To NOT feel guilty that my kids are in childcare?

3 of my children went to playgroup from when they were two. I have no regrets because it helped them (one of my children had a speech delay) and they had fun.
I wasn’t working but that didn’t mean they couldn’t go and benefit from the learning and social opportunities that playgroup offered them.

You can't predict 'outcomes' though. All anyone can try to do is what's best for their baby in the here and now.

Theories on child development are relevant because they can help people understand their baby's lives experience at given stages, from an infant perspective. For instance, when people say things like "oh nobody remembers the early years anyway, so it doesn't really matter where they are"... if they had a better understanding of infant development they would realise that this kind of statement spectacularly misses the point.

But nobody is going to make a decision on using or not using childcare based on some academic paper purporting to identify 'outcomes.' Nobody would say, "oh my child is miserable in daycare, but no worries, I have a study to prove x,y,z outcome in a sample population.' Or, "My child seems ok in nursery right now, but I've seen a study about negative 'outcomes' so henceforth, I'm going to be a SAHM, even though it will make me depressed and we won't be able to afford anything."

All these sort of jokes about being a deadbeat or being an amazing mum because you do Disney land just make you seem really insecure in your choice. Just send you kids to do nursery and get on with your guilt free life surely?

Hand on heart I wish I didn’t have to work full time. I have always worked full time (gone back each time after four children and short Mat leaves) and now I have to continue because of the expenses that I myself have created. I have made choices such as buying a house in a nice area at a price which requires two salaries. My children get to enjoy playdates in a nice area in a nice house in a nice garden. If I didn’t work yes their bellies would be full and they’d have a roof over their heads but those extra things that I can provide for them are nice. State schools but we can afford private one to one tuition to help them. We can consider going away to a resort in the summer. We can afford cleaners and a nanny so we have 100% family time on weekends and don’t need to run around doing errands or organising the house. I’m not saying what I do is best (I kind of just fell into this way of life climbing up the ladder at work and earning more and then bringing in cleaners and all that). I do feel sad sometimes that I’m not with the kids as much as I would like and sometimes think of packing it all in but then what - we downsize and I get what half a day back let’s say two or three days a week. I work from home a lot which helps. A bit of a stream of consciousness there but wanted to share!!

I also feel that mothers tend to have an inflated sense of their own importance in children’s lives. Why is the mother necessarily better than the key worker at nursery who gives lots of cuddles? Why am I necessarily better than a nanny at helping with homework. Sharing the parenting journey with these qualified women is not necessarily a bad thing.

And everything here is spot on. Most of the research used to back up the theory of nursery being damaging is flawed or outdated.

@melua

Why are people constantly asking for or posting so-called 'research' into the 'outcomes' of childcare?

I can’t speak for everyone but from my perspective as someone who had no choice to use childcare because I feel if people are posting scaremongering material implying that childcare is bad for children there’s a burden on them to demonstrate that there is some validity to their points as opposed to just judgment.

It’s a bit like the analogy of someone running into a crowded theatre and shouting “Fire!”. If you’re going to start a discussion on something highly controversial and emotive which many people have no control over you owe it to them to have thought this through and researched it.

To their credit some posters have done this and are posting reasonably credible sources. Others are just being inflammatory and goady based on nothing more than their own prejudice.

Why are people constantly asking for or posting so-called 'research' into the 'outcomes' of childcare?

The decision as to whether to use childcare or not, or a nanny or childminder, is very personal and immediate. For instance, your child was screaming at nursery drop-offs and was becoming unbearable, nobody's going to think, "Oh well, a study showed that the impact of childcare for the under 3s had no impact on A-level outcomes" or whatever the 'measure of successful outcome' may be. People either have to use childcare, or they decide it's a better opinion on balance, in their specific circumstances. But the decision is made in the here and now. Surely nobody thinks of their children as an experiment - a projected 'outcome?'

I think actually it’s possible to think that in an ideal world children would be at home but also know that practically there’s nothing wrong with nursery (as in, I know my child has thrived so in reality there’s nothing wrong with it for us although in a parallel universe I’d rather they were at home with me maybe). Those don’t necessarily go hand in hand.

But it’s not just about paid parental leave for longer - the cost of living here is now such that two wages are often required, which is why people go back to work. Who would foot the bill for one parent to take 18 months off fully paid? The government? How would that go down with people who don’t want children or older people who’ve had their children? There are still many employers who will only pay stat pay, so they won’t be willing to be compelled to pay full wages for 18 months. Are we saying you get a percentage of your wage for that time, in which case given the COL many parents would still end up back in work before 18 months.

It’s not just about parents of young children currently, who probably would push more for improved parental leave - it would need to be supported by the majority, and given the views of many on maternity leave and SAHM as being a holiday that’s unlikely to happen.

Fundamentally we have a different mindset here than they do in Scandinavian countries (not just in relation to parental leave, they’re miles ahead in many areas imo) and so something like that is not going to be a vote winner with 85% of the electorate. The government hasn’t just refused to change their policies because mums love nursery so much, it’s because fundamentally they know given the mindset of many in this country towards parenthood, it wouldn’t be that popular.

its so bizarre your friend said that. I used to work in Oslo and the nursery staff would bring babies up to the office to be breastfed. It’s a small city so you could be right next to your baby, popping in as you like.

Well it seems that some people do think it's ideal. I wrote earlier that Pretending that there are no negatives connected to nursery whatsoever is like an ostrich putting it's head in the sand and then another poster replied directly to that comment with "I would take issue with the idea that it’s beyond debate that there are negatives associated with nursery."

So yeah, some people think there is never anything wrong with nursery.

Scandinavian countries give such great parental leave (split between both parents) because as a society they agree that it is more beneficial for very young children to be taken care of at home. I've heard from a friend that most nurseries in Sweden point blank refuse to take a child under 1 year old. They have demanded better for themselves and their children and so the government delivered.

Judging by this thread, the UK is full of people who believe nursery is the best choice - in which case, why would they ever pressure the government to extend parental leave? I guess we'll keep the status quo for the foreseeable future.

Same queen

I am not surprised!

I'm the higher earner. I was still asked if I was going back and 'for how many days?' when I said yes.

Guess who was never asked? My lower earner husband.

It is usually the mum that is the lower earner unfortunately.

Mine goes 4 full days and 1 short day (9-3) on my non working day. She’s become so much social and confident since starting. No guilt (although I do feel sad on the rare occasions she cries at handover)

Tbh honest I think part of the chippyness from that poster and similar is that I think a lot of women didn’t really get on well with work, and haven’t really achieved much but when they had children, because they’re really not that challenging to manage, they found something they were good at.
They know have that feeling they’ve always desired of feeling really accomplished and good at something, but they’re frustrated that society doesn’t really recognise being good at being a SAHM. So it’s a real anticlimax

I don’t think anyone is saying it’s 100% ideal though. I work, out of necessity; in an ideal world I wouldn’t work and I wouldn’t send them to work. In the real world however, I need to work and had PND that meant even if I didn’t need to, I’d probably have sent them very part time.

I don’t think anyone is arguing in an ideal world 6 month old babies would be in nursery full time, the argument is simply that actually, if your child has to go to nursery, they’ll probably thrive regardless and some of these spiteful scenarios about how you don’t love your children aren’t true.

The government hasn’t upped paid maternity leave to scandavian levels because we all think it works perfectly at the moment, it’s because there’s absolutely no political will in this economic climate to do so.

It's tricky because as far as I'm aware, Sweden have a less sexist society. Until we change that, I'm not sure the Swedish setup would work the same here unless we force men to take parental leave.

I'm all for men having more than 2 weeks parental leave.

How does the 18 months leave work in Sweden? Is it shared out as the parents please, can one parent take all of it etc?

I'm not completely against extending leave but it needs to be expected that men take it too, otherwise it's just going to hurt women in the workplace.

Like I said, there are exceptions to the rule.

I think handling things at work is a bit different than handling everything that goes into managing a family, though some jobs have similarities… Statistically, most men aren’t going to be managers in their positions.

https://www.benenden.co.uk/be-healthy/body/man-flu/#:~:text=Scientists%20have%20discovered%20that%20men,bouts%20of%20flu%20and%20viruses.

I have noticed, being in the military, that whenever we get less sleep, the women in my unit tend to be more emotionally volatile than the men. But to me, that just suggests that maybe I don’t belong there, and I’m better off at home where I can nap when DD goes down, and (mostly) control my sleep schedule. Even when she was a baby and waking up to feed every 45 minutes, at least I still had the ability to nap during the day to catch up a bit.

I believe you that your children are thriving. I trust that you know your own children.

That said, kids can thrive even if their parents are struggling with money. But is that the ideal? Kids can thrive without a big garden to run around in, but wouldn't it be nice to have one? Kids can thrive in a large class of over 30 kids, but surely a smaller one of 15 children would be better?

Kids can go to full time nursery at 6 months and still grow into well-adjusted adults. It might be a bit more difficult for them though, or more sensitive children might struggle etc.

If we as a society insist that the current nursery set-up is the ideal, then the government will never extend parental leave or invest more in early childhood at all. Lots of countries offer better, longer, higher-paid parental leave - wouldn't you want that here too?

Thanks for the links. I can well imagine that it's beneficial to be a working mother. My argument would be (and what the article I linked to points out) is that it is very important to differentiate based on age. Both articles you linked to don't mention age at all.

Sending your child to nursery at 1 month is very different to 1 year which is different to 2 years old etc. At 2 years old, most children would get a lot of benefit from the socialisation and the activities offered at nursery. At 1 month old, children don't need socialisation and instead need the safety and security of their primary attachment figure.

I think we have a lot to learn from countries like Sweden that offer 18 months paid parental leave. Unfortunately, as long as people insist that nursery doesn't have a single drawback, then the government has the perfect excuse to not extend parental leave here in the UK.

Maybe because they are thriving? I'd say that they know that their child is thriving better than someone on the internet who has never met them.

My children are thriving too. I see it with my own eyes every day.