To think most men wouldn’t survive a year living the life of an average woman?

I do agree that if you are at home then that is such a shame not to utilise your time in reading books (which are free from the library), preparing home cooked meals (you can buy healthy, non-branded food very cheaply from ALDI/Lidl), etc. To me the point of it is to invest your times and efforts into your children, so yes that is a loss.

I do think the morale of some mothers is on the floor, I wonder is she is feeling depressed and lacking support/confidence in what she is capable of achieving? It’s a shame if nobody in the community has suggested any simple activities. There is so much to do which is very simple but hugely beneficial, eg naming all the different foods whilst doing the weekly shop together, singing nursery rhymes, visiting the park.

OK, your credentials sound great. I have read a lot of studies and research about cortisol, brain development and how levels of this are much higher the longer a baby/toddler is in nursery, suggesting shorter hours are better. I have seen research that suggest it’s harmful for the 1-2 age bracket, neutral for 2-3. I have seen research which is more positive towards childminders.

The research seems less controversial for 3-4 year olds- I haven’t found any negative myself, and actually plenty of positive. Would you agree? I thought the government funded hours from term after third birthday was actually spot on, and that all 3-4 year olds should have access to a school based nursery, ideally led by a qualified teacher. I was pleased to see Labour wanting to utilise empty classrooms to expand and improve provision for 3-4 year olds- I do think this is beneficial (open to opinions to the contrary).

Me and my DH do all these too. Again. Not exclusive to you as a SAHP.

Not surprisingly you’re missing the point @ThankYouNigel
The point is that just being a SAHM does not guarantee better outcomes for your children.
The home environment you are providing is what’s important. You are doing that as a SAHP and I’m doing that as a working parent. Your way isn’t automatically better.

I don’t particularly like using anecdotes but this one seems appropriate. My step sister is a SAHM. Her mum has convinced her that nurseries are bad so she’s never sent her 3 year old to one. She’s never worked and neither has her boyfriend ( he comes from a community where generational unemployment is the norm). They live in poverty.
Their child is developmentally and socially way behind where he should be. There isn’t a single book in their house and they live off takeaways.
Are you saying that environment is preferable to a household where the parents are invested in their child’s development and education but they also happen to work?
No it’s not. And that’s what the research tells us. It’s complex and nuanced and certainly not the black and white picture you paint.

I have a PhD in education which drew upon some of this research happy to debate this all day long!

https://www.aecf.org/blog/parental-involvement-is-key-to-student-success-research-shows

I have the time and flexibility to do all of these things consistently (they are in my job description)- my ability to do these would have been dramatically hindered by my previous career, so that had to go!

https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/eric-bettinger-why-stay-home-parents-are-good-older-children

An interesting read.

This isn’t proof.
I work in an education faculty at a university so I’m very familiar with the research.
With regards nursery, you need to ensure that the research is reputable. I’ve seen many a poster on MN quote research from religious or political groups which which has an agenda around ‘traditional values’ so presents research in a way to support their views.
If you look at the reputable research then the overall message is the quality of the childcare provider is key.
For under 2’s childcare is neutral. Meaning it’s not beneficial but it’s not detrimental either (this is assuming a quality provider)
For over 2’s there are multiple benefits to be seen including social and educational. Children who attend a nursery or pre-school are typically more ‘school ready’ than those who haven’t.

In relation to longer term educational outcomes then the following can have an impact.

Socioeconomic status is shown to have an huge impact. Poverty is pretty much the most important factor in poor educational outcomes and this is linked to parental education and employment.

High quality early education can also have a positive impact of future outcomes.

School - attending a good quality school. These two factors are also linked to socioeconomic status as good nurseries and schools are often (but not always) in more affluent areas.

Supportive home environment is of course important.

Access to resources and extra curricular activities (again, linked to socioeconomic factors)

There is no evidence that a SAHP is beneficial to educational outcomes . It’s far more complex and is actually linked to the home environment rather just having a parent at home.
There is increasing evidence that a mothers employment is beneficial for educational outcomes (particularly in girls) and it’s the parental involvement overall that is key rather than whether they are working or not.

Interestingly, I have a team of academic staff who teach on early years education courses and childhood studies and they all used childcare and returned to work. Make of that what you will!

I did as much as I could beforehand, so I fed both an early lunch, changed my youngest’s nappy and made sure eldest had been to the toilet. Youngest was very content in her pram, I guess I would have asked the member of staff to rock or jiggle a toy, and ignored minor crying. Eldest had been taught by that age that there are times we need to wait and not interrupt unless urgent, eg during an important phone call. He was brilliant with his books, and it was a quick filling thankfully!

My eldest had a bad run of GP appointments during Reception, youngest attended all of them with us. Actually thinking back, my youngest also came to his hearing assessment clinic appointment- that worked as he could do the listening tasks quietly in one room whilst we watched through a window. So I could see my eldest and he knew I was there, but he could focus on the tasks (really important we weren’t making any background noise- impossible for youngest to be silent).

I did insist that my smear test was during DH’s annual leave- now that really would have been inappropriate to take them to and pretty stressful! 😂

It is, and I am not someone who home educates- my eldest attends a state school.

I am still not in denial that children who are home educated are often entered for exams early and achieve very highly academically. This is because 1:1 learning is much better as it can be better matched to their current level of learning, and also move at a far faster pace for more able children than a class teacher trying to meet very diverse needs can achieve.

I live in a county where home education is on the increase. This has changed drastically over the past 5 years- I never knew of anyone doing it, now most people I speak to know someone once removed who is doing it. I also notice far more activity slots specifically for home educated children to follow their talents during the day when I am booking my own children’s activities.

And?

I doubt that's true about home educated children.

Proving links with beneficial educational outcomes is extremely difficult. Many factors influence these (IQ, level of parental engagement, motivation, child’s temperament, quality of school and teachers, behaviour, resilience, attitudes to homework and revision, influence of peer group, etc.), which in the long run have little to do with whether they attended a nursery or not.

In fact, those who are home educated often outperform those in state schools.

Lol. What would you have done though mid filling if the baby cried or 3 year old started playing up?

I think the scan thing is very strange tbh. Especially with slightly older kids. I'm not sure what they'd have expected me to do with eldest if she wasn't us day nursery and I was a sahm when pregnant with the 2nd

This is not proof. It's a not a full scientific study. Read the 'limitations' section.

"The evidence is not conclusive proof that all children under three in nurseries for long periods are always harmed, as the level of proof is mainly associations and not based on randomised controlled trials. However, we cite one systematic review. Most children in nurseries are not affected but as many as 40% may be."

Without randomised controlled trials you can cannot prove causation, the article itself admits the evidence is not proof and in any case, it states most children are not affected. You need better 'proof' than this if you want to prove your point.

Yes my pregnancy scans were the same, and during covid I wasn’t actually even allowed my husband into the 12 week scan with me. I have regularly taken one or other of my children to GP and hospital appointments for the other. I recently had a GP appointment for myself which both children again came with me to, as I could only get a time after school. This is very normal where I live. My dentist is private/NHS- I don’t really know what else to say, I’d say to ring them and check for yourself but that would be bizarre for us both 😂

Strange For example my daughter wasn't allowed to take her 6 year old into an antenatal scan with her and had to arrange seperate childcare

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7160792/

This only refers to educational outcomes, not emotional ones. It also highlights ongoing staffing issues and that staff are not required to be as highly qualified or undertake ongoing professional development like teachers for older children.

You do realise a growing proportion of SAHMs are qualified teachers? Google ‘Missing Mothers’ for more on this- the government are aware and are trying to woo them back (good luck with that! 😂)- they are now much busier and happier ensuring their own children have an excellent start at home and in their local community. They are much more highly educated and excellent speech and language models, as well as being their mother first and foremost.

Early intervention is only really beneficial for a tiny minority of children living in extremely impoverished/neglectful/abusive homes.

Also, far more support used to be provided to mothers at home via fantastic Sure Start centres. It would be great to see more governmental investment in such things (Labour are discussing this, one who knocks on my door who was a SAHP was in complete agreement about this, fab chat).

That's a really interesting article.

Too many points to mention but I did find it interesting about the study showing that two young boys will usually welcome a third to play with them whilst two girls will often try and exclude another.

I'm spite of much talk of the sisterhood I've always wondered whether men's success is partly down to the way they seem to be able to work together more naturally than us.

I needed an emergency filling. I requested a time after my DH finished work- none available, only middle of the day. I would obviously have preferred to go on my own, as it clashed with all our usual lunch/nap routines. My usual dentist on the ground floor was off. No elevator. My then 3 year old walked ahead up the stairs whilst the dental staff helped me carry my then under 1 up the stairs in a pram. My youngest laid in her pram and my eldest sat on a chair looking at books whilst I had the filling done. My children were absolutely amazing and are both very well behaved generally. Thankfully!

Why on earth would anybody lie about this? It happened! I got on with it.

I'm surprised the dentist allowed you to take 2 kids under 3 into the surgery while you were unable ( as laying in chair) to control them. Doesn't add up

Everything you’ve posted has been your opinion with zero evidence to support it. People in glass houses and all that …

Well no actually. Not just her opinion.

An international study found that children who spent more time at nursery specifically before the age of three had better educational outcomes and were more adaptable to different social situations than those that stayed at home with a parent.

https://share.google/0hJCauXw5YOgilS3G

You really think men don't suffer the burden of expectations, or safety worries, or emotional labour? Do you realise men are and historically always have been deemed expendable, hence "women and children only" policy and the fact that men are expected to do the dangerous jobs and put their lives on the line fighting in wars (the gender ratio on battlefield front lines has never been 50/50). I agree that women regrettably still have to suffer a lot of shit at times but that doesn't equate to men having it easy. Try looking at the lower end of the distribution instead of the top end and extrapolating onto everyone else.

https://medium.com/cregox/is-there-anything-good-about-men-by-roy-f-baumeister-d111ba407de3

In your opinion.

There has never been a time in history where every woman who wanted to could stay at home with her kids. Working class women have always had to work, often serving middle and upper class women, allowing them a life of relative leisure. It’s just some 1950s utopia about the ideal mother but it’s never really been obtainable by all.
And anyone CAN stay at home if they like. It’s an idiotic idea because you won’t be able to afford the rent or mortgage and even if you have a rich husband you leave yourself vulnerable on divorce and face the risk of poverty in old age. But if you want to do it, if the nanny wants to do it, crack on.
In Germany, the parental leave is unpaid but you can claim benefits but most people use it to work part time. In Scandinavia, there is a lot of social support and there is even provision for the state to pay people to raise their kids at home. Very very few women take this up. They have the choice but they’d rather work and use the generous state funded childcare. Being a SAHM is not the norm and people would wonder why you didn’t work, much more so than in this country. Because generally staying home for longer than a year or so isn’t really best overall.