If you didn’t send your child to nursery ?

People seem to think that if you don’t send your child to nursery or pre-school they never leave the the house, meet other children, or do any activities and spend their days looking through a crack in the curtains at the outside world…..

Mine didn't do nursery or preschool. No particular reason against them I just didn't want to. We did loads of social things and had many groups/activities. No one said anything about it to me, why would they?

Why?

I work part time and had a nanny so no nursery but sent to term time pre school at 3 for the 15 hours. I was judged by others for not socialising my son by sending him to nursery, although he did go to playgroups and have playdates. I did it as my first son was a high needs baby with challenging sleep and I couldn't imagine his needs being met by a nursery. I also didnt feel the knowledge of child development was good enough in the nursery settings I visited when he was a baby.
I think some of the judgement was jealousy, some was due to a misunderstanding of child development and when babies are capable of truly playing with peers, and also caregivers own disquiet that they couldn't acknowledge about sending their little one to nursery.

Yes, and it's always worth remembering that whatever studies are produced, there are ALWAYS limitations to research and studies that are based on a lack of data about individual cognition.

Having worked with the top experts in the field of child development and early years care, it boils my piss to see people misquoting and backing generalised research to the hilt on Mumsnet to have a crack at other mums or to valorise their own choices.

One of the most profound statements on early years that I heard in my work, from a leading expert, was, "good enough is good enough".

Essentially, children are robust little things, and we don't need to be perfect or provide them with perfect 100% of the time. When given a loving, sufficient and not actively harmful environment for their needs, they will thrive. Attachment and enrichment are not a programme of or the result of one exact style of parenting or care.

My daughter is autistic (we didn’t know it then). She had never liked big groups so we sent her to the most amazing childminder where she flourished while she was there. On the other hand my our son was and still is polar opposite. Lives to be in the thick of it so he went to nursery and was really happy. It depends on lots of circumstances and fortunately for us we had lots of options near where wile lived

Only had my kids in pre-school nursery - first year of foundation stage - funded by local authority, five half day sessions a week. It wasn’t a case of being well off and not needing to work, but not being able to find a job in a new town and find or afford childcare for two and then three children. We lived very frugally until the youngest started school and I found part-time work. Enjoyed toddler groups and playgroups and just being at home with the kids instead of sending them to nursery.

For some children nursery before 3 can be beneficial, that is why the 2yo funding initially came in, as not all families are as involved with their child’s development as they should be, for a variety of reasons.

None of mine went to nursery or preschool. I took them to a co-operative collective where they socialised with other children while having all the activities available that would be in a preschool, but run by parents who stayed, play groups, music groups, swimming, gymnastics, dance, whatever their interests were and what gave them new experiences to help them discover the world and find out what they enjoyed. We visited friends, went for walks, to the park, lots of other outings, I did crafts and gardening and cooking and all sorts of things with them at home. No-one has judged.

Please re-read what I said. I asked what a nursery can give that a "hands-on, involved, curious, and loving parent" cannot.

A parent like that would take their child to play groups and classes and have play dates so the child will have plenty of socialisation and friendships in which they can explore social etiquette, social norms, manners, etc.

In addition, they would take their child on outings to the park, library, farm, woodland, etc which a nursery would not.

My own toddler goes (and will continue to go indefinitely) to groups where he mixes with people of all ages - from babies younger than him to older adults the same age and older than his grandparents and everyone in between. In terms of learning social skills, that's surely far preferable to be artificially placed into a room with only others born within 12mths of you?

It's unclear what age-bracket the OP is talking about but 2yr olds are not developmentally ready to share or "understand peer emotion" and throwing them into a group setting and expecting them to do so is just a recipe for absolute chaos. Ask anyone who has worked in a toddler room. 3&4yr olds don't have to be in a formal setting to learn these skills either.

Mine was 3 when adopted and SS said he HAD to go to pre-school and knowing no different, I complied.

Worst decision.

It made the bonding process so much harder because every day I was taking him to somewhere he didn't want to go and every day when I picked him up he was cross and upset with me. It did him no favours and probably underpinned his whole aversion to "school" and having to withdraw him completely in Y8 as it was unsustainable.

I wish I had the knowledge then that I have now, and had stood up to SS and said "no". But when you are scared they will take the child away again if you don't jump through their flamming hoops, it's hard to make sensible and reasoned decisions.

So I don't judge anyone for not sending a child to nursery or pre-school. It doesn't suit every child.

Why would anyone judge that?

You are either well off and don't need to work, and can spend time early years with the child or the child has complex needs and struggles on daycare/nobody will accept them. That's my experience of people not using childcare.

I wouldn't judge either of them.

No judgement from me for making your own choices, but it's not surprising that you knock the choice you didn't make, admit that partly it was very much for you own convenience in the same post.

But this is just wanky:

I much preferred that over some 18 year old college btec key worker looking after my child in the same room day in day out.

For one, my son's keyworker was 19. Yes, she had BTecs. And she was emotionally intuitive, brilliant at engaging with my son, fab at challenging his learning and great at encouraging good behaviour too.

There are shit childminders and shit parents and shit nurseries, but don't piss on young women and denigrate their qualifications to justify your choices.

I'm not the poster you asked, but I was part of a major early years study.

To me, it's not as straightforward as "good or bad" for each option, because there are bad parents, bad family care and bad childminders/nurseries/nannies, as well as good. (There are also of course, bad teachers, who project their own prejudices onto children)

Some of the noted common disadvantages of each bad example are:

• parents - limited experiences when the parent hasn't done much beyond have the child at home, without any good routines etc.
• family care - strict rules about play and activity that means the child is excessively cautious to engage
• childminders - poor learning experiences copied, e.g. bad grammar, things like calling a cube a square
• nurseries - bad behaviour management leading to poor emotional regulation/socialisation
• nannies - similar to bad family care, but usually at the preference of the parents for a "strict" nanny

Of course, any and all of these can happen in any of the settings, but those were the noted trends by schools involved in the project. And although it's anecdata, that doesn't preclude it being noticeable and true. Data, especially social data, often originates in anecdata, because humans intuitively find patterns.

Pre-school nursery which introduces the routine and curriculum and prepares children for starting school - yes.
Private nursery where children spend 10 hours a day with bored, unqualified teenage staff - no.

3 under 3, stay at home mom mainly, then worked evening and weekends.
why would I send them to day care?
no one cared, most of my mom friends were full time sahm.

SAHM - neither a need nor the finances for my children go to a day nursery before the age of 3 as didn’t need childcare.

I took them to local (cheap) ‘stay and play things’ at churches, children’s centres, 1 0’clock clubs and libraries etc so plenty of chances to mix with other children alongside me. Lots of play dates with other mums etc and I feel my child benefitted from having a lot of 1:1 attention from me. I was there to model behaviour and gently intervene to teach them to share and play gently etc…

I loved setting up craft activities at home and taking them to parks and playing with them in the house and having 1:1 to read and chat and play all day with me meant they never missed out on an ‘education’ as education at this age is all about exploring and play and that’s what we did. Non stop chatter and interaction !

screens not a thing when mine where little - except tv and we had that less than 1/2 hour a day as we were too busy playing and doing things together and tv only put on if we were going to sit and watch it (never background wallpaper) so very ‘focused activity’ of lets watch Tweenies - then it was turned off.

At 3 had the chance to go to school nursery ratio of 26:2 (1 teacher , 1 nursery nurse to 26 kids - ie 13/1 ratio) or local ‘preschool’ where ratio was 5/1. Chose the preschool both for higher ratio and also the most beautiful setting with a massive outside space that outsripped the school nursery.

Did have to pay a bit but mainly covered by funding where as school nursery was ‘free’ but liked the more informal set up of the preschool that truly was play based where as the school nursery was uniformed and formal and very much ‘school prep.’

Preschool was right for us and they went into reception at age 4 (young in the year as aug birthday) and no problem settling. Were ‘school ready’ as toilet trained , able to change own clothes / put on shoes and knew how to use books / had a concentration down from reading extensively at home with me and had had lots of interactions with other kids (knew how to share and play nicely together, knew how to tidy up ) could eat and drink from standard cutlery / cup and had had exposure to huge range of play activities and craft . Could write / read own name etc as had learnt at home with no pressure from me just occurred naturally as I write their name in their drawings etc.

every activity at home was a learning experience - either playing with toys or helping me cook or do chores - so many maths skills through sorting, weighing etc and constant language development from talking.

I think people underestimate how much of a ‘good education’ a sahm can provide if they are engaged and actively seek to make everything a learning experience.

My two learnt invaluable social skills in pre school IMO. I witnessed a child who I think didn’t go to pre school really struggle starting primary school. I think for those children pre school is a valuable transition. There’s no settling in period in our primary school in Ireland. There is free universal pre school free for 3 hours a day for 2 years. Apart from that one child I haven’t met anyone who hasn’t availed of it.

You can still spend significant time with your child & send them to pre school for 3 hours a day.

I think I’d ask myself the reason for wanting to keep my child out & if some of it has to do with not wanting to let go of them being little.

I wouldnt however comment to anyone about their decision, not my place.

Because I didn’t need to or want to. No I wasn’t judged as far as I know.

I’ve experienced a bit of judgement and rudeness with comments along the lines of “when are you sending her to childcare, it’s so good for their development and they make friends and get all kinds of experiences you can’t provide at home”. Or else statements like “I don’t know how you do it all day at home still, both my child and I would be so bored and I need to use my brain/talk to adults at work” etc.

I’m a stay at home mum to my toddler daughter because my husband and I both value having our children at home with a parent in the early years, and because we are hugely fortunate to be well off enough financially that we don’t need me to work. I don’t find it boring, my daughter and I are out doing things every day (parks, play centres, playgroup, swimming, library, music class, baby gym etc) and I know that she is much better off with me than in a childcare centre/nursery.

I would say that any vaguely negative comments I’ve had were made from a place of insecurity and jealousy.

There is research to suggest that actually there’s no benefit to childcare before 3 years, for most children who come from nurturing, stable homes. I’m in Australia and there’s a childcare quality crisis here with a lot of media about neglect, abuse and poor standards in childcare centres.

I’d imagine a lot of parents would rather not use nursery/childcare centres but can’t afford to stay home. And plenty of people have careers they enjoy or just don’t want to be with their infants and toddlers all day everyday and that’s fine too!

And before any of the comments come along about the vulnerability of stay at home mums, I have independent income from investments, I have a supportive husband and I absolutely love being with my child all day. That being said, I also wouldn’t be judgmental towards parents who do use nursery - the vast majority need childcare because they need to work to have even a basic standard of living.

We need to focus on improving parental leave and on improving the standards of care for all children in nurseries rather than making parents feel guilty for using it.

No mine went to a childminder instead! She was a lady who raised 4 children into successful adults, had a great home full of toys and learning aids etc... she had memberships at the local farms, zoos etc... so DD was out at least twice a week to these places with her and some other children she cared for too.

I much preferred that over some 18 year old college btec key worker looking after my child in the same room day in day out.

Another factor was that we needed 4 days 8.30 - 4pm and although when she was 3 I felt bad for not sending her to nursery, it wouldn't have been practical as they only did term time 9.30-2.30 sessions or something!? So it would have been a massive ball ache to organise.

Agree.

Don't forget 'wear a silly, impractical uniform (makeup strictly prohibited) so you'll get used to the world of work' where nobody would dream of removing a scratchy blazer on a hot day.

Agree.

I am in the US and was privileged to be.a sahm. My DCs stayed home with me until age 4, when they went to preschool for two hours a day, four days a week. One went to a programme where I signed up for eight week sessions, so I skipped the January and February session because they are the worst of the winter months and schlepping toddler plus 4 year old out in the bitter cold for a 2- hour session, home again with toddler, and then out again for pickup wasn't worth the effort.

The DCs were perfectly secure and happy and settled easily into school when Kindergarten rolled around (at age 5). We didn't even do a huge amount of activities at ho.e aside from the usual art/ crafty stuff, playing with toys, watching kids' TV, and walking to neighbourhood attractions. It's not necessary at all to pile on outings and entertainment for small children or make them spend time 'being socialised' with others in a loosely supervised setting.

With one of ours we didnt . She is autistic and was non verbal and didnt like strangers. Only really let me and her dad near her. So simple practical things she may need help with they would not have been able to do.
We went to play groups . Although she didnt acknowledge the other children. We did parks/soft play and so on. And just did simple play that involved learning at the same time.

Children are constantly told to be ready for the next stage(s).

“go to nursery to be school-ready” - they then often have a six week summer break and a drawn out settling in period that can take them until end of September when they properly start reception anyway!

”lots of testing so ready for SATs”

”homework from 4 so they’re ready for homework at senior school”

”go into school when feeling ill to slow productivity for more people so you get used to making your colleagues ill and slowing team productivity when at work”

”if ahead of your class, be bored in case you work in a job that doesn’t challenge you at all”

”sit at a desk for hours in case you get a job that entails that”

”send them to nursery so they can pick up as many bugs as possible before they start school to also pick up as many bugs as possible”

I wouldn’t judge you OP. Mine did a mix of part time nursery and childminder, sometimes had to use emergency Nannies and then they went full time to preschool.

At my school there are people that used childminders, were/are childminders themselves, nursery, nannies, grandparents, none.