to think that people who don't approve of parents who put their children in childcare should not work in a nursery..

GOod posts, squiffy and Xenia. We never did get an answer to the question why a father can have a good relationship with his children if the mother is at home or works part time but not if the mother works outside the home.

have just seen this thread and had to comment, what an excellent post this was from greenmonkies

GreenMonkies on Mon 18-Aug-08 10:10:06

well worth reading

I don't think Xenia's position of having a nanny negates the general concept:-

1. Having good money, dedicated nanny, good role model with career = sounds pretty fab to me and I have yet to see ANY research showing a negative effect in such situation - even Joseph Rowntree research concludes positive indicators where parents have high achieving careers (although they do admit it through gritted teeth)
2. Having less money, wanting to work and build career, childminder or nursery = Why not? Not altogether stress-free, will need to make sure childcare good and not a vicky pollard. Research mixed.
3. Having less money not wanting to work but having to, childminder or nursery = probably not the happiest of existences, will need to make sure chilcare good and not a vicky pollard. Plenty of research to show not very much fun for parents, research for kids mixed.
4. Having less money not wanting to work but having to, childcare in vicky pollard type situation = shite on all sides really, might have negative effect on kids, depends on situation and too many contexts to conclude that childcare setting is anything other than a potential moderator, rather than an antecedent.
5. Choosing not to work, stay at home = why not? Your call. Kids might thrive might not. Again tis a moderator at best.
6. Wanting to work but not being able to, so staying at home. Wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. Haven't seen any research but suspect that this situation most common in single parent households so impossible to eliminate contextual factors (father figures/extended family role models, social context etc)

I think that covers pretty much all of us (either gender).

What I fail to see is what gives group (5) the right to take a sledgehammer to any of the other groups? The only groups that on balance research seems to show their set-up as potentially having causal negative effects are groups 4 and 6. And when I consider the people probably in these groups I feel a bit sorry for them and tend to view them within a social construct as being those who benefit most in terms of governement policy, welfare provision and community support. I definately see these peple as havign far more pressure and stress than the other groups. I certainly don't see them as fair game for bullying.

Sorry, wise owl, have strayed once again from toic in hand but the other thread is full and the we've all ended up on this one now.

Xenia you have said elsewhere that your children had their own nanny who stayed for 10years. That's a completely different situation to putting children into a nursery with lots of other children and possibly a variety of carers.
Your children had consistent care within a family setting surely?

Well, that's that sorted then.

If stay at homemothers are happy fathers can have good relationships with children and work full time why don't they agree the same can be true of mothers? I just have never understood that.

I have nothing to prove - 24 years ago I went back full time to work which I love, benefits many people and brought up 5 lovely children, 3 of whom are at university stage and we both worked full time always as do many many parents.

"It is interesting that mums who choose to stay home are so very interested in judging those of us who choose not to. I can't really understand what they are trying to achieve." I suppose some of those mothers just feel inferior or something. They feel they have to take some moral high ground probably because they hate the lack of money and status and dependence on what can be feckless men so the only thing some have left to cling to is a myth that only a mother at home can properly care for a baby. Rid them of that (and my view is children do better with mothers in successful careers anyway) and you kick the stool from under them and they go into freefall.

Those who love being at home and are happy with it aren't cross when working mothers say that is a better set up for children just as I don't mind if stay at home mothers want to con themselves into thinking they have taken the best option as I know my route is best.

OrmIrian, fabulous posts. I do think people tend to forget that being a WOHM is a matter of absolute economic necessity for some. I'm going back (2.5 days) after mat leave next week and have spent many an hour wondering whether we could maybe just about manage after all on dh's doctoral stipend. But sadly there is not much downsizing to be done from a 2-bed flat for 2 adults and 2 children.

That said, we are in the fortunate position of being able to juggle things so that ds2 (11mo) gets one-to-one care while I am working (from a childcarer, MIL and with dh working from home). am, I admit, glad not to have to send him to nursery.

Any business has to make a profit and if that means paying staff low wages they will.

Childcare pay is getting better though. Not reaching dizzy heights or anything, but getting better. My SIL is a nursery nurse, she was also an NVQ assessor for other people doing childcare NVQ but went back to working in the nursery after about a year.

Nursery wages (IME) were disproportionate to nursery profit and not inline with childcare such as nanny/childminder. I think it is getting better.

This does seem to have strayed from the OP. Which was quite a simple and reasonable proposition.

ttb - I really don't think that you can disregard the economic and social elements of working parents when you consider the impact of nursery care on young children.

As long as childcare is seen as women's work it will be low status and thus low paid.

I wonder what would happen if nursery workers were really well paid? What kind of people would make the majority of workers?

Men?

Power hungry alpha ladies?

yah I'm in for a promotion after Jack in the yellow room finally gave in and took his first steps

"it can become a slanging match or a I'm-so-better-than-you-because-of-x contest"

What - like this?:

"FWIW, the relationship I have with my daughter is far better than the relationship my SAHM friend has with her daughter"

FWIW my posts have been about (primarily) my concerns re: nurseries for babies and very small children, not about children cared for in a home environment by a c/m.

And I think you misinterpret some of the posts. I know working mums love their children just as much as anyone else and do their best to juggle everything to suit the whole family. That doesn't affect how I feel about the experience of group child care as far as it concerns babies. I do think we should be allowed to talk about the shortcomings of nursery provision (or any other form of childcare including care by parents) without being labelled as competetive or unsupportive.

"As for the research, I know there was something published about how boys can suffer from attending nursery full time, but I dont think there is anything much past that

Actually there's quite a lot - try googling 'Penelope Leach' or 'Jay Belski' or 'Steve Biddulph' and 'nurseries' and 'research', just for starters.

"they didn't see that much of Mummy during the day when they were babies, but I doubt they remember that now"

Luckily for us - there are many things they don't remember (being born for a start). Doesn't mean these experiences haven't played some part in shaping the person they'll become in the future.

TTB - my DD is in childcare for 35hrs a week. She is with a lovely childminder who she has been with since she was 6 months old. They spend their time painting, playing, reading, on trips out, cooking together etc. Sometimes she is with three other children, sometimes it is just DD.

Unfortunately I had to return to work because otherwise my family would have been made homeless.

If we had waited until we could "afford" to have children on one wage then I probably would never have been able to have children.

I do like my job. What I am training to do can, in future, enable me to freelance, consult, run a business from the home rather than having to work in the office if I choose to change.

My daughter benefits from going to the childminders, the biggest benefit that she has is the interaction with other children. We dont often see other children from the family, she has no siblings, and the thought of going to toddler groups scares the life out of me, so going to the childminders means that she sees a small group of children and has learnt to interact with them, it wont be such an upheaval when she goes to school.

As for the research, I know there was something published about how boys can suffer from attending nursery full time, but I dont think there is anything much past that.

If you consider crime rates though, and profiling of those who commit crime, poverty and lack of possibliities can be a major factor in committing a crime. I work to keep a roof over our head, food on the table, fecking expensive heating in the winter. I'm not shopping at Selfridges (dont even know where one is!) or getting my shopping from Waitrose, or jetting off four times a year to the exotic islands, or driving around in a brand new merc.

FWIW, the relationship I have with my daughter is far better than the relationship my SAHM friend has with her daughter, my time with DD is packed with fun and painting and games and reading and playing... my friend spends her time yelling at her daughter, smacking her, swearing at her and telling her she is stupid. That is not indicitive of her being a SAHP, nor indicitive of me being a WOHP. But, I know I'd rather be me and DD than her and her DD iyswim.

All I ask from other parents is a little consideration. I think we're all trying to do the best for our children, and it saddens me that when parents get together (paritcularly a bunch of mothers) it can become a slanging match or a I'm-so-better-than-you-because-of-x contest.

What AN says.

Lupo - why did I have babies? Oh I wanted to improve the gene pool and to give some feckless Eastern European girl the job of bringing them up for a pitiful salary while I swanned around in my designer lifestyle.

No, I had them because I wanted children. Not babies, children. Because they are babies for a very short space of time, and yes, babies are phenomenally dull, in my opinion. Not necessarily hard work (and yes, I have had periods where I have been at home with them and not worked outside the home when they were tiny - it's called extended maternity leave) but mind numbingly, screamingly boring. We were all much happier when I went back to work.

And I agree with OrmIrian on the emotional, social and economic needs of the children. We have a much better standard of living because I work, and the children have a much nicer life. No, they didn't see that much of Mummy during the day when they were babies, but I doubt they remember that now.

squiffy: "I think it boils down to the fact that I want my kids to be respected and don't really care if I'm not. Just so long as you they don't rub it in my face."

Totally agree. It would be disingenuous for me to insist that the nursery workers should embrace the parents in order to work there. I know some parents (myself on occasion) do give them a hard time. And certainly as an professional myself I can see my company and clients for what they are, warts and all. I don't always think my clients are reasonable but I accord them a grudging respect because I know they have their pressures too and recognise their job is not to please me.

At the end of the day, you stay in the job because the draw (money and excitement in my case, children hopefully in the case of the nursery workers because lord knows they aren't paid much) is greater than the sum total of gripes.

If their feelings against individual parents go beyond occasional unhappiness into actual disapproval of their parenting choices and life style, at some point, these feelings may seep into their care of the children of these parents.

I had a ex-CM poster on another thread telling me about the parents being pandering idiots resulted in their children being demanding and attention-seeking and in her opinion naughty with behavioural issues.

yep, i'm afraid yabu.

I would expect the person looking after my child to like children, not me particularly, and my life style choices.

TBB - hijack comment here.

On the whole I disagree with many many of your points, and if we did want to get down and dirty, we could probably slug empirical research back and forwards to each other for months and we would not reach agreement nor change each other's fundamental views.

However can I just say that it is kind of refreshing to see your posts on this and the other thread - I get so sick of sensationalist and rabid mud-slinging on these threads that it is like a bolt of lightening when I see someone posting and think "that is someone I could sit down with, share a bottle of wine, and have a bloody good debate with" TBH I tend to leave most of these types of threads thanking the lord that I don't have to rub shoulders with people like that in real life (not because of their views, but but because of crassness and lack of empathy with which they express them). Makes a change to think oh bugger: will take a bit more time to demolish this one. Not saying I agree with anything you say, mind....

Hijack over: Pitchforks to the ready: resume the battle:

And by the way: On this thead topic itself: I have always assumed that the people who work in nurseries because it is truly their vocation DO probably disapprove of us as parents. and whilts I would not hesitate to remove my DD from the care of someone who expressed such views to my face (purely because it would display a horrific lack of professionalism and judgement), I kind of hope that these are the people looking after my kids - far better that than carers who can't be arsed to care. I think it boils down to the fact that I want my kids to be respected and don't really care if I'm not. Just so long as you they don't rub it in my face.

A bit like my feelings in Investment Banking TBH. Just because I take my 12 pices of silver doesn't mean I heart the industry I am in. But it does mean I don't diss it (and indeed quite often defend it) when I talk about it - except after consuming said bottle of wine of course

anyway, off to the Lapland thread for some light entertainment

"I feel sad that these discussions seem to always revolve primarily around the emotional, social and economic needs of parents "

Let's not forget the emotional social and economic needs of the children too. If I was unable to go out to work because the parenting-Taliban decided that I musn't (being a mummy and therefore really only permitted one role performed in one way) my children would have their economic needs seriously compromised, and along with it their social and emotional ones. The reason discussions always revolve around this subject (if they do, and I don't beleive they do as it happens) is because of the need to keep our children housed, fed and clothed is fairly fundamental. Contrary to
the lore that some SAHMs seem to hold truee, many many mothers do not go out to work to fund a wildly extravagant lifestyle. But for those women obviously this was their fault for not finding a nice alpha male to take all the nasty money worries away .

God I hate this sort of smuggery. Most of us get by the best we can.

"But historically children have been brought up by the community not just their parents."

No, sorry Portofino - didn't mean to snarl at you!

I agree with your comment above - but we are talking about CHILDREN, not BABIES.

I really, truely am not 'anti nursery'. I'd be a nutter to be anti-nursery given that my ds (5) has been doing 5 afternoons at one for the past 2 years and my second ds (3) is to start at one in a fortnight, to do 9.30 to 3.30 every day!

My primary concern (and the focus of the research which flags up concerns) is babies and children much under three doing very long hours in nursery (ie 40 hours a week and more).

"They are worth their weight in gold, every one of them"

Yes - agree. And it's a bloody appalling scandal that the majority of cc workers like madrose earn so little.

toomuchmonthatendofthemoney - friendly nod!

madrose: "I have worked in nursery, and the children had good fun, and they were cared for. The staff were dedicated to the children they worked with."

madrose, I have finally found you .

I was beginning to think mn is populated by disgruntled ex-nursery workers with nothing good to say about the nursery and swear black and blue they would never use as a 'dump' for their own children (leaving aside the issue of cost, of course) but happy to slag off selfish and materialistic working parents, effectively biting the hand that feeds them. Where are the gentle, kind, lovely and, well, just sensible carers like those at dcs' nursery, who genuinely like children, give (imperfect) parents the benefit of the doubt, and make the nursery a fun and interesting place for the children? They are worth their weight in gold, every one of them.

round of applause to TBB for sensible, informative and cool posts. Have read down this thread with interest, thinking, i will post about this/that/there and TBB has said everything i wanted to!

Sorry Tittybangbang - I seem to have incurred your wrath! I take on board your statement that bf kids stay with their mothers. But historically children have been brought up by the community not just their parents. And i do not believe that my comment about "quality time" is guff. It IS a recent invention. If you had money you had a nanny and saw the kids when it suited, If you didn't you had to cope with a household with no domestic appliances and not much income and probably a large family.

We spend all our time worrying about our DCs - too much / not enough / should I / shouldn't I... I appreciate there were plenty of kids who lived a miserable existance (as we would judge it) I was NOT comenting at all about SAH mothers.

TBB I agree with alot of your posts. I think quantity time is very underestimated and is as important as 'quality' time if not more so.