Attachment parenting childminder - is there a call for it?

But that isn't attachment parenting.

I can appreciate what you're saying, and yes, that sounds annoying, but don't lump it in with "attachment parenting" as though anyone who ever uses the term is some kind of overprotective, deluded loon, or that they aren't "allowed" to use the term unless they conform to your narrow guidelines on what it is supposed to be.

AP is not incompatible with working, in any way.

Reality, I went for the childminding training. I looked into it really carefully and was almost set up...then I realised that the things parents wanted in exchange for their minimum wage payment was not something I wanted to do.

Each charge generates me minimum wage, of course, if you have more kids you make more money - but, it irks me that the salary for looking after the youngest and eldest, and most precious and vulnerable people we have, is, essentially crap. People thought it was ok to pay me £3/hour " because otherwise it's not worth my while going back to work"

If you want me to look after your kid, then let me look after your kid. Don't bug me with "Jessica only eats vanilla Waitrose yogurt off a pink spoon. Do you have pink spoons?"

Of course, reasonable requests are fine - but we both know that some people salve their conscience about going back to work by pretending that they can make CM care exactly the same as their own.

It's not. If you want your child to be raised in your way, then stay at home. If you don't want to stay at home, then don't be so ridiculous as to suggest that you are an attachment parent.

I was definitely at the tree-hugging end of the scale with my own children (extended bfing, slings, cloth nappies, co-sleeping etc) and as a CM I would say my approach is fairly consistent with how I treated my own children. I use slings and buggy, am very happy to use cloth nappies, work with parents who are bfing, do baby led weaning, use signing etc, and I do not leave children to cry (most of the other CMs I know think I am either soft or mad....).
The families I mind for have a fairly similar approach, although I don't think any of them would describe themselves as attachment parenting, but I know it was important to them that I don't leave babies to cry it out. I think there's definitely a market there if you're in the right area - I could have filled my places twice over by now and I've only been registered 6 months. However, I only take 2 little ones at a time (my own are 4 and 7, DS1 has ASD so I'm not doing before and after schoolers as it would be too stressful for him) and nap times can be a bit of a challenge with 2 babies who both want to be ''parented" to sleep - so your approach might put limits on how many children you feel that you can care for without having to compromise your approach.

Exotic, I'm not saying that CM's are influenced by the minimum wage - I am saying that that is what they earn. Their job is to care for the child - not your neuroses, guilt or whims.

You are choosing to leave your kid in the care of someone else. Fair enough, nothing wrong with that, works for loads of folk. But, to pretty it up for the sake of your conscience and call it attachment child minding?

That's an oxymoron. You are either attending to your child's needs, or you are paying someone else to do that for you. One prioritises the kid, one priorities your job.

I can't really see how going back to work makes you an attached parent.

There is a market for anything-you might just find it harder to find them.

"I just hate the labels. People have been carrying babies around in slings forever and yet someone writes a book, makes a lot of money and it implies a whole philosophy, as if you can only be attached to your baby if you carry them around. It worked for DS1 and DS2 but DS3 simply wanted to be put down-from a very young age."

And that's why I hate the term. It's responsive/baby-led parenting, not necessarily physically attached so for want of a better word, even though DS3 didn't want to be physically attached to you, you probably did attachment parent but didn't call it that, you just did what you felt was right which is the way it should be instead of reading a book about how to raise your child

I think people are too hung up on encouraging independence etc and maybe insufficiently informed about what attachment caregiving is. I read an article about the definition of a good baby bring one who can be plonked down and doesn't cry. There are babies who are just like that but we don't need to train a baby who prefers cuddles and interaction to do it that way. Those kind of 'good baby' personality traits in an adult could easily become passive.

If you saw me in RL you probably wouldn't 'define' me as AP, I was standing chatting at the park with a couple of other mums a few minutes ago while DS toddled round. He's now playing with a couple of older kids who think he's the bees knees. I brought him in a sling but we live in a second floor flat so everyone just thinks its practical. Cosleeping and BFing happen at home. I interrupted writing this because he fell over and wanted me. Nothing particularly special about it on the surface and in fairly willing to be at least one other family in this park cosleep and I know one is BFing her 10month old.

Rant over. I promise.

OP I think there is definitely a market for that style of CMing and parents who don't want it just won't use your services.

And if you don't think it top quality then you shouldn't be leaving them.

I agree completely with BertieBotts' post.

I worked part time up until last summer and our nanny continued our responsive, baby wearing, 'touchy feelly' style of parenting with our children. She developed a strong 'third parent' type bond with the children and is still very much part of our family (and is DD's Godmother)

I think that it is mean to say that CM are influenced by the minimum wage. Most of them are doing it for the love of it and because it fits in. They won't parent the same-no one does -but it doesn't mean that it isn't top quality care.

I just hate the labels. People have been carrying babies around in slings forever and yet someone writes a book, makes a lot of money and it implies a whole philosophy, as if you can only be attached to your baby if you carry them around. It worked for DS1 and DS2 but DS3 simply wanted to be put down-from a very young age.
I think that attachment (for want of another word) CM is fine if they are looking after one child, I wouldn't choose them for my toddler if they were always carrying the baby. I would want to know that at times the baby was out of the way asleep. However, people want different things from a CM so perhaps some people would like it.

Sorry, voice of dissent.

You need to accept that you are choosing to leave your child in the care of a stranger you are paying minimum wage to look after him.

The CM will care for his needs, and might even love him. But, can't parent him like YOU would.

You takes your money, you makes your choice.

Unattached parenting IMO is: dump baby in cot, feed baby every 3 hours, ignore cries and attempts to communicate etc.

It's a spectrum and I personally hate the term AP but it's a recognised way to refer to what we do.

What's unattached parenting then? So for those if us who have dodgy backs and couldnt manage a sling or have toddlers who need cuddles as much as babies!

Was I unattached?

Yes, exactly LittleWaveyLines. Tummy time is an invention for babies who are sat up in chairs/swings/carseats/pushchairs all the time.

I have one DC who was in a sling practically all the time except at nighttime for the early months of their life because they were massively unsettled and my constant presence was the only thing that seemed to reassure them. Obviously they sometimes sat on my lap on the floor. That baby was the earliest of my three to crawl or walk (crawling at barely 6 months and walking unaided at 10 months). First time in a pushchair was at 9 months with grandparent, although had occasionally sat in a highchair from 6 months. Never had 'tummy time', nor did they lie on babygyms or anything else before they could sit unaided and play on the floor with me sat next to them (if I moved away they screamed!!). Thankfully the others weren't quite so clingy, but this baby's development was certainly not negatively affected.

Also, I can't see any difference between caring for a mindee baby and toddlers/older children in this way and having several young children yourself who you are parenting in this style. Slings work really well for mums of babies with toddlers.

"I would wonder how the baby would physically develop. If there was no floor play, no highchair time, no pushchair time etc. "

^^ I find this comment just bizarre and I hope it doesn't come from a CM. If so it worries me that a CM could know so little about normal development (although in fairness I've heard HVs come out with similar tosh) . Babies who are carried in slings a lot don't need 'tummy time', and it certainly isn't necessary for babies to be in plastic manufactured devices to develop. Think about other cultures!!

I've got twins plus 2 others, and back slinging makes a huge difference to how much you can physically do with a baby attached. With one baby on my back I can get lots done with the others, including bfeed! On the front they just get in the way as they get bigger.