Lots of people think that babies should be at home with parents - but how does this work in reality?

[Buthowdoesthatwork]

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/thirty_days_only/5227945-whats-your-secret-viewpoint

I’ve noticed a lot of people on here, including the above thread, expressing the view that babies and toddlers should be “at home with mum” (they rarely say dad, but that’s another topic) when they are 2, 3, or until they start school. Many people also point out that nurseries are not the best environment for young babies.

Whilst I’m sure that there are many benefits to this proposed set-up, I’m genuinely curious as to how it translates into reality for most people in 2024? Not trying to bait anyone here - but I really do wonder how people are making it work?

I can imagine that it’s possible for families where one parent (again - dad?) is a very high earner, to the extent that the other can stay at home without causing any financial issues. Perhaps it also makes sense if one parent earns very little and/or is in a career where a long break wouldn’t harm longer term employment prospects, such that childcare costs are not offset by the benefits of working.

But, perhaps incorrectly, I imagine that most people fall somewhere in between these examples? For example, I know that I would have great difficulty in returning to the career that I’ve spent over a decade training for if I took three or four years off. I now work part time and childcare consumes a huge proportion of what I earn (shared money, but for the sake of illustration); however, I think it will benefit my children in the longer term if I can retain some of my career and earning potential. I’m not talking about fancy houses and flash cars either, as some critics seem to be suggesting are the drivers for both parents working, but just - maintaining an OK standard of living with heating on and clean clothes and fresh food? We couldn’t afford a nanny, we don’t have family on standby to help - so nursery it is.

I’m prepared to believe that it would be better for my children if I was at home all the time, especially whilst they are little. Or to have a nanny. But those aren’t truly realistic options for us. I don’t really know what the solution is. I’m wondering whether all those who pan nurseries are in a very privileged position, either financially or in terms of support? Or if there are other things I’ve not considered.

I would be bored, frustrated, under stimulated and lacking in worth, and how is that good for children to be around.

Reading some of the threads on MN about nurseries and that sentence sums up the staff.

People are able to believe it (I do) but also understand that life doesn't always work out that way (I do) and feel sad about that (I do) because it likely is better for children to be at home with their parent (except, of course, in cases of neglect, abuse etc). Most of the time that will be mother because of breastfeeding.

IMO they are just justifying their own choices.

They were able to stay at home with their children, so think that must be the optimal choice.

Much of the time I see parents criticising childcare have not actually used a nursery or childminder, so they’ve got some preconceptions about what it’s like based on… somewhere between very little and nothing at all.

eg the classic ‘leaving your child with strangers’. They aren’t strangers, as they see each other multiple days a week. My child’s relatives see vastly less of them, and no one would query my leaving them together!

My Mum looked after a couple of other kids at the same time when I was young to bring in extra money. It was nice for me too to have someone to play with. She also did Avon.

I do believe that it's better for under 3s to be at home assuming decent parents. I actually know multiple people who have managed this on very meagre income.

My thinking is more "why can't more people afford this?" Full-time nursery is soooo expensive, it would have taken up nearly my whole salary, so it wasn't worth working for me - and I wanted to be at home anyway. If you aren't entitled to a significant number of free hours, surely a large percentage of people aren't seeing any financial benefit from working for the first two years? Thus could stay at home if they wanted to.

Also OP, anecdotal but, I find it quite funny now that my own mother (stayed at home while we were young) has this viewpoint - despite having been insistent throughout my own childhood I must have v good job etc etc.

I’m not really sure what she was envisioning would happen either, as I can’t be career-woman and also at home for several years. I might ask her when I next see her.

I think if people were truly comfortable with their choices they wouldn’t be so judgemental. Like a PP says, it’s a lot of people justifying why they think their way is best.

I think nursery is brilliant, it’s been amazing for our child. I wouldn’t want to be a stay at home parent, it wouldn’t work for us and it wouldn’t be the best for our family. If it works for others great, do the best for your family, but don’t assume what is best for you is best for everyone.

It only works if one salary is enough for the family.

Personally I do think - as with financial investments - parents look after their own children best in those very early years, with maybe a little nursery time ( three hours in the morning/afternoon) for social skills.

But having seen a lot of nannies, as we lived on a “ nanny circuit”, I’d pick nursery over a nanny. The problem is they are alone with the Dc for hours on end. I’ve often observed them at the park, playgroups, science museum etc. They don’t always interact with the Dc the same way. So at the museums - or even in shops etc - you will see parents bend down to the pram to point things out, explain what it is etc. The nannies often stalk through pushing the pram and interaction is limited to basics like “ do you need the loo?” or “ we’ll have your sandwich now.” They are often glued to phones! They also sometimes tell parents the Dc is “ friends with x” which really means “ we’ll do a playdate with x cos I get on with his nanny and we’ll chat.” It’s just so unsupervised. I’d pick nursery over long hours with a nanny.

The thread title says "babies" but then you are talking about 2 and 3 year olds, which are not babies at all. I think everyone can agree women need time off work with a new baby, partly to recover from the physical impact of pregnancy and birth, and because breastfeeding and baby sleep patterns are not really compatible with most jobs.

I don't think there is any widespread view that women should stay home full time with toddlers and preschoolers, unless they have had another baby, which of course is often the case.

I'm in the very lucky position that I could choose what I wanted to do, and I chose to stay at home until my child starts school. I have a career that is much easier than most to get back into after a break (teaching), and we can survive on my wife's salary (also a teacher), plus our combined savings.

However, the main reason we can afford to do this is because my parents bought me a house 9 years ago, so we haven't had to pay any rent or mortgage in that time. I don't know anyone else lucky enough to be in this situation, so yes, realistically, most parents of young children cannot do this.

I stopped working to look after DD (I was previously a teacher before quitting that before I got pregnant, and worked for a local charity for pennies). DH earns well and my income wouldn’t have covered full time nursery (I know he obviously would have contributed but we’d have made a net loss every month). I have been HEAVILY judged for stopping work to be a SAHM, less so when I got pregnant again (will have a 20 month gap between babies) but despite OP making the valid point that a lot of people say women should be at home with their children, I’ve personally found that because I AM at home with my children, I’m subject to judgemental comments constantly.

Women can’t win!

I genuinely think it's better for babies and toddlers to be at home and that in an ideal world most people would choose this. I suspect a lot of people justify to themselves by saying it's beneficial to leave children in nurseries. I don't think it is and if I was doing it again I wouldn't.
Nurseries are staffed by poorly paid overworked people with poor educational skills. They are cesspits of germs.
Old fashioned toddler groups were infinitely better.

I went very part time and put DC in nursery which took up my entire salary. This was in the 90s before there was any free childcare. We took a massive drop in income and standard of living for 7 years.
I could just as easily have just taken those years off and I think the DC would have benefited. But you don't know that at the time.

Many people can afford this. They just don’t want to. I didn’t want to. Many people don’t want to be a SAHP. Bully for you if you want to, obviously but why assume it’s everyone’s preference? I would no more have considered being a SAHP than I would have considered retraining as a burlesque dancer on maternity leave.

That's not actually true, though - that a nanny or full time home is proveably better than nursery - if the nursery is high quality, isn't crazy hours, and the family isn't forced into it.

"Women can't win". Nailed it.

I agree women can't win! I chose to return to full time work when my baby was 9 months and I took my time to pick a nursery that I liked. Honestly, all was fine. Baby was happy, he still is 5 years later. Very sociable, very attached to me, very bright.
Have I had few years of a very hard life balancing a demanding corporate role with sleepless nights, breastfeeding and a child in nursery (meaning illnesses left right and center)? Yes, I did. But I would do it again.
My career took off. We can afford nice experiences for him, travelling.
The sweet spot was probably when he was a preschooler, as our private nursery would be open 8am-6pm (he didn't stay all those hours, but it was great to have the flexibility every day), they were doing really amazing activities and he wasn't ill so often anymore.
Then when school started....the shock! For a starter, school hours are fixed. And the whole system is really not made for working parents, with so so so many 'events' you are supposed to take part in (exclusively in the middle of our working hours!).
Fortunately, as we are both now very senior in our careers we can move things around in our diaries and we are always doing all drop offs, pick ups and go to all nativities, events etc.

I work 13 hour shifts, 10 days a month. 4 of those days fall on a weekend so my husband has them on those days. My parents very kindly mind them on the 6 weekdays a month that I work (during my husband's working hours, he collects them again at 4pm). It works for us. I like the fact with my children get a lot of quality one on one time with mum, dad and grandparents. My eldest is 3 now so he goes to preschool for 3 hours a day which is brilliant too.

All families are different and everyone is doing their best for their children. Whether that means full-time childcare, one parent staying at home, working part-time or being fortunate enough to have family help. Once your children are loved and cared for you're doing a great job.

For many people it doesn’t work, but that’s a problem with society. I think being at home, with perhaps a morning in preschool from the age of 2 or 3, is 100% better for children. You can debate about whether it’s better for mothers or for the economy but imo we need to accept that the culture we have now effectively sacrifices children to a small degree. Some people may think the cost to children is small and worth paying for the greater good.

For us, it was really important to have someone at home most of the time, partly for the kids but also because they are ill so often, it’s actually really hard for both parents to be working. We both worked 3 days a week for many years, so someone was almost always at home. For the one day of overlap we had a childminder.

Definitely.
Some very young children have been very badly damaged by long days in nursery.
Attachment disorders.

This is really interesting and I think tangentially related to the falling birth rate. In our present culture, being a mother is fairly low status.

Childminders are the gap in the middle?

That's where mine went.

Smaller than a nursery but equivalent to a big family.

A happy mum is more important than a full time mum.

Perhaps if the argument was balanced that the dad should be a supportive partner, either by flexibility in both their jobs, or not abusing his position financially then fine have a debate.

In this modern world childrearing and running a house should be a joint effort however each individual household decides to divide that up.

You’re making some huge assumptions.

I didn’t need to return to work but wanted to - I had an interesting career I’d studied for and wanted to progress. DH was in a similar position.

Not all nurseries are poorly staffed - DT’s had a 1:2 ratio in the baby room - same ratio if I’d stayed home with them. Their nursery had a low turnover of staff who were well qualified - teachers, nurses. It wasn’t a cesspit of germs - clean premises and lots of outdoor activities and space.

Old fashioned toddler groups would have been my idea of hell

We believed being looked after by close family was the best thing for DD when she was little and it wasn't too hard for us to manage, and we really enjoyed our set up as a family.

I took maternity/annual leave to cover the first year. Then DH and I both reduced our hours. I worked 3 days a week, DH worked 4 days a week for 3 years. My mum, retired, had DD 2 days a week.
When DD turned 3 she went to nursery for 2 mornings a week, to get ready for school.

But we had the right circumstances that made it work so well for us.

• Accommodating work places
• Manageable mortgage, no other debts
• Available and supportive grand parents
• Only having one child

Not everyone has what we have or wants what we have. So we don't think badly of parents who make other choices.

Thanks all. Lots of thoughtful and measured replies here, instead of the usual fight about which way is best.

Sadly, I think it’s absolutely right that women can’t win! As many have said, I suppose we all have to muddle through and work out the best way to balance things given our own unique circumstances, relationships, children, families, jobs, finances, interests, and so on!

Those of you who say we have to own our own decisions are also right! Perceived criticism is hard to take when it might suggest that you’re not doing the very best for your kids - but clearly, there’s no way of doing everything perfectly and we all just have to do things as best we can.

DT’s are now in their mid 20’s. They and the majority of their childhood friends went to full time nursery from six months old and had two working parents. None have been damaged by this or have any attachment issues. DT’s are happy independent adults leading successful personal and professional lives.