to be saddened by a three week old baby in full time childcare?

[lilystyles]

At a local toddler group last week there was a childminder who I'm friendly with, she had with her a new child, a baby of 3 weeks who's mother had gone back to work full-time in teh pub she and her husband own. I am not judging this woman, it's her choice but I couldn't help but feel sad at the situation.

It is sad.

I don't judge the parents in the slightest, whether the decision was by choice or necessity.

I do judge a society that doesn't make better provisions so that young children can be cared for by the people most likely to care for them best - their parents. Parents should have alternatives available, but in a civilised society either parent should also have the choice to stay at home also.

Pip, you assume though that parents are the best people to care for tiny babies. I know I wasn't when they were little (I'm better with ages 3 and over). I wouldn't have been able to do, it'd drive me nuts. I think DH would be better than me, but when you're with your tiny baby and all you can think about is "when are you finally going to sleep so I can do some work" because you genuinely MISS working, then you're not the best person for the job.
And that doesn't make me a bad mum. Quite the opposite

twilight3 - like I said, all parents should have the choice. I don't judge the choice they make, whether to stay at home or not. What I object to is the position where some parents - many of whom will be the best carers for their babies - don't have a genuine choice.

YANBU

Poor mum. Poor baby if the c/m isn't the cuddly type.

I went back to work three days a week when my oldest was only five and a half weeks old. She was like a little pig in clover - clutched to my mothers heaving, grateful bosom all day (my mum was convinced she'd go to her grave without a grandchild cause I was a bit tardy settling down). But I missed dd sooooooo much when I wasn't with her. I was utterly obsessed, like every pore in my body was yearning for her.

"I find it difficult to understand people who say that it physically hurt them to be away from their children"

I fell profoundly and intensely in love with my children over the first few weeks of their life. I felt completely obsessed with them, thought about them non-stop, yearned for them - their physical presence, the smell and feel of them. Felt anxious when I couldn't see them. I assumed this was what the 'bonding' process was and that it was a normal, instinctive mammalian response to becoming a mother.

Do you think that it's a signal of a lack of confidence in my parenting? I see it as the opposite - that I'm happy to follow my instincts and not afraid of being judged as 'neurotic' by other people!

Titty- I felt like that with the first, and it's got progressively less acute with each baby. Now I trust that most people who offer and are willing to look after your baby are not going to drop it on its head or batter it. I didn't used to trust anyone to look after DS1 for any length of time and ended up staying at home for 6 years when my older children were small. I'm don't wish I hadn't done it, just wish that I had organised myself to be in a position to be able to work to work when they were little.

tittybangbang - I know exactly what you mean. I find it immensely difficult to comprehend that other mothers don't find that being with their baby/child is their most overriding desire!

titty - I was the same with DS, I couldn't bear to be physically separated from him, it was almost painful.

We can all only see this from our own perspective though, so to me the situation of having to go back to work only a few weeks after giving birth would seem like the biggest calamity in the world.

twilight - I find your suggestion that any mother who isn't able to walk away from her newborn for several hours without a backward glance is neurotic to be slightly offensive.

I don't think that having an overwhelming desire to be with your baby necessarily means that you don't trust anyone else to take care of him/her. I left my baby with my mother very easily when I needed to do something that required me to be without her, and I never had any separation issues (went away on holiday without her when she was a baby, had no problems leaving her at nursery school etc). But I still would rather see her as much as I possibly can - and she's nearly 6!

that was not my suggestion, that's what the nanny said. I was thinking about it back then and I suppose, from her point of view, it must be quite tiresome, if not offensive, for parents to call every half an hour to check if their cild is still alive under the care of a loving professional. And she has to reassure them, yet again, with a big smile.

I loved that woman, I actually miss her, she supported our little family through some rough times.

although my last sentence is completely irrelevant to the topic

I went back to work 6 weeks after a crash CS. Best decision ever. DD1's childminder was a wonderful women. She cared for DD beautifully and competently. I asked for and took advice from her which I would have thrown back in my mother's face.

I took a longer maternity leave after DC2 (4 months) but after DC3 I went back after 4 weeks (planned CS this time!). The last time I handed care over to my DH as 3 DCs changed the economics of paid for childcare.

I have no regrets about going back to work quickly. My DCs are now growing up so I have a lot more perspective than I had before. The early years are about making sure that DCs are comfortable and stimulated to the extent that that is necessary. This can be done by a parent or another carer. It doesnt really matter which so long as the baby is comfortable.

The parental role really comes to the fore later when DCs need emotional and intellectual care - parental advice and guidance. This starts in the primary years.

Physical care can be contracted out but it is the emotional care which need to come from parents.

With you Suzie. But to offer the emotional care my children deserve I have to maintain my sanity by going to work. It's just how it is for some people.

Totally agree Twilight. The emotionl care doesnt need parents and DCs to be constantly in the same room. Emotional care covers so much more than just saying 'There, there' over a scraped knee.

Suzie that is just your opinion. You sound rather clinical and detached to me.

I think we are in danger of grading lother love by just how me we need to be with our children.

Truth is babies and young children and teens for that matter dont really care who looks after them so long as that care is loving and good.

If you love your dc with every pore in your body (as i do ) it doesnt make you a better or better bonded mum its more about your need.

Of course it is just my opinion. This is Mumsnet not Childpsychologistnet.

I am now emotionally detached from placing my children in childcare because that started more than 15 years ago. I didnt feel guilt then and now that I see the outcome of many of our parenting decisions I have no guilt now.

YANBU

Suzie - if I understand you correctly, you believe that a little baby's overwhelming need is for physical care, and that children's need for emotional and intellectual care grows with age and that parents come to the fore as that need for emotional and intellectual care develops and need for physical care diminishes?

I want to tell you something funny about ds .......it is related -promise .

Last year ds was taking an A1 in psychology,they were looking at attatchment the tutor explained how mothers,fathers and children bond and the impact upon the bonds.

Then for example she pointed to ds 'teendracschick for example has a v strong bond with his Mum'

'really' asked he 'how can you tell?'becoming quite neurotic that his mummysboy leanings were disclosed.

Well probably the way you always phone her at lunchtime as I walk by smiled wise tutor .

love that tutor .

Don't understand the argument of "well things could be much worse for the baby, so you have no right to be saddened."

Yes, things could be worse, and they could be better. NOone is blaming the mother; noone knows her circumstances, but the OP is saddened at the thought of the baby and so am I.

"This can be done by a parent or another carer. It doesnt really matter which so long as the baby is comfortable"

Bring back baby farms I say!

As long as they're having their physical needs met then emotionally all will be well.

Can we carry this premise over into our marriages too? I'm thinking of hiring someone out to iron DH's shirts, cook for him and shag him so I don't have to.

Babies' understanding of the world and their sense of themselves is shaped by their relationships with those who love them most passionately. And this is never going to be someone who is caring for the baby primarily for money.

I wonder how much of this is a reflection of our own upbringing. I suppose I don't necessarily see a problem with babies being left because I lived it and probably did better for it.

Personally I was raised by 3 fantastic professional nannies while my parents worked (and then not so wonderful au pairs when we were older). I don't think I'm scarred at all. In fact I consider myself lucky that my not-terribly-maternal mother didn't drive herself round the twist looking after me and my siblings because people thought she ought to. Instead I benefited from endless patience, knowledge, experience and nurture from someone who wanted to be around me all day and my mother benefited from going out to work, so I was happy, she was happy and I had a strong, independent role model who, whatever mistakes she may have made with me otherwise, made the right choice!

I never felt my mother didn't want me, i remeber she was always there when I needed her, she came to almost every speech day, sports day and end of term concert, she was there every evening and every weekend and she was better for it.

the problem is that society is designed in a way that's inimical to parents.
WOmen or men who SAH are isolated, intellectually, financially, emotionally. The support for parents is dire, in most cases.

My sister went back to work when her DD was 3 months old. My niece is a very lovely, very well adjusted woman (she's now 19) and her and my sister have a great relationship.

The problem with this kind of thread is that it leads to creep about what is an acceptable age to leave a baby. And inevitably becomes an attack on all WOHMs. And meanwhile men go back to work three weeks after the birth and no one thinks anything of it.