to be sat here crying at the thought of putting my baby in nursery

[pinkyp]

my 2nd ds is 10 months, i've just gone and got myself a good job only problem is they only had full time available. I start next week. I'm sat in floods of tears looking at all the nurerys online - they dont look good enough, cant bare the thought of going to one, no one will be able to look after him like i do. What about when he's being naughty they wont love him they'll dislike him for being naughty.

I feel like running away, tempted to go get in bed and hide. Please help me get a grip.

You'll be fine, and your child' (most importantly) will be fine

You do seem to have left it rather late to organise childcare though- and 'you definitely need to visit not just look online.

Once you're into the swing of your new job and the nursery routine you won't look back.

And ignore the small minority who have posted on here just to tell you that 'it wouldn't do for me, only family are good enough!'- clearly they aren't happy with their own situation and are probably jealous that you have a good job.

My kids are in their teens now so I think I'd notice r childcare had damaged them. But as they are happy and successful, and I have 'the benefit of a good career because I never gave up work, I'm not losing sleep over anything!

Honest- in a few weeks you won't believe you felt like this

if childcare

Nurseries are like everything else, you get bad ones and great ones. Sames as you get good schools, bad schools. Good solitictors/bad solitors etc. You absolutely have to pick a good one.

When you go on a visit, speak to the staff, ask them 'difficult' questions, ask what their policies are on various things, what are their staff/children ratios. Do your research before you go and know what to ask them. If they don't know these things it's a big no no.

I'm a nursery nurse and I work in a fantastic nursery. The owner is totally dedicated to the wellbeing and development of the children (and staff-she's ace!) but I do accept that's not always the case.

a bit at "1 to 1 care is the most pleasant way for everyone"

how do we know what is the most pleasant way for a baby? and how do we know that the closeness to a sibling can't mean as much to them as the closeness to an adult carer?

from the time I can remember I loved growing up with siblings close in age; I certainly wouldn't have wanted to change places with my cousin who had the 3:1 attention of his mother and grandparents

no doubt it was harder work for my mother- but again, who decides that "harder work" equals "less pleasant"? she wasn't lazy, she wouldn't think something was unpleasant because it meant working twice as hard

Agreed cory - bizarre statement.

Is the most pleasant way when they are babies. If anyone wants to come and say that looking after two babies or a baby and little toddler is easier than looking after one, then they can do so and I will think that is a bizarre statement. And to suggest that a baby doesn't prefer undivided attention is also bizarre.

Again it is totally different when children are older. I wish posters would stop conflating the situation of babies and preschoolers.

What the parent finds easier and what the child prefers are two different thing.

You only have to look at the close bond between twins from a young age to show that they find it much more pleasant having there twin close.

tryingtoleave, what some of us cannot understand is why you equate "easier" with "more pleasant".
I never said looking after a toddler and baby would be "easier"; it would just never occur to me that anything that is harder has to be less pleasant: I think of life in terms of fun, not in terms of having an easy ride.

My present job is far harder than the job I did in my twenties- but it is also far more pleasant because it is more interesting and challenging.

I am fairly sure this is how my mother felt about having 3 children close in age: "more pleasant" to her meant "more fun, more interesting, more challenging". "Easier" might well have meant "duller". After all, the easiest path would be to have no children at all. She liked a challenge, lots of people do.

And looking at all the photos of dd and ds gazing adoringly at one another I am not convinced that they would have had a better time with more input from me and none from each other.

Oh course it is easier for the parent with one!! Unless that one is particularly difficult and you are comparing that child with 2 more easy going ones I suppose. There are always exceptions. Agree with cory - does that make it better?

It is very odd to say it is better for the child. Past the obvious - 'how do you know what all babies prefer?!' question the benefits of having a sibling to play with are enormous.

I do equate easier and more pleasant in this case. You might be looking for some different adjectives, like 'more fulfilling', 'more satisfying'. I speak as one who generally gets satisfaction from choosing the more challenging route. And I am not denying that children get benefits from siblings eventually - I'm just not sure that many toddlers are excited when mum brings home a rival.

I don't think it is controversial to say babies prefer to be cuddled than to be left to wait? Are you denying that?

No, but dd and ds seem to have spent a lot of their childhood cuddling each other. I am sure they have had more love and affection because they've had each other. You seem to think parental attention is the only kind that counts. I don't agree with that: I think siblings can get a lot from each other.

No I dont. Don't you read? Haven't I said there are benefits from siblings. Many times. I have 2 dc myself. All I am saying is that it is more pleasant to look after one baby at a time?

You are getting sidetracked and misconstruing a fairly unobjectionable statement.

Looking at the early pictures of myself and my 1 year younger brother, going out in the pram together, having our nappies changed together, being read to while he was breastfed, it certainly looks as if I am getting something precious from the closeness to him. Not saying I was never jealous or angry with him, but then there were times when I was angry and jealous of my parents too. As far as I can tell, the good times prevailed.

I'm not disagreeing.

"All I am saying is that it is more pleasant to look after one baby at a time? "

And all I am saying is I find to me "more pleasant" does not mean the same as "easier". I found life got more pleasant, because more interesting, once I'd had my second baby. It was a better life for me, having a baby and a toddler, because I was enjoying myself even more. Are you trying to say this can't possibly have been the case?

And fwiw my friend who had 3 babies in the space of 3 years did not seem any less happy when the third one had arrived- I'd say probably the opposite. She looked like a woman who was having fun.

But in this case is it not what's more pleasant for the child that counts not for the parent?

Ds has gone to a nursey from 8 months ish and loves it. The staff do give cuddles and care when needed. I wouldn't have sent him there otherwise! He has also got so much out of the interaction he gets with other children!

Exactly sirzy

There seem to be some posters who feel that what they find easiest or pleasantest must therefore be 'best' for the child. My kids thrived in their childcare setting and as teenagers are confident and bright . No doubt my life would have been easier not working, or having a massive age gap with one in school before having the second- but it doesn't mean THEIR lives would be better

She must be a masochist.

I had a friend with 3 under 2. She used to get very cranky when parents of one said they were having a hard time.

Anyway, this is still totally irrelevant.

As a mum of twins and an older child, I would say that it is obviously more difficult looking after two babies than one baby. However, at about the age of 2, I actually found it easier looking after the twins than I did one child (when my oldest was at that age) as they were loads of fun and were never bored. The special bond between twins and siblings can be a joy to watch.

I do agree though with what tryingtoleave says about twins reaching their developmental milestones behind single children. My own are about a year behind in terms of speech/language, though hopefully they will eventually catch up. Of course, not all twins have delays ... I know several sets of very chatty girl twins! But there is quite a lot of evidence to suggest that twins (esp twin boys) are more prone to developmental delays and behavioural issues.

The latest twist to this thread is not helping a pregnant mother of a 15 month old who will be 21 months when her 'rival' appears! (Fingers crossed etc.)

The bit that is not irrelevant to the main argument, trying, is the suggestion that many babies and children derive a lot of satisfaction from interacting with other children.

From everything I have heard or seen of my own childhood this was the case for me: being close to my brothers made me happy.

My own dcs clearly got a lot of pleasure from each other- ds (the younger) showed pleasure in his sister's company as soon as he was able to show anything at all.

Ds showed signs of enjoying toddler group from a very early age; dd enjoyed the other children at the childminder's.

My nephews seemed much happier after they started nursery.

All children in my large extended (and very close) family have shown pleasure in interacting with their cousins from babyhood onwards. Adult attention is not the only attention worth having.

Going back to a previous point about other countries nursery provision. We live in Spain and mat leave is 16 weeks and almost everyone goes back (has to) when it's up. Municipal nurseries (at least here in Andalusia) are subsidised heavily and usually very good. The one in our village would have been a max of 120 euros a month even without being eligible for subsidy for care from 730 am to 530pm (hardly anyone actually uses this much...DS went 9ish to 130). Mostly gps are used to pick up slack and often have them from end of mat leave til 12 months ish when they go to nursery as baby places v limited. Nursery here is seen as normal and a good thing for kids. No hand wringing at all. DS's nursery is the municipal one and excellent. All staff are long term and the atmosphere and the care is great.

RE:BF'ing and working full time, get a good electric pump (the medela swing and electric mini are wonderful) and either get your DS used to a cup or a bottle. I used Breastflow bottles and expressed 2/3 times a day and I managed to BF at home with DS drinking expressed milk and formula at nursery (if they ran out of EBM) until he was 18 months and I chose to stop.

I do think that the debate goes round in circles, because people who are anti-nursery aren't willing to budge and will stick to their guns that every child is better off at home with mum having 1:1 care and those that are pro-nursery think SOME kids really benefit from nursery from an early age

PointyBlackHat, you make a very salient point. We really really undervalue those who look after children, be that SAHM's or childcare workers and I think it's terrible that they aren't given more credit, recognition and renumeration for doing a very hard very important job whether it's caring for their own kids or other peoples.

Childcare is seen as women's work, and there is also often a misconception that childcare workers lack intelligence which boils my piss. The fact that we don't value childcare and those who provide it either in theri own homes, or professionaly and give it more importance is a part of the reason that poor nursery care exists, because we're not placing the importance we should on excellent provision of childcare for all