to think once the children are there it is too late to do anything about it...

[Oakmaiden]

This is not a thread about a thread as such, but it was inspired by another thread.

Sometimes I have heard people say "if she didn't want to spend time with her children, she shouldn't have had them". And I always think - but maybe she thought she was going to love spending time with her children, but it turns out once they have arrived that actually they just don't feel that way. That despite loving the children as people, the sheer work and drudgery is so unlike what was expected, that actually looking after the children is not a joy but simply a chore.

What should a person in this position do? Would it be so very wrong for them to "subcontract" the joyless parts to someone else? I don't have an answer, but I wonder what people actually think when they say the fated "well, she shouldn't have had children then"...

People say this about women who work don't they.

If that's what you mean then in most cases work is not a choice but a necessity. I don't subcontract someone to do the joyless parts. There are no joyless parts for me, but I do have to work some am happy to pay for my child to be in a safe, caring, social and educational environment.

I wonder why it's always 'she' and not 'he'

I don't see how a parent who does 'other things' (whether it's paid work, voluntary work or golfing) gets berated for having a nanny/housekeeper/cleaner

Who gives a turd fuck if you can afford it?

And children are not that interesting

I know people do say it about people who work - and that is particularly unfair, because so often, as you say, that is a necessity not a choice.

I was thinking though (totally hypothetically) about someone for whom it IS a choice. Someone who thought they would love the whole parenting thing, but once they got their found out that they really really don't. And so chooses to spend their time in other ways. I can't help feeling that it wouldn't necessarily be wrong of them... but I dunno...

YANBU it's similar to a lot of pointless posts like "why did you have a child with this man you're having problems with?" etc...

It assumes the OP should have had the ability to foresee every future problem. It also seems to suggest the solution is going back in time as I can't see any other reason someone would post that as advice

Yanbu! I always think that's a ridiculous comment. It's a bit like why get married if you don't enjoy the honeymoon or sharing a bed.

Thing is I don't particularly like kids and I'm really not into babies. I have five children and would have loved more but I like them once they're at least 6 or 7 and start to enjoy them as teens and adults. So yes I went back to Uni or work ASAP and used childcare when they were young.

Comments like this put other people under pressure and are usually made by unhappy resentful people trying to justify their own misery. Also think mother admitting they don't want to spend every waking minute with their little darlings is still frowned upon by some.

I was just sat wondering what I really thought - and I really couldn't quite decide, so wondered what other people thought :)

Sometimes I love my children so much it nearly takes my breath away. Then sometimes they have to be in bed by seven because I'm tired and can't do any more childcare. I would never let them see that I want them out of the way but god, sometimes I'm gritting my teeth till bedtime. I thought that was perfectly normal.

I think until you actually have them you don't really believe they can be as hard work as people make out.

Especially with babies.

You have them and love them but that doesn't mean you can't have days where you just want to hide in a cave.

People do jobs they love and still get pissed off with various aspects from time to time! It doesn't mean they shouldn't have taken the job.

I dont think people say this about women that work. I had to go back to work when my ds was 12 weeks (yes 12 weeks old) as split with ex-dp. Needed the money, had to weigh it up. Eat or starve and be on the streets homeless. I think the OP is talking about people that have children. Stay at home (nothing wrong with that whatsoever) but let nannies spend more time in the childrens lives. When really the mother could possibly in some cases be out socialising all the time (nothing wrong with that in small doses), and should be doing many more things with her children. Also its good if the mother can get a break but some i think take it to the extreme

I love my children, and I love being a sahm, but I am a better parent for having a break when my 5 year old is at school.

When he was a baby, I couldn't imagine ever wanting to be away from him for a single minute, but I am only human and sometimes it is nice to go to the loo on my own.

It always annoys me when people judge. We are all made differently, and full - time childcare is not for everyone. If we lived in stone age villages, we would have the odd break while our mothers, sisters and neighbours shared the load.

I dont think the OP is talking about mothers going back to work. I think she means dumping children with nannies for most of the day when the mother is out gallivanting most of the the time. Nothing wrong with having a nannie and the mother going out from time to time socialising and getting her hair/nails done. There is a balance but I think your children come first

Until you have had them you are not really in a position to say what it is like.

A lot of it is utterly utterly boring. I don't blame anyone for subcontracting. Knowing what we know now, dh and I are not 100% sure we would have children.

Generally people only leave the DC with people they trust.

MIL has my children a far bit, she loves spending time with her and I enjoy the break.

In fact since my DC have come back from hoilday with PIL I have be a better mum.

Mylovelyboy - I wonder if it is better for a child to spend most of their time with a bored and resentful parent, or with an enthusiastic and committed Nanny... I rather suspect the latter...

Of course I believe that in an ideal world every child should spend as much time as is possible with an enthusiastic and committed parent, but if that is never going to be able to happen, then what is the better scenario?

oak fair point. Why bother having children in the first place ? makes me sad to think a parent could think this way. my ds has bought me so much love and pleasure.

That is the point, though, Mylovelyboy. Before you have children you don't know what it is like to have children. Especially nowadays, when often people's first experience of handling a baby is when their own is born. So how do you know before you have children that actually you are not going to like it? And once you are in that position, what can you possibly do about it?

It really really is often not about love. I think you can love your children in a heart stopping way, but still not enjoy actually looking after them on a daily basis...

Nobody bats an eyelid if a man only spends 15 minutes a day with his children (for whatever reason).

fwiw matryoshaka I felt the same as you until ds arrived a year ago, he's bloody fascinating. It's an absolute privilege being able to watch him develop so you never know

And another - I don't think you sound vile at all. I think you sound honest.

Oh yes, I should add I enjoy him much more now I'm back at work part time!

I agree that some ladies do have PND. Must be awful. And yes, help at hand is a good thing if you are finding it hard to cope for a medical or personal reason. I am talking about the wrongs of subcontracting for the sake of the mothers social life.

I believe the parents should do the most of the childcare they can, children are people with feelings.

Children who are not with there parents often tend to grow up feeling unloved, rejected by thier parents.

Of course all parents need a break.

It's when the nanny takes on the role of the parent where it comes a problem.