To go away for 3 months and leave DC with dad

[Littleworrier1]

I's a student and need to graduate by end of the year. As part of my studies I have the option of doing a research in Asia for three months. Me and DP were planning to go together and bring DC (10 months old) with us but we won't make it for financial reasons. The research is not compulsory but will look good on my CV, hence increase my chances of finding a job (at least I hope so). DP thinks I should go. He wants to put DC to nursery for few hours a day and MIL would have DC the rest of the time while he comes back from work.

I'm not sure whether to leave DC for three whole months and miss her dearly, or go do something that might help us in future. I know DP will look after DC ok but I doubt he will be as dedicated as me - like I always cook fresh food, use water rather than wet wipes when changing nappies, bath every night, etc.

Would you say someone is a bad mother if they go away for three months if they had the chance not to?

So what was the lol in relation to mango?

Quite a lot of people doing themselves proud on this thread.

Always a bit bemused by those who keep shouting the same thing over and over again and never getting to the point where they recognise that other people might have different opinions and that's ok.

OP - I would seriously step away from this thread and make your own decision based on some non biased research. All you're getting here is emotive responses from people whose backgrounds you have no idea of.

Those who shout loudest are the one's whose opinions I would suggest you ignore the most. There's a reason why they shout and continue to shout so loudly, aggressively and defensively, those reasons should not be what you base your decision on.

I've not read the whole thread, but I'd take some advice from your tutors as to how much value a 3 month research project really adds. Not convinced myself, but maybe. I don't usually place that much weight on short internships when recruiting. Is there not similar work you could do closer?

I leave my kids for work regularly - and I have many colleagues who do too. My trips tend to be more like a week, now, but colleagues will do month long ones. I wonder how many of the people who comment on this thead that they would never do so, would do so if their work substantially depended on it

I think 3 months is a very long time at that age, too.

Good luck with whatever you decide.

Bowlby and attachment theory is often misused as a means of guilt-tripping mothers into being the passive uncomplaining carers within Western society (which to my eye represents a lot of the sub-text here).

Bowlby actually said that if the mother and child have a warm and loving relationship to start with, then the child shouldn't be badly affected by separation. Obviously in this case someone would need to be equally warm and loving to the child and do what the mother was doing, but given that as a caveat it should be fine as the child should be sufficiently attached.

Three months is quite a long time but if two other adults are going to put the child at the centre of their world for that time, it should be fine. The problem would more likely be that the OP would miss her DD badly.

I wouldn't do it, it's just too long at that age.

I might go but I would take my DD with me at that age.

So what was the lol in relation to mango?

I already explained Gone, and it is all there in black and white earlier in the thread, but here it is again just for you:

Salene: A young baby needs its mum more than its dad, the bond is greater between mother and baby than baby & father.

Me: Proof?

Handsome: God I dread to think what 'proof' anyone would find for that. Probably something involving baby monkeys being raised in cages by robots.

Me: Lol

Me: Irrefutable proof that a baby likes its mum more than its dad....
(I attached 2 pictures on this post - one of a laughing baby with a woman, one of a baby making a cute 'sad face' with a man)

Is that good enough for you Gone?
Or is there any other parts of the thread or my posts in particular that you need me to explain further for you?

Of course Boffin that makes such simple, perfect brilliant sense that it's a wonder it never occurred to the OPbefore.

You're not a bad mother for wanting to go. You're a strong woman with (it sounds like) a great support network making the very most of her life.

Be prepared to miss her much more than you expect, but realise that DC and DP will be fine while you're gone and you can always fly home if it isn't working out for whatever reason.

I'd take some advice from your tutors as to how much value a 3 month research project really adds

Good advice. Why not show initiative and see if you can find an opportunity thats more suitable?

I don't think you'e fundamentally wrong op (although I wouldn't do it), but it's the vague nature of it all that makes it seem like a massive sacrifice for possibly no added career value.

I asked my sis about this thread. She is an academic, frequently overseas for work, and recruits for her department. Essentially, If you're right for a job, then you're right for it. If you don't have the skills or aren't the right fit, you don't. A 3 month research trip makes no difference at all.

Of course that may not be true of every employer, but it's unlikely to ever be a deal breaker.

IF you just want to go for the hell of going, then go. If you're trying to persuade yourself/other people it will mean a better paid job, then personally, I think that's probably wide of the mark.

It is amazing how many people acknowledge that the mum will miss the baby, despite the fact that the OP knows why she is going, knows about time and how long three months is, and most of all has a fundamentally has the understanding she is coming back.

The baby has none of this. Don't you think that the baby is going to fare worse than the mum?

If dad had been primary carer from the start it would be different. It is not mum v dad. It is who is primary carer. At the moment it is mum, when mum goes it will be dad but presumably not all the time, will it be dad at night and MIL in the day? When the OP comes back will the child view the MIL more as primary carer? That would really sadden me as a mum but more to the point how confused will the child be?

It's great the mum wants to something good and fun but having kids often gets in the way of all that! It if was essential, it would be different.

OP please do your own research on this.

None of the people cheering you on will be around when you get back and find your baby is mistrustful of you. I hope it won't happen but I would be concerned it would and there is no way I would do it. My son is adopted. he had a birth family, (still does but doesn't see them), a foster family (we still see them about twice a year for his and our benefit) and his family now, our family for life. He had those changes but he was older, 3 years not ten months, and he has come through it all.

IMHO it is not worth putting very young kids through this stress if you can avoid it.

Your name is Littleworrier, is that because you rightly acknowledge this is a worry? If so, why be swayed by others who assure you all will be OK. maybe it has been for some. I don't want to challenge anyone else's experiences except to say not remembering something is not the test of whether it has affected you, especially not in children under three, and especially in pre-verbal children. Please just read up on this decide for yourself.

All the very best.

The thread was somewhat derailed by people scaremongering. It is possible to arrange things so that the child gets used to spending more time with dad and grandmother and even nursery ahead of the mother going.
Of course it will have an effect on the child and the mother, but either can be soften by the measures above and constant contact via Skype during that time.
Besides, going is not for "fun", but had a specific objective. From what the OP said, the trip is quite relevant to her degree, it's experience that she can't get in the UK, from what I gather.

Having said that, it's really up to you to balance the pros and cons. It is certainly a difficult position, and I didn't take work trips that were longer than necessary after my son was born. That meant not taking an extra couple of days for touristy things. I don't know it I'd go for 3 months at that age. In your situation I might if I deemed the trip important and only you can judge that.
If you decide to go, it will be important to find strategies to minimise impact particularly for the child.

MangoMoon Fri 27-May-16 23:27:21
I understand you had not heard of the other experiments before. And you were probably not thinking of the monkeys and the robots per se but wanted more to laugh at posters who think OP's baby might be harmed if she goes away to work for three months even when her father and grandmother would be there to care for her.

Again, you are ascribing things to me that are simply untrue
I did not want to 'laugh at posters' at all

You really need to stop making such huge assumptions ffs

Sorry MangoMoon, if I misinterpreted your post about LOL at a certain joke and I also misinterpreted what I thought you might have lol about instead.

Now I am not sure who you were laughing at then when you said you'd LOL,

You've said it wasn't the baby monkeys raised by robots even though your lol comment followed that joke.

Now you've said it wasn't the mothers posting who take the view the absence of the OP for 3 mths might be harmful for her baby either.

Would you explain what the LOL was about?

Janecc
I saw videos of that experiment on the tv.......
Sorry, I'm a little unclear about the relevance here.

Janecc, I am sorry for the confusion - no, there was no relevance to the OP's baby but I was not responding to Little's OP question when I mentioned that.

I was objecting to:

a. the joke a poster made about other posters whose attachment theory idea that the mother's absence might cause harm to the baby was probably based on research on baby monkeys raised by robots

and at the same time I was responding to,

b. A lol comment from another poster that followed the remark.

I said no, I would not lol about that.

(I had assumed the research joke by the first poster was a vague extrapolation of that famous experiment. I may have been wrong, the similarity of baby monkeys with robots in the joke to that experiment might have been chance. But whether wire or cloth mothers or robot mothers for baby monkeys I don't like it.)

I went on to add that I knew the OPs baby wasn't like the baby chimps to try to make that clear but I am sorry for any confusion.

From somewhere in the recesses of my mind, I vaguely recalled the hideous experiments EveryoneElsie describes. I was being flippant and feeling exasperated.

My joke made reference to but wasn't about those experiments - nobody was laughing at the actual monkeys! The joke was a reaction to the misappropriation of evidence (as so elegantly described by Manatee) and hyperbole I've witnessed on this thread and elsewhere.

I don't think mangomoon can explain except to say what is obvious - that she finds everything and everyone 'amusing' that she doesn't agree with.

kind I agree, the whole thing is in poor taste and most unhelpful.

I find guilt-tripping pretty distasteful

Boffin describes why misinterpreting or wilfully misquoting attachment theory is so damaging very well upthread.

Kinddog, it is clear exactly what my intent was.

From my post explaining, cutting and pasting the flow of posts, and indeed the screenshot you posted.

I replied with a 'lol' to a post that I took at face value.

I really, really can't think of any other way to explain it to you.

I did not 'laugh' at other posters who would not want to leave their children (I respect their view), I did not 'laugh' at the experiment of the mid 20th century involving baby chimps being removed from their mothers (because I had not heard of that until this thread).

^*I was objecting to:

a. the joke a poster made about other posters whose attachment theory idea that the mother's absence might cause harm to the baby was probably based on research on baby monkeys raised by robots^*

Kinddog, that is untrue.

The poster made a joke about 'dreading to think of what proof might be used' to prove that a mother's bond with her baby is stronger than a father's bond with his baby.

NOT a "joke made about other posters whose attachment theory idea that the mother's absence might cause harm to the baby was probably based on research on baby monkeys raised by robots".

Jesus wept, it's all there on the thread & even on the screenshot that you took and posted.

I don't think mangomoon can explain except to say what is obvious - that she finds everything and everyone 'amusing' that she doesn't agree with.

Gonetoseeamababoutadog.

What utter crap.

All I have done on this thread is posted about my experience with leaving my children, and called out scaremongering.

At no point have I taken the piss out if anyone else for saying they would not or could not leave their children.

HandsomeGroom

I found your joke distasteful and rather ill-judged, but thought maybe you wrote it on the spur of the moment. I thought my response that I would not lol was mild.

Forget 'guilt-tripping' you. Once out there, that joke about the baby monkeys needed comment.

You also seemed to be sneering at other people you didn't agree with by making that joke.

For me, your sneering tone in general is least helpful of all as it doesn't seem necessary.

MangoMoon
Jesus wept, it's all there on the thread & even on the screenshot that you took and posted

Yes it is all there.

Good Lord.

I apologise to Mango because my joke has caused her to receive a bizarre amount of grief. I will not apologise to those wilfully misunderstanding the context in which I made it, however.