To not use my mum who wants to provide childcare?

[Revving5]

I really don't know if it's unreasonable of me

DS is going to nursery for 3 days a week (he's 1) while I'm at work. My mum is absolutely gutted and says that she wants to look after him, I'm really grateful for this, but I really want him to experience what the nursery can offer (healthy meals, the correct stimulation, interacting with strangers, learning to play with children his age, etc.) I just think it sets him up well.

We go and see my mum all the time in the week (I see her pretty much every day with DS, so it's not like she doesn't see him) and she kindly has him if I have a doctor appointment, etc. and as lovely as it is that they spend time together, I don't really want it for those 3 days too, not saying she doesn't do a good job!! She's a great nan, but I just worry that it's not like nursery at all.

I'm not being unreasonable am I?

But one day of pj's will do no harm. She clearly loves him and unless there's a back story I think this is a wonderful idea:)

1 day a week is alright for both of them.It wont be too much for your DM and a pj day would be good for your dc as well.Win win.

Why have you ignored all those people suggesting she has him for one day a week?

I would take her up on at least a day. It will save you some money and he will get quality time with her.

If you don't think that he will be cared for in a way you are comfortable with then absolutely don't be guilted into changing your arrangements.

Not suggesting your mum doesn't love him or want to do stuff that will provide him with stimulation, but you seem confident that it will be minimal compared to what he gets at nursery.

My mum does childcare for me and seems to think that sitting in the same room as the kids doing her sewing or reading while they watch tv (sometimes not even in the same room as them) counts as childcare.

I'm in a tricky position as I can't 'sack her' and gentle discussions have had no impact.

It's one thing to decide to take up her offer if she were planning to match stimulation/ activities, but if you know already she won't....

I'm with you op. I didn't have the option of grandparent care, but my first child thrived in nursery from a very young age and my second is loving it now. Both went before they were one year old. Keep grandma for the babysitting/appointment cover/ quality time, then everyone benefits.

Research shows that very young children get far more benefit from being cared for by adults with whom they have secure personal attachments than being institutionalised in day care. Unless you have serious issues with your mum, your DS will get so much more benefit emotionally with her than with a series of nursery staff.

I assumed the PP saying that 1 is too little for nursery and he won't benefit from it etc have experience and evidence to back this up?!

I would do 2days at nursery and 1 day with his grandmother.

It will be completely invaluable and something money can't buy. It's also supposed to be very good for children's language development to have one on one time with grandparents.

Obviously up to you, but I personally think it would be hugely beneficial to them both.

YANBU. I disagree strongly that a child his age needs nursery but I think grandparents providing childcare leads to all kinds of difficult dynamics and blurs boundaries. Plus as others have said, there are strings attached.

Would it be possible for her to pick him up at lunchtime one day a week so she has an afternoon with him once a week? And sell it to her as wanting him to be with other children?

Yes another here who thinks as long as your mum is generally alright I would go for having a day with her and two at nursery. mil has had my dd one day a week since she was six months old and like someone else said their bond is really lovely. They go to town on the bus and cook and sew, they both really enjoy themselves. Plus it means dd is happy to go for sleepovers at nanny's house which is just wonderful

I would never use free childcare from familŷ members it always comes with far to many strings attached and obligation

I think that "just being" is as important as always doing something.

Children benefit just as much from a calm, chilled area as they do from a busy stimulating one. They don't always need to be doing something to be learning, Especially when they are under 3.

I'd let her have one day a week with him and increase the nursery days either when he is older or if it's not working out.

I worry more about a child's security than 'socialisation' and frankly, institutionalisation for a one year old. To clarify, two or three different people feeding, changing, teaching him who don't have an emotional attachment to him. Meh. I'd go with your mum, really.

www.theguardian.com/education/2004/jul/08/schools.uk

I have just picked one study but the research out there overwhelmingly suggests that under the age of 3, nursery care is not beneficial. It is undoubtedly sometimes a necessity but given the choice of 1-1 care with a Grandma who will be a part of the childs life for ever v expensive nursery care ........ that would be a no-brainer to me unless I had cause to believe my mother would not look after my children properly.

I think that there are good reasons to support both sides of your dilemma, so perhaps a more blended approach to your childcare might be an option? 3 mornings a week at nursery, and the afternoons at your mums? I don't know about your DS but mine still had a good nap every afternoon, and it seems such a waste to be paying a nursery whilst he naps. You could also encourage your mum to do more with him? Does she drive? If so then there are often several grandparents at most baby and toddler groups, and she might be more inclined to go if she finds other grandparents to talk to.

Keep him in nursery. You are happy with his childcare so there is no need to change it.

Both my boys went to nursery from a young age and my parents would then have them for the occasional weekend.

Oh I would be biting her hand off at that offer.

Nursery environment is amazing ( if you get the right Nursery) but 121 at the age of 1 is a million times better.

I say that as an ex Nursery Manager.

I worry more about a child's security than 'socialisation' and frankly, institutionalisation for a one year old. To clarify, two or three different people feeding, changing, teaching him who don't have an emotional attachment to him.

I agree completely.

I don't understand the rush to get a baby into a nursery. One-to-one care with a relative who loves him seems far preferable.

None of my DC went to nursery at the age of 1 and they've managed just fine without that early socialisation and all the rest of it. At that age I would say that secure attachment to a consistent care is more important.

At that age, children need a secure nurturing relationship from somebody who loves them.

They don't need all that that other stuff you mention until they are around 3.

Wait till you hand him over that first day, I would have loved to have my mum do the childcare.

My dswent to my dm 4 days a week and one at nursery to give her a break . I think being looked after by someone who adores you is better then a nursery environment at that age .

I look after my grandson aged 1 two days a week. We both have a great time and I take him to the park. He has one day at my house and one at his own. I was a childminder for 12 years looking after up to six children at a time and brought up my own three children just fine. I think nurseries are great in theory but can be expensive, rarely one to one, more like 1 person looking after 3 or 4 children and staff are not always as qualified as they could be. As someone else said babies often nap in the afternoons. 3 days a week seems a lot for a 1 year old. Maybe try a compromise to start off with and then see how things go.