Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Babies in Childcare - Honest Opinions Please

303 replies

ChesterBelloc · 18/11/2017 09:19

I've read several threads recently in which people stated that so long as a baby is competently cared for in a suitable environment, it makes no difference to the child whether the adult(s) in question are the baby's parent(s) or childcare professionals.

Do you believe this?

(I'm not asking for yet another debate about the extent to which 'stay-at-home parenting' may be detrimental to women's quest for equality/career progression/intellectual stimulation etc etc. There's enough on these boards already about that.)

I'm asking whether people genuinely believe that babies have/should have no stake in the discussion; whether they think that it makes no difference to the babies themselves whether they are with their parents all day or with a nursery/childminder - and if there is a qualitative difference, which is the better option, from the child's perspective.

I'm genuinely curious to hear people's views, not trying to be goady (though fully expect to be flamed for even raising this question, due to the possible implications and inferences that could be extrapolated from it). Thank you for reading thus far!

OP posts:
ChesterBelloc · 21/11/2017 08:36

"The reason the question of “what is best for little children?” is important is because the answer is used to justify social policy. Let’s say studies find nursery is great for children right from the get go. Both parents straight back into work paying lots of tax, chzthxbai. Or how about only mothers are good enough carers for little children? Well then - stop demanding equal treatment at work all you working mothers. We know you should be at home with your children."

This is why I asked the question - to unpick the theoretical basis behind the assumptions on which social policy - and societal set-up generally - is based upon.

I don't know how you can jump from a premise that babies are best cared for by their mothers, to the conclusion that mothers should get no special treatment at work, though. Surely it should be the opposite way around?

If society agrees that the optimum situation for the future generations of that society is maternal or at least parental care for their first year of life, then society needs to structure working-life so that it can be provided, without penalising anyone - not the working parent, not the employer, and not the child.

OP posts:
ChesterBelloc · 21/11/2017 08:43

And I agree with a 'living wage' for parents who choose to cease working temporarily whilst caring for their children (or elderly parents, for that matter), and would love to see subsidised, high-quality childcare available for everyone.

But as long as caring for children is under-valued, it's difficult to see wages for that industry rising in such a way as would help to ensure high quality provision. High quality childcare should cost more than a retail assistant's wage - and what then, for the retail assistant with children?

OP posts:
WildBluebelles · 21/11/2017 21:08

When a family court lawyer (in fact, I think spero may be a barrister) talks about the emphasis being on removal rather than support, it's very important and should be shared. Not to scare families but to show why some parents flee or leave the mainland as with the gentleman discussed upthread

But where does she say that that emphasis/policy comes from? Because the law is centred around the child's welfare- there is no presumption in favour of removal. Often there aren't the resources for early intervention which means that SS get involve when it is too late so to speak. I just can't imagine that a family lawyer would say that there is an emphasis or policy in favour of removing children from their families and I would like to see on what basis she argues that. Is she saying that in the cases she has been involved in, children are wrongfully removed? Because in your average care case, the facts are quite grim to be honest- drugs, alcohol, neglect, abuse, violent partners etc.

Yes, it's true I didn't see the post- wasn't trying to 'invent' anything as Battleax so charmingly put it- just trying to understand the basis behind a claim that I believed may have been misinterpreted by others. If anyone can find the post, it would be interesting to see it.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.