To say Nursery is beneficial before 3

[Shouldnotwouldnot]

I know there are loads who argue that Nursery for those under 3 is negative and it’s always better to be with parents. However, anecdotally from friends I’ve noticed that children that have been to Nursery from a young age seem much more confident and, often easy-going than those who’ve been at home all the time. SAHM mums seem to say how hard their children find being away from them and socialising with other children whilst those who’ve been attending Nursery seem to throw themselves into these things far more easily.

Thoughts?

condepetie as a child care professional you presumably realise that children do change between 2 and 2.5 even if they are at home with a parent?

As I understand it, considered purely in terms of the impact of nursery itself and not other issues such as nursery indirectly giving the family the ability to eat, it's somewhere between 2 and 3 on average where nursery becomes beneficial. This doesn't take into account that some will be lots earlier or later, the varying quality of environment at home and any advantages the child might accrue from the financial advantages of the parent working.

I've had a choice and sent mine whilst in the 2-3 bracket. Wouldn't have chosen it earlier- and for us it was voluntary.

Mine didn't go to nursery, just preschool at 3. Settled in brilliantly- off on first day with a quick hug goodbye and we had even missed the induction sessions because of illness. Now doing very well as school despite being one of the younger ones in the class.

However, they were not at home with just me. They went to my Mum for a few days each week. She has child psychology, maths and TEAFL qualifications and obviously loves them to bits! We also all took them out to lots of toddler groups and activities once they were old enough to appreciate them so lots of learning but without separation from family.

It's still fascinating how many people list their child's absolutely normal, age typical development and attribute it to going to nursery

I think the questions pretty irrelevant.....everyone is focusing on a very small period of time in a child's life.

What does it matter how well children do in nursery or whether it prepares them better for school. What matters is what best supports their development into functioning adults for the next 60 70 years of life.

This short term immediate achievement focused thinking is the reason all our family Home Education we want to develop lifetime adults not meet a momentary target irrelevant in a years time.

As an aside some of our children did go to nursery a couple days a week at 2. Soley to give us time for activities with the older ones that were difficult with toddlers around. I cant honestly say i saw any difference good or bad between those who went and those who didn't.

I cant really tell the difference between children who have had different care arrangements to their 3rd birthday to be honest.

Yes, it is interesting that children at nursery are always described as "thriving" when achieving normal standards.

Thriving is a commonly used term though. Failure to thrive also is.

Yes, but not thriving isn't down to not being at nursery unless the parents are really struggling. Saying a child is thriving just because i.e. they start walking at 12 months etc is a bit of an exaggeration.

Shouldnot I think the part I disagree with in your OP is that young children who don’t find socialising independently of their parents easy is an odd thing. It’s not, it’s normal. Kids go at their own pace and that may have been the reason their parents didn’t send to nursery before rather than a cause of not having been to nursery yet. Whether nursery is a good or desirable thing is totally down to the individual child and parent. Their needs, sensitivities and personalities. It’s more nuanced than it being ‘good’ or ‘bad’. I found your OP judgemental and I am a parent who has done nursery before 3yrs for one child and after 3 for the 2 others. For what it’s worth I wish I had been able to delay with DC1 but I recognise that other kids thrive at nursery before 3yrs.

Totally agree Basecamp. It’s the longer term picture.

I noticed a difference at reception with the dc who had never been to nursery. Even just as an observer.

My son initially went to a childminder for over a year after I returned to work and it was wonderful. He developed so much, I had progress reports on him, he can't home with artwork and tasks he'd been set etc, I was really impressed.

When he was about 2.5 years I took him out and put him in a nursery because I thought it would be more beneficial for him. He'd come home with bites, injuries, bruised, I never saw a single assessment of any kind regarding his development in the 8 months he was there and he never bought any artwork or the like home with him. Most times I picked him up it was just a case of kids running riot. One day the manager phoned me and told me that Ofsted had been round and the nursery was being closed as of that day and it transpired it was due to safeguarding concerns.

I then put my son back with his initial childminder and it suited my son so much better. I started getting assessments on him and progress reports etc, he'd be learning so much and was clearly much happier there.

When he hit pre-school age me and DH after lots of discussion decided that pre-school would be beneficial for a variety of reasons and so placed him in one.

After 5 months of being there, despite me asking, there haven't been any assessments on him, I don't think any learning takes place, I constantly have accident forms to sign, his behaviour has deteriorated since being there and again, when I go and pick him there's just kids running wild, screaming and shouting etc and it just seems a bit out of control.

Me and DH recently spoke about our concerns about the pre-school and we have now handed in a letter to inform the we will be withdrawing our son from their care and he will be returning to a childminder.

I know every nursery is different etc etc but in my opinion, apart from kids meeting other kids I haven't seen any benefit of being in a nursery or pre-school environment that a parent/childminder can't provide themselves.

Children can be exposed to other children and socialise with them in lots of different ways, it's silly to think if a child doesn't go to nursery or pre-school they are going to be introverted, clingy, not know how to form relationships etc etc

I have a young baby at the moment and based on what I've learnt from my experience with my older son, this one won't be attending a nursery.

But onlyonescoop what is your observation? That they find it harder to settle, are academically behind, less social? None of those things are a problem at 4yrs. You see a snapshot of 5mins at the start and end of a school day and make the judgement that children who don’t go to nursery suffer for it.

This argument can only ever be anecdotal so it goes round in circles.

Surely you have to be guided by the individual child?

For instance, I have 4 DC so 4 different experiences. I'm a SAHM, but they all had a place in a nursery for 3 mornings a week, from just before the age of 3. The first DS loved it, probably because all his NCT friends were there and he was a bit bored maybe at home. The second DS was "meh" about the whole thing. DD1 was hysterical for months and never really got much out of it, so most of the time I just aimed for one morning a week. DD2 said it was ok but she didn't like the fact that a lot of them had snotty noses! Again I didn't push it - if she was really anti-going or a bit tired, she just stayed home. They were all absolutely fine starting school. No issues whatsoever.

queenofmyprinces why on earth did you keep them at a Nursery like that! No wonder they had a bad experience. Most are not like that obviously

I don't think it necessarily has to be nursery but some form of regular group activity with other kids of the same age definitely helps, whether that be nursery or a playgroup/Mum's and toddlers group.

Yabu

I've been a sahm with my dd for 2 years and she's one of the most confident children I know, I don't think it's anything we've done it's just her nature, she's never been clingy. This is exactly the reason why I have now put her into pre school for a couple of morning (she's 2.2 now) because I know she'll cope with it fine, and sure enough she waves me off happily. If she was clingy i would probably wait until she was a bit older.

Her little friends who go to nursery part time are much clingier than her.

You simply can’t categorise ‘children’ as one homogenous group, there are too many variables.

Therefore there is no correct answer other than ‘it depends on the child’.

Anecdotally, I don't think nursery had a huge impact on my DS. He went for 4 days a week from 8 months old. He was happy there, never any problems being left or not wanting to go. He's in Year 1 now and, while he's perfectly happy at school and has friends, he isn't fussed about play dates or parties: "I just want to be with you, Mummy". I presume he just has my not-particularly-sociable genes!

Children that go to Nursery wouldn’t (usually) be happy to just be chucked into a room of strangers and get on with it. And no-one is suggesting they should as your post suggests.

Yes you are, your OP basically says that children who attend nursery:

from a young age seem much more confident and, often easy-going than those who’ve been at home all the time. SAHM mums seem to say how hard their children find being away from them and socialising with other children whilst those who’ve been attending Nursery seem to throw themselves into these things far more easily.

You and other posters are saying/implying that DC who attend nursery are more outgoing and happier to be separated from a primary carer than DC of SAHMs whose children are clingy.

I'm saying clinginess is not a bad thing for under 3s... its developmentally normal.

attachments can be formed with a wide group of caregivers and results in normal secure attachment base from which to explore the world. This is normal.

Of course attachments can be formed with multiple people, children don't exclusively attach to their primary carer and no one else. But multiple attachments are not the basis for a secure attachments style. It just isn't. Attachment research, along with neuroscientific research consistently supports the importance of forming one main secure attachment to a primary care giver in the first year of life for a secure attachment... if we're talking about childcare before aged 3 then for newborns/babies/very young toddler the research suggests it can affect emotional development and attachment. See links I posted above

How ridiculous. Every situation is different.

I kept ds at home with me (apart from the odd couple of hours at Grandma's) until he was 4.

I made sure he saw other kids at least 4 times a week.

He started preschool at 4 and the others had all been going 2-1 years before him.

He's the only kid that went without a whimper or a look back. The teachers say how he's amazingly social and outgoing. He's incredibly confident.

So yuabvvu.

And I say this as someone that was a maternity nurse/nanny for 20 years looking after other people's babies and toddlers.

queenofmyprinces....why on earth did you keep them at a Nursery like that?

Because I was told being in nursery is good for their social development - just like you seem to be saying in your opening post?

Besides - I'm not keeping him in his current pre-school, I'm removing him because I'm not happy with it.

The general feeling I got off others when I had worries about his original nursery was that having accidents, bumps, bruises and bites is just a normal part of nursery life and it's to be expected when lots of kids are all together in one place for a length of time.

I have no doubt there are good nurseries out there, I'm definitely not anti-nursery, but from my own experiences I don't think there's anything beneficial about going to one if a childminder, SAHP or family member can provide childcare instead.