to ask if anyone on here regrets going back to work after dc, and not being a sahp?

[mammyoftwo]

Context: It's a snowy day here..........beautiful stop-you-in-your-tracks-to-look-at-them snowflakes.....it's spent playing outside, coming inside for home baking, snuggling by the fire with books and an all round "good day".

(For full disclosure, I fully acknowledge we have plenty of "not good days" with two toddlers).

But anyways, it got me to thinking...............................................so often on here I read threads about "I don't want to give up my career for my children"/"Do you regret being a sahp" etc, etc etc....... you get the gist.

So today, having had a "good day", I'm going to be bold and brave enough to ask it.............................................does anyone back in paid work after children regret it?
I'd have hated to miss out on all that we did today. Things aren't easy, we've made sacrifices in spending for one parent to be "at home" but it's a choice we made as we believe it works best for our family.

We hardly ever go out -cant be arsed and DH falls asleep instantly if we go to see a film
Didnt go out much when DC were little as often had to work around DH and DC and I BF forever
The GP thing ,there are lots of threads on this with the end result being the OP going back to using CC due to all the drama attached to using families as CC.
Also all the stats suggest its not good for DC-poorest outcomes if looked after by GP.

Thanks for your suggestion Cinderella...might look into it in a few years time!

Totally agree with the previous poster who said these threads always get polarised between those whose are FT WOHM and complete SAHM, when most people are somewhere in between.

Interestingly, when my DC we're young I only know of one Mum who went back to work FT and two who were complete SAHMs. Most were PT.

Some (like me) worked PT and mostly used family for childcare (DH / grandparents), some were Home all day, but worked evenings / weekends when their DH got home from work. Some worked from home (childminding and the like).

Of the two that were complete SAHM, one still used a childminder twice a week, to give herself a break and so the child could have time to 'socialise' with other children!

Most mums used grandparents for at least part of the childcare, but they only worked PT. I did, and it was perfect for us... but I've now got my children to the teenage years and they've never had a babysitter, never gone to holiday child care... I changed my job this year, and I'm using the most childcare I've ever used - a grand total of four hours a week. My daughter thinks it's most unfair... youngest (aged 11) is allowed to go to after school club to play with her friends, and she was never allowed to. I have pointed out that at 14, she's a bit old for it now!

We used the staff from the nursery as weekly babysitters. It worked well- DT’s knew them, we were comfortable with whom we are leaving the DT’s with and the staff were keen to earn extra money on a regular basis.

Regardless of whether I’d gone back to work or not ( although I knew I’d be going back after six months as I wanted to continue with my career) we would have needed nursery care as English is DT’s third language. We don’t speak English at home (I came to the UK from Belgium when I was 5 and DH arrived from Canada when he was 21) so it was vital they had good exposure to English to ensure they were at the right level when they started school.

Hi Parker, yes considered asking someone from pre-school...But at dd2's pre-school setting most of the women are older and have families of their own or don't appear to be in need of any extra cash!

@LAorbust - where is the research about GP care having poorest outcomes? I'd always read that up to approx age 3, a primary caregiver (usually parent) is best. If not parent then GP as an alternative?

Sorry I cant link for some reason.
Easy to google
It was children having motor skills such as using cutlery/dressing /toilet training at school age plus social skills -significantly worse in DC looked after by GP .

I’d love to stay at home, but I earn a lot more than DH so we really need me to go out to work. Many mornings I feel like crying when heading out

What was the research about grandparents on @LAorbust goggle hasn’t brought anything like that up.

Joseph Rowntree Foundation
Parenting and outcomes for children.

I've not heard of that either re: GPS... I always thought the research generally supported the rhyme - if not mummy, then daddy is better than granny is better than nanny is better than minder is better than daycare....??

Saying that, I think the potential negative effects of nursery before aged 3 are very minimal if children are in a loving, responsive family setting the rest of the time. And in children from deprived/abusive backgrounds nursery is beneficial.

This article is a pretty balanced review of the evidence about benifits/negatives of nursery

www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/oct/02/nurseries-childcare-pre-school-cortisol

It probably makes sense - grandparents are the least likely to be up to date on current educational and developmental recommendations. Plus, some grandparents are awful caregivers but the parents feel trapped because it's "free". (It's not really free if it comes with emotional payments!) I'm certain there are wonderful grannies out there who do lots of enriching things with their grandchildren but that's not going to be consistent across all, is it?

Probably the mummy better than daddy etc (so many issues with this but whatever) is supposed to relate more to attachment ie how emotionally close the caregiver is to the child - as you get one level of separation away each time. Though I'd argue it's simplistic, not to mention sexist, and doesn't take into account other factors in the slightest. If this is the most important factor to you, then perhaps it works. Otherwise it's just nonsense.

Ah right. Hadn't heard of that but wouldn't pay much attention anyway as it's something so easily caught up on, and the emotional health benefits of being looked after by a (assumed) loving relative for me would outweigh it anyway.

@BertieBotts - dismissing attachment theory as nonsense is rather simplistic.

One thing I'm taking away from this is that more places really need to offer flexible working.

I've sort of taken it for granted in my field, but we can work from home, leave early/come in late if we make the time up, and there are loads of people on PT or working school hours. I don't know why so many jobs seem to be "60 hours or go home".

That rhyme isn't attachment theory! If you think it is then it is you who is being simplistic.

That rhyme has nothing to do with attachment theory and if anything, sounds like old wives' tales. I have never heard of it. It is not remotely attachment theory and so dumbed down that must only be for single-celled simpletons who never came within spitting distance of a research paper.

This single-celled simpleton is guilty of speed reading through the posts and completely missing the bit about the rhyme up thread....

I never said that rhyme was basically attachment theory.... I've studies attachment theory in my Psychology degree and used to work in HV where I saw children with genuine attachment disorders - I understand the theory just fine. Also used to work in research (and I've conducted my own research) so I understand scientific research just fine too thanks

I never said that rhym was scientific (?) I said that from the reading id done, I thought the bulk of research on the subject generally supported that caring hierarchy. Like I said, that guardian article is a good objective overview of the research and the various +/-

Nope! I was a SAHM with DD for 18 months. When DS was born I went back to work when he was 4 weeks.

My next door neighbour has a very high flying career and had the most brilliant nanny through her 3 DC. The nanny had worked for them for 5 years when she had her own baby and, after a few months off, returned to nannying my friend's children with her own baby in tow.

My friend was happy with this initially, until it became clear that, no matter how professional the nanny was, it's almost humanly impossible not to prioritise your own baby above someone else's. It's an instinct that only a parent has. My neighbour saw it - if her son or the nanny's child needed something, the nanny was so much more tuned in to her own baby. There was a particular incident which brought this home. Eventually, it didn't work out.

I don't really know anyone who has used day nurseries, it tends to be nannies around here, especially with multiple children. Where it all seems to fall apart is as the children get older and the demands re-homework / after school clubs etc become greater. Often the nannies might be from another country and English is not their first language. They can't effectively facilitate homework for say, competitive exams at 7 plus or 11 plus, etc. Often they don't drive either which can be problematic with after-school clubs. It's often at this point, with several children in various schools, that life just becomes too complicated and one parent decides to significantly cut hours or SAH.

But this is quite a "rich" priveleged life you speak of. Extremely extremely priveleged in fact, I don't know a single person whose parents had to cut hours specifically to tutor and drive them around! And I went to school in a "posh" area.

I went to a grammar and the only "tutoring" I had was a few practise papers my mum bought and went through with me on the weekend, same with my brother.

None of us got driven anywhere, I got myself to different clubs just like I got myself to school. Most kids at my school were playing Runescape after school and going to Costa or hanging with friends on the weekend.....I knew one girl who lived in my town and didn't get the bus/train to school.

It's like another level of posh on here sometimes. Like the £500,000 a day comment earlier 😐

I observed the opposite with our CM, her own DC sometimes missed out.

Yolo - well yes, I can see that. However, the independent secondaries around here are St Paul's, Westminster, Latymer Upper etc and the preps are geared towards getting the DC in. It's a whole other level of homework and prep really and it's hard enough for a parent to get their head around, let alone a nanny who would just think it's all bonkers.

Chances are, you will end up with DC in different and quite far flung schools because all the schools are super-competitive (not just the "top" ones). You need to be on top of it to give your child a fighting chance in this sector. An academically "average" child may well have to travel out quite far to have any chance if a school place. Many bright children get no school offers.,

This is what happens. Parents either employ all sort of tutors to do the prep while they're at work, or they do it themselves. Or sometimes both! Life gets extremely complicated with several children on this kind of environment. I can barely manage myself sometimes, so there is no way I'd expect a nanny to do even half of it.

My neighbour who I mentioned above makes well over £500 k, I would say. There is a lot of overseas travel. Her DH who had a very well paid city job left work because it was all too much with 3 kids. Their son went from being fairly average in Year 4, to being offered a place at St Paul's in Year 6 because the dad made it his mission to familiarise himself with the process and get on top of it.

1nigo, that just sounds bonkers. Whilst I can believe that is true of a certain strata of that small part of London, there is no reason you could not move to a less bonkers part of the London with lots more choice for your dcs and saner family life, if you and your dh wanted to.

WOHMs put themselves under pressure to juggle all the balls. Have you considered you are putting your dcs under undue pressure to keep up by living where you do? Good forbid if you ended up with an academically average child.

You have chosen a lifestyle, which includes having a large family, using after school activities in different places - what is wrong with the very decent after school provision in your dcs' independent schools which I am sure has late buses and coaches - and super-selective schools. Why not use tutors that specialise in getting dcs into those super-selective schools like most people do?

All this helicopter parenting sounds rather self-inflicted and slightly boastful.