Mothers should always be with their children until they are 3 years old

[abacucat]

This is what one parenting "expert" is recommending in the name of attachment parenting. And he does mean mothers, not fathers. AIBU to think this is a load of rubbish? Babies and toddlers are not damaged as is alleged, from spending time apart from their mother.

www.drmomma.org/2010/07/mother-toddler-separation.html

Omg everyone I know must be a bad mum me included I haven't taken more than a year at home in either DCs life. Literally breastfed both of them with my laptop open working.

Despicable
Shake my head

All these flipping selfish women screwing with nature!

In my experience yes
I don’t. Spontaneously discuss the whole sahm/working mum thing unless a retort is required
I used to habitually get comments from the PTA crew,eye rolling,head tilt,previous moments speech
Such a shame you weren’t at sport day the face,the head tilt
why isn’t your dp here I asked..too busy,cant take time off work they reply
So it’s ok that the dad isn’t there,cause he’s working.but big tuts to me for same reason...

Back in the real world, I had to work full time to ensure DS1 and I didn't have to sleep in a cardboard box in the street each night. I returned to work when he was 6.5m old but when I wasn't at work we spent all of our time together. He was very securely ttaxhed to me, loved his nursery keyworker too, but I don't feel he suffered because I wasn't there during the day really. It broadened his ability to love and trust other adults, it didn't diminish it and he thrived.

I was able to stay at home with DS2 until he was 3, though not really through choice as I was made redundant then struggled to find work. Now they are older, I see no difference in my sons' levels of bonding with me, their emotional or academic progress or anything else tbh. They are both very secure, feel very loved and we are all a team. We help each other through bad times (there have been many!) and good times and they know that it's not realistic for me to be at home 24/7 like a 50s housewife if they also want to be fed, have the things they need and a roof over our heads. I feel that I am setting a good example for them in working hard. The lesson is that you have to work for what you need, a good work ethic is something to be encouraged and they see the rewards of that. They know that I am responsible for providing for them and (unlike their father) am prepared to do what is needed to make sure they don't miss out on things. That's a good thing to model too, right?

Yes it’s a good example to model,and as you say they’re well adjusted &. happy

.’ Now they are older, I see no difference in my sons' levels of bonding with me, their emotional or academic progress or anything else tbh. They are both very secure, feel very loved and we are all a team’

^ this^

Our 3 children had different experiences, because I returned to work when dc1 was 12 weeks, and had longer off with dc 2 and 3. Dc1 went to a childminder, dc 2 and 3 to nursery. Of course with me being off on Maternity leaves, the ages at which they had me around full time at home varied.

Theyre all very happy well adjusted adults now and you’d be hard pushed to know whether they Went to cm/ nursery/ had me home for 12 weeks/ 6 months. And I’m sure they’d be equally well adjusted if I’d been a SAHM too!

There are plenty of ways to model a good example of responsible adulthood, just as there are plenty of ways to model a poor example/irresponsibility.

Roomba asked specifically about her situation and I agree with her it was good parenting,good modelling
It is the quality of the parenting,the consistency,the regard that matters
And it can be delivered by working or sahp or parents who are away with work
Women don’t need to be Velcroed to their kids 24-7 to be a good mum and working doesn’t render one a bad mum

I actually don't think it's best for children to be with mum exclusively for three years. Not in today's society. Humans are pack animals, children need peers around them, even when little. I think if we all lived with our parents and sisters and sisters in law and loads of cousins and siblings in a 'pack' then yes, it would be ideal to always have mum in arms reach. But that's not how we live. One adult and one child in 1:1 interaction 24/7 is not 'natural' for our species.

Even though i live in a city there's not enough toddler groups around to make it anything like the tribal experience of our ancestors here.

I honestly think a mixture of sufficient parental attention and groups such as nursery and childminders with multi-age children is optimum.

I wouldn’t think I’d wasted my life raising a child just because they didn’t take “responsibility over” themselves though.

Sure, but she is definitely reassessing her priorities.
You can still raise a child without compromising too much of your life. At least not enough that you feel disappointed in the end.

You can still raise a child without compromising too much of your life. Only if you have a supportive dp who’ll compromise & share tasks
I’ve read plenty mn,the dad won’t change his behaviour,work hours or assist with childcare. Cue the mum to step up,and over time give things up because her dp won’t share parenting

You can still raise a child without compromising too much of your life

I never found it a compromise to be honest!

I never found it a compromise to be honest

Me either to be honest. I felt working would mean compromising on the life I wanted for the DC AND for me.

Me either to be honest. I felt working would mean compromising on the life I wanted for the DC AND for me.

Same.... it’s a shame people can’t be more accepting of that.

I think people need to be accepting of all the choices families make. People get pissed off at being told that one way is the best/only way.

I personally get very annoyed at the expectation that women have to make all of the sacrifices.

There are clearly well adjusted, happy children across the whole spectrum. You need to choose what works best for your family as a whole as that will ultimately be what is best for the children.

Definitely look at what works best for the family is key but some people look only at what works best for them. Frequently men only consider their needs and not those of their child or partner when it comes to child rearing

Exactly, I don't feel I compromised my career because I wanted children. I don't consider it a sacrifice that I chose to put less focus on the career than time with my child.
But I would have considered it a sacrifice to leave my career just to take care of my child, or to change my career to something I didn't enjoy.
Other people make other choices, which, hopefully, they don't consider sacrifices. And that's fine.
The problem is when people do make sacrifices one way or the other, which means they are basically not happy with their choices.

It worked well for us and our kids have grown up fine.
I didn't want to work and leave our dc with others, so I didn't.
have a dh who supports my wishes and we parent equally.
Being with your kids doesn't mean you miss out, I can't say I feel at all compromised.
It also doesn't mean they don't mix with others if you don't use institutionalised childcare or a child minder.
They don't need peers from 1-3, other kids for playtime yes, but you don't need official childcare for this.

So you don’t feel like you sacrificed your career but do you acknowledge the time you sacrificed with your children?

Lol,Who are you addressing with the accusatorial so?
That’s how employment usually works.give up own time to undertake predetermined activities to an externally imposed standard in return for financial remuneration
And I need doing so one gives up ones own time

institutionalised childcare haha it’s nursery not state run gulag
Kids having circle time, not hate hour to denigrate individuals who oppose the state

Why is everyone arguing amongst themselves?

Do what suits your family. We all live in different circumstances- can't we just accept that we are all trying to do our best?

In fairness, I was reading research and articles during the 80's about the same thing, it's nothing new.
you either agree with it all, some of it, or none of it and make your decisions accordingly.
I believed it and made my decision to drop my career and become a sahm, I thought this was best for my family and my dh agreed.
It turned out best for us and gave us so many opportunities that wouldn't have existed if I'd kept my career.
But these probably wouldn't be applicable to others and it be best for their children to be in childcare.

Umm,are you clear on the fundamentals of online discursive forums
People post opinion,and invite others to contribute,contrary & opposing opinions are expected
It’s not necessarily arguing, no one is inviting anyone to step outside or hold ma coat

romany

*I believed it and made my decision to drop my career and become a sahm, I thought this was best for my family and my dh agreed.
It turned out best for us and gave us so many opportunities that wouldn't have existed if I'd kept my career. *

This too has been my experience.

I jacked my career, became a SAHM,. I too found opportunities that I wouldn't have considered- I now think I am in a far better position now than if I had taken short maternity leave and continued in the same groove.

LipstickHandbagCoffee - maybe revisit the definition of institution?