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

By his logic - that for a child with no concept of time all separation is equally bad - I actually feel less guilty about going back to work at 6 months, as apparently I've already traumatised my child by regularly handing him over to DH for two hours as a newborn so I could sleep, or indeed by leaving him with DH while I had my stitches put in about an hour and a half after he was born - apparently he never had a chance, poor thing! Selfish mummy abandoned him straight away just so she didn't carry on bleeding all over the floor...

It comes to something when looking after your own child is being labelled as clingy!
And to answer a previous post a lot of parents have 2 young kids or multiple births making 1-1 care impossible without help.
I was lucky in my timing in that I had my second as my eldest was starting school so it worked out well but that was pure luck. I do think 1-1 care for under 3s is optimal though and a lot of research supports that. But yes, other children and the need to work don’t always make it possible.

I am. Thanks.

I have friends who took a different approach to us...we have never compared or discussed as each family’s choices and actions are dictated by their own circumstances and priorities. I don’t think our way is THE way...but seeing as it’s being discussed, that’s my tuppence worth.

I agree with pictish
Starting school nursery at 3.5 is time enough for children to learn how to socialise in bigger groups.
Under 2’s don’t really play with other children anyway, they tend to play on their own quite happily.
People talk about babies as if they’re 18 or something. An 8 month old really doesn’t need to ‘get out there & meet people’

Mum being home and being the only carer for three years+ is a totally modern phenomenon. People call it ‘traditional’ but it was never like that before. Nobody was expected to spend all day every day interacting with their kids.

The working class women had to work whether that be taking in washing, cleaning etc. The children were often there but mum was not focusing on them singing ‘the wheels on the bus’. A lot of the time the kids would be left with another bunch of kids of varying ages, an older child, a grandparent, unrelated woman or just left to their own devices for huge swathes of time.

The middle class women were also not singing ‘wheels on be bus and crafting 24/7, they were more focused on their husbands, social engagements. They would have help to look after the kids.

The upper class women and royalty barely saw their kids, a nanny would look after them until they were packed off to boarding school.

This ‘traditional’ mum at home actively engaging with the kids all day every day is pretty new.

Misogynistic, sexist crap. Written by someone who can't possibly understand that many, many women work because they want to not because they need to.
I work full time because i love my job not purely for the money. Funny how men's working patterns are never questioned. You never hear the phrase 'working father' do you?

My mum and grandmother were not super rich but didn’t have to work as my dad/grandad brought in enough money to support the family. Up until fairly recently it was possible to live fairly comfortably on one wage.

Rubbish. What about the mum being a happy person so that her kids are happy?! I went back to work when my son was 9 months and haven't looked back.

Sexist claptrap designed to keep women in the kitchen

This with bells on. Funny how they only need their Mother, not their Father .

I stayed at home for a year, would've stayed home until DS started school if I genuinely thought he would have been better off. He was desperate to explore things and play with others, even as a baby he loved being around others. He's never once cried because I've left him. He's 3 now and goes to pre school every day he absolutely loves it. He asks me everyday am I going to nursery today. We are still close and have a great relationship. So it depends on the child.

@surferjet @pictish

I have an 9 year old stepson and 4 year old daughter. SS didn't start nursery (pre-school) until 3.5 and before that his main interactions were with adults.

My daughter started nursery at 10 months part time.

The difference in their social skills around other children is definitely noticeable.
SS was distraught at being sent to pre school and quite obviously felt abandoned with strangers.
Daughter knows no difference and started school this year without so much as a backward glance.

We do need to develop children's social skills, I'm not saying an 8 month old needs interaction with other 8 month olds. But definitely around the age of 2.

My dh, more unusually, was looked after by his dad as his mum was the higher earner which was rare at the time. But he would do the typical toddler groups, park trips etc.
If you’re talking about women in the past as either needing to work to make ends meet or being so rich they had staff you are missing out the vast majority in the middle.

Of course, no one every asks the under 3’s where they’d rather be.
I’m certain most would rather be at home with their mum.

Yep. My 2 year old asked to come to work with me yesterday, rather than stay with her grandmother who she isuoloves staying with.

Luckily I only work 2 days a week.

Oh, in answer to a poster on the first page about them having 11 kids, my mother had 11 children and stayed at home for every one of us. We didn’t leave her until we went to school. She was none of those things that you describe.

On my, that was meant to say “usually” not whatever nonsense that says!

I had a stroke in childbirth which meant that I was separated from my baby when they were a day old for the first month. This child constantly is a 'mummy' child even now they are school. They are very outgoing and independent but constantly tell me that they love me in a way that the others don't 'need' to. I think that we hugely underestimate the impact of the early years on children's emotional development. There is a huge pressure on women to go back to work and to be economically 'valuable'. I think there isn't a one size fits all answer -some children thrive in a nursery, others don't. It also depends on how one-to-one time they get outside with their primary carers.

Usually loves! I’ve not long woken up 😬

I also disagree that babies at home don’t get a chance to mix. There are so many toddler groups on these days that I could have gone to 2 a day had I wanted and obviously in those places you meet other parents with children of a similar age and socialise with them outside of the groups as well. I’ve never been so surrounded by babies as I was when mine were little!

Someone also mentioned adopted children. Having worked closely with a child care legal expert, I would say that most adopted children DO have attachment issues, especially when taken as very small children. Adoption is very hard.

Of course, no one every asks the under 3’s where they’d rather be. I’m certain most would rather be at home with their mum

Of course plenty of people ask - what makes you think they don't?

And plenty of people also try very hard to figure it out from non-verbal cues. My DD is 18 months and perfectly capable of yelling at me to take her to nursery. She likes it. They're good with her. I had no particular expectation this would be so, and definitely wouldn't have put her in (or kept her in) had she not enjoyed it.

I wouldn't put her in for a full day at her age, but that's about her and me, not a judgement on anyone else for what works for them.

OhComeOnRon

I think we need to follow up children at 16. those who were at home until 3.5 / 4 & those who were at nursery from 6 months old.

I doubt they’d be any difference in their social skills.

Of course, no one every asks the under 3’s where they’d rather be

I have actually asked my 3 year old if he'd like to stay at home with me instead of nursery as he also goes on my days off now and I'd be happy to have him at home if he didn't want to go. He says no.

What I’m saying is, a child who has been in full time nursery from a very young age will be no more intelligent, happy, friendly, or socially acceptable at age 16 than a child who was at home with his parent until age 4. All else being equal obviously.

To me though, the ideal would always be for a parent to be at home with the child, pre-school

For me the ideal would be for both parents to be at home some of the time and for the child to have some time in childcare.

Anyway as others have said, you can't give 1-1 care if you have more than one child. If he has 11 kids the younger ones must have got virtually no attention at all!

What I’m saying is, a child who has been in full time nursery from a very young age will be no more intelligent, happy, friendly, or socially acceptable at age 16 than a child who was at home with his parent until age 4. All else being equal obviously.

But all other things are never going to be equal, are they? And that's why studies of children in childcare are always pretty limited - you can't randomly assign them because no one would agree to enter a study where the researchers told them whether or not to go back to work, whether to use a nursery or a childminder, etc.

Hypothetical DS who had a mum who stayed at home until he was four would inevitably be pretty different because he'd have a totally different mum - one with different priorities and desires, one who had made very different financial decisions in the past - I mean, ultimately, if I'd really wanted to stay at home with my children then I wouldn't have married DH so DS would have a different dad! It's impossible to control for all the things surrounding the decision to use childcare, it's completely tied into so many other things that affect the life of a child through both nature and nurture.

Agree one primary caregiver is probably ideal for most children. There's loads of ideals and the job of the family is to decide what's best for them balancing all the factors including financial.
He agrees that for some mothers are doing their best by working to support the family so I don't know why posters are suggesting he must fund families in order to give his opinion.

He does also say that in his opinion a family who are secure but frugal and provide one caregiver until 3 is preferable to a family who choose to prioritise income and associated quality of life. That's where it becomes controversial and complex (more income might give the children more opportunities and outweigh the value of one primary caregiver etc) and limiting it to women gives it a misogynistic undertone which I agree has no place in 2018.

Otherwise it's simply an opinion on parenting choices just like any other parenting article.