To have a 10 month old baby in a nursery 5 days a week?

[Toomuchworkon]

Just been reading another thread where it’s generally agreed this is a lot / potentially too much and I’m all worried now.

Honestly, would you be judging me harshly?

I'm always perplexed by the people who assume that all mothers would choose to care for their children 24/7 if there was no financial necessity to work.

Where did I say that? I save you time, I didn't.

I said many not all parents not mothers would rather spend more not all of their time with their children, especially when the alternative is their child spending 40 hours a week in nursery care.

I wish we'd gone with full-time nusery rather than 3 days nursery and 2 days with MIL, at her insistance. Do what works for you as a family.

@pointythings

40 hours in nursery is almost 50% of a baby's time out of their daytime hours. It's not a trivial amount.

You do know they also nap in nursery, don't you? If you're going to be persnickety about sleep time, be consistent about it.

Ideally I'd have worked part time. But that wasn't available when mine were little, and we needed two incomes for those trivial luxuries like heat, food, a roof over our head. That didn't make us worse parents. Nor does staying at home make anyone a worse parent.

I notice the ones judging OP on this thread are the SAHM brigade, not those of us who put our DC in nursery.

I think it’s significantly more than 50% of a baby’s waking hours at FT nursery actually. Most are probably awake and with their parents only about 2 hours each weekday and about 10hrs a day at the weekends, so maybe 30 hours a week with the parents.

As far as it being the SAHM brigade “judging” the OP, well how could the “putting their babies in nursery full time brigade” judge her? By saying the baby will not have enough time in nursery somehow?

Also, the OP has literally asked to be judged, both implicitly by starting the thread, and explicitly in the content of her post.

If the OP has no choice, it doesn’t matter what anyone else thinks, but she did ask!

If you have to, you have to, but I don’t think it’s ideal, and I would have been very unhappy doing it. You just have to make the best of the choices available to you though.

@FourTeaFallOut

But how can you possibly know whether that is true or not?

I'm the main earner by 4x

My twins have been in full time childminding from 5 months old.

Same with my older daughter. Has done her zero harm and I personally think she is more confidant and articulate than many of her peers who stayed at home until age 4. Our relationship is just as strong as any other mother and daughter where the mother worked less 🤷‍♀️

I wouldn't judge you at all. My own DD went full time 5 days a week from 9 months. I had to work. I was happy with my decision, DD was happy at nursery, so I didn't give a toss what other people thought of it.

If it works for you OP then embrace your decision.

And DD has turned out perfectly fine and remembers her nursery very fondly, as do I.

And if you want to and that works for your family, then that’s all good too, OP. Neither option is automatically superior; it very much depends on individual circumstances.

@FourTeaFallOut

I said many not all parents not mothers would rather spend more not all of their time with their children, especially when the alternative is their child spending 40 hours a week in nursery care.

Well, it's really obvious that most parents don't actually want that because take-up of any scheme to get men to spend more time with their young children - e.g. shared parental leave - always have a pathetic take-up. Countries have only managed to get men to do it through make it use it or lose it, which means imposing a financial penalty on families where the men don't take it. Whether most mothers do is less clear.

@WeepySheepy

Have a baby and seeing it grow everyday it a wonder, I just dont see the point in having one them missing all the good bits they aren't an entertainment system or a film. This is a real human and it's about what is best for them. In my case, being looked after by trained professionals in a nursery setting. There's no way I could do half of what they do with my child.

God, same. DS does all kind of fun an enriching experiences at nursery. If he were with me he'd be eating processed snacks, watching TV and doing sensory play stroking the shoes in the Harvey Nicks shoe department . I think he's better off with the professionals.

I had my first when I was still in the US. I had six weeks' maternity leave (cobbled together out of unpaid leave, sick leave, and my measly 8 days annual holiday allowance) and then she was in nursery from 8am to 6pm, five days a week, until she started school. She thrived and was very happy, very healthily attached to me and to her father. It was much harder on her than it was on us. Her sister was born after we moved to the UK and I took a year off before putting her in nursery two days per week because we could at that point afford for me to work part time. She is lovely of course and doing fine for herself but is much more anxious and less confident than her sister. Maybe it was nothing to do with nursery, no way to know. But her "nursery-raised" sister absolutely thrived and continues to thrive.

Sorry should have said it was much harder on us than it was on her-obviously!

@Bobsyer

I did. I had to. Mine went from 8 months. I had no guilt whatsoever and my children don’t remember it at all. They are just as sociable and well-adjusted and close to me as the child who didn’t go to nursery at all.

I refuse to be made to feel like a bad parent because I wasn’t there 24/7 for a period of their lives they won’t even remember. I remember feeling like supermum being able to manage a job and babies at the same time!

No ‘firsts’ ever occurred not in mine and DH’s presence.

Nurseries and nannies often don’t tell parents when “firsts” occur, so they don’t spoil it for the parents who can think they were there when their baby first did something!

I think it's fine and my children were both in childcare from six months though part time - but I don't agree with the people who make claims like children in nursery are more confident etc. That's just judging the other way. There will be good and bad on both sides and essentially it's about what works for the family - I also think it's good when parents do get time with their pre school babies and toddlers.

Btw - traditional societies - ie. how humans lived for thousands of years and how we actually evolved to live - would have had many adults helping care for babies - I read a great anthropology book about it, the adults are called 'aloh parents' and there would have been around 15 adults caring for and loving each baby.

Because of the contortions that I see performed by me and my DH , and my friends and acquaintances to avoid that outcome. Parents dropping hours, parents working either end of the week to reduce nursery hours, grandparents picking grandchildren up from nursery early in the day to reduce the hours there, women timing children so maternity leave can be cobbled together in a fashion to spend more time with children, and the op's subsequent posts would point to my conclusion.

And this anecdotal evidence may amount to something or nothing but will be no more or less reliable than your own.

@Hardbackwriter we have had a fantastic shared parental leave take up at our company. Loads of men have taken between 3-6 months off and loved it. I think it is one of the most welcomed policy changes I've seen actually and most men I know who've had a baby have taken at least a couple of months.
Maybe the issue in many companies is the fear of judgement from employers (many don't actually support men taking it in reality as they aren't forward thinking) and partners who don't want to sacrifice any of their leave.

You go girl. Do what is right for you. Then your baby will be fine.

Nurseries and nannies often don’t tell parents when “firsts” occur, so they don’t spoil it for the parents who can think they were there when their baby first did something!

So it therefore makes zero difference then!

YABU to run a poll on this completely personal decision - who cares if people judge you unless you actually respect their judgements. Honestly, crack on with your life, the main thing is if it works for your family and you're happy with the care your baby is receiving.

@FourTeaFallOut

I think you are underestimating the desire parents have to spend more time with their children, especially when they are young.

I heard that complaint many times. Most of the women I knew dropped to part time employment so that could have more time with babies. I knew someone who lived in Spain. There, childcare is really cheap and plentiful and flexible so that women can better manage their working hours. J

I'm really pleased to hear that it's had good take-up at your company, @Suspicioussam - I personally think that using SPL was one of the best decisions DH and I ever made for us as a couple. But nationally the take-up is 2%, so it's hard to see the scheme as an overall success.

Well, it's really obvious that most parentsdon't actually want that because take-up of any scheme to get men to spend more time with their young children - e.g. shared parental leave - always have a pathetic take-up.

We could have a conversation about that and I may broadly agree with you but it seems an odd sidenote to your accusation that I said all women want to spend 24 hours of the day with their children.

I'm sorry, my post obviously came across to you as an attack on you specifically, and that wasn't actually my intention but I can see how it came across that way. It was supposed to be more a musing about the way that there's this widespread narrative that all women would be at home if they could, and working mothers are supposed to perform this (see how much talk there's been about what people had to do on this thread). But I shouldn't have quoted your post, even though it was my mental jumping off point for that thought, as you're right, it misrepresented what you said.

DC were in childcare from 12 months, between 7.30am - 6.30pm, so very long hours. DH and I both worked in a traditionally long hours, City job. I'd go in 'late' after doing the 7.30am drop off which was just behind my office. DH would pick up 'early' - he worked in the same office as me.

DC were tired, I was tired, DH was tired, but we were happy and it meant we both maintained our careers. I'm very pleased I did, as DH has now been made redundant twice and works a NMW job, whilst I'm still in my career which is allowing us to pay 2 sets of private school fees. DC are thriving in their academic and social lives and I'd make the same decision again if I had my time over.

@Hardbackwriter but why do we think that is? It's not just because most men in the UK don't want to be with their new baby. Maybe some don't but to assume 98% of men don't take it because they want to avoid childcare is a very tenuous argument.
I'd say it's actually because 1) a lot of women still want to take their full maternity (me included), 2) men are judged harshly for taking it, and employers don't look favourably on it, and 3) the support network for SAHDs isn't great and can make it quite daunting. How many dads do you see at baby groups? I wouldn't want to be the only woman at an event either. It will take time before we see any big changes.
If you asked most men if they thought two weeks was enough paternity leave and they'd rather be back in the office I'd bet my house a lot more than 2% would say yes.