To think 8am to 6pm at nursery/school+wraparound is just too much

[magicsoosh]

Apparently Mon-Fri 8am to 6pm childcare is normal.. AIBU to think that's a lot? That's more hours than most full time jobs

[quote FairyCatMother]@babyjellyfish Mainly so we could be closer to my mother who has a degenerative condition, and so we could afford to buy our own home. It sadly meant leaving behind many friends and a wonderful support network, but we soon settled.[/quote]
Bingo.

Well maybe other people's families and support networks (not to mention jobs) aren't conveniently located in the Midlands where houses are cheap and it is possible to support a family on one modest salary.

[quote FairyCatMother]@TheKeatingFive And what benefits are these? Being deprived of their parents' company for 10+ hours a day, for the sake of being able to afford that all-important TV subscription, and fashionable conformity to the latest societal norm of women being in the work place as much as men, with the added pressure of raising a family and maintaining a household as well?[/quote]
TV subscription?! That's at most £100 a month. My salary pays our mortgage.

@TheKeatingFive while I do agree with it not always being a choice I have seen plenty of times personally as an au pair where the mother could have worked part time and still been on a more then comfortable salary even just the income of the father alone would have made them more then comfortable. while I know this is not always the case there are cases like this.

Why does the mother have to work part time? Why not the father?

Equally I see as many posts on MN slating those who decided to become SAHP. I don't think anyone is disagreeing with situations in which parents have no choice but to place children in childcare for such long hours, but rather those who choose to 'for the sake of their career'.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with working parents wanting to have a career.

@cafedesreves Case and point, placing children in a nursery for 10+ hours a day to afford a £100pcm TV subscription justifies exactly what the OP was saying.

Why shouldn't mothers work for the sake of their career? No one seems to object when fathers do it.

@babyjellyfish Or maybe they could do precisely what I described in our situation (had you read my post) which is to leave behind their support networks and find alternative jobs to make affording their own home easier.

placing children in a nursery for 10+ hours a day to afford a £100pcm TV subscription justifies exactly what the OP was saying.

And no one is doing that. So I don't understand the point being made.

I ended up a single parent when DS was 10 months old. I chose not to work and lived on benefits until DS started school. Bet those of you slating parents for putting their kids in childcare would also slate me for not working. We are all different and minding your own business is a good start.

@TheKeatingFive Missing the point, the objection is to young children having to spend 10+ hours a day away from their parents, for the sake of that parent's 'career'.

[quote FairyCatMother]@hangrylady Equally I see as many posts on MN slating those who decided to become SAHP. I don't think anyone is disagreeing with situations in which parents have no choice but to place children in childcare for such long hours, but rather those who choose to 'for the sake of their career'.[/quote]
So you're basically fine with women working as long as they don't dare to do it through choice or, god forbid, have an actual career they'd like to maintain. Right.

Hmm my kid is 8.30am 5.15 pm, actually loves it and has actually crawled into the stroller on a Sunday asking when are we going? I don´t actually work full time, 35 hour week and am the main earner. Needs must I am afraid. Slightly fed up with the goody-two-shoes parent shaming threads.

[quote FairyCatMother]@babyjellyfish Or maybe they could do precisely what I described in our situation (had you read my post) which is to leave behind their support networks and find alternative jobs to make affording their own home easier.[/quote]
Or you could just keep your nose out of other people's choices. Wild concept, I know.

@codeVeronica the part was part of my post so i will answer that. because in this case I am talking about the father was still on the slightly higher pay. it would have made more sense. also unlike her husband the mother did work freelance so could somewhat have more control of her work load

[quote FairyCatMother]@TheKeatingFive Missing the point, the objection is to young children having to spend 10+ hours a day away from their parents, for the sake of that parent's 'career'.[/quote]
Why can’t I have a career? No one expected my ex husband to give up his job and sit at home?

I’m in a good job now - I wouldn’t be if I hadn’t worked at it when my kids were younger.

Plus. The alternative was claim benefits. Is that really a better option?

for the sake of that parent's 'career'.

Why the inverted commas, do you not believe women's careers are real or something?

As I've already outlined, there are many benefits to the children from mothers careers. Why is it only the person with a penis who should be paying the mortgage and covering expenses?

@emeraldcity2000 no one said it has to be the mother. both parents could prioritise the child before their careers or the person on the lower pay could at least for the very early years take a step back

@emeraldcity2000 Whilst their children are still too young to be apart from their parents for such long periods, yes. It's not that hard to grasp!

@Waxonwaxoff0 The point of discussion is entirely that. Resentful, much?

Anyway I'm signing off, time to take my LO to his baby group!

@TheKeatingFive

that all-important TV subscription, and fashionable conformity to the latest societal norm of women being in the work place

Gosh, what a surprise that you resort to 'working mothers are nasty materialist' tropes. I never would have guessed.

Anyway, benefits of me staying in work for my family.

Family security. Two incomes are always more resilient than one. Not only are we less worried about one of us being made redundant, we also both have more flexibility to start our own businesses or change career if we wanted.

Proper pension provision, my children will never have to pick up any tabs here.

Money for private schools, funding of university, savings towards a deposit for a first house, any opportunities they want to avail of as teens.

So many benefits. Whether they are of value or in reach for others, I don't know, I'm speaking from my own POV.

This, this, this. A million times this. I work for all kinds of reasons - financial security, career progression, pension fund, the ability to make sure that DS graduates with no-debt, can do unpaid internships if he wants/needs to and can have the deposit on a flat. Also, by staying in work, DH and I have reached a level of seniority that allows us a reasonable amount of flexibility if DS is ill, or has to go to a doctor's appointment or needs an early pick-up for whatever reason.

My parents were always short of cash and it hung like a cloud over my whole childhood. I don't want that for DS.

If someone doesn't want to work and wants to be a SAHP that's great. Good for you! Don't shit on those of us who have to/want to/need to work.

No penis here to pay the bills. DS has moved out and has his own place and it’s me and 2 DDs

Why is being on benefits and not working seen as a better option?

[quote sweetbambi]@emeraldcity2000 no one said it has to be the mother. both parents could prioritise the child before their careers or the person on the lower pay could at least for the very early years take a step back[/quote]
There was only me. I had no one to rely on but myself.

@AchillesPoirot then clearly the point people are trying to make is not about you.

[quote FairyCatMother]@babyjellyfish Or maybe they could do precisely what I described in our situation (had you read my post) which is to leave behind their support networks and find alternative jobs to make affording their own home easier.[/quote]
The point is that moving to the Midlands wasn't a random choice for you, was it? Your mother is there.

What if your mother lived in Cambridge, which is expensive? Would you still have moved to the Midlands because it is cheap and you decided to prioritise cheap housing over friends and family?

Do you think people whose jobs, families and support networks are all in places where houses are more expensive should move somewhere where the cheap housing is really the only advantage?

I live somewhere expensive and yes, my son goes to a childminder every day. If we moved somewhere cheaper so that either I or his father could give up work, we would lose:

• the beautiful home in the lovely area that we live in
• being close to excellent schools
• being in the same town as my son's grandparents, uncle, aunt and cousins
• being able to afford to visit his other grandparents and other family abroad
• being able to save money for his future every month
• the security that comes with knowing that we have two salaries coming in
• both parents having our own financial independence, now and in retirement

My son loves his childminder and the other baby that she looks after. He's happy. The situation works for us.

I certainly don't feel he has a worse life than he would have living in a small house in a cheap area, far from his extended family and with one stay at home parent.

[quote sweetbambi]@AchillesPoirot then clearly the point people are trying to make is not about you.[/quote]
But it is.

Single parents have to just get on with it. Many of us don’t get maintenance and we don’t have anyone to rely on. What the hell else are we supposed to do?

A lot of women that use childcare do not have careers though just regular jobs.

I read on mumsnet all the time that you should have children later when you have developed a career and then have more choices and can spend more time with your children but this is a lie

As it seems that now you have this career you can't spend more time with your children as you do not want to go backwards in your career.

The issue with 7.30 to 6.00 nursery at a young age is that the child is woken and has breakfast at nursery. Then when they are picked up have a quick dinner,bath and bed. No time is spent with their child.
And often they don't even have dinner. We have had parents thinking that tea in nursery is a meal when it just snacks.

I have also noticed that parents who have their children in this long do not like to pick them up when they are ill and bring them in when they are sick even with covid because they can't possibly miss work.

I love when its Bank Holiday and these parents have to loon after their own chikdren.

[quote FairyCatMother]@DietrichandDiMaggio There are many places where my husband's salary would make affording a decent sized home easily affordable. We left London during the lockdown and moved to the Midlands for that reason[/quote]
Really? Because based on his take home pay he must earn around £25K, so borrowing based on that would not afford a family home in all but the cheapest places. Obviously we don't know your particular circumstances, so don't know how you have afforded your home, but a family with just that income would struggle to get a big enough mortgage for a family home in many places, not just London and the SE.