To feel sad seeing a 7 week old baby at DC's nursery today

[comfysketchers]

Dropping my 15 month old off at nursery today before work and there was another woman there at the same time handing over a 7 week old sleeping baby.

He was absolutely tiny and I just felt so sad looking at him thinking that he barely even knows he is out of the womb and his mum is dropping him off to spend all day with strangers in a noisy nursery environment.

I should also add that I live in a country that has excellent parental leave from the government plus most private companies pay at least 10 weeks of full pay on top of that, with many paying much more than that.

YABU - It’s perfectly normal for a 7 week old baby to spend 8 hours per day in a nursery.

YANBU - A 7 week old baby should be at home with its mum.

@enchantedsquirrelwood sorry this wasn't aimed at you - agreeing with your point!

Then why do you think people who were in childcare from a young age have them?

Main caregiver and parent does not indicate gender or sex.

WTH.. OP, you literally have zero idea of this person’s circumstances; how dare you judge and worse yet, put up a poll encouraging other people to judge. If the parent/carer needs to go back to work for whatever reason, or just needed some support for the day, thank goodness they have it in the form of a nursery. As parents, we should be each other’s champions, cheerleaders and supporters! If you ‘need’ to put your child into nursery because you have no other choice - I support you. If you ‘choose’ to go back to work - I support you. If you ‘choose’ to stay at home until your child is older - I support you! If you just needed someone to look after your child for a few hours, or a day or whatever because you needed a break - I support you! I support no matter what choice a parent needs and/or decides to make regarding THEIR child as long as their child is safe, loved and cared for. I do not support posts like this where people feel entitled to give their opinion on something that has nothing to do with them. The world needs more cheerleaders and less judges. Concentrate on your own family and get a grip.

The overwhelming caregiver mentioned in this thread is mothers

It’s almost like every woman feels differently about this, which makes the whole thread redundant

At 7 weeks old, the baby does not have a sense of self. He / she does not realise they are separate to the mother and has no sense that a mother can actually leave them, or be separate to them. They were still inside her a few weeks ago. They are only aware of 'part- objects' - eg, the mother's voice, her smell, the breast etc. Its called the 'paranoid-schizoid' phase. Eventually they come to relate all these various 'part objects' or sensory experiences to the mother as a whole person. When they realise she is a 'whole person' there also comes a realisation that she is actually separate to them and therefore can potentially leave. This happens about 6-9 months, which is why babies often display separation anxiety at this age.

Throughout the early months, a baby is developing various coping strategies to cope with a sense of overwhelming 'disintegration' in the absence of the mother. Coping strategies could include finding their thumb, or fixating on something familiar in their cot - as a means of 'holding themselves together' and coping with a developing awareness of separation from the mother.

Being plunged into an unfamiliar environment can obviously disrupt this process. Because the baby has no awareness of whole separate people, they don't have any organised attachment at this age. This is why it's harder to settle babies at 6 months or so, when they will cry in a more 'organised' way - eg. when the mother leaves (or when she returns to alert her to their presence). But just because a baby is in the paranoid-schizoid state, doesn't mean he / she is not going to be highly stressed. They will adapt, because they have to, but it's not ideal. At worst they may internalise disorganised various attachment patterns which may affect their relationships in later life or with their own children.

I'm sorry if this is not what people might want to hear but that's the baby-centric perspective. All babies are different, some will be more resilient than others, but it's not ideal.

Here we have it again: it's about what the parents want, not about what's best for children.

Me, me, me.

That would make pretty much every thread on here redundant, really.

Mainly decades of studies. Attachment issues can present in multiple ways some not always obvious.

This is a sage study taken to measure high cortisol concentrations ( stress levels) in babies in nurseries for example.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0141076820903494

Those who stay at home for years by choice do it because they want to as well. What's the difference?

Fully how all the people confidently asserting that what is best for children is to have stay at home parent and not go to nursery appear to be people who were stay at home parents and didn't send their children to nursery.

So those parents who need more in their life to not go stir crazy should stay at gome and be resentful? Is that what's best for the child?

Personally, having happy, healthy, fulfilled parents is what I think most children would be best off with. Whether that's from one being at home, two being at work, whatever. Having a parent resent you for making them not be a full version of themselves is going to cause more harm than going to nursery ever could.

Everyone saying the poor mum, maybe she has no choice etc etc the alternate viewpoint is just as valid - maybe she wants to leave her baby and is happy tp do so. I really, really hope that's not the case.

You just do not know the circumstances and for that reason it’s best not to judge. I wouldn’t be sending my 15 month old to nursery because I am lucky that my mum does his childcare. That doesn’t mean I would judge you or anyone else who puts a young toddler into nursery. Circumstances are different for everyone.

''I couldn't imagine leaving my baby''
''I wanted to stay at home with them''
''I felt fulfilled as a SAHM''

Me, me, me.

All these posters who effectively want women of childbearing age out of the workforce for 5-10 years. It is so backwards.

No to female doctors, judges, politicians, CEOs etc. Let’s take them out of the competitive workforce for those prime career-building years and force them to stay home and be good mummies.

And raise another generation who think women belong at home, because that’s what Mummy did.

No thanks!

The ‘requirement’ not to be able to commit to their baby/child should be considered before having children.

If the parents feel having children will prevent them becoming a ‘full version’ of themselves then maybe becoming parents is a mistake and poor judgement? It’s grotesquely unfair to have a baby and disregard their needs and development.

Yes that’s because of the law - including human rights legislation. A baby attending childcare with consent from the parents is worlds away - ethically, legally and practically - than a baby being removed against the will of the biological parent/s in court.

If we all got together and said this is not Okay? What isn’t okay? Many people have pointed out there may be very good reasons for that baby being in childcare and I’m glad that it’s available to that mother. What is it you want to see? A ban on childcare for babies? Forcing a parent to stay home?

Posters saying “don’t judge” is not a race to the bottom, it’s acknowledging that things are often far more complicated and more nuanced than they might seem on first glance. Any mother judging another mother at a nursery drop off based on what OP posted isn’t doing anything positive for women or children.

You've done nothing to effect change, you’ve thrown around awful accusations of abuse and neglect and been very vague about what you think should happen through “voting and taxation”.

You have also referred to studies into early years in a very superficial way without referencing them. News flash — my understanding is that they don’t all say young children are better at home than in childcare because in some cases the opposite is true.

Right, I’m absolutely with you

What the fuck kind of bullshit is this?! 😂 you can’t tell, you complete loon. Just as you can’t tell who was breast or formula fed, who was in reusable or disposable nappies…

My son is articulate as fuck, and he frequents childcare.

You can tell yourself you’re better than parents (not mothers) who use childcare, but you’re not. You’re worse. Because you’re so judgmental.

God help any daughter you may have if she chooses to have a decent career and children gasp.

Ah yes, I forgot everyone should consult their crystal ball and check that they will feel exactly as they thought they would before they gave birth 🙄

By your logic, only people who do not have any desire in the life other than to have a child, should therefore have a child. No, female doctor, you can't have a child because you might feel the need to go back to work afterwards? Sorry Mr dog walker, you provide a valuable service but because you don't earn enough to have your girlfriend stay home you can never be a dad. Ah, so you were told you could never have a child but got pregnant unexpectedly after studying for YEARS to become a barrister? Sorry, you should have planned better.

I hope nothing in your life ever veers off your plan, I don't think you'd cope.

So on the one hand people should only have children they can afford.

And the other hand they should only have children if they do not plan to work.

Has anyone else spotted the flaw in this plan?

This is not about women having careers or not or what's best for women. It's about a SEVEN WEEK OLD baby and what's best for them.