Nurseries for 12 week-old babies - ok or not?

[weatherthestorm]

Inspired by the current boarding school thread ... Now that there is widespread awareness of 'boarding school syndrome', are we not, as a society, in danger of sleepwalking into raising a generation whose mental well-being is going to be impacted by even earlier separation into a form of institutional care? Will the next generation be defined by 'childcare syndrome', alongside and exacerbating the mental health epidemic that is already emerging through unlimited access to social media content? Will we look back in disbelief that we ever thought it was ok to put babies, as young as 12 weeks into long days in nurseries, where they spend most of their waking lives before they even have any concept of themselves as a whole, separate being? AIBU that we need to lose the taboo / discomfort around engaging with this important issue, before it's too late?

I get that for some people it’s a choice, as you say if you want to have a 600k house in a beautiful area and holiday twice a year, then yeah, going back to work is a choice to have that lifestyle.

But for lots of people they really can’t choose differently. One of my friends has just had to go back to work, they are already in the cheapest rental they could find, her partner earns JUST enough that they aren’t entitled to any UC but nowhere near enough to pay all of their bills, buy their food, formula, nappies, wipes etc. If she didn’t go back to work, the only “choice” they had was whether to stop paying their rent, stop buying food, formula, or stop paying their gas & electric.

I think it’s a valid point. I’m pregnant with my first and will be taking my full maternity leave. After that the child will be going to childcare. I’m worried that it’s not the best thing for my child but the bills need paid. I do think society needs to debate and research this and the bottom line is that young families need more support.

But my daughter in nursery has a ‘key worker’ who provides majority of her care every day so she has built a connection to one adult figure. Also I don’t buy that the children don’t form attachments with one another before 2 - dd is 18 months and they all run up to each other and give each other cuddles when we arrive, and even at home she can name all her friends.
I do think 12 weeks is too young though and much better support needs to be provided for babies and families.

Wut? Children have been going to nursery for decades now. And 1950’s style ‘parenting’ was questionable at most. I think we are at risk of becoming super pedantic about such trivial issues. 12 weeks is 3 months, which I think is too early, and given that funding starts from 9 months it would be a question of the mother and father earning enough to collectively pay for childcare. Usually it’s not worth it from a financial perspective.

There are nurseries which will take babies as young as 12 weeks. I don't know how common they are, but they certainly exist. I don't know when this type of nursery started, so would be interested to hear.

When I worked in social services, you can't imagine the amount of money that was being spent on keeping mums with severe mental health issues or drug use with their babies in mother and baby units. It went on well beyond 12 weeks. Ideally, mums and babies would be supported to be together for a year because, even notwithstanding the risks, this was still considered in the baby's best interests. I don't understand why the govt is funding this on the one hand, but there is no support for mums and / or dads who are more then willing to be with their babies for that first year, but can't because they need to keep a roof over their heads. It doesn't add up.

@BodyKeepingScore yes a lot of lone parents can work and not board their DC unless that work also requires them to travel which is why flexi boarding is so popular.

I guess you don't know what flexi boarding is though do you?

It means they sleep at school 1 or 2 nights a week. Hardly traumatising.

These threads always crack me up. Full of shitehawks who have never been in the shoes of the person they are quick to criticise or they think the government should magically make SMP cover the mortgage and costs of a lone parent.

Most of us are simply doing the best we can.

I had a live in nanny from when my DD15 was 4 months old, I didn't want to put her in nursery full time. Would I judge someone for doing that though? No

Is there another option? I would love to hear it.

As others have said it’s very unlikely to have babies that young in childcare unless they have to. I’ve worked in childcare for 9 years and only had one baby that young because the mum had severe PND and had no family for support.

It’s based on need, but many don’t get what they need, I agree. My son is developmental delayed in his communication, most likely autism, and we have had to wait until the term after he turns 3 to get funding. I don’t earn enough to get earlier funding, and he also doesn’t qualify in terms of the need to be in a setting due to his delay. Whereas I know parents of typically developing children who get funding much earlier and don’t even make full use of it. It’s not fair, but it’s the way the system is set up.

This is said all the time I know but... I'm going to say it.

For most of human history - hundreds of thousands of years - babies were not raised by a stay-at-home mum in a private space. Babies were raised by communities of people living together. All members of the community would have had to contribute to the 'work' necessary for collective survival, eg foraging. Sure, babies might have been with their mums a lot (if their mums survived childbirth) but they weren't raised by them exclusively. Humans scraped out their survival in a way that left no spare time for some people to be exclusively dedicated to childcare only over a substantial period of time.

Eventually humans developed agriculture. When our ancestors worked on the land, sure, babies were again probably with their mums a lot but again, mums were working. Women didn't have time to continuously interact with their children. They contributed to working the land and keeping the home going and the work was exhausting and constant. Same for after the industrial revolution (except this time more and more women DID have to work and their babies came to work with them or were looked after by other people where this wasn't possible. And throughout these time periods, women in wealthy families weren't dedicating their time to childcare either - they were outsourcing childcare and even breastfeeding to other, poorer women.

The ability of one parent to stay home continuously with their baby, dedicating most of their time and attention to supporting that baby's development, is an incredibly recent phenomenon.... and of course even today many (most?) parents cannot afford to make this work.

In short: I'm not convinced that some babies going to nursery at a young age is to blame for whatever social problems we might see in coming years, or that we are already seeing.

There are nurseries which will take babies as young as 12 weeks. I don't know how common they are, but they certainly exist. I don't know when this type of nursery started, so would be interested to hear.

They won't have just "appeared" they will have been around since nurseries began, but the need will have fallen off a cliff with the development of maternity leave, there will be outliers that still require it even if for part time.

@Greywarden - all that is true, but children being brought up in larger families and communities is very different.

but this is the first generation really, who are increasingly being put into full-time nurseries as babies.

Which generation are you talking about? The generation who are now mid 20s to 40 whose mothers got only 3 months maternity leave?

Because that's who had absolutely no choice about returning - it was go back to work full time or lose your job. No right to request flexible working, no option to extend maternity leave - although sometimes you could get 16 weeks if a doctor would sign you off as needing additional time. Even then, it was SMP.

I agree it wasn't good for babies' development. But thankfully the Labour government extended that to 18 weeks, then 26, then 39. It made a massive difference to millions of families. Sure Start also meant lots of families were supported in giving their babies the best start.

There's a lot to criticise the Blair/Brown government for, but their focus on early years was unprecedented.

All of the nurseries closest to me take babies from 12 weeks, some take babies from 6 weeks.

But the vast majority of babies don’t go from 6 weeks or even 12 weeks and most babies don’t even go full time if they do go to nursery.

I’m not sure why your focusing on something that is very much the minority in this country other than to shame the small amount of mothers (because fathers are never judged for going back to work at 2 weeks) who either have no choice or feel like nursery at a younger age is beneficial for their circumstances.

No, I don't think this will be an issue. People who worry about it are giving far too much weight to a time of life none of us grow up to remember. I have no memory whatsoever of what my SAHM and I did together during my babyhood and my DC have no memory at all of nursery/having a SAHP for a time either. Parenting is a long journey over 18 years and more. There is endless opportunity to help your DC become secure adults with healthy attachments who know they are loved and cared for. Including time before and after nursery and weekends.

I think it's awful that with all the research available, not only in regards to childcare but also how important those first few years are, that mat leave isn't available up to 2 years. It is incredibly short sighted and I honestly believe that more funding for parents to be able to stay at home along with subsided parent and baby classes would have a significant postive impact on the future generations.

I don't know when this type of nursery started, so would be interested to hear.

You're posting from a place of little information, then, OP - there have been nurseries doing this since at least the 1970s. 50 years isn't exactly a 'new' thing.

Hm different perhaps but not necessarily better or worse I think. Personally I think my close family provide my DC with incredible childcare but I'm lucky. Given the number of posts on her where people worry about how their parents or indeed their DHs look after her their DCs, I can see why professionals in a nursery setting might often be the genuinely better option.

Heres a link to some info on childcare during the industrial revolution, for interest. For me it's a great reminder that working mothers aren't new. Working class women could often not afford not to work so never lived the sort of domestic life that we stereotypically associate with women's historic roles. https://www.historyworkshop.org.uk/womens-history/labour-and-love/#:~:text=The%20industrial%20revolution%20did%20not,to%20bring%20their%20children%20up.

My point is that none of this stuff is really new!

It is not about how much a child 'remembers' @5128gap . That has nothing to do with it. Nobody remembers the first year.

@weatherthestorm are your dcs in nursery ? Do you work ? I have 3 dcs and they didn’t go to any childcare setting before 3. I don’t like nurseries for under 3’s. BUT it’s so, so ignorant to not get how hard it is now for parents who need to work , it’s incredibly difficult if you don’t have family support.
I have family , near -in 14 years no one has watched/babysat my dcs for even 5 minutes. They wouldn’t help me when I had 3 under 6 and was sick or for any reason! Some people really really don’t get that. Wtaf are parents supposed to do if they have no financial support from family , no physical support and have to pay bills and mortgages?? What alternative help are you suggesting op ? I’m genuinely interested.

Is it? Nursery can very much be part of that. Especially if you don’t live close to family. Nursery can become an extended family, especially if it’s an excellent one and you have sent multiple children there.

The nursery my daughter is starting next year takes babies from 6 weeks and we viewed 4 nurseries before choosing this one, they all take babies from 6 weeks so that must be the norm at least where we are

How can a nursery become extended family?

So explain to me what it is then? What damage do you think is going to occur?

@weatherthestorm could you also tell us what age your children are? It’s absolutely relevant

Because you get to know them well, especially if you send more than 1 child there.

DS’ former keyworker became DTwins keyworker and also our first choice babysitter and friend as an example.