AIBU to think that once you have paid your childcare, its not really worth working.? Is it that you just don`t want to look after your own kid. prefering to stick them in daycare as soon as the shine wears off, it really bugs me!

[discusturd]

Some go from 7-6 and never see there parents, I know I will get slated but in the nursery I work some kids hardly know who their parents are.

oh God, ScottishMummy has found a pal

God help us

LOL you heard there was argy bargy and wanted to stick yer beak in too. wee bitty sherricking from you

classy

jellybeans - I think you make a good point about retired people or people who cannot work. I haven't seen a single working person on this thread who has said that work is the only thing that defines them. There are lots of things which define me - my children are the most important things to me, my husband, my career, friends, books, travel, films etc as I said on an earlier post.
What really pisses people off (and I would imagine it pisses off working dads as well as mums) is the assumption by the likes of happyhoney that if we work we are somehow missing out on something. I'm sure it's true that some people give up work and find they are happier and more fulfilled, but it's equally true that many of us combine parenting, career, and all the many other fascinating aspects of life and are not missing out on anything at all. And nor are our children. I have no issue with people choosing to not work, or work part time, or whatever, if they are in a position to choose. So why is it that some (and I'm sure it's a disenchanted and bitter minority) seem determined to insist that parents who work outside the home are missing out on something. HappyHoney actually used those words - she tells me that I am missing out, but funnily enough, cannot tell me how. Now, as far as patronising posts go, that surely takes the biscuit. Telling someone else, who you don't even know, FFS, that they are missing out! Ludicrous and entirely illogical.
I repeat, I am not missing out, nor is my husband, nor are my children. And before happy comes back and accuses me of being defensive - no, I am not. I am simply telling it as it is. Which is what she can't stomach!

FTR You know what is best for you/your family. I think that is all that matters. Perhaps they would feel they would be missing out if they worked f/t and that is what they mean? (I haven't see the mentioned posts) I also put my DD first when I worked f/t. It was different in some ways and there were plus and negative points, like with anything in life. For me, I do what is best at the time and I am sure it is the same for others. Some people will disagree with anything we do (re the toddler in a buggy threads and other judgey threads), take it with a pinch of salt.

It is incredible how many people let themselves get sucked into these deeply unhelpful and divisive debates. Especially when they most likely started by a troll...

Frankly all of us Mum's have more in common with each other than we do with the person who started this thread (a childless nursery nurse) who does not understand the first thing about what it feels like to have a child - the overwhelming love, the worry, the difficult decisions, the second-guessing, the guilt. These are emotions of a mother not a nursery nurse. Once your identity is tied into raising children for whom you would lay down your life you are forever altered (whether you work or not). The OP does not and cannot understand this because she is not a parent.

Anyone else remember last time they knew how to be perfect parent? For sure? It was before you had kids wasn't it?

So really, let this thread and it's pointless and unhelpful and anti-feminist infighting die as it should have done before it got off the ground.

And sorry for the bad grammar - it is past midnight here and I am exhausted... must go to sleep...

Jellybeans - I share your feelings about how my life has opened up since leaving work to be a SAHM.

I've done a DIPHE (I already had a BA and a MA) since leaving paid employment, and have retrained to do a much more interesting job. I also now do voluntary work and am much more involved with my community - which is a very good thing for me and for my children.

My work was OK (I was a teacher in FE) but I felt like I was on a treadmill a lot of the time and I never had the time to sit down and really think about where my life was going. I LOVE what I do now and feel like a different person.

I have made sacrifices - I've got crap all pension and I've had to buy my clothes in charity shops for the past 3 years but my life is much more productive, varied and interesting.

My own mum didn't have an education or a career, but concentrated on doing charity work, making a lovely home life for us and cultivating her marriage and her friendships. She's always been the centre of everything in our family. At 74 she's still a very busy woman with amazing friendship networks and the love and respect of everyone who knows her in her community. I'm so proud of her and grateful for what she did for us. She's a role model for me.

Good post Bluebutterfly. The OP really was talking a load of wank!

Wanted to respond to this:

"Until we hit upon a CONSENSUS, no on should be throwing their weight around telling parents that they are fools who don?t know what they are doing."

That's extremely unfair. Neither I nor anyone else has talked about parents in this way. There will never be a full consensus on this issue but parents need to know what the research says, so that they can make up their minds about how they feel about it. I personally had no idea about the wide ranging concerns about the impact of early fulltime group childcare on children's emotional development until I hunted this information down for myself. Of course there are always articles in newspapers - but not all parents read these papers and not all parents find information in this sort of format useful when it comes to assessing the value of this sort of research. It's also the case that people sometimes turn away from information that makes them feel uncomfortable or anxious when it comes to the choices they make for their children. That's natural.

As Juule says: "Perhaps it's just me then and the people I know.
With my first child, I was totally unaware that there might be any reason to not send my child to nursery or any other form of childcare. The overwhelming view was that it was normal to do so and that I was not normal to feel uncomfortable with it. I was totally unaware of any other viewpoint."

I was exactly the same. Actually this really makes me think of the whole infant feeding debate. When I had my first I wanted to breastfeed, thought it would be 'nice' and 'natural' but also went out and brought bottles and formula because I assumed that bottlefeeding is a normal part of being a parent and that I'd be doing that too. I knew bf had benefits but it never occured to me that there might be any reasons not to formula feed. I was completely staggered a few years down the line when I opened a midwifery textbook and saw there was a whole chapter on 'The Risks of Artificial Feeding'
And then as I read more I realised that in professional circles the concept of 'risk' in relation to artificial feeding is common currency, but people don't talk to mums about it because they don't want to make them feel guilty about their choices. It's like talking about the disadvantages of using nurseries - it's become a social taboo.

"to provide a multitude of other BENEFITS is not abuse"

Again - very, very unfair and unhelpful. I never implied or said that putting children into nursery is abusive.

"Get a grip. You are passionate about this, but it?s the passion of the zealot, who only has half the story but still believes in the WORD regardless cos it spoke to them personally."

No - I am not a zealot. I am very pragmatic about childcare. I have used childcare for all three of my children, including nurseries. Far from having HALF the story I have the FULL story - I know about all the supposed benefits of nursery care, which was why I chose to place my daughter in one, and why my son has attended one for 5 afternoons a week for the past 2 years. I have also spent a lot of time reading and researching about the possible disadvantages. It is you that can't bear to have your preconceptions about nurseries challenged - you are the one with a huge vested emotional interest in the research being meaningless and irrelevant.

Findtheriver - it was not one piece of research that caught my attention and made me think about my child's experience of nursery, it was a whole body of research dating back over the last decade.

Absolutely - there will never be a full concensus because research is an organic, ongoing process. The body of research we have at this moment in time is different to the body of research available a decade ago, and is different to the body of research we will have a decade into the future.
I am sure that all intelligent people are able to access and interpret research for themselves, so to assume that any one person can have the 'full story' while everyone else only has half the story is arrogant beyond belief.
My view is that we all make what we believe are the optimum decisions for our own family. When it's a big decision such as where your child will go to school or nursery, or what career we will go into, we obviously give it a lot of thought,do the research etc etc. Smaller decisions - what we are going to feed our family for dinner, whether to let a 10 year old pop to the shop alone - again, it's a case of weighing up the pros and cons and then making a judgement. We all do it, every moment of the day. So, it is up to each family to make the decision that is best for them. I have no problem with people not working, if they have someone to support them or independent means. Their choice. Personally I would not put a young baby in nursery for 40 hours a week, because I wouldn't feel comfortable with that decision. However, for some families that may be the best decision for them. There is certainly a lot of evidence that children from disadvantaged backgrounds can do extremely well in organised childcare provisions. So, what is right for one family isn't going to be right for another. Which is why when you look at the body of research, it's pointless unless you apply it to your own particular circumstances.
I think a lot of this thread has been really interesting. My only issue is with the small minority of MNers who seem to be incapable of reasoned debate and resort to cheap jibes. For example, happyhoney telling me, someone she doesn't even know, and has never met, that I am 'missing out' on something because I am a working parent!! It's pathetic. I am not missing out on anything, and neither are my children. If we were, then I would do something about it, because I am fortunate to have the choice financially not to work. Apart from the small number of ignorant posts, I find it an interesting debate, and yes, it will run and run, precisely because there will never be a general concensus. And why should there be? Children, like adults, are all individuals.

Titty: "Far from having HALF the story I have the FULL story".

HALF the story is knowing all the possible research out there that is pro and against nurseries, childcare, SAHM-ing etc. I believe you, me and others on here have more or less got to this point.

The WHOLE story is, knowing what you know about the research (which is by no means consistent or conclusive), what do YOU as a PARENT observe as how your children are actually faring in the arrangements you have put in place in the light of your family's circumstances.

Your dd did not settle in nursery, mine did. My judgment as a parent is better than yours or any other 'expert's', where MY dc is concerned.

I did have a question for you in an earlier post but you probably missed it. Would you still have pulled your dd out of nursery if she had settled nicely, in the light of the adverse research against nurseries for little ones, even though the arrangement was working for your dd and family?

FTR,

You are the one who bought up the issue of missing out.I have no intention of getting into s debate with you about this as it is you choice, your life, if you are happy then stop harping on as it really does make you look like you have something to prove.
I would not make a statement stating that my kids are not missing out - how do we know this, I for one cannot be sure that the lifestyle I have is 100% right for my kids. I am at home at the moment and have done loads with my DC but I do question wether that is fair - should I put them into a holiday club where they have access to a broader range of activties and people. The debate roles on and on........

happyhoney, maybe you are suffering selective memory loss here - but YOU are the one who told me I was missing out. Several times, because when I asked you to explain how, you couldn't!
I wouldnt dream of telling you how to live your life. You are perfectly entitled to say that you would not be happy to work because you would feel that you were missing out on something in your family.
What you are NOT entitled to do is tell me that I am missing out on something in MY family, because I choose to work.
And for someone who doesn't want to engage in debate, you do seem to keep coming back for more!!

Calm down you two. IS it worth it?
I have to say tho that it's often an inate attitude of SAHMs that WOHMs are missing out on something. Sickening.

FTR,

I want to join the debate just not with you as you are fixated on the missing out thing. Don't put words in my mouth - I never said you were missing out.If you continue to speak such crap I will be ignoring you.

By happyhoney on Tue 19-Aug-08 20:26:43
'Not sure what we're supposed to be missing out on'

Uh, hello?????

By findtheriver on Tue 19-Aug-08 20:27:48
Yes happyhoney? Do you have a point? Would you like to tell me what I'm missing out on??
By happyhoney on Tue 19-Aug-08 20:28:22
River, if you don't know I am not the one to tell you.

• from yesterday evening, happyhoney, when YOU were telling ME that I am missing out!!

I think you are right not to want to engage in debate happy, as clearly you have difficulty remembering what you said last night!! This is a public forum, btw, so do feel free to opt out if you want!

is this still going on???

Some mums work, some don't, end of...surely?

FTR,

buzz buzz - splat

Have lurked on this thread for a while as I have been thinking a lot about this issue. There seem to be plusses and minuses on both sides, and i'm not sure the research will ever be really useful, because for every report telling us the negative points of nursery, there's another telling us the good things!
I do think generally on MN there is a lot of animosity started by SAHMs towards WOHMS. It does seem generally as though WOHM are more 'live and let live' while the SAHMs seem to want to convince themselves that they are doing something better. And I say that as a SAHM (at the moment)! I have a lot of friends in both camps though, SAHM and WOHM, and I honestly can't see any difference in how our children are. The ones who go to nursery or CM are perfectly well adjusted; in fact I am currently debating whether to take some part time work to be able to afford a lovely nursery for my son. I couldnt cope with working up till now, but that's to do with me and my capacity to cope with mothering/home/work - I'm not saying I am a better mother for being at home at the moment, and I certainly do not think any of my working friends are missing out in any way at all.

Interesting post toni. As you can see from the post preceding yours, the quality of debate is variable on these threads

Very well said, toni.
Part-time work is great- do consider more.

My kids both went to nursery - p/t - was fab! I am pg with no 3 and will be sending this one too.

Chelsy - scottishmummy has not found a 'pal'. I simply agree with her. How old are you? Some of the posts on here make me think DC's have logged on and are posting instead!

ToniGuy - I also think your post makes very good sense. Think that makes us pals too!

Blueshoes, you have so misunderstood where I'm coming from on this one. You think I've taken dd's response to her nursery, looked for research which provides a rationale for our experience and then extrapolated that to all families and situations.

Actually

1. dd had begun to 'settle' when I took her out. I did point this out in my earlier post. I took her out after an incident with an unchanged nappy which shattered my confidence in the care she was getting at that particular nursery. I didn't put her in another one as my mum stepped forward to help me out and it became unnecessary.

2. This incident happened 8 years ago, long, long before I read the research that I refer to on this thread.

3. My concerns about the affect of full time group care on the emotional development of babies have got nothing to do with dd's particular experience. Firstly she was only in nursery for 2 days to start with. Secondly, I have little doubt that in the medium and long term she would have settled in nursery. Most babies settle, otherwise their parents take them out. Actually I'd go so far as to say that most babies and children are probably happy in nursery care. If I'd found a better nursery I think my child would have felt happy there.

But that's not the point though. The research I referred to flagged up the LONG TERM developmental impact of group care on ALL children. The argument is that happy or unhappy, settled or unsettled, small babies and children under 3 in nurseries have consistently higher levels of stress hormones in their bodies than children raised in the home, and that this affects their emotional and cognitive development as they grow older. There is also a mass of research flagging up the concerns about higher levels of anxiety and aggression in children who attended nursery f/t between the ages of 0 and 3.

In other words this is not about how happy or otherwise children attending nurseries are. I'ts about the impact of this FORM of care on the less tanglible aspects of a child's development in the longer term. And before anyone says 'my child went to nursery and is well adjusted and happy now they're older', the research is complex and needs to be read. There are no simplistic conclusions to be reached that if you do X then Y will happen to your child. For me this research helped 'flesh out' my understanding of this issue and how it relates to my younger children and the choices I would make for myself and for them when it came to work and childcare.

As for the comment about conflicting research - well there will ALWAYS be conflicting research in relation to all areas of children's development. That doesn't mean we can simply disregard the research that doesn't support the choices we make with the complaisant dismissal that there's probably other evidence out there that somehow 'cancels it out'. It doesn't make sense to do that. It's also worth pointing out I think that the research on the benefits of nursery education which people can probably remember seeing over the past few years - it's been widely reported on, doesn't actually contradict the research which flags up concerns about the impact of fulltime group care on children's behaviour or long term emotional development.

Titty, having explained yourself, which I appreciate, your dd has as good a chance of settling as mine did. Just that you did not have to use that particular nursery in the end, which sounds like a poor one I would not have used anyway.

But you still have not answered my question. If your dd had settled, and based on your explanation, you did not have your mother to help and you were otherwise satisfied with the care, would you take your dd out based on the research you quoted?

Research is one thing. But real life is another. These are the real life decisions working mothers have to make based on real life scenarios.

"The argument is that happy or unhappy, settled or unsettled, small babies and children under 3 in nurseries have consistently higher levels of stress hormones in their bodies than children raised in the home, and that this affects their emotional and cognitive development as they grow older. There is also a mass of research flagging up the concerns about higher levels of anxiety and aggression in children who attended nursery f/t between the ages of 0 and 3."

I am well aware of the research. I am not brushing it aside. I am not even raising the obvious issues about whether my particular dcs have the higher levels of stress hormones reportedly observed in nursery children, the quality of care in the individual nurseries sampled, the individual makeup and resilience of the sampled children in question, the propensity to anxiety and depressive disorders and exposure to other more significant environmental and external factors that lead to emotional and psycological disorders. Do we know for a fact that the low level stress we are talking about (not Romanian orphanage levels) actually lead to emotional damage in later life? Do we know whether leaving a baby to cry-it-out, lack of bf-ing or early weaning will lead to psycological damage? I co-slept with my infant dcs fully aware of the research on cot death. As a parent I made that choice and I feel they are emotionally stronger for it.

Questioning and not following research due to individual circumstances is not the same as 'brushing it aside'. In your case, it is convenient to your life choices that the research supports your circumstances. Other parents make an educated choice with all the risk factors in mind and they should be respected for it.