to think that people who don't approve of parents who put their children in childcare should not work in a nursery..

[AtheneNoctua]

where parents are putting their kids into their care whilst they work. Are they not enabling the very system of which they so disapprove?

AS far as I know there is no scientific evidence that suggest parrent who work love their children less than parents who don't.

What AN says.

Lupo - why did I have babies? Oh I wanted to improve the gene pool and to give some feckless Eastern European girl the job of bringing them up for a pitiful salary while I swanned around in my designer lifestyle.

No, I had them because I wanted children. Not babies, children. Because they are babies for a very short space of time, and yes, babies are phenomenally dull, in my opinion. Not necessarily hard work (and yes, I have had periods where I have been at home with them and not worked outside the home when they were tiny - it's called extended maternity leave) but mind numbingly, screamingly boring. We were all much happier when I went back to work.

And I agree with OrmIrian on the emotional, social and economic needs of the children. We have a much better standard of living because I work, and the children have a much nicer life. No, they didn't see that much of Mummy during the day when they were babies, but I doubt they remember that now.

TTB - my DD is in childcare for 35hrs a week. She is with a lovely childminder who she has been with since she was 6 months old. They spend their time painting, playing, reading, on trips out, cooking together etc. Sometimes she is with three other children, sometimes it is just DD.

Unfortunately I had to return to work because otherwise my family would have been made homeless.

If we had waited until we could "afford" to have children on one wage then I probably would never have been able to have children.

I do like my job. What I am training to do can, in future, enable me to freelance, consult, run a business from the home rather than having to work in the office if I choose to change.

My daughter benefits from going to the childminders, the biggest benefit that she has is the interaction with other children. We dont often see other children from the family, she has no siblings, and the thought of going to toddler groups scares the life out of me, so going to the childminders means that she sees a small group of children and has learnt to interact with them, it wont be such an upheaval when she goes to school.

As for the research, I know there was something published about how boys can suffer from attending nursery full time, but I dont think there is anything much past that.

If you consider crime rates though, and profiling of those who commit crime, poverty and lack of possibliities can be a major factor in committing a crime. I work to keep a roof over our head, food on the table, fecking expensive heating in the winter. I'm not shopping at Selfridges (dont even know where one is!) or getting my shopping from Waitrose, or jetting off four times a year to the exotic islands, or driving around in a brand new merc.

FWIW, the relationship I have with my daughter is far better than the relationship my SAHM friend has with her daughter, my time with DD is packed with fun and painting and games and reading and playing... my friend spends her time yelling at her daughter, smacking her, swearing at her and telling her she is stupid. That is not indicitive of her being a SAHP, nor indicitive of me being a WOHP. But, I know I'd rather be me and DD than her and her DD iyswim.

All I ask from other parents is a little consideration. I think we're all trying to do the best for our children, and it saddens me that when parents get together (paritcularly a bunch of mothers) it can become a slanging match or a I'm-so-better-than-you-because-of-x contest.

"it can become a slanging match or a I'm-so-better-than-you-because-of-x contest"

What - like this?:

"FWIW, the relationship I have with my daughter is far better than the relationship my SAHM friend has with her daughter"

FWIW my posts have been about (primarily) my concerns re: nurseries for babies and very small children, not about children cared for in a home environment by a c/m.

And I think you misinterpret some of the posts. I know working mums love their children just as much as anyone else and do their best to juggle everything to suit the whole family. That doesn't affect how I feel about the experience of group child care as far as it concerns babies. I do think we should be allowed to talk about the shortcomings of nursery provision (or any other form of childcare including care by parents) without being labelled as competetive or unsupportive.

"As for the research, I know there was something published about how boys can suffer from attending nursery full time, but I dont think there is anything much past that

Actually there's quite a lot - try googling 'Penelope Leach' or 'Jay Belski' or 'Steve Biddulph' and 'nurseries' and 'research', just for starters.

"they didn't see that much of Mummy during the day when they were babies, but I doubt they remember that now"

Luckily for us - there are many things they don't remember (being born for a start). Doesn't mean these experiences haven't played some part in shaping the person they'll become in the future.

I wonder what would happen if nursery workers were really well paid? What kind of people would make the majority of workers?

Men?

Power hungry alpha ladies?

yah I'm in for a promotion after Jack in the yellow room finally gave in and took his first steps

As long as childcare is seen as women's work it will be low status and thus low paid.

This does seem to have strayed from the OP. Which was quite a simple and reasonable proposition.

ttb - I really don't think that you can disregard the economic and social elements of working parents when you consider the impact of nursery care on young children.

Childcare pay is getting better though. Not reaching dizzy heights or anything, but getting better. My SIL is a nursery nurse, she was also an NVQ assessor for other people doing childcare NVQ but went back to working in the nursery after about a year.

Nursery wages (IME) were disproportionate to nursery profit and not inline with childcare such as nanny/childminder. I think it is getting better.

Any business has to make a profit and if that means paying staff low wages they will.

OrmIrian, fabulous posts. I do think people tend to forget that being a WOHM is a matter of absolute economic necessity for some. I'm going back (2.5 days) after mat leave next week and have spent many an hour wondering whether we could maybe just about manage after all on dh's doctoral stipend. But sadly there is not much downsizing to be done from a 2-bed flat for 2 adults and 2 children.

That said, we are in the fortunate position of being able to juggle things so that ds2 (11mo) gets one-to-one care while I am working (from a childcarer, MIL and with dh working from home). am, I admit, glad not to have to send him to nursery.

If stay at homemothers are happy fathers can have good relationships with children and work full time why don't they agree the same can be true of mothers? I just have never understood that.

I have nothing to prove - 24 years ago I went back full time to work which I love, benefits many people and brought up 5 lovely children, 3 of whom are at university stage and we both worked full time always as do many many parents.

"It is interesting that mums who choose to stay home are so very interested in judging those of us who choose not to. I can't really understand what they are trying to achieve." I suppose some of those mothers just feel inferior or something. They feel they have to take some moral high ground probably because they hate the lack of money and status and dependence on what can be feckless men so the only thing some have left to cling to is a myth that only a mother at home can properly care for a baby. Rid them of that (and my view is children do better with mothers in successful careers anyway) and you kick the stool from under them and they go into freefall.

Those who love being at home and are happy with it aren't cross when working mothers say that is a better set up for children just as I don't mind if stay at home mothers want to con themselves into thinking they have taken the best option as I know my route is best.

Well, that's that sorted then.

Xenia you have said elsewhere that your children had their own nanny who stayed for 10years. That's a completely different situation to putting children into a nursery with lots of other children and possibly a variety of carers.
Your children had consistent care within a family setting surely?

I don't think Xenia's position of having a nanny negates the general concept:-

1. Having good money, dedicated nanny, good role model with career = sounds pretty fab to me and I have yet to see ANY research showing a negative effect in such situation - even Joseph Rowntree research concludes positive indicators where parents have high achieving careers (although they do admit it through gritted teeth)
2. Having less money, wanting to work and build career, childminder or nursery = Why not? Not altogether stress-free, will need to make sure childcare good and not a vicky pollard. Research mixed.
3. Having less money not wanting to work but having to, childminder or nursery = probably not the happiest of existences, will need to make sure chilcare good and not a vicky pollard. Plenty of research to show not very much fun for parents, research for kids mixed.
4. Having less money not wanting to work but having to, childcare in vicky pollard type situation = shite on all sides really, might have negative effect on kids, depends on situation and too many contexts to conclude that childcare setting is anything other than a potential moderator, rather than an antecedent.
5. Choosing not to work, stay at home = why not? Your call. Kids might thrive might not. Again tis a moderator at best.
6. Wanting to work but not being able to, so staying at home. Wouldn't wish it on my worst enemy. Haven't seen any research but suspect that this situation most common in single parent households so impossible to eliminate contextual factors (father figures/extended family role models, social context etc)

I think that covers pretty much all of us (either gender).

What I fail to see is what gives group (5) the right to take a sledgehammer to any of the other groups? The only groups that on balance research seems to show their set-up as potentially having causal negative effects are groups 4 and 6. And when I consider the people probably in these groups I feel a bit sorry for them and tend to view them within a social construct as being those who benefit most in terms of governement policy, welfare provision and community support. I definately see these peple as havign far more pressure and stress than the other groups. I certainly don't see them as fair game for bullying.

Sorry, wise owl, have strayed once again from toic in hand but the other thread is full and the we've all ended up on this one now.

have just seen this thread and had to comment, what an excellent post this was from greenmonkies

GreenMonkies on Mon 18-Aug-08 10:10:06

well worth reading

GOod posts, squiffy and Xenia. We never did get an answer to the question why a father can have a good relationship with his children if the mother is at home or works part time but not if the mother works outside the home.

these threads get so polorized (sp?) don't they? and its always the same posters on each side

"birds of a feather" and all that, but isn't it great that we are all so different, sure makes life more interesting!

hercules, I suspect we will never get a rational answer to the question about how it is possible for a ft parent to have a good relationship with the children if the other parent is at home or pt, but not if both parents work ft. I am not saying it works it all cases, but just a recognition from the other camp that it is possible for this to happen if the children are loved and the household is otherwise well organised with outsourcing of housework, childcare where necessary.

Sadly, I think Xenia is right about why it is so hard to get through to some of the more emotional elements in the SAHM. Is it so difficult to admit that there is more than one way of skinning a cat?

Squiffy, I am in awe of your categorisation of the different family situations out there. You have certainly thought this through.

"On the otherhand I could stay at home and turn into a narrowminded bitter old hag like my MIL who has never done a days work in her life having raised 4 children." (my bold)

Raising children isn't work, then?

The original point was about leaving small babies in nursery for long hours, five days a week, not about using a cm or a nanny, or using nurseries part-time, or using nurseries for older children. Why are people so defensive?

(It's ok, that's a rhetorical question, I think I know why. )

I can understand why people put their babies into nurseries for these very, very long hours, but I can't think it's an ideal way to raise an infant.

I did a mixture of things - I was SAHM for the first 6 months or so, while studying at home, and then set up a small business as a bookkeeper, working from home. I was lucky that DS1 slept through the night from six weeks of age.

I had a few clients, but not enough to meet all my costs, so then became a cm because I couldn't afford to pay for childcare but needed to earn more. (It helped that I do like babies and small children.)

I also worked part-time in the evenings and at weekends in any kind of work I could find - in a pub, in a video shop, in a bingo hall, selling Ann Summers at parties and so on. I didn't have a whole day off for nearly two years. When DS2 was 2, I used the experience gained to get a part-time day job which paid quite well, and used a cm. Both boys went to state nursery part-time.

In many ways I had the "best of both worlds" in that I was effectively around most of the time when the boys were tiny while still being able to earn, but there's a difference between "earning" and "having a career with pension etc".

I think that people who don't approve of different parenting styles should not work in a day nursery! Or jobs that involve working with children!

Nursery staff(or any form of employment that involves working with children) should keep their opinions about the parents to themselves - LIKE IN ANY OTHER INDUSTRY!

I'm sick and tired of nursery staff bad-mouthing parents of whom they know NOTHING about, and worst still, be so indiscrete.

There's a world of difference in "slagging off" parents in the privacy of your own home, with a fellow staff member AND openly "slagging off" parents in front of other children or worst still, in front of the child concerned or a national forum where parents themselves can read the criticism.

After all, how would the same nursery staff like it if the parents did likewise? "Slag off" particular types of nursery staff on a national forum? "You can give it but you can't take it" springs to mind. Hypocrites.

This is in the Bella magazine this week.
I haven't seen Bella for years, but went to my mums today and she has bought it, and its pretty much the extremes of both sides - one mother on each view, both saying the children are being damaged.

..and never a single word of criticism against all conquering hero perfect men who are never castigated whatever they do. Mother as eternal whipping boy. Such is the sexism and misogyny which is endemic on this planet.

I only skim read the article.
After a few vicious threads on here, it felt a little de ja vu!

actually I think the op is being unreasonable

why shouldn't nursery workers have a view?

if I worked in tesco does it mean I have to buy my shopping there?

there's the view here that nursery workers should never say a bad word about kids in f/t nursery, as if the mums didn't work f/t, the workers wouldn't have a job

BUT if the workers didn't work the mums would have no childcare for their children

the view raised earlier by I think it was squiffy was spot on, she isn't interested in what the workers might be saying about her and her choices, as long as they are kind to her child, she can accept they might not approve of her choices

Chelsey, the point was made a very long time ago on this thread that the problem was not the views she held, but the way she advertised them to her market (on a parenting website). There is a big difference beween quietly disapproving, and coming onto a parenting website to insult those very people.

And, of course, Xenia is spot on about men never being targeted. I have never seen a man questioned for returning to work full time when his baby is two weeks old. But, women certainly experience it all the time.

"I have never seen a man questioned for returning to work full time when his baby is two weeks old. But, women certainly experience it all the time

Sorry - I don't understand this point. Of course you lift an eyebrow when you hear about women back in the workplace two weeks after giving birth. Childbirth and breastfeeding mean that women and men have radically different experiences and needs postpartum.