to think that day care centres or 'nurseries' should be banned?

[Goodomen]

Having spent some time working (doing supply) in several different nurseries I have been appalled by the treatment of the babies and and young children.

The babies spend most of the day crying, desperately wanting to be held or have some kind of one to one attention.

They are all forced to 'nap' at the same time whether they are tired or not.

They are put in highchairs and fed one by one with the poor children at the end of the row crying until it is their turn to be fed.

The worst part is when the parent arrives to collect their child and asks how they have been they are told 'He/She has been fine, had a lovely time' even if the child has been crying all day!

Why oh why would anyone out there child in such a place?
If you have to work get a childminder!

also i would go mad if i spent every hour of every day with DS. he's also nearly 3 and needs time playing with other children and learning to socialise.

I believe i'm a better mum to DS because i go to work, get to be a grown up and myself, not just mummy. Maybe I'm lucky that i can work part-time so still get to spend time with DS.

I'[m talking about babies, toddlers I can see it's often a very good thing. Babies, no.

Sorry for confusion/.

I think ds1 would have been happier away from me at 3 as well, I often wanted to leave the house without him

Babies under a year or maybe two really need more imo

what's attachment theory?

Ds went to nursery when he was six months when i went back to work, but was also cared for by my mum (and still is some of the time).

it's all down to personal circumstances and choice. stupid thread anyway ... should never have looked as it's clearly inflammatory

flight; "Has attachment theory been done on this thread yet?"

Well, some poster went even so far as to bring up RAD.

Interesting the idea that you can step off the career ladder for several years and then straight back on again at the same level without any adverse effect. Because in practice that's just not true. After a while your knowledge and skills erode, and in any field where things change your skills can become outdated very fast. Of course your underlying capabilities don't change, but that's rarely enough. That's why areas where skills are in great demand have courses designed to get you back up to date. Nursing for example, where you have to take a back to work course before re-starting professional practice.

I worked for the public sector in a specialist senior management role (that I was told I was very good at), and am currently on a career break. I know that the lovely lady who is running my job for me right now is doing a fantastic job, should I decide to return (I am out of the country at present, and hoping to stay that way) she will be better suited to that role than me, with up to date knowledge and skills, which I will not have. If it were an open competition she would get the job, and deserve to do so. No one is irreplaceable except in very very niche roles where there simply are not enough specialists.

Bosses will frequently say things like we will always give you a job, there is always something here for you etc. They may even mean it. But in practice it isn't that simple because jobs are not held open for more than the legal minimum, and there usually are other people out there who are available and good to do whatever it is that you do. For example after six moths of my career break my dh was made redundant and we almost had to return to the UK. My boss said how great that I was going to come back, and of course they could find me something to do. The Head of HR however told me that I could apply for the existing vacancies same as anyone else (very nicely, she's a friend of mine).

Very few people step off the career ladder for long periods of time and return career unharmed. That's not necessarily a problem, but it certainly is a consideration.

londonone I believe that current evidence suggests that around about 2 1/2 is the optimum age for group care as opposed to one on one care (only available to single children in any case) so I don't see any reason why your 18 mths is any less valid than someone else's six months - it's just an opinion. The government on the other hand believes for at least some children professional childcare is a much better option than home care, and are paying out large sums of money to provide SureStart etc (one of the few initiatives with some very good research behind it too).

just becauuse you can put your baby in a nursery 5 days a week from 7.30 till 6 0'clock doesn't mean you should and there won't be any adverse effects

There are all kinds of different issues on this thread and they get mixed up.

I believe a child is better at home with a loving parent until they are about 2 or 3. I have a vague memory of some studies on this a while ago...Penelope Leach? Can't remember. Think it said the optimum was to be with mum, followed by a close relative, followed by 121 i.e childminder, followed by nursery. But this was talking about the under 1s or 2s, (again can't remember...so ignore me)
I wouldn't be happy putting DS into a nursery now at 11 months and if I can get away with it (and I'm lucky enough to work PT and have my mum to do child care) I'll wait til he's 3.5. I'd be perfectly happy with group care then but for me I wouldn't like nursery care much younger than 2. I think there's a biiiiiig difference btw a toddler and a baby at nursery and there's a difference btw them going some or all mornings and going ALL day. Here is Spain, nursery from 8-6 or later is very normal from about 4 months as mat leave is only 16 weeks and many many women don't have a choice. THAT is sad, especially for those who don't want to return to work...many are not in high flying satisfying jobs and would prefer to stay home but can't afford to.
I think it's sad there is such a push to get so many women back to work and the kids in childcare, when there are many who would like to stay at home for longer.

Can I just point out that a childminder (usually) does NOT offer 121 care.

But Nooka you can at least mitigate those effects in many a career.

I've spent most of the time since ds3 was born atudying at Uni. Once ds4 is old enough I would like to do a PT PGCE (there is one in my field quite close). Instead of sacrificing my career,I'll have gone from a charity worker in a dangerous job to a secure job (coz when the money runs out.....) doing something I've always wanted to.

Not always possble but very often there are ways around things with a bit of compromise

Neither do most parents!! Also any childcare in "homelike" settings involves a fair bit of benign neglect as there are other things that have to be done (for example housework, cooking and other chores). In any case I'm not totally sure that babies really need an adult meeting their every whim with absolutely no delay all the time.

We decided on a nanny when I went back to work (the nursery I had hoped ds would go to attached to my hospital had neglected to tell me that being third on the list was meaningless as anyone with more important skills got priority - I think I was still third on the list when I got a new job eighteen months later).

It is a fallacy to suggest that all parents will love looking after their babies or be particularly good at it, or gain from the experience. There are plenty of us here who did not enjoy that stage much. Both of our nannies on the other hand thought that babies were the bees knees, and actively chose to spend their days with them (indeed the first one they both left for other families with tiny babies). I have no doubt that it was a good choice for our family. Personally I think it is when your children are older that they really need a parent as opposed to someone who just likes looking after them. Both dh and I have spent periods as SAHP in the last four or five years, and helping the children with homework, friendships and the difficulties of growing up is at least as valuable as cuddling them when they were tiny.

I didn't have children in order to look after babies, or feel that anyone should be censured for not wanting to do so. It's such a small part of their lives. I had children because the time was right to start a family, there are many many years ahead of us yet. My mother and I are still developing our relationship and I'm nearly 40, what's six or eighteen months in the scale of that?

Some careers are more family friendly that others. Personally I decided against being a politician because it is incredibly un-family friendly and the same is true for jobs with lots of unavoidable travel, or rigid commitments. More people have more than one career too. I just think it is foolish to consider that there isn't a cost. If two people of equal skills and commitment start a career and one takes say four years off (two children) and the other doesn't then the outcome for their careers will be different. For some careers that just means one of them loses say five years (one year to catch up plus four years out) of seniority/progression whilst for others it would mean really starting again, which given that most parents start their families in their late twenties would mean losing about twelve years of pay promotion etc (start first career at 22, second at 34).

For many families that's fine, but if you feel that your career matters (for whatever reason) then it is a big cost, compared to which the high childcare cost from six months to two years is comparatively small beer.

I prefer childminders/nannies purely because of the flexibility and the fact that the CMs I know including myself always take the children out most days, so a varied environment. Nurseries do take children out but usually not often enough for my liking and then only for local walks/park. Whereas we go everywhere within a 30 mile radius! No nursery can adequately accommodate my hours as a nurase working shifts, all our local nurseries open at 8 -6pm I started work 30mins away at 8am and often didn't finish until 2100hrs on a late shift while DH worked away lots. I gave up, even with a CM as dd1 hadn't settled even after 4mths. Luckily I now know lots of good ones
I think nurseries are better for over 2yrs and CM/nanny for babies and young toddlers if its full time. I don't view the arrangements as so important if its part-time because the baby will be with a parent on days off iyswim.