To think toddler group shouldn't be handing out such anti nursery literature?

[Ebb]

I have recently started going to a toddler group, run in a church, which is, in general, lovely but today we were all handing print outs of 'Raising Babies' by Steve Biddulph entitled 'Should under 3's go to nursery?'

It basically suggests that babies under 1 shouldn't go to nursery at all. "Organize for your baby to be with a parent or Grandparent all the time except for occassional breaks - days off or evenings out - when you have a trusted and familiar babysitter."

When your child is one "up to one short day per week eg. 9-3 with a trusted and familiar carer. Ideally 1:1 but in a 1:3 ratio at most."

Further quotes include "Some children are not ready (for nursery) until three or more and group care can be upsetting and harmful for these children." and "*Remember - nurseries have become big business. Many nurseries never engage emotionally with their children."

I am lucky in the fact I take my Dc to work with me but a lot of parents don't have a choice and nurseries are the feasible option. Surely a toddler group shouldn't be putting more pressure and guilt on parents by handing out such cr@p?!

Thanks tiktok.

Fuzzy - you know what you are doing here. You know you categorically stated that all children who go to nursery will turn into little horrors - that does not make me defensive that is a simple reaction to an untruth!

Policywonk 'But some of you need to acknowledge that nurseries like this do exist, they are not that unusual, and children end up attending them for long periods. This cannot be a good thing, surely?'

Oh, yes 100%. I completely agree that a poor nursery can damage a child. I am angry that such nurseries are allowed to function - and further exacerbate risks of social deprivation as they are often the cheapest ones. On the flip side there are some fantastic ones but they often cost more. I am lucky in that I can afford to pay over the odds (just). My nursery is fantastic and known for being one of the best - and I dont believe I am blinkered here. However the down side is that my nursery bill each month for 4 days a week for 2 children is around £1200! It is sad that money often equals a good nursery but in paying their staff more I presume that is why they have such a good retention of staff.

blueshoes: you ask: "is the fact that a baby having had to occasionally wait 10 minutes rather than 3 minutes to have her crying attended to going to screw her up for life?"

The answer is a resounding no, or at least to be scientific, the evidence strongly suggests 'no'

But babies do, on the whole, need to be responded to promptly, and for their carers to understand their behaviour and interpret it; to help them 'regulate' their feelings and reactions; to be safe, emotionally; to develop a sound, strong sense of being a worthy person (good author to read for this stuff is Daniel Stein). The evidence is that a loving, consistent, not-too-stressed carer will do all this anyway, most of the time - as long as they have no daft cultural notions of spoiling or rods-for-own-backs etc ect. It's really got very little to do with the timing of any particular incident of crying, as I can tell you know...

Good enough parenting has love on its side, whereas a full time nursery has to overcome that deficit

"fabsmum, you have inadvertently cited an example which proves my point for me."

No - because 'damage' doesn't necessarily manifest itself in ways which are going to be obvious to the onlooker (or the individual themselves), or result in anti-social behaviour. That doesn't mean that someone isn't affected by their early childhood experiences. We have very high levels of depression and anxiety disorders, aggressive behaviour and family breakdown in our society. Who knows what causes this? Yes, children are resilient, but they are also very malleable too.

"Do early children influences necessarily shape a person's brain for life. Short of grotesque neglect in Romanian orphanages, is the fact that a baby having had to occasionally wait 10 minutes rather than 3 minutes to have her crying attended to going to screw her up for life?

You are reducing the argument to absurdities. No one is arguing that a baby having to wait ten minutes to be comforted every now and again causes irreparable damage to the brain. That's not what Sue Gerhardt is saying either! You should read the book - then you'd know what you're actually objecting to instead of plucking silly ideas from the air and setting them up as targets.

Fuzzy - no child has perfect behaviour so if you think that nursery has downgraded Thunderducks behaviour from perfect to good, you don't really understand children!

You will never find a nursery child that isn't a 'little horror', I guarantee it. Not because you are right, but because the minute you find out that they have been to nursery you will most definitely change your opinion of them I have no doubt.

I have to say I haven't before come across anybody who has managed to upset both extremes of the childcare debate quite so emphatically. Well done you!

Why is there seemingly no middle ground in these arguments when they make the papers? This infant determinism (presumably a parenting guru construct since it doesn't appear in any academic journal) that assumes that a baby is influenced by what happens to it in the first few years. Clearly it is not right but at the same time, I do beleive that there is evidence that how you parent a child in the first 3 years does impact how they turn out.

However, to an extent our development is preterminated by genes and our inbred personality. I think that is what provides the resilence and is probably why 'good enough' parenting is sufficient and we don't all turn out in some way damaged by our less than perfect beginnings.

Besides, babies brains are wired by repeated experience of the same outcomes to their behaviour. Leaving a baby to cry once won't matter a jot, 10 times probably hardly at all. Do it every day and it will begin to have an impact.

Sadly, got to go just when this is getting interesting!

Glad to hear that occasional crying is fine. My dcs cried for prolonged periods of time despite my 24/7 care for them at home during my maternity leave. Funnily, they were a lot more independent at nursery and got on with the toys (along with other children) and seemed to need their carers a lot less than they would have needed me.

I cannot explain this but this is my observation with both dcs. Children are resilient, malleable and they are also social animals. They react to their surroundings as well and to the people within it. If my dcs needed different things from nursery than when they were with me at home, that works too.

Tiktok, you mentioned the love deficit in nursery. Actually, affection will do fine IMO.

The carers at my dc's nursery are there presumably because they like to spend time with children (as there are easier and much better paying jobs out there). It is good enough for me that they can tell me all my ds' little friends and quirks and his fave toys at nursery with a twinkle in their eye. And for ds' eyes to light up whenever I mentioned his carers' names.

That's an interesting POV blueshoes. I would say that, among my contemporaries here in Paris, most people think they are wise to the fact that childcare is "easy money" compared to other jobs.

blushoes - affection is essential in nurseries but it would not be enough for babies to have affection only, as I am sure you'd agree. Love is essential at some point in a baby's life, but I am not expecting it to be on offer in a nursery...babies can of course survive without love, and they can appear to make do with affection. But longer term, a lack of love takes its toll.

It was love that kept you showing tender behaviour and responses towards your dc, despite their prolonged crying. I am sure this was exhausting and demoralising at times, even, possibly, hurtful, but you hung on in there. This will have benefitted them enormously, even if it didn't stop them crying.

Anna, if childcare is easy money in France, I have an inkling of the level of care (or lack thereof) that is provided if my recent French aupair was any example of it, having worked in a daycare centre in Paris and all.

Oh it's crap here. Did you not get on with your French AP?

Tiktok, my dcs get affection at nursery, then they get love at home with dh and I. I don't see them as being deprived of love, quite the contrary actually.

I'm quite sure your DCs are very loved, blueshoes

Anna, she was adequate, but disturbingly did not know how to 'play' or interact with dd. Thankfully she decided that aupairing was not for her!

That's my point, blueshoes.

However, the younger the baby, the less appropriate full time nursery care is, because the younger the baby, the more he needs hs relationships to be 'love' ones

And I have seen, and heard, of nurseries where the physical care may appear fine, but there is precious little affection

Blueshoes - my DS was strangely like that. Cried all the time at home but once he went to nursery he seemed to settle and be much happier. I think he liked the stimulation and goings on of nursery.

No, French parents often don't know how to play with children at all. Their role is to give instructions, not to play...

I'm pretty sure that love overcomes many things.
Most of my generation would have had fairly hands off parenting. I was bottle fed, left to cry it out, occassionally smacked. My Mum often told me I picked my children up too much and 'spoiled' them. I'm sure I'm not alone on here.
And yet we are not all emotionnally damaged because despite parenting taking an entirely doifferent style we were still well loved.
Recently I heard a comedian telling a funny story about his Father calling the police whenever he was naughty. Said 'police man' would then tell the boy that any more nonsense would see him carted off top prison. Yet everyone was laughing.

Now that is a very interesting debate: What constitutes a good nursery?
How can we as parents spot bad nurseries? What should the government do to ensure high standards
particularly for the care of babies?

That's different from saying: Nurseries as such are not appropriate for young children.
Which is Biddulph's position and why I don't take him seriously.
I have a lot of time for Pe Leach so would love to find out more about her reservations.

I am not sure any new neuroscientific evidence has emerged, Tiktok.
From what I have read Gerhardt seems to have got a little ahead of herself.

To me this sums it up:
"Similarly, neuroscientist Steve Petersen at Washington University argues that the environment would have to be very bad to interfere with a child's normal neurological development. His tongue-in-cheek advice to parents is: 'Don't raise your child in a closet, starve them, or hit them on the head with a frying pan.'"

Ouch Thunderduck! Were you cared for in a nursery at an impressionable age? After reading a comment like that I'd say yes. What an awful attitude. I thought there was a 'no personal attacks allowed' rule...

So send your kids to nurseries - good or bad ones! I'll continue to care for mine myself with the help of his grandmother, and have no worries about him being left to cry or sitting in a soiled nappy for hours. Good luck to you in finding a nursery where this doesn't occur. I wish you & your kids the best.

I think you've been far more obnoxious than I. You've pretty much stated that all children who go to nursery before they are two are brats.
I may have offended you but you have offended a great many people with your opinions that have been presented as fact.And you've managed to annoy both SAHM and WOHM parents which is quite an achievement.

I've yet to work in a nursery where a child was left to cry for longer than a few minutes without anyone attending to them, and have never seen a child that's been left in a soiled nappy for hours.

Of course there are bad nurseries, we've all admitted that, but that is not the usual standard of care in nurseries.

I just have to say that on the grandparents point, my youngest DD is probably more comfortable and better off at the nursery with people who are more recently experienced with young children and have much more energy than she would be with any of her grandparents, however well intentioned they might be. This is something they would admit themselves. And there is no question I would have more confidence in my nanny to look after them over a whole weekend, for example, than the grandparents. It would just be plain too much work at this age for them.

I hope you also realise that not everyone is lucky enough to have a relative who is willing or able to help with childcare.

Thunderduck
Assume that was addressed at Fuzzy. But I totally agree.