Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to be so peeved that we spend approx £1400 a month on childcare

675 replies

couture1 · 17/09/2009 16:44

I know I have to pay for the service but it leaves me with little left over each month and we need to salaries to get by. I dont want to give up work as 1 cant afford to and 2 Im hoping that when 3dc are at school in 3 years time we will be better off each month - but how do we manage until then?

Rant rant rant

OP posts:
FairyMum · 19/09/2009 23:13

Well, I think I speak for all working mums when I say that as long as the colour of your handbag matches your hair (!) then you cannot be expected to always remember your child's name.

scottishmummy · 19/09/2009 23:13

oh how we laughed

flopalong · 19/09/2009 23:16

Wow, is this a record???
I love working mums and dads, I couln't work otherwise. I don't charge to much, enough to pay for things I need and a few things I want (not many). My kids see me, but have to share me, their toys get broken, some children are better behaved and kinder than others as are some parents who can cause alot of trouble. I work long hours and get very stressed at times, I sometimes wonder if I should quit and get a job in a childrens centre, maybe that way I could come home from work and not have to work in my 'spare time' as in saturdays, the evenings and God all the time. I love watching kids grow though so love my job

carriedababi · 19/09/2009 23:18

When the children start school you can sometimes spot the one's that where in childcare fulltime from an early age as they can be aggressive and have emotional issues.
not all of course.

Also I don't think you can tell by what the mothers wearing as a sahm probably has more time to spend on apperance.

I agree that being a sahm can broaden your horizons as you get a chance to tak time out and think about different options in life.

scottishmummy · 19/09/2009 23:19

not record.mn continuum.never ending haze of indignation and ire about sahm/working mum

carriedababi · 19/09/2009 23:21

This debate will still be going on in 50 years! lol

FairyMum · 19/09/2009 23:24

"When the children start school you can sometimes spot the one's that where in childcare fulltime from an early age as they can be aggressive and have emotional issues.
not all of course."

Really? And where did you get this information from?

Northernlurker · 19/09/2009 23:28

One assumes Carrie's info comes from the Bumper Book of Things Women Do Wrong - volume two - the working woman features whole chapters on what needy, aggressive, un-nurtured children are raised by working women. Of course they look like ordinary kids but once you know, you know.

scottishmummy · 19/09/2009 23:33

a ft wage and career broaden my horizons,thanks

flopalong · 19/09/2009 23:33

nah its the sahm who watch jerramy vile all day that have agressive kids.

FairyMum · 19/09/2009 23:35

Can you buy this Bumper Book in the Daily Mail bookclub?

Northernlurker · 19/09/2009 23:38

Yes but flopalong nobody can blame them. They stayed at home and did their nurturing - imagine what horror they would have raised (or not raised but deputised to someone else) had they dared to slap on the tights and the work jacket and earn a few quid.

FairyMum · 19/09/2009 23:40

I do watch jeremy vile at work sometimes. What hope is there for my children?

Northernlurker · 19/09/2009 23:45

No hope you're all doomed, doomed I tell you!

(Copyright The Bumper Book Of Things Women Do Wrong Volume 3 - avialble with it's sister volumes (ha ha) from the Daily Mail Book Club for £19.99, buy 'Why Labour wants you children sold in slavery' at the same time and save 50p)

carriedababi · 19/09/2009 23:47

fairymum here's a few bits, although personally I think the father can do just as good a job as the mother, only problem with that is I think ideally a child should be bf for 2 years, all being well.

Childcare expert Penelope Leach is emphatic that day nursery settings are particularly inappropriate for the very young:

?What is good for most children of three years is not necessarily appropriate for children of thirty months and may be downright harmful to any child of thirteen, let alone three, months. The educational tradition that legitimises pre-school centres has no relevance to infants, and their corporate nature ? so desirable to policy makers and reassuring to parents ? is developmentally inappropriate for them.?

Leach shares Palmer?s view that a baby needs one-to-one care ? even 1:3 is too low where age groups are segregated (as they are in most institutional settings). Hence family care is the most appropriate for 0-3s. Where family care cannot be provided, the best substitute for family care is small-scale care in a home setting.

Other research shows that children suffer when they are removed too soon from their mothers. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation used longitudinal data from the British Household Panel Survey to demonstrate that children whose mothers were employed full-time when the child was under 5 had reduced chances of obtaining qualifications, were more likely to be unemployed and to suffer psychological distress in early adulthood. Professor Jay Belsky of Birkbeck College has also expressed strong reservations about the increasing use of non-maternal care, particularly for the under-5s. . In his detailed analysis summarising 20 years of research into the impact of daycare he concludes that:

?early nonmaternal care, as routinely experienced on a full- or near-full-time basis, poses risks with respect to the development of aggression, noncompliance, and problem behaviour? and that such care is also ?associated with less harmonious parent-child relations.?

II. Why Parents are Best

Infant and child development expert Stanley Greenspan, in summing up the developmental needs of babies and young children lists the importance of ?An ongoing, loving, intimate relationship (lasting years, not months) with one or a few caregivers in order to develop caring, empathy, and trust.? (6)

Infancy is the stage during which the foundations for trust, empathy, conscience, and lifelong learning are laid down? A child who does not find empathy by the age of three is likely to have difficulty showing empathy towards others. A person without consideration for others has a much greater tendency to drift towards anti-social behavior such as violent crime. (7)

In institutional daycare staff turnover, sick leaves, promotions, vacations, days off, split shifts, lunch breaks etc. make the provision of a consistent mother figure impossible. One study showed 15 new caretakers over 3 months. Additionally, when staff must cope with two or three under 3s at once, there is no way they can simultaneously meet the needs of each. (ask anyone who has twins or triplets.) (8)

?The problem starts at the beginning of life, when the scales are tipped toward a future of trust and love, or one of mistrust and deep-seated rage.?
?A demographic revolution is occurring which may result in future generations that have huge numbers of detached children.? (9)

Loving relationships are the foundation of a peaceful society and are essential for raising the next generation.

Daycare for under 3s puts at risk the development of empathy with its enormous anti-crime potential. Without empathy (fellow feeling) there is no internal check on antisocial behaviour.

FairyMum · 19/09/2009 23:59

carriedababi, to be honest I don't really need research as I can just look at my own children and feel happy with my decision. Of course, I could also find an equal amount of research stating the opposite. I am Scandinavian. From a country where over 90% of all children attend FT nursery. Of course there is the argument that UK nurseries are not supposed to be as good as the Scandinavian ones, but as a Scandinavian I would say UK nurseries are as good if not better (although I do think the standards varies more in the UK).

My best advice to someone who wants to be a SAHM is do it because its something which is right for you and your family. Don't do it because you think your child will fare badly unless you give up work. You might end up very disappointed if you do something you don't enjoy and meet a lot of well-adjusted happy bright children with a background from FT childcare outside the schoolgate.

Northernlurker · 20/09/2009 00:01

Yes but Carrie you were speaking in your post as if you yourself had observed this and now all you can come up with are the views of experts based on their overall world view or on research done over many years looking at settings and circumstances which differ from today. Good childcare offers sufficient consistency, children can cope with a large circle of familiar figures. The parent always remains the primary figure against that background.

I will tell you about my personal experience though - in all the years I've been around kids (dd1 is now 11) I've only once seen one child who I actually did think was lacking in empathy. He was the oldest child of a sahm who loved babies and kept having them and then ignored the older children. Negelecting your children has fuck all to do with the waking hours you are with them. Limiting their horizons and damaging their prospects likewise. I wish people would let go of this obsession with hours logged. I don't think sahms are worse mothers becxause they don't work, I don't pour doom on what their children will become - why is it ok to do that for the children of wohm's?

FairyMum · 20/09/2009 00:02

Also, you really don;t have to give up your fab holidays. Your children might never thank you for always having to go to Butlins every year.

FairyMum · 20/09/2009 00:03

And Penelope Leach was as far as I can remember actually mortified her book was used as an argument against working mums and childcare.

Quattrocento · 20/09/2009 00:12

I'm not sure quoting Penelope Leach is advancing the argument. There's a vast amount of data showing that children from better off families do better. And similarly more data showing that the children of educated parents do better academically.

I've not witnessed the children of my friends - who all work - exhibiting any form of aggression or anti-social behaviour. But I assume this is because they are all by and large educated and fairly affluent.

bibbitybobbityhat · 20/09/2009 00:12

Fairy - what is the point of your jibes about Butlins and being fat and wearing tracksuits? If you are trying to lighten the tone I don't think its quite the way to go.

I am fairly veteran mumsnetter and don't think I take offence all that often. I'd say I'm fairly thick skinned.

But I have lost the will to argue the toss now as you appear, from your posts on this thread anyway, to be a complete

Quattrocento · 20/09/2009 00:21

"Also I don't think you can tell by what the mothers wearing as a sahm probably has more time to spend on apperance."

More time surely. Less money though.

"I agree that being a sahm can broaden your horizons as you get a chance to tak time out and think about different options in life."

You could of course consider the proposition that mixing with a lot of high-powered brains with different ways of approaching technical issues would force you to think and keep thinking. Having time and space to think doesn't mean that people actually use that time.

BonsoirAnna · 20/09/2009 06:59

"More time surely. Less money though."

I thought we'd established on this thread that lots of WOHMs are doing so at a loss, due to the cost of childcare.

So a SAHM would actually have both more time and more money to devote to her appearance .

And high-powered brains devoted to technical detail can become very narrow. I remember very clearly, ten years ago, when I was in a job that was theoretically high-powered, being conscious of how I was being seriously de-skilled in all but a very few areas.

foxinsocks · 20/09/2009 07:50

I'm amazed people care so much tbh

I don't know many people in real life who actively express their opinions on this subject (in such black and white terms) tbh

One thing I will say though, I am not someone who envies other people's lives at all BUT I have a friend who has

  • his sister
  • his wife's brother
  • his parents
  • her parents

all within 15 mins of where he lives.

He has not once paid for an hour of childcare and he's been away for the weekend with his wife on his own, they go out for dinner about once a week and his wife (though a SAHM) can go and get her hair done when she likes etc. etc. I sometimes feel they do not know they are born!

We have no family nearby and never will do and have had to pay for every penny of childcare we've ever needed! It is, quite honestly, like living a completely different life to theirs despite us being similar in other ways.

OrmIrian · 20/09/2009 08:21

"you had a baby not an epiphany"

I like that