to be questioning my entire life plan because I read Stephen Biddulph's Raising Babies?

[mrsbean78]

I'm posting this on AIBU because I want to canvass a diverse range of opinions - and because I haven't decided what I think myself.

I have a four month old boy and am in the process of finalising childcare/my return to work arrangements (due to heavy demand in our area).

I've been bothered about my choice (a daycare nursery) since day one, and am going to look into other options before committing and would prefer a childminder.

However, today at the library I spotted the 'Raising Babies' book and as the little man was napping, skim read quite a bit of it.

Wishing I hadn't. So much of it made sense.. it's common sense that a parent will stimulate and respond to a baby more than even the very best childcare worker on a ratio of 1:3, or even 1:1. Amaxing how I never thought of this before!

Just wondering if anyone here read it and threw it in the bin in disgust (and why) OR read it and promptly rearranged their lives naccordingly (and why) OR "other" (and why)?

Why 3? What happens at 3? A lot of you have picked this as the magic age, I'm intrigued.

I so hear you MrsBEan - I am up at this silly hour trying to work out how I can really leave my baby at 6 months or if I wait until 12 months. I am in a complete panic about it....

I'm also interested in the often repeated statistic that children do best in the home environment until 3. I believe that it comes from a study by Penelope Leach (although am very happy to stand corrected, and of course the results of Leach's study may have been replicated elsewhere).

But the crucial point to my mind, having read the study, is that it doesn't (and can't) distinguish between mothers who willingly choose to stay at home with their DC and relish every moment, and those who stay at home out of a sense of duty and find some (much) of the time unfulfilling and dull. I suspect that the outcomes for the two groups would be very different if they could be measured. I'm not aware that anyone has ever studied this point.

I am in the latter group. I love DS beyond measure - I would die for him, I have no doubt - but I was miserable when I stayed at home looking after him. I felt deeply unfulfilled and ultimately depressed. DP and I agreed that I would return to work - even though we didn't need the money - and for our family it was the best decision we could have made. Now, I love my job but I love my hours with DS even more. Weekends have gone from being chores to being magical times.

DS (now 2.4) had a nanny until 22 months, so still got 1-1 care, and now goes to a wonderful childminder. We chose a CM because we prefer the home atmosphere. He races out to the car in the morning to go to Emma's house, but also grins all over his face to see me when I pick him up of an evening. Truly, for us, it's the best of both worlds.

Other families find different solutions of course - and all due respect to them.

So - explore all your options for childcare, think about what hours you want to work taking into account all of your family's needs, talk it through with your DP/H, be willing to be flexible once you've returned to work if your original plan doesn't work out for any reason.

One final comment - don't get too hung up on the idea that 1-1 childcare is the only gold standard. If 2-1 care was that awful then no-one would ever have more than one child, and twins and other multiple birth DCs would all be screwed up!

If one to one care was so crucial then all younger siblings as well as elder children with siblings less than three years younger would be messed up. I've never seen any research that suggests that. I've seen some fairly strong criticism of Biddolf, especially his testosterone at four theory, which I understand is biologically wrong.

But then anything that insists all boys are the same is going to tick my "what a load of crap" box in any case, and I have a very stereotypical boyish boy.

I don't think that the research says that the primary carer for young children has to be closely related to them. My understanding is that they need to be consistent and (obviously) caring. I'm not sure a large nursery will provide that, personally I think that nurseries really come into their own when children are round about two and a half.

So if I were you I'd look for other options and make sure that you find a childcarer that you are really happy with, and use that as your key decision maker. But really don't feel bad that you find being at home a bit boring. Small babies are quite boring, and to be honest if it's not really your cup of tea the you probably aren't going to be the mos wonderfully stimulating person for your child.

We had nannies (the first with her own baby which really lowered the cost, and then a different one when we had dd too) when our two were little, and it worked really well because they loved babies. I am sure that was better than me or DH staying at home and slowly going mad. Our children have needed us as parents (rather than anyone else) much more as they have got older (dh is now a SAHD) because their needs are so much more complex now, what with growing up, school work, coping with friendship issues etc.

For me the problem is that by the time your child is old enough for you to really know their personality and what will suit them you may well have made the decision that seemed right at the time but turns out to be wrong (if that makes any sense).

Knowing DS2 now, I should NEVER have put him into childcare at 3 months (1-2 days a week, lovely childminder) as his massive separation anxiety probably stems from that (and he's now 11). DS1 on the other hand had childminders, nurseries, you name it from 6 months (also part time) and emerged a poster boy for the positive effects of socialising your children by putting them in child care.

What I would say is that if you are not 100% confident about the nursery don't do it. I do think that childminders are better for little ones, but also realise that choice is sometimes a luxury not everyone has.

It's one view.

And it's written to sell as many books as possible.

People don't live their lives according to some theoretical blueprint. And if they try, they often end up seriously screwed up.

Look at your life, your wants and needs, and love life your way.

FWIW I have 3 older children who had various forms of childcare ar various ages and they are all emotionally healthy and bright. You could stay at home and give your child one to one care and stimulation til the cows come home, but it's no guarantee of raising a happy and fulfilled young person (or of being happy and fulfilled yourself)

I meant live life your way, but actually you should love it too!!

"For me the problem is that by the time your child is old enough for you to really know their personality and what will suit them you may well have made the decision that seemed right at the time but turns out to be wrong (if that makes any sense)."

Exactly.

I originally said I would go back at nine months because at that point in time, I was aware of an impending colleague's maternity leave in my 'dream job' that backfill will be appointed for. I've done some backfill for it before, have the requisite skills and experience and it is a bit more money (but mainly more valuable re career experience). At that time (about a month ago), securing this dream job seemed the right thing to do. I think it would be more family friendly, I think I would need to be back at work in Sept to gret it.. I think all sorts. But even a month ago, nine months seemed so BIG. Yet then I met a few nine month olds and looked a bit more objectively at them and realised that they are tiny and that really, I couldn't give a stuff about the dream job..

But am not sold on home living either.

It is a minefield. I'm amazed anyone ever makes the decision to go or to stay. I read all these comments and they all make sense to me..

And that is why, as someone said earlier, I am swayed by contrary opinions. I am an undecided voter, so to speak.

When I had dd I decided to take a year off with her, as we could afford to. At 12 months old, it became clear to me she's still very much a baby who needs to be at home with a parent. However, we have the luxury of finances enabling us to make that choice.

However, in terms of career fulfillment, I'll say this: I've considered myself highly ambitious and motivated, and was very successful in my twenties. I thought I'd have no patience with babies and young children, and be itching to continue climbing the career ladder (I work in media).

How dd (now 14 months) proved me wrong. I find looking after her full-time fulfilling and fun, especially from around 8 months onwards, when she started sleeping well (which meant lost the sleep-deprived zombie look!). Every day she becomes more interactive, and is constantly surprising me.

My main point re career, is that while I still hold my ambition (and have continued doing a very small amount of freelancing to 'keep my hand in'), I believe my generation will be working until we're at least 70. If I take 5 years out now from full-time work, or even 10, I feel confident I can make it up later. Even if I'm 40 when I return to work, I'll have at least three decades to climb that ladder again.

The other point is that I can only afford to be at home due to our current situation with DH's job. If that ever changes (and it's more than a possibility it will), I'll have to work pt or ft. So I'm grabbing the opportunity to stay at home while it's available.

Good luck to you Mrs Bean. And remember that whatever course you choose, you can change your mind.
It's not like you're signing up forever!

A cm that loves children and dotes on your child is wonderful. Bollocks to 1 to 1 care. I'm at home with 2 children at the moment and it's way more fulfilling than just looking after one baby all day, which bored me to tears. 2 at least presents some kind of challenge. I still send dd1 to cm twice a week because she loves it there.

I read no books but I would not send a baby or toddler to nursery if I had a choice. I prefer a cm, especially one that doesn't buy into the massive lie that interfering with how people do their jobs and burying them under masses of paperwork is treating them as professionals (rather than the exact opposite).

If he actually had some relevant qualifications - and was actually a seasoned academic undertaking his own well conducted research I would pay more attention to him.

However his books are based mostly on his own opinion and ideas. He cherry picks some research to support this. He cleverly ignores the limitations of this research or variability according to child.

He doesnt conduct any of this research himself - he reads bits and pieces and then writes a book. Anyone could do this. He has also written a book to sell - if he cares so much why does he not write academic review articles that would be free to read...which would actually be impossible for him as he doesnt base his ideas on well balanaced academic evidence.

I am not saying he is wrong (although having thoroughly read the academic evidence I disagree with his claims) but neither is there any evidence that he is right. I put him in the same category as SWMNBN - in that they are her ideas not her well conducted research.

So if you have read the book and identified with him, great. If you dont identify with him or feel you cannot or do not want to follow his ideas, great. The book is a way of thinking not absolute fact (just like any parenting book or approach really). Do what you identify with and is best for your family.

I'm sure if you looked along the shelf in the library you'd find a whole load more books to guilt inform you about how best to raise your child. Trust me, I've read lots of them since having my first 7.5 years ago.

You have two choices. Either you allow yourself to be guilt tripped by what others think you should do (and they will all disagree with each other anyway), or you can remember that (in general and within reason) happy parent = happy child. So if going back to work makes you happy, do it. If it doesn't, don't. But don't allow someone else to make that decision for you!

I meant gulit inform

"I just imagine it would be quite boring. Babies don't do a lot. I have no children yet, but will be interviewing nannies as soon as I get the positive pregnancy test result.'

Brahms - OTHER people's babies are boring. It's like things other people's cats do. TEDIOUS.

But YOUR baby will be the most fascinating, amazing, clever, dearest creature in the world. I am sure of it.

biddulph methodology and research is flawed and his motives questionable.he used to write books effusing and promoting nursery

he is much loved by precious moments mamas and tambourinne bashers

go visit a few cm and nurseries ask about, try get recommendations.word of mouth always good,read ofsted reviews

and lose the biddulph.its toxic woman know your place rubbish

Love this:
i have read 3 of steve biddulph's books on raising children and am yet to be convinced that they are based on anything other than his own very small-minded opinion on how children should be raised.

I met a woman-know-you-place man at a party this weekend proclaiming 'I just don't get why some parents BOTH go to work. The mum should be at home with the children'. I offered to show him a copy of our mortgage statement to illustrate exactly why some parents feel it important to work...

We've used a mixture of childcare arrangements including both parents, grandparents AND nursery - DS and DD are both loved, happy, and all the rest of it. And the bonus is they also have a roof over their heads but Biddulph seems to assume this is provided by magic or something.

YANBU. Some books just speak to you, seem to put into words what you've been thinking. (I just read the continuum concept and had a bit of an epiphany...) This book sounds interesting, I'm going to order it off amazon.

Everyone is different, and I am of the live and let live school of thought. I do bits of work from home when the kids are asleep, but have decided not to work full-time til they're at school. This has had an impact on our income- We have a smaller house than we did pre-DCs, have downgraded to one car, no foreign holidays etc. But I wanted to d it, and I'm glad I did. Just like my best friend is glad she went back to work when her DS was 6 months- We are just different people with different opinions.

If you are interested in a book that will give you a perspective on all the child-rearing debates over the years, including that about childcare, I recommend Dreambabies (can't remember the author). It's a historical review of all this stuff. V. interesting.

Biddulph, like all experts, picks his perspective and runs with it. I do actually happen to agree that a nursery can be overwhelming for the littlest ones and would personally choose a childminder or nanny share. Bt the argument that you can't care for a child except 1:1 (which you mention with regard to ratios) is quite clearly bollocks. Are all children with siblings deprived? If you think it's an age thing, are twins understimulated?

FWIW lots of studies on childcare show that it's mainly consistency and stability, along with affection, that children need. That's why I'd prefer a childminder, where the carer doesn't change.

Also bear in mind that a lot of these 'studies' about the effect on brain chemistry of babies being separated from mum are things like the effect on baby monkies being stuck in a room with only a dummy for comfort...

There is all the difference in the world between a good nursery and a bad, neglectful one. It is not simply a case of "nursery is bad for children". It depends on the nursery and the child. I chose nursery for DS because I felt it would be more stimulating, more to do, better chance to meet other children he liked to play with and also better safety ie more staff around so if there is an emergency situation (or a bad apple) there will be someone else to see it/step in. DS also went from a young age (7 months).

I love our nursery and couldn't have asked for more consistent, individually tailored care. There is low staff turnover so DS has really bonded with his carers and I don't think I'm exaggerating if I say they really love him and he them. The activities and facilities are way more than what he would get with a CM and for my DS, that suits him. It's 3 days a week and with that balance (ie getting 4 days with me and/or DP) I don't think it's bad for him, in fact I think it has helped him hugely to become more sociable than he would be otherwise.

I'm not saying a CM isn't a better choice for another child, just that nursery doesn't have to be a bad choice. You have to look at childcare options available to you and go with what feels right for you and your child, not what a book says about children in general and particularly a book with an agenda.

with all due respsect stop reading whimsy cod psychology lifestyle quasi-science trotted out by authors with a books to sell and axe to grind.all these daft books heap on misery and guilt where really none is required.being mum is hard enough without "research" that they must not be left alone for a nanosecond ever or else suffer attachment disorder or cortisol poisoning

get pragmatic

what can you afford to do?
what do you need to do to maintain career/cv

bear in mind 5years time baby at school. you need to consider what you do now impacts upon 5years hence

once a child is at school,out house 830-330 you need to be doing something.how will you achieve that

We couldn't afford childcare, so it was a non-issue for us. I went to work FT, DH was a SAHD, then when we got to where that was unaffordable, I still worked my FT job and he worked at evenings and weekends.

I've heard of this bloke and what I understand is that he thinks it is better for adults who love the child to look after, so parents or close relatives.
From the children I know I would agree. Most toddlers I know are only in part time child care, but the happy little girl I know with the best language and general knowledge and good manners is looked after by parents and 2 sets of grandparents. I even think she has an advantage over my same age DD who is only cared for by me. I think this is because the adults who care for her try really hard to engage her intelligently for most of the time they're in charge whereas I have dinner to cook, clothes to wash, am a bit tired etc.
By the way I think I am amazing at caring for my DDs as I'm clever and creative and imaginative enough to find even the dullest household chore interesting, but I still think they'd be better off with more input from Dad and grandparents.

OP- Marine makes a very good point about staff turnover on nurseries. The good ones will have low turnover and therefore address the consistency point I made.

Standard answer no 2 "It's more complicated than that"