to wonder who Oliver James is? working mothers look away!

[Chulita]

Here Sorry if there's a thread on it already, I just read this and was a bit

What no-one seems to have mentioned (forgive me if they have -just speed read most of this)is that Oliver James is now writing the sequel called love bombing which tells you how you can undo all the harm you have done by your poor "choice" of childcare. genius. call me a cynic but what a brilliant marketing ploy -Whip up a frenzy with poorly researched (oh yes it is) nonsense and then watch as your own self penned solution flies off the shelves.

I chose nursery care as my first choice.

Why do men bother having children if they are just going to go out and leave them?

Last time I checked my DC's were not in nursery 24/7 and I actually have to interact with them sometimes (damn).

You are very misinformed if you think the average woman can just go out and get a job after having perhaps 10 years out of the workforce. Funnily enough they are not handing them out - tend to have to have recent qualfications and skills.

And why on earth are men better suited than women to going out to work?

Because they are better at going to work peppapig, havent you seen all the research?! and women are better at childcare of course - duh!

Silly silly me

Off to starch my husbands shirts (or whatever one does with them) and iron the curtains.

A large part of his work seems to be arguing that you can create this perfect child, and if the child isn't perfect then it is your fault. I find that approach quite damaging. A large part of being a good parent is accepting that children are different from each other, and you have to respond to the that child as an individual, and accept them even when they are very different to you.

It is a very great burden to a child if they have to grow up being perfect as some sort of testament to their parent's abilities.

Totally agree, MillyR.

I am much more of a nature-over-nurture belief. Whereas OJ would have you believe the opposite.

Most children will reach their potential within a stable, non-chaotic, loving structure provided by their parent(s). It is rocket science. But that message does not sell books, sadly.

It is not rocket science.

There is no research that children are all the same! There is just as much difference between individual children as between individual adults.

any parent with more than 1 will tell you,children are not the same

consider babies on post-natal ward,all different personalities and different characteristics.definitley not the same

Oo it's nice to see this. I've been getting really pissed off with OJ over the last few week and been wondering what exactly is his problem.

The Times headline - toddlers' behaviour always mother's fault... why not the father's fault for example? But the headlines might of course be a misrepresentation of his views. If they are he should be writing in complaining . Letter to the Times - Dear Sir, I never said that, despite being an ageing Old Etonian father who has never done a day's childcare alone in my life I think it would as much be a father's fault as a mother's so how dare you misrepresent me by the way you write about my work. Let us see if he writes the letters...

I have met OJ on several occasions and find him quite a contradictory character.
On one level he talks a lot of sense - I think the idea behind Affluenza, that being too obsessed with money is a bad thing, is fundamentally sound.

However, his prejudice against daycare - which is his particular prejudice, rather than a generic prejudice against working mothers - has always annoyed me. It smacks of snobbery and ignorance and if you challenge him on the subject - which I did, he will soon back track and say that not all children are badly affected.

He is now in his mid 50s and is very comfortably off; I'd be very surprised if he's ever had to make any tough financial choices.

I think in many ways he is a professional "troll" and would be very surprised if he genuinely believes that all personality/behaviour is down to nurture, when this is patently rubbish

i read an article of his that blamed schizophrenia on bad parenting. Since then I've found anything he says very hard to agree with

Apologies if this point has already been made, but in his column in yesterdays Guardian, OJ discusses the pressures mothers face re childcare/working and goes on to say 'If only their partners felt the same pressure'.

He finishes his article by saying 'The real solution is going to be men starting to feel-every bit as much as women-that it is up to them how the baby is cared for'

Surely that is the point. Until men and women have equal responsibility for the care of children, via I think new legislation, then women will always feel guilty about the choices they make for their children.

I'm not going to fight Oliver James' battles but I gather when he mention children and sameness he meant their needs and of course not their personalities.

Sorry, I meant to type the word - mentioned not - mention.

My memory of ' they fuck
you up' is that he states how much he thinks is due to nature / nurture by mental illness. He clearly does not think all children are born the same or that nurture is all. In man y respects I find this a positive message. I've known too many children of mentally ill / addicted parents who were terrified they would become their parents.

And again, he is one of the few men who talk
about men's responsibility for childcare - for that alone I like him.

In relation to prejudices against group child care for children under 2, I share them too. I'm sure there are exceptions and most children will thrive, but I have too many concerns to use it- alhough some of my friends's rather lovely children have been going since babies and this was the right choice for their family. Most people concerned with child development / welfare professions feel something similar if you ask.

One of the reasons why so much money has been pushed into early care services by the previous government was because of a totally different set of evidence, which suggested that rather than damage you for life, good quality nursery care brought lasting benefits. True that was compared with sub-optimal parenting, but then you can't just divide mothers (and whatever OJ might have to say abut fathers needing to be more involved, I don't see any crass generalizations made about type of fathers, at least in the quotes from his books or recent articles) into "huggers" and "organisers" whatever those really mean. We come in all shapes and sizes, as do our children.

Having seen some of OJs very odd pronouncements on mental heath and in particular on Alzheimers and his very dubious use of research, I doubt the evidence he uses on childcare is very balanced, or for that matter relevant (of what possible relevance is being evacuated to going to nursery?)

He is 56 and therefore of an era where it seems natural that Man is the breadwinner. wtf. Most of my friends are this age, and they are not stuck in some mythical Victorian Age. Dh is this age and we job shared. My Fil would be 101 if he were alive today- that is rather older than Oliver James- and he was a SAHD for many years while his wife worked. These solutions were available for men born in the 50s and even if they hadn't been- if you set yourself up as a guru, why should you then passively blame the times you were born in? Before I ask you to think for me, I want some kind of evidence that you can think for yourself.

Even when he talks about the need for men to get more involved, he still makes it the responsibility of the woman.

"I know lots of men who actually love looking after their children and love being involved with them and if they were given a bit more incentive and put under a bit more pressure by their wives and partners, they would do more."

Oh diddums. You can't work these things out for yourself unless Mummy puts you under pressure. How about using your own initiative?

Yes, he does say he has MS and can't look after children fulltime. But if it had been his wife who had had MS, would she had had the career and been able to set herself up as a guru? I doubt it somehow.

But to my way of thinking, any bloke who is only 56 years old has only himself to blame if he clings to outdated sexist thinking; he has had plenty of time to be exposed to other views.

Strange how he cannot look after the children but can carve a niche for himself as a guru. Surely if he portrays himself as such an expert he must have done extensive research himself, had a huge team of researchers and students, spent time out in the field...oh no wait, its not evidence based just his cherry picked beliefs

Wahwah - your comment about those working in child development / welfare having concerns about childcare is really interesting (and I genuinely mean that I'm not being sarcastic). I have a PhD in psychology and work in child research...yet have no qualms whatsoever about the impact of nursery care on children's development. Nursery care was my first choice over a nanny, childminder - or even a grandparent or my DH if that had been a real choice.

Perhaps I am in denial about it like OJ thinks . However I was fortunate enough to be able to afford a top quality nursery and would never have left my children in the work based nursery (literally 1 minute from my office, 40% cheaper) because I didnt see the quality there.

I would like to know how much time OJ has actually spent within childcare settings doing his own observations and research rather than theorising on a small amount of cherry picked evidence.

I agree with peppapig I have a degree in childhood studies and have worked in a nursery for 10 years. My child was in a nursery from 16 weeks and I would happily put all my future children in a nursery setting.

Sunshine - going off on a complete tangent here. Was your child in the same nursery as you? Were you looking after them alongside the others or were you in a different room - always wondered what that would be like. Whether it was great or difficult as you couldn't really favour your own child.

Oliver James, look and weep: I have not an iota of guilt or self-questioning about being a mummy when I'm at home and a worker when I'm at work. My son has fabulous care (from a nanny, you will be happy to hear) and I love my job.

sigh ... he'd probably just say I'm in denial.

Interestingly as someone also in the child development arena, and as I said earlier, I am much more dubious about the wholesale acceptance that a childminder is definitely better than a nursery. I think if I could get a quality childminder who provided 1:1 or at most 1:2 care I'd say, well, maybe.. but that just doesn't seem to be the norm. I cannot understand how people trot out the line that childminders are developmentally better when the ratio is so similar to a day nursery. I do believe there is also research that there have been more fatal accidents etc in nursery..

For me, quality and - I have to say - quantity (e.g. amount of time spent in childcare) are important factors, with the research seeming to point to quantity being a more important factor.

I am making the decision now whether to go back for 3 full days or 5 mornings/short days (4 short days is not an option at present due to the nature of my work and how it is divided over different contracts).

People in general seem to be telling me that 3 days is the best option.. but from looking at the research that has been linked to on here (e.g. the Belsky article) I wonder if 3 days is actually just the nicer option for me. In practical terms, 3 days = 30 hours (if not slightly more) in day care, due to my commute. 5 mornings = 22 hours in day care, a more consistent routine and 4-5 hours my son will spend with a parent each day vs 30 minutes to an hour for three days and then two full days.

I can fully see why other mums tell me that 3 days is better - I would get an adult lunchbreak, I would have time away from work and less commuting during the week, I wouldn't have to commute with my son, it would work out well for annual leave purposes etc.. but I wonder if the evidence says something else here.

I have yet to decide yet it strikes me these are the questions we should be using research to help us answer, if we are interested in considering research, that is - using research to decide on how we approach daycare based on what is personally feasible vs the ideal (I have to go back to work). I don't think calling OJ a twunt really helps us answer these questions..