Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

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

510 replies

Chulita · 22/05/2010 12:06

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

OP posts:
FairyMum · 24/05/2010 20:48

Yes, I have two children 8 and 10 who have both been in daycare from 3 and 7 months. Perfectly happy children with fond memories and good friends from their nursery days.

edam · 24/05/2010 20:53

Notbree - ds is younger than your stipulation (he's about to turn seven) but neither I nor anyone else has ever been able to see any issues as a result of having gone to nursery as a baby. He went at 7 months old - at the time I wasn't amazingly happy about this but had no choice but to go back to work at that point. He's a happy, funny, secure, cheerful little boy who is doing very well at school, makes friends easily, isn't any more disobedient than any other 6yo (I think that's one of the issues Oliver James claims are related to nursery care).

His keyworker at nursery was very caring and in fact eventually left to become ds's nanny. Then when he started nursery school (2.5 hours a day attached to his primary) we had a childminder who also looked after several of the other kids in his group at nursery. Did wonders for his confidence starting reception because he was surrounded by friends and actually in the same room for reception as the nursery class (large open plan foundation unit).

Maybe we've been lucky, but I really can't see any signs that ds has been unhappy with any of the childcare we've used. He used to be very relucant to leave the day care nursery, when he was tiny, preferred staying to play with the toys with Mummy in attendance to actually going home. (I think he liked to show me what he'd been doing all day.)

scottishmummy · 24/05/2010 20:54

tbh bree if you chose your child care on every opinion piece and quasi-research you might as well get an apron and don it now (for a v long time).there is a veritable publishing industry in guilting out mothers

you cant make your individual life choices based upon an opinion piece in a newspaper

pragmatically you do what you have to do for yourself and the family.to pay the bills etc

but do grow a thicker skin.working mums kop it all the time

and majority of mums with children work. The age of the youngest child affects the employment rate of mothers. Of working-age women with children aged under five,
57 per cent were in employment. This compared with 71 per cent for those whose youngest child was aged five to ten and 78 per cent whose youngest child was aged 11 to 15. two-thirds mum in employment

littleduck · 24/05/2010 20:56

My DD is nearly 13 months. She started nursery just round the corner from home at 6 months - I had to go back to work 4 days a week as we could not afford to continue to pay the mortgage and other bills on £120 per week Statutory Maternity Pay and what DP brings home.

I looked into the option of childminders but there were no minders with vacancies in a convenient location in the local area. Have looked on and off (more out of curiosity than anything) and still haven't been able to find any minders with vacancies anywhere near where I live or on the way to work.

I have been lucky enough to find a really good nursery where DD has settled very well. She has formed a lovely bond with her keyworker and also 2 other staff members in particular. DP drops her off in the morning and hardly even gets a goodbye - she is holding her arms out for a cuddle with the lady who is there each day for the early shift, and can't wait to go and play. There have been a few staff changes lately but the staff she has strong relationships with are still there so I'm not too worried.

I didn't pursue a nanny as an option as I don't have a spare £2500 per month (to cover net wages, employee tax plus employee and employer NI) that it would cost to employ a qualified nanny in London.

I do sometimes worry that my daughter would be better off if I stayed at home to look after her. However the finances mean that I simply can't do it. I have done the best I can in the circumstances and as she seems very happy in the nursery I don't worry too much.

blueshoes · 24/05/2010 20:56

Agree, nooka, that it is a long haul game and the over-emphasis on early years.

So long as care is responsive (does not have to be adoring), it is easier for a pre-school child's needs to be met by a non-parent. Parents' emotional and educational support become much more vital once they go to school.

I would say plan to work during their early years just in case you have to quit to stay at home to support them in later years. By no means cripple yourself financially for the early years only to find the cupboard is bare when you need it most.

BessieBoots · 24/05/2010 21:03

I think everyone has to make up their own minds on childcare. There isn't a one-size-fits-all answer, as OJ himself would admit. I have read, and loved his book (They Fuck You Up)- It taught me a lot- But I don't agree with everything he says, and I don't think that he writes in a preachy way. .
I have utmost respect for working mums- they get a lot of stick. I got a lot of stick for being a SAHM ("But your children would benefit from seeing you having a life away from them" "You are setting bach the feminist cause"), and now that I'm working part-time around the children, I get "You can't possibly do both jobs properly"!You absolutely cannot win.

JosieZ · 24/05/2010 22:03

My niece was in nursery from when she was tiny (under 1, I can't remember exactly) and I think there were some trying times when she cried because she did not want to go. Mum was at home more by the time she was three/four years old.

Anyway, she is 19 now and at uni and a very 'normal' well adjusted young lady.

cory · 24/05/2010 22:50

Xenia has already said more or less what I wanted to say to Sakura in response to her post about fathers running off. I know lots of divorced families in Sweden: they all have shared custody; fathers just bunking off is very rare there. It is common in this country- because of low expectations of fathers and comparatively little involvement of many fathers in early care of the baby- this is clearly not something that has to happen.

My own dcs haven't attended nursery, but 3 of my nephews did and they certainly seem very well balanced.

Niecie · 24/05/2010 22:52

I know I am joining this a bit late, I know, but I have to say I agree with Cornflowers.

I think there is a certainly lots of denial going on that for most children, one to one parental care or childminder, nanny or relative is better in the first couple of years than a nursery. It is common sense. Saying 'well, my child went to nursery from 6mths and they are fine' is just irrelevant. One child does not a study make.

Surely research reports levels of risk, not that every child will be damaged if you dare to put them in nursery as a baby. OJ is saying that children in nurseries are at more risk of behavioural problems than those who don't go to nursery. It is a newspaper article not a scientific paper so it doesn't say whether the difference in the risk is the difference between 1 in 1000 children and 2 in 1000 children or 1 in 1000 and 500 in 1000. Big headlines and a potentially contraversail message sells papers, not pages of scientific analysis.

I have also read They F*ck You Up and I definitely don't see him as WOHM bashing. He accepts that some women have to work and also that sometimes a child is better off being looked after by somebody else. Besides it is not a childcare guide, it is a book on the nature/nuture debate. Of course that includes children but I don't see it as a guide to raising your chidren.

And as for those say that there is too much emphasis on the early years, that is because it is the most important. Of course you can help your children a lot by being with them when they are older but that doesn't mean that this more important. Anybody else read 'Why Love Matters?' - Very interesting book on the impact of the early years on child development. And it has a shed load of research references at the back to support the arguments too.

Just13moreyearstogo · 24/05/2010 22:59

Don't OJ and Penelope Leach have similar views about what's ideal for children in the first three years of life?

scottishmummy · 24/05/2010 23:09

someone else ideal doesn't pay bills,buy food.given majority of mums work seems such views are not wholeheartedly accepted either

my parents both worked,imbued me with good work ethic.i always knew id work too.was always part of the plan

gaelicsheep · 24/05/2010 23:15

I'm sure it's been said already - too late to read the whole thread, sorry - but what really pees me off is that it's always the mother that's apparently to blame. What this man is talking about is families where both parents work, therefore the responsibility for any "fucking up" is equally shared, surely? Or am I also fucking up my DS, just because I'm a working mum, by leaving him in the care of his father?

Sakura · 25/05/2010 02:12

scottishmummy, regarding not being able to pay the bills: OJ argues for giving more money to families. I am completely for this idea. Cuts can be made in other areas, but mothers (and fathers) shouldn't be forced away from their babies. THe choice to do so is another matter entirely.
THe idea of work ethic is a misnomer, because lots of women I know personally admit that they work in an office because being with their kids full-time was too draining. That's not their fault- lots of issues involved regarding the lack of support for mothers in society. BUt its important to discuss them.

Sakura · 25/05/2010 02:24

Xenia

Sak..hmmm...I like it.

Yes you probably have a point there about mothers allowing the father to bond. BUt lots of women do. ON mumsnet lots of women make sure they have a baby-moon with the father so both parents can bond with the baby. I think its important that grand-parents stay away during this important time, personally, if that's what the parents want.
BUt you can't "blame the victims". I really don't think all men running off can be blamed on the mother not allowing the baby to bond with her child. Being a mother is quite instinctive. I got on well with my baby's father so it was fine for me to let him near my baby. BUt I was shocked at how my body reacted when someone who I didn't get along with picked up the baby. It was quite a violent negative reaction. My husband didn't really get this "body" reaction.

Sakura · 25/05/2010 02:36

Although come to think about it my H did get this body reaction, but it manifested in a different way. His was more when people we didn't know on the street cooed and touched the baby. He felt very protective in that way, whereas I didn't mind that so much.
Anyway, fathers should be encouraged to bond, definitely, but men who run off and leave the mother in the lurch are in a league of their own, sometimes.

tortoiseonthehalfshell · 25/05/2010 02:52

Sakura, going back a little bit:

"if you are the kind of woman who is likely to not want to stay with the babies, then you 'd better find a nurturing-type man who will do it for you"

Childcare is not something my husband does "for me". It's something he does for his daughter, and for him.

thumbwitch · 25/05/2010 05:16

GUilty of only reading the first and last pages, but also the Telegraph and Guardian article.

While I agree that his emphasis has been on the mother, he does say in the Guardian article:
"When their children are small, most mothers employ mental acrobatics to reconcile their "mummy" and "worker" identities, and justify decisions about working or not working. If only their partners felt a similar pressure."
(my bolding)

And then at the end of that article he says:
"Abundant evidence shows that what is most harmful to a mother's mental health is when she is wanting one arrangement and living another. A life of quiet desperation soon develops, as she constantly has to hide behind a patina of rationalisations when talking to friends and colleagues.
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."

From these bits, it doesn't seem as though he really is bashing WOHMs - the Guardian article at least appears to be more a discussion of how working mothers make their peace with their situation. And suggests that it is only the mother who feels the need to make their peace with it - that the father/partner has no such problem and perhaps they should.

That's how I read it anyway.

I disagree that a child's character and behaviour are entirely down to nurture - most people with more than one child would probably also disagree, as children who have the same care can be wildly different in character and behaviour.

I chose to stay at home with my son and feel lucky to be able to do so - for the first year and a half I also worked regularly but short hours at home, thus getting the best of both worlds. Since leaving the UK I have not been able to do much work from home, and the work I have had I have found quite hard as DS is now older and more demanding of my time - and tbh, I miss the work. Not because it was "Me time" or my identity - just because it gave me someone else to talk to and broke the day up a bit.

Now, we have playgroups we go to twice a week so that helps - before I found them I was starting to get a bit cabin-feverish, with not knowing anyone here either.

I think it is deeply silly to make sweeping generalisations about all women and all children. Some women will do better working, others will do better being SAHMs.
Some children would prefer their mums to be there more, others are quite happy in the social atmosphere of childcare and yet others will be happiest with a mixture of the two scenarios.
The real problems arise, as the man says, when the mothers are not doing what they would most like to (be it from financial, situational or partner pressure) - and presumably when the children are not in their preferred environment either.

We have a long way to go before most men have the same problems in their lives, although some already do, of course.

Xenia · 25/05/2010 07:12

"If only their partners felt a similar pressure" - more and more do and plenty of people take childcare decisions together. Perhaps the problem is simply as I said above - criticisnig working mothers (but never fathers in our sexist world) sells newspapers so misconstrue Oliver (if indeed he has been) and you make more sales. But why wouldn't he then wri9te to the Times and force it to publish in effect a retraction of headlines like - if womne work children are hurt or whatever last weekend's headline was which I think I had quoted somewhere above? If it so misrepresents his views he should publicly come out against the headlines.

I agree with tw that nature and nuture both apply. I've always thought it was about 50%. Observing my 5 very different children who have had a similar upbringing shows that.

The main hurdle we need the the press to get over is that men are not involved with their babies and that they don't "help" but they are as much responsbility as women to ensure their children are properly looked after. If my children's father in 1984 could interview nannies etc I don't see why in 2010 that cannot be so unless we've returned to a much more sexist society which I very much doubt, quite the opposite.

dorisbonkers · 25/05/2010 07:53

I work part time 3 short days a week (since daughter was 14 months) and my husband works 2 long overnight shifts a week. He actually sees her more than I do because he's working while she's asleep and only sleeps part of the day in between to recover.

We care for her pretty equally. We are lucky we can afford to do this for a while. But we can't forever and he'll have to up his hours again when she's 2-2.5 years.

I don't have a high opinion of OJ and neither does the scientific community (read the Neurskeptic blog for a good deconstruction). That said, I read Affluenza and some of the ideas chime with mine and although it was a major irritant (and OJ is a terrible hypocrite and I think misogynistic) it did make me think long and hard about how I would deal with the issue. Up until I had her I was in 'head in the sand mode'.

OJ is a knob and he doesn't back up his theories, and oversimplifies (like women either go back to work just for 'fulfilment' or for 'money') but that's not to say there isn't some common sense to his arguments.

Ultimately we look at the long-term picture of yoru family as a whole and make the best decision and find the best childcare based on that.

He really is a bit of a (old Etonian, no money worries, can fuck off around the world for months leaving his kid at home with her indoors) twat.

dorisbonkers · 25/05/2010 07:55

sorry, here's the proper link neuroskeptic.blogspot.com/2010/05/does-oliver-james-damage-brain.html

I'd love OJ to put his money where his mouth is and stay at home himself from 0-3 years.....

peppapighastakenovermylife · 25/05/2010 07:56

Niecie - I don't think anyone is saying that ideally one to one care isn't best for a baby. However just because one thing is the best doesn't mean that something else causes harm.

The point is that there is little evidence to suggest that there is any harm (when childcare is good quality) and certainly no odds ratios of risks that I know of.

Therefore for many families the hypothetical risk of the child not having one to one care is overwhelmed by the very real risk of not having a dual income, the impact of the mother etc. Overall the situation would often be worse with one parent staying at home.

Life is like that - I doubt anyone can hold their hand up and say they have done everything perfectly for their child. You take the information and work out what is best for your overall family situation.

It also has to be considered from an individual child perspective. You will probably say I am in denial but my children's personalities + the quality of their childcare mean that I can't see any negative impact on them.

dorisbonkers · 25/05/2010 08:04

Yes peppa, you'd think for a scientist he'd be able to tell the difference between cause and correlation.

cory · 25/05/2010 08:07

When I chose a childminder for my pfb, I specifically chose one that already took in other children so she would not be having 1:1 care. I thought having the sole attention of one adult- particularly one trained in educational activities- might be a bit much and wanted the CM a little diluted tbh.

Since then, I have gone to a great deal of trouble (some of it admittedly pleasurable ) to give dd a little brother, again because I don't see what's so great about this 1:1 concept. If I could have managed a 1:3 ratio, I think that would have been even better, but nature got in the way.

peppapighastakenovermylife · 25/05/2010 08:09

WahWah - there are a few different reasons why I chose a nursery over a childminder.

Firstly the nursery I use is very childminder like in that it is based in a big house. Each age group has a specific room which is designed for their needs. They have a lovely big garden (with different sections again for ages) which they play out in. In the baby room there is a side room with cots and reclining chairs - like a baby's room at home. There is a proper kitchen, proper eating areas etc. They get involved in making the food, cleaning up etc from a very young age. There are also specific key workers per room who work on a rota basis so one is always there and usually both. Staff retention is so excellent that the same staff are there from 4 years ago. Also they didnt force children into routines - although they had general eating and sleeping times, if they were hungry or sleepy at other times then they let them.

Secondly I did want the rules and regulations that the nursery had. There is a manager, assistant manager, assistant assistant manager, room leaders - you get the picture . It would have been very difficult to be lax about rules, ignore the children in any way etc. I knew exactly what they were giving them to eat which was proper home cooked food(they have their own cook). They have an open door policy. I have genuinely never seen a child ignored or upset (and not being comforted) when I have turned up at odd times of the day for one reason or another.

Thirdly, I liked the idea that I knew where my children were in the day - not being driven around or going on school runs

Fourthly - a minor one, I didnt have to worry about the childminder being off sick, going on holiday etc.

Also this nursery is 20 years old - it has a great reputation, lots of friends had used it. I didnt really know how to find a childminder with such a strong reputation or personal experience.

Saying that I was very particular about this nursery - a lot I looked at I would not have left the DC's in and would have seen a childminder as better option.

peppapighastakenovermylife · 25/05/2010 08:13

Doris Yes my pet hate

What actually are his qualifications (am off to check). I wonder if he realises how scientifically crap he is being (and therefore as a psychologist actually unethical) or whether he doesnt actually understand basic research principles.

He is of course entitled to his opinion and his ideas and to use examples as he wishes - but not under the guise of being an academic.