nursery for babies

[clarinetplayer]

to tell my sister that she will miss out on many of the most important milestones in her baby's life if she sends her aged six months to nursery 5 days a week from 8am until 6pm. This is longer than a school day. My sister got very offended when I suggested that being looked after as part of a cohort of 8 babies by three carers was not ideal for her seven month old daughter. She doesn't need to work full time but loves her job and is worried that if she goes pt she'll miss out on promotion. Is it unreasonable to think that now she's a mum she should put her daughter's needs first?

"I work in a nursery and i am not a teenager or of very low intelligence. In fact, I am studying for a degree and have just been awarded student of the year"

Good for you.

Sadly most people who work in private nurseries aren't like you.

They're not of 'low intelligence' and I didn't say that they were - I said they were often poorly educated, which is different.

And if you're asking how I know - I spent 10 years teaching on CACHE and NNEB courses.

I'm not anti-nursery. All three of my children have attended state nurseries pat-time from the age of 3 onwards and thrived in them.

But I do have concerns about very tiny babies attending private nurseries full-time, particularly as there is some very poor quality nursery care out there.

blueshoes, I've re-read your post, and it really, really annoys me.

"Otherwise years from now you will be bitter you sacrificed your life for dcs whilst those reprobate WOHM mothers' dcs grow up to become well-adjusted adults and achieve the same, heck even more, than yours."

God, that's annoying. "My child's going to achieve more than yours, ner, ner, ner, ner ner." FGS!

My mother was a SAHM and it was the best thing she ever did for me. I will feel just the same about being a SAHM to my own children. I feel it now they're 8 and 6, and I will feel it when they're old. How on earth could anything ever begin to compete with growing up knowing that you matter more than anything else in your parent's (or even parents') world?

Some people have no choice but to put their children in nursery. Those who do have a choice are making a bad one if that's what they go for. It may be good for them, but it isn't good for their children. In my opinion.

Don't worry IHJL your posts really, really annoy me

Ah, porridge, but they aren't aimed at you personally. That's the difference. Presumably I'm not entitled to a hobnob?

Goodness I was just pondering the issue of whether to be a SAHM or to go back to work. I have to say I am getting more and more confused reading this thread

YANBU

cannot for the life of me figure out why some women would want to do this. don't have kids if you can't nurture and spend time with them.

being a sahm has affected my career and finances, but when i'm at my daily playgroups and watch the babies/toddlers with their childminders or nannies ALL I CAN THINK IS: they should be with their mummies. IT IS JUST NOT THE SAME (and yes, i believe it SHOWS in the way they interact with them) and makes me want to hug my son even more that we get to spend this time together

OP I suggest you go play your clarinet... focus on something that you are good at rather than upsetting your sister.

YABU and can't believe you even have to ask the question (or perhaps deep down you alreaedy you YABU which is why you have posted this). You take a very narrow minded view of the world!

When I was a baby, I spent my first couple of years in another country and (after the first few months) went to nursery every day.

Then we moved to the UK. I didn't go to nursery (because at the time they wouldn't take kids under 3). I stayed at home with my (very loving) mum instead.

According to my mum I was bored and lonely and really wanted to go to nursery and play with other kids/nursery helpers.

I cannot understand why so many people are convinced that small children prefer a SAHM and are sad when they go to nursery. Many children adore nursery. It all depends on the child.

Personally I think the answer to the conundrum is for it to become totally normal for both parents (to the extent that there are two involved in the baby's life) to work part time and share care of the baby.

Me and DH are lucky enough to be able to do this and it is a win-win. We both keep our hand in at work, both have lots of time with DD, both go to work happy that she is at home with the other one, both know what it is like both to have the stresses of work AND what it is like to have a demanding baby all day.

I wouldn't criticize anyone's childcare choices individually - we all do the best we can with the resources available and in the context in which we find ourselves - no mother actively wants less than the best for their baby, after all!

That said I think its unfortunate that the feminist agenda around liberalising women from the endless drudgery of childbirth and domestic chores has somehow got harnessed up to the capitalist agenda whereby we all have to work all hours just in order to be able to fund the mortgage.

I think that is one of the difficulties I have with nurseries, aside from the question of how good an experience they are for children. I feel women are encouraged to go back to work; on the surface, it looks like "choice" and "female emancipation", whereas the reality is most of us are forced to go back to work longer hours than we would like in order to fund the mortgage, high house prices being a product of the capitalist boom and two-income families). In doing so, we compromise on what happens to our babies, and our babies are of fundamental importance to us as women - we grew them, for goodness sake!

I am willing to bet that if by some magic the state made it financially possible, many more women would choose not go back to work till the kids were all at school, and if the state made a free choice of childcare available to those who did choose to work, I think nurseries would start to disappear as the vast majority of women would choose high quality one to one nanny care in the child's own home.

So I can't help feeling that we are just a shafted as we ever were in the 1950s in terms of getting our needs and priorities met by society - in the 50s we were chained to the hearth and not getting the education/career opportunities we needed. Now we are chained to the office desk and the mortgage, and most of us are not getting the opportunity to do what matters most in life to us - caring for our small children.

I use "we" meaning women generally - I personally feel very lucky that because I get paid better than most and can work from home, DH and I have got a very happy arrangement for DD. However I am well aware of the agonies all my NCT friends and others have gone through when the time came to go back to work. The wealthy ones chose to go back two days a week only and employ a nanny. The poor ones have had to go back full time and leave their baby at a nursery five days a week - I can see that they are trying to make the best of it, but after a year of deep attachment to their babies, it is bloody painful and they are unhappy.

Lady Biscuit - agree with all your posts wholeheartedly.

OP - YABU obv. Trolltastic.

Wow...some people certainly take opinions personally...if you are happy with your decision and your situation why so upset?..people have opinions..get over it!

Iheart, my mother was a SAHM. She should have gone to work. Been much happier too.

After a while, children are able to draw their own conclusions about whether it was a good idea for their parent to SAHM or not. It is not always the 'gift' you think it is.

Bumpsadasie, I don't feel women are shafted. I am so grateful I have such a nice balance of work and a family life and the ability to earn a decent income and accumulate a pension to boot. My children also have a nice balance of nursery/school and home life. It is great.

I profoundly disagree that if women had the choice many more would not work until their children were at school. Not sure how you can come to that conclusion in the face of the totality of views of WOHM on this thread.

A lot of women can and do enjoy their work as much as family life. Perhaps if you weren't thrilled about your job to begin with, I can understand.

Work for me is being asked to do something challenging with my time and being paid for it. I would hardly want to give it up. Being at home is nice but not challenging mentally. I was working at a fraction of my intellectual capacity. My children would have thrived anyway without me being there 24/7. IMO I cannot see the point of SAHM ing ft.

"How on earth could anything ever begin to compete with growing up knowing that you matter more than anything else in your parent's (or even parents') world?"

My daughter grows up in the knowledge she matters more than anything else in her parents' world. She also grows up in the knowledge that career and family is not an either/or choice, but that it is perfectly possible to have both, and that she won't have to give up one dream for another.

"I am willing to bet that if by some magic the state made it financially possible, many more women would choose not go back to work till the kids were all at school, and if the state made a free choice of childcare available to those who did choose to work, I think nurseries would start to disappear as the vast majority of women would choose high quality one to one nanny care in the child's own home."

I made a conscious choice of nursery over one-to-one childcare, am happy with my choice and would be surprised if I was the only one. What do you base your assumptions on?

yup, widow, another one here who actively chose nursery for her dcs over a nanny.

There is lots of room for differing views as to the best childcare for a particular family.

Bumpsa, don't think you can speak for women in general but you are entitled to your own views, of course.

OP (if you're still here), YANBU.

I agree with Mumcentreplus - I don't think the OP was unreasonable to say this to her sister. If she screamed at her, teling her she was unfit to be a mother, etc etc, then yes, that would be unreasonable. And bloody offensive. But if she simply gave her opinion and then left it to her sister to decide, what's wrong with that? Why are we all suddenly allergic (aka hypersensitive) to other people's opinions about what we do with our children? No person is an island and all that.

I say this as someone whose ILs are definitely on the bossy side when it comes to dishing out advice without invitation. They're a right PITA when they get going. I don't mind opinions, but as long as they're offered as a free gift (i.e. not imposed). Haven't read the whole thread but so far I don't get the impression that the OP was trying to be forceful - or have I missed something?

As for the suggestion that a mother with 3 kids vs a child carer with 3 kids provides the same standard of care - what planet are you on? No child carer could ever have the same love that I have for my children, and THAT makes a massive difference to the standard of care. I am a far better carer for my children than my son's wonderful and brilliant nursery teachers. It is far more offensive that anyone could suggest that the opposite may be true.

Personally if I absolutely had to work 6 mos after giving birth I'd rather choose a trusted family member, or, failing that, a childminder. I don't like the idea of nursery for children under 2 - IMO and IME personal, home-based care is far better for them than being in an institution.

If anyone finds small children mentally unchallenging, they are doing it wrong.

I was a university teacher in my previous life (headhunted for my splendiferous academic results and world-renowned publications, no less), and being with the children 24/7 is far more mentally taxing (esp. as I have one with ultra-high-functioning AS.)

I think the WOHMs on this thread are particularly strident, which skews the perspective a bit. But I do remember reading that something like 70 percent of mothers would give up work if they had a the choice.

Please will someone explain the attitude that I encounter so often in rl that SAHsingleM qre benifit scroungers but that mums with a partner that want/ need to work are selfish/lazy etc. I just don't get why there are different rules for theese two types of women.

As a mum of a 7 month old that is reluctantly having to look for work despite having a partner with a fairly decent salary (read don't qualify for any support), and wanting to stay home for a while longer (despite being highly qualified) I'm finding it very difficult to deal with the judgemental attitudes.

Why can' we accept that the majority of muums only want what is best for their children and stop assuming that have a better idea of what that is?

OP you realise that hundreds and thousands of mums do this dont you? Its not shocking that your sister would want to join them in their choices.

And you do also realise that even more dads do this every day... miss out on all those precious moments I mean... No one seems to want to have a go at them.

Iheart, I totally agree it is mentally taxing. It is just not challenging.

I certainly don't need a uni degree to do childcare. In certain ways, it is easier to enjoy SAHM-ing if you did not need that intellectual stimulation.

Perhaps your perspective is skewed because of your son's condition.

I also dont understand these comments about how childcare isnt good quality because childcarers are paid peanuts..

Mothers dont get paid anything at all but would you say SAHMs dont do a good job because theyre not getting paid for it?

My childminder became a childminder because she wanted to stay at home with her children, she loved being with them and didnt see it as drugery. Now they are grown up her husband earns enough that she doesnt have to work but she still does because she loves spending time with kids. I dont love staying home with kids so i pay her to do something she loves (and does very very well) while I do something I love.

And everyones happy, including my DD. If you ask her she'll tell you (in a very confident and articulate manner that would usually be expected from a child of far advanced years)

Just realsied talking about my childminder might be off point as this is about nurseries... sorry!

blueshoes, perhaps it is. Thanks to my eight-year-old, I know far more about nuclear fission than I have ever needed to know before. I have to read up on stuff all the time, just to have a vague idea of what he's on about. In fact, having a job would be so much easier that I might rethink it altogether.

Today I biked to the library with the children (they broke up a week ago), and we had a bun and watched a building being demolished. We rode past a big day nursery; the children were outside, playing - but to my mind, it really didn't compare.