Nursery care is harmful - guilty parent here.

[fifitot]

www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2010/may/08/oliver-james-daycare-under-threes

Thanks Oliver.

The comments below are quite interesting though.

find james smug and ever so condescending as he sagely observes how all us dullards are neglectful avaricious consumers

hey hoo

but biddulph is still biggest laugh.esp love his take on slammers. much loved by precious moments mamas and tambourine bashers

Seems like there is a lot of defensive dismissal going on here - which always happens when we read something we don't like. There has been lots of research on attachment theory that shows that group care foe the very young affects neurological development in children, but we don't want to hear it because as a society we value women's right to self fulfilment over the basic needs of children - namely to be brought up by people who are genuinely responsive and love them. Like most of us were. Be interesting to see how our children deal with this issue when they are older - whether they will carry on contracting out the raising of our children or will want to do things differently.

what are slammers?

highlystrung, it is a fact that lots of women need to work (to buy food and keep a roof over their heads, not to buy luxuries). Even Martha Sears said that it was essential for her to work when their first child was young.

both my parents worked full time.it was a good role model and has definitely influenced my adult decisions

no robust research has conclusively "proved" nursery to be harmful.many cited studies have methodological and interpretative flaws.certainly no research has caused me to alter my use of nursery

brain plasticity does mean our children are shaped by experiences but that is not in itself reason to extrapolate mothers shouldnt work

slammer biddulph speak for ft working parents slam children into day care orphanages.

Highlystrung - you have a very idealistic view of the past. Both my grandmothers worked full time when they had small children. My parents were therefore looked after by a succession of relatives, and in my dad's case, he was often left on his own upstairs, as my nan worked and lived in a doctors surgery, and used to leave him upstairs in his cot whilst she went to work downstairs.

Highlystrung - it's not about women's self fulfillment over the basic needs of children. That is pretty offensive really.

If I didn't work, we wouldn't have a home or meals on the table. The only choice for some women is to work or not have children. I would happily not work but there is no way on earth we could afford to live - and am not talking luxury lifestyle here either.

What annoys me about this research is how it's used to criticise working women (mainly) - as if most of us have a choice! Give us adequate maternity rights for the first 2 years of our child's life and I bet most women would bite your hand off.

i wouldnt take 2 years off work.dont want to. i like work.it fulfils me.i get approbation and validation from it.

the guilt ridden,run ragged working mum is a bit of a cliché too.denies that some of us chose work

Thanks, Biddulph is by my bed waiting to be read. Maybe I'll leave it for a bit.

Me and DH work v long hours. DS has 2 days at nursery, 2 days with us and 3 days with various family members/ grandparents at home. I know my being away so much stresses him out actually. And other decisions I've made too; I know, for example, that stopping bf a few weeks ago has also stressed him out. I don't like to do cause him stress but both are necessary, to keep us afloat financially/ beause am pg and v flipping tired/ because you have to take decisions that aren't perfect sometimes but what else do you do?

I wouldn't want to give up work completely either. A bit less work and more time with DS would be really nice but I too have worked long and hard and it is an important part of my life. I want DS to see industry from his parents and hopefully value it later on (not as a teenager, clearly!)

Highlystrung, doesn't most writing on attachment theory deal with children who are either wholly removed from a loving environment or inadequately parented? How do you think the daycare model of adequate, loving parenting in the evening and weekends (taking at face value the notion that daycare is inadequate care) impacts on this?

Genuine question, am finding it quite interesting. My DD is cared for by a grandparent, so have no personal agenda- I am interested in the comparisons within the research, and where the baseline data came from.

tbh if you work at all biddulph is best avoided.unless you enjoy being berated

i like the chris green books well written and balanced

I was supposed to enjoy the first year?

Will give that enjoying thing a go with this next one! Cheers.

I really identified with your post hairymelons. For some of us this is the reality.

"you have to take decisions that aren't perfect sometimes but what else do you do?"

I have had quite a bit of judging in rl about me working (pt currently fwiw, but am seriously thinking re ft). The only thing that shuts up some of the busybodies/former friends is lying and saying the only reason I work is financial.

Yep, it is partly financial, but also for lots and lots of other reasons that you have cited and also scottishmummy earlier in the thread.

Work is my identity. I love my work, am fulfilled by it. fwiw I was brought up by a parent who chose to be sahp (father) and refused to work until I left home in late teens. This made me at the time and more so now.

We had a horrible life in many ways. Poverty is a strong word but it kind of sums up my early years.

Agreed, scottishmumny. I love work, my dd loves nursery (two days a week - rest of the time with dh or her grandparents). She doesn't particularly like being on her own with me at home for more than a couple of hours at a time (and I am neither depressed nor unimaginative in looking after her). She just likes being around lots of people, particularly other children, which is why we always socialise a lot on the days when I am with her. She's 13 months old and has been two days at nursery since 6 months.

Surely babies are just like anyone - all things being equal some thrive around lots of people, some aren't as sociable or extrovert. Oliver James makes a distinction between poor and good care and then doesn't qualify it, but that must be key, I would have thought. I really would like to know what quality of care the children in these nurseries were receiving, because my dd certainly isn't looking around for me every time the door opens nor holding up her arms to be picked up all the time. When I arrive to pick her up I have to practically jump up and down to get her attention she's so busy either playing or being read to or cuddled by one of the carers at her lovely nursery. As for children under 3 not playing together... I'm not sure who they've been observing but that is not my experience of watching dd greet and play with her cousins and my friends' children.

There are so many variables, I just can't take this 'evidence' seriously. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that poor nursery care 5 days a week is going to cause problems for a child, but excellent nursery care, either full or part time, well, surely it depends on the child whether it's a good idea or not?

Biddulph made me feel quite inadequate. Also iirc he is a bit chauvinistic?

It was only when I joined mnet that I realised the problem was him and not me!

biddulph used to be pro-nursery.sold books on it.massive u turn sells books on that too

You must be all on great wages as I don't earn enough to afford nursery fees and my husband's job precludes us from help with childcare costs. There always seems to be an assumption that sahm's have chosen the luxurious and easy route. However, that is not really what is under debate here, its just it winds me up every time there is a thread like this.

The point I wanted to make was the emphasis this article places on "working mothers", "depressed mothers", always the onus of responsibility on the mother and not on the parents as a unit, a fundamental problem with attitudes towards the entire issue of childcare. It seriously pisses me off and while I agree with some of his points this blatent sexism is offputting. My dh would love to be a sahd but he is the bigger wage earner and in an ideal world we would share work and parenting but this is not an ideal world.

The last time I read a Christopher Green book, it told me to smack my child if he repeatedly got out of bed at night....apparently a smack would put him off getting out of bed again. I bet it's been updated, though.

Yes, it probably is best to avoid Bidulph's books if you work and have to use day care.

Child care provision has changed so much since I was a baby, and my mum went out to work. (I was left with the friendly lady over the road,and probably spent much of the day in my pram, not put in to a stimulating nursery with lots of other babies, and read stories by some one who didn't really want to be there.)

Child care can be improved, and that is what we should be working towards for our grandchildren.

highlystrung I for one am not cross with the article because it says something I don't like, I am cross with it for three main reasons: articles like this cannot/ do not appraise the quality of the scientific research they are quoting; do not properly explore other conflicting scientific studies; and are hedged about with the article author's own personal prejudices and preferences.

What gets my goat is opinion pieces being touted as scientific fact, which mothers then read and take as gospel. I suspect that even if I read all the scientific research on the issue I would still be left with lots of questions and no clear answers .

what does "my husband's job precludes us from help with childcare costs" mean please

you will get your free hours at 3yo

Scotishmummy...isn't Bidulph pro-nursery for over 3's? When was he advocating nurseries for babies? Must have been before I had my 11 year old. Biddulph was like a breath of fresh air amongst all the other baby books, which DS1 had obviously not read before he was born!

it means there is no help before the age of three.

We would be homeless if I didn't work. But one day we hope to be well off because we work our arses off now to build something for the future.

Onepiece, I would tell anyone that wanted to judge me for that to get gone. I just don't get this judgy thing- out of my friends with children, we all do it differently. Some work, some don't, there is every type of approach from AP to GF. If we sat around judging each other for our different decisions we wouldn't be friends very long and that's just not nice and not how grown ups should behave.

Again, talking about role models, I don't want DS to see me only continuing friendships with people who are exactly like me/ always agree with me. I think not being threatened by differences is a good life skill.

Highlystrung I disagree with the basic principle of your point about society valuing mothers' right to self-fulfilment above children's right to be properly looked-after. I think that view is founded on a very idealised motherhood-and-apple-pie view of the past. And why are you only drawing attention to mothers' rights to self-fulfilment, as if we are the ones who are creating the problems through our craven self-interest? Are fathers' rights to self-fulfilment totally unproblematic, then?