New childcare study shows that....

[ladbrokegrove]

the under thress do best when looked after by their mums. Can't do links but it's front page Observer. I'll retreat without saying what I think about this one!

Well, I'll just say you tricked me into it, so it will be ok!

MTPW... you are very welcome to hold that belief (and there certainly appears to be endless research to support it), but you can't expect us all to agree with you. Don't judge anyone else's decisions, eh?

M2pw "Because I can't believe a parent would choose to work 12 hour days, rather than be with their child, if they didn't have to."

Sorry -I am one of those parents who skip off to work with a spring in my step. I love my kids to bits, and I have worked my career around spending time with them, but I couldn't do it full time - as much as I love them I need to escape from them too. I have a job that I love, and frankly I need the "energy-injection" that being at work gives me.

And, yes, I choose to work, certainly from a financial viewpoint I don't "need" to work.

I personally agree with M2PW. Thats why I gave up my career to be with my children. I miss it now that they are both at school but I would have missed them more and feel that they would have missed me. I know its not a choice everyone would make but its a shame that the system is set up such that those who want to be at home for thier kids find they can not and have to have them raised by others and others beliefs

thanks phillipat
well the article is really sloppy (the reporting on Sundays seems to be so slapdash, it really irritates me) but the survey is actually pretty thorough I think.
I think the problem is that we see so many of these reports (this is the second one this week IIRC) but there doesn't seem to be any correspondent pressure in the economic and political circumstances that make it necessary for so many parents to work full time. So it just seems like extra guilt with no hope of change. At least Penelope Leach is trying to suggest some change to government policy.

I suppose what I am trying to say is that this type of survey should be more useful in affecting large scale policy rather than the decisions of individual families, because at that level the decision making process is much more complex and focussed on the individual well being of the family members.

or something.

I agree with M2PW too and actually don't see it as contentious

Why shouldn't I believe that I am the best person to raise my children?

I am fortunate that I have the opportunity to do so. I am not saying that everyone else should be doing the same, everyone does the best they can within their own circumstances, but in an ideal world I truly believe any parent who wishes to should have every official support to make it a possibility to do so.

Which is better

A parent that spends a couple hours a day playing quality, uniterupted time (ie no wahsing the dishes, put the laundry on, making the beds, hoovering etc etc) with their child.

or

A parent that is at home all day, but when the actual 'time spent playing' is added up (with all the housework being done 'around' the play) spends the same/similar amount of quality time with their child?

I reckon it's 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.

I'm a SAHM (atm) but looking for work (for financial reasons - but around DH's hours as I couldn't earn enought for childcare). However, even if I didn' have to work - and I could afford it - I'd be sending DS2 (now 22 months) off to nursery for a couple of mornings/afternoons a week - because I feel he needs that extra stimulation which I simply cna't give him.

intersting how many of those that 'agree' with the article are using the word "parent", as opposed to just 'mother', when referring to the looking after the child..........

What I object to about the reporting of these studies is that they always focus on what women should be doing (not what parents should be doing) and they reduce it to an argument about individual choices, rather than public policy.

Let's say for the sake of argument that a definitive study was done which showed that in general, kids are better off with with a parent. If that were true, then reports like this should be arguing for the government to change its financial policies and employers to change their employment practices, rather than laying a guilt trip on mothers.

I'm with Twiglett and M2PW on this.

What angers me is that it is made difficult for mothers and fathers to truly decide what they feel is best for their children. Having to go to work shouldn't come into it - only wanting to go to work.

There are some fantastic working mums
The are some fantastic SAHM's
There are some pretty awful working mums
There are some pretty awful SAHM's

Equally

There are plenty of children of SAHM's who are horrible little shts () with poor development.
Plenty of children of working mum's who are little shts with poor development
Plenty of children of SAHM's who are lovely, happy children, and very well 'developed'
And plenty of children of working mum's who are lovely, happy children and very well 'developed'

I agree with you Caligula and in fairness I think that is what Penelope Leach is doing, although the results are not available on line yet.
the report does seem hugely focussed on mothers though, that's true.

Thing is - if they used the word parent, there would be a backlash from some sectors criticising them for assuming that all children have 2 parents, and that how that assumption is not fair on women who are on their own and how it marginalises single parent families even more. I don't think they can win either way.

I also agree with mtpw to the extent that I've always believed that happy mother=happy children. And most mothers claim that they would rather spend the first few months or years with their children or having a reasonable work life balance. There are very few who claim to want to work 12 hour days when their babies are 12 weeks old, but for those who do, if that's what makes them happy, then chances are their babies will be happy. I just wish state policies supported the former group as well as the latter though.

Happy mother=happy child? Shouldn't it be the other way around? ie Happy child=happy mother???

Chicken or egg?

Child comes first, doesn't it?

imo if a mother is deeply unhappy it's very likely that she won't be the best parent she can be.

every study shows the same results though, don't they?

And if the child is unhappy then - what? Parenting is about putting the child's needs first, unfortunately! Certainly when they're little.

tbh I am not sure that this is true. If a mother is happy, it doesn't necessarily mean the child/ren is/are happy.
but the reverse may well be true - i.e. if a mother is very very unhappy, she is unlikely to be providing the right kind of love and care.

Agree Caligula.
I was pretty confused about this report with its distinction between 'grandparents and other relatives' (IIRC) and 'mothers'. Which category is the father supposed to fit into? This is a very pertinent issue for me as dh will be at home with our 4.5mo ds when I am back teaching in a couple of weeks. I'll only be out of the house about 20h/week, but a lot of the rest of the time I have to do preparation, admin etc. from home, and dh has to occupy himself with ds then. Have been working from home for 4 weeks now and do the best I can to fit in playing with ds etc. (and am bf on demand), and I like my job, but I would rather be a sahm (though if I was one, dh would have to work and miss out on ds!) and do feel guilty. I am with M2PW, emkana, Twiglett on this one in that I feel that for us personally the best thing is for ds to be with his parents (one or the other) and would prefer not to use other childcare for the first couple of years, to the extent that when my contract runs out in 6 months we are each going to try and find a part-time job in order to be able to share childcare. But that is our personal decision and surely a lot is dependent on the situation of the child and the parents. I live in a fairly conservative corner of Germany and when I got back from mat and annual leave I found I hadn't been paid, only to ring up and be told the state had assumed I'd gone on extended (unpaid) mat leave - when I protested that I now had no money coming in (I'd said earlier in the conversaton that my dh is at home), I was told 'what do you want - you've got a husband, you're not starving' . I do sometimes find it quite hard to deal with the reactions I get to our set-up - while no-one else has been openly hostile, it is very tiring to be always having to explain myself, and I do sometimes wonder what my students/colleagues secretly think of me carrying on working and whether they feel sorry for my ds
Oh dear - sorry for the ramble.

We might have to disagree on that then paolosgirl, I don't think one should put the child's need first IF this happens to the extent that it makes the parent deeply unhappy. There's a balance to be found imo.

I think the father as primary carer is still an alien concept for most people....have been to a couple of job interviews recently and been asked 'where is your son now?' to which I want to reply either a. none of your business or b. oh I tied him up to the lamp post outside I'll pick him up on the way out!

Dp has ds most of the week as he works p-t, I work f-t and without a major lifestyle change (sell house etc.) there's no way I could stop working or cut my hours...but ds has one parent there the majority of the time, why is it an issue that that parent happens to be male....

I gues it is all about priorities, WWW. A happy child, with a happy settled childhood to look back on, is the most important thing for me - esp. when they are young, as I say. If I (or DH)am happy doing something even when that makes my children deeply unhappy, I'd have to take stock.