Child guru says nurseries harm small children

[flashingnose]

oh dear

surely it's a given that a small child is better off with their mother rather than in childcare if at all possible. Unfortunately not all woman have the choice to stay at home with their child.

I have no words. I honestly have no words. so, parp!

I was brought up kinda like that, but have thought it thru for myself.

I am a Christian - not extreme and off my rocker - I just believe that the Bible is written by God and try and do what it says. We are supposedly a Christian country...

I will teach my children what the Bible says.

DH is a missionary - helps out at church, does youth work etc.

This may be a Christian country, beartime, but beware, you have unbelievers in your midst!

snorts at "not extreme and off my rocker"

I am a Chritian too, but I think those words need to be considered in context of the time when they were written. And the message contained in those words needs then to be adapted to modern life.

what bad stuff cod?

And by the way I know that not everyone has a choice to stay at home.

gotta go and bf, sorry flashingnose for diverting the thread subject!

What kind of breastfeeding mumsnetter can't type one-handed????

Sophable (if you are still reading this thread), do you have references for some of the "latest research into brain development" you mention?
A lot of the stuff I have read/read about has some big methodological problems - either because it looks at development of children in extremely deprived environments (Romanian orphanages etc) and extrapolates from that, or else because there are problems in selecting the groups of SAHMs for comparison - ie no-one is forced to take part in a study and you may be more likely to volunteer if you are feeling good about your choices, which would skew results by self-selecting.
(This is genuine curiosity, not an attack on your posts, BTW - I agree with much of what you have said.)

we need MB here to explain the way gender works in the womb. As an oversimplification beartime, We are all made female first - which kind of puts the 'Eve made out of Adam's rib' theory into disrepute!

Message withdrawn

"Plus, I sincerely doubt that Biddulph could accurately pick out the "nursery kids" from the "early years SAHP's kids" in a class of 30+ 13 year olds. "

Ah but Normsnockers, the emotional damage we are doing to our kids by sending them to nursery may not be fully evident until they are adults.

How do you adjust for confounders in such a complex type of study?

I think a lot of the attachment parenting theory got very diluted from its original clinical use and made us all into armchair child psychologists

Message withdrawn

At the end of the day, research changes every so often. Wean at four months / wean at six months. Put to sleep on front / Put to sleep on back. Stay at home / Go to work.
I was het up about this yesterday, possibly due to it's close to my time to return to work. But I think I'm just going to put it out of my mind. I know that when I get home from work with my DD, I will give her all the love and attention I can. Yes she'll be spending some time in nursery, or with a childminder, whatever, but she'll be home with her mummy and daddy at the end of the day, who wont be stressed out by money (not a sahp trait, but it would be our situation), who wont be stressed out because we never see one another.
We're all trying to bring up our kids in the best way we know how, and as somebody pointed out long ago on this thread, we should all support one another rather than critising the "other way". I think that is the one downfall of motherhood (and many mumsnet threads), that we get split into camps. SAHP Vs Working / Breast Vs Bottle / Early Weaning Vs Late Weaning / Routine Vs Demand etc etc
I dont think that being a sahp is a bad thing, I think those who can do it (financially and mentally) are very lucky. I just hate the idea that people think that because I will go to work, I love my child even an smidge less than they love theirs.

Cristina7 - couldn't agree more

I think another way of looking at the issue is that there may well be small percentage differences in the likelihood of, say, aggression or unhappiness between children cared for in nurseries and those cared for at home, but the differences between the groups are still tiny compared with the differences within those groups: nursery/home is only one of many factors in how a child develops.
This seems to obvious I can't believe I'm saying it.... and yet in the Times around Christmas there was a pro/anti nursery discussion in which a reader wrote in and said, 'Your child will [WILL!] become withdrawn and aggressive if he stays at nursery....'
Also agree very much with those who've said that looking at whether nursery or home is better distracts attention from the fact that there is good childcare and bad childcare of both sorts and we should be thinking about how to make it better.

I agree with Steve

childminders much better for under 2s than nursery IMO

I second that. Childminders are really underrated in my opinion. There seems to be a kind of snobbery about it. Finding our beloved CM was the best thing - she had dd and now has ds - along with his cousin.
I get a bit upset when I pick up dd (nearly 4) from nursery and see the 6 months olds crying in their little seats. I just want to pick them up and I know the nursery staff do too - but they often have other children to see to. Children should always have access to a special person who can cuddle them....I think that's a good rule.

Hi Welshie

I'm actually inclined to agree with the point about the chilminder as well. Although I do know a little boy who has gone to nursery since 6 months. He is three now, and has positively flourished at nursery (4 full days a week).

Hi yourself

I'm a Christian too (as is DH) and if you know your bible as well as you claim to it also tells men that they have to LOOK AFTER the women, infact they get the short straw - we have to 'submit' (different words used in different translations and lots of interpretations) to our DH's - no big deal, perfectly possible for bloke to be 'head of the house' and all of that without beating a woman into submissions so to speak.

However a man has to love his wife as much as god loves the church = now that is a MASSIVE responsibility for Christian men to undertake.