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

News

All under threes should be cared for at home?

162 replies

mrsruffallo · 08/01/2008 11:10

Two varying opinions in a magazine I have read recently;
First by Oliver James
Right now, being a stay at home mum has a lower status than that of a streetsweeper. The current government has pursued policies that encourage more parents of young children to enter the workplace and put demands of their careers before the needs of the children...... There is little question that children under three should be cared for by one person who knows them well. Toddlers need to feel secure that their needs will be met, and that they will be loved later in life. In my view, what we need is a less consumerist society, where both parents do not feel compelled to work during these amazing years. That means rethinking both our workaholism and our materialism.

Second by Joanna Grigg
It would be foolish not to keep your foot in the door re your career: nearly half of all mums will end up as single parents .....part time workers camn be seen as ineffective...working mums feel alienated and undervalued...the bulk of research shows that nursery doesn't harm children, the real issue being that your child feels loved and you don't have to be a sahm for this.

OP posts:
mrsruffallo · 08/01/2008 19:53

I agree with Sophable and an earlier poster in that sahm is underated by this government who seem to think it is more important to leave your child in nursery and get out to work and pay tax asap.
In a materialistic society it seems that the person doing an unwaged job- volunteers/carers/ sahm's are under valued

OP posts:
Reallytired · 08/01/2008 21:34

I think that people should mind their own business and let parents decide what is right for their families.

Personally I prefer nurseries to childminders. A good nursery keeps its staff

policywonk · 08/01/2008 22:00

I don't see Oliver James saying that it ought to be the mother who stays at home, just one stable figure who loves the child. And I agree with him, although can appreciate that it is not always possible.

And I read that Joanna G article in full when it was published and found it rather insulting to SAHM/Ds - she definitely seems to believe that work is a more worthy option than looking after your children.

Agree with a lot of what Walnutshell says. Government policy in this area is shite. Why should parents go out and work for buttons in jobs they don't particularly like in order to pay bored teenagers buttons to look after their children badly? It's crazy.

Quattrocento · 08/01/2008 22:04

I think that the buttons parents get paid add up to more than the buttons that the bored teenagers get paid. Bigger buttons for parents if you will.

I think there is more to it than that. A colleague of mine took two years out. In just two years, her worth on the labour market HALVED. It has taken her five years to creep back up to the level she was before she took time out.

Partly it's about maintaining your skills and being seen to maintain and develop your skills.

Reallytired · 08/01/2008 22:08

The nursery that I used for my son had staff with a range of ages and they were all qualifed. I don't think they were bored teenagers. They wanted to work with small children.

Going to work is more than just earning money. Its about making a contribution to society by doing something useful and being part of a wider community.

policywonk · 08/01/2008 22:09

But I don't think the parents should get bigger buttons. Childcare workers in Scandinavia (um, broadly speaking - I think it's Denmark but can't be arsed to Google) get paid proper fuck-off salaries and have to have years of training. Consequently, children in nurseries in Denmark tend to do rather well. I find it immensely depressing that I can buy three hours of care for DS2 for 13 quid - I just don't think that the care can be all that good for that price.

Re. skills and all that - I just don't think that's as important as giving your children the most loving, stable infanthood that you can (and by 'you' I mean, those who love the child). I don't give an arse about whether my skills have degraded in the five years I've been out of the job market, I really don't.

Elphaba · 08/01/2008 22:10

'Going to work is more than just earning money. Its about making a contribution to society by doing something useful and being part of a wider community.'

You can do all of that by being a SAHP you know.

Heathcliffscathy · 08/01/2008 22:12

bravo policywonk.

Heathcliffscathy · 08/01/2008 22:12

in spades elphaba

policywonk · 08/01/2008 22:13

'Its about making a contribution to society by doing something useful and being part of a wider community.'

Raising a child well is pretty bloody significant at a societal level, I'd say. At least as significant as the work of most public servants, for instance. And just as skilled in its own way. And I contribute a great deal more to my local community now than I did before I had children.

Look, I don't think everyone should be tied to the kitchen table with a rope - if not working out of the home would make you miserable, then obviously you should work out of the home. I DO get irritated by the assumption that staying at home with children is in any way less important, significant or difficult than working in a paid setting.

Elphaba · 08/01/2008 22:16

Agree with everything you say policywonk (except I pay around £13 for 9-1pm nursery care for ds3 and it's honestly blardy fantastic and every parent I know that uses it completely raves about it - this is a sessional morning nursery, not a day nursery btw. All the workers there are older 'mummies' and they look genuinely happy to be there).

Quattrocento · 08/01/2008 22:16

Nobody's saying that Policywonk. No, what I was taking issue with was the idea that somehow sahm should be paid. I think that would actually be a poor idea.

TellusMater · 08/01/2008 22:17

Oh GRRRRRR at the idea that staying at home with your own children is somehow an anti social thing to do.

At the only way of contributing to society is through paid work.

Rubbish.

policywonk · 08/01/2008 22:17

Why a poor idea Quattro?

Quattrocento · 08/01/2008 22:22

Well because

(i) The world is overpopulated so paying people to stay at home and look after children cannot be globally the right thing to do

(ii) There are many carers - not just of babies and small children but of disabled people and elderly people - they would presumably need to be paid too and the economy just can't stand too crippling a burden of taxation - capital is both global and mobile nowadays - look what's happened in France and Germany with great social policies - businesses left in droves - forced to change - strikes - yada yada yada

TellusMater · 08/01/2008 22:22

Oh sorry. Only read a few posts. Carrying frustrations over from another thread. Very bad form...

policywonk · 08/01/2008 22:23

When Michael Howard briefly mooted the possibility of paying SAHMs (and it was a derisory sum - hundred pounds a month I think?), for the one and only time in my life I considered voting Tory. Wages for Housework - one of the original feminist principles, surely?

TellusMater · 08/01/2008 22:24

Do you think more people would have children if there were a wage for SAHPs? (re the world population argument)

Or that people would have more children?

francagoestohollywood · 08/01/2008 22:24

as a sahm, I honestly don't think I have contributed much to society. In what way? I'm pretty much convinced that my children wouldn't be different had I been in a full time job. Mind you I didn't contribute much to society when I was working in fashion pre-children and pre-UK. Quite the contrary, really...

policywonk · 08/01/2008 22:25

Ah well Quattro - rather predictably I couldn't disagree with you more on that one but I'm sure you know what my arguments would be without me having to go to the trouble of writing them out...

paulayatesbiggestfan · 08/01/2008 22:25

yes double grrrrrrrr Tellusmater

'society' Quattrocento is our children is it not - therefor i am doing the best by society

Sophable ahhhhhh what sense!

Quattrocento · 08/01/2008 22:25

Well I would have loved to have more children but I didn't think we could afford them in terms of time ...

Quattrocento · 08/01/2008 22:26

paula I don't have a clue what you are talking about

TellusMater · 08/01/2008 22:26

It was reallytired who made the society comment I think.

paulayatesbiggestfan · 08/01/2008 22:32

yes sorry - i must be really tired

I just expect to be disagreeing with Quattrocento

Swipe left for the next trending thread