Would anyone be interested in calmly discussing this Times articles with me please?

[Sycamoretree]

Article from Times 2 today.

here

Have read with interest as DH is currently SAHD due to redunancy over a year ago, so my youngest, (DS) has only been cared for at home with a parent. He is 20 months old.

My DD is at pre-school and starts reception in Sept. She had a nanny for the first couple of years until DH got made redundant.

DH is trying hard to get back into full time work and nursery was/is something we are considering. We certainly could no longer afford a nanny for one on one childcare.

I'm particularly interested in anyone who can confidently refute this quote from Steve Biddulph:

"quality nursery care for young children doesn't exist. It is a fantasy of the glossy magazines."

On the one hand I am furious that such an article gets printed as so many of us are between a rock and hard place when it comes to just surviving, and nurseries are often the only solution.

On the other hand, if any of this is actually true, then as a society, we need to start having this debate/conversation - surely?

Thanks foxy, glad to see a positive view of nurseries from a carer's point of view. I wish there were more like you.

This morning I was in a bad mood with ds when I dropped him off (long story). The nursery worker picked up on it and rushed over to him. There are wonderful carers with a genuine affection for children. I cannot praise them enough.

Brangelina, the rates for fulltime private nursery in Milan are approaching the lower end of UK standards. I assume it is an option only for fairly well-off families.

loulou, well done on your sons' nursery. Most important is that your sons are settled and happy. If the nursery already has a long wait list, I don't think the prize will increase fees, after all what is long wait list, compared to a longer one .

Probably already been said, but it's a long thread: I thought it was the length of time a child spends in nursery that is the issue. For every hour a child spends then problems in the child as pointed out in the article begin to increase.
I see no problem with nurserys up to a point; it's the fifty hour weeks I find outrageous. I for one would NEVER take a job that means I spend fifty hours in an office, so I wouldn't ever expect a small child to endure the same hours n an establishment or institution.

IMHO I would think around four hours a day is ideal for a child to be in a social environment and long enough to be away from his/her parent.

This is my longest ever thread.

Would just like to add its meant to say cant afford it not can afford it in last post!!!!

JUST - I wish it had been a funnier one...

I agree with Spaceman's comment that the issue is the length of time a young child is spending in the nursery.

Although I have said that I was impressed with the level of care DS had in his Nursery, this was on a part time basis and I don't think that even the best nurseries would be the best thing for a child on a full time basis.

okay loulou.

Just to explain how and why for nursery staff children at our place... All the nursery nurses who are mothers at our nursery have had thier children in the babyroom at some point, which does say something, however most have also chosen to work in the babyroom at the same time. This has had a really good effect on the room as the mother's (typically exceptionally high) standards for her own child's care are applied equally to all the babies - it is always a good standard to live up to! It also gives a real family feel.

We tend to enforce our own high standards rather than avoiding nurseries out of fear of lower standards. Those poor pre-children nursery nurses that have to work with us though!

"however most have also chosen to work in the babyroom at the same time"

Have they moved out of the babyroom with their dc?

I think that's good planning on their part. With their babies while they need them and being paid for it too.

at my nursery parents aren't allowed to work with their own children.in any nursery setting.considered a conflict of interest

parents who are staff are rotated so not in with own child

motherducky, lol. My mothering standards are rather low, maybe not at baby stage, but really falls off a cliff once they got to pre-school stage. My dcs' carers (nursery, aupair) were more patient and game to play with them.

Glad to see you are setting the standards in your room.

well spaceman, you may have a choice NOT to take a job that is a 50 hour job but plenty of people might not have that choice or it might be a good opportunity...

my working week is way longer than 50 hours because of the commuting either end... even in a standard 9 to 5 job, if you only had an hour's commute, your week is 50 hours and many many people commute for a lot longer than that.

some of us stay in the babyroom (myself included), others go to work in Early years, most of us rotate every few years anyway. I think the conflict of interest depends very much on how much the nursery nurse/mother genuinely cares about the other children TBH. Realistically though I think it is just a diplomatic way of avoiding the stress for the other nursery staff , and the manager occasionally being challenged by nursery nurse, but then of course they lose out on all the benefits I mentioned above.