Feeling so guilty...baby at nursery 5 full days a week

[London7]

Hi, my one-year-old baby goes to nursery 5 days a week from 8am to 6pm. I'd love to be a stay-at-home mum but financially it is just not viable. I feel so guilty about leaving her at nursery for so many hours a day (it feels so wrong that somebody else will be doing all those things her Mummy does every day for her...) Anyone with the same dilemma?

had put money on you looking for opinions for a piece in a newspaper but just checked and you have posted before (I know, I know, shouldn't doubt people).

Look, 8 years ago, my baby was in nursery from 7.30/8 till 6. I shouldn't have done it, it wasn't the right choice and I realised this fairly quickly. She was only 4 months at the time so it's a bit different and I think at one, it's not SO bad but if I could do it all again, I'd get a nanny right from the start.

You might think it will cost you a lot more but nurseries are so expensive now, that I doubt it will. Really search, properly search, for someone you really like. Check their references and double check. And then entrust them with the care of your little one. You'll be happier and your baby will get care in your own home which is probably far better at that age (in my opinion)! Or look for a childminder if the nanny option is too expensive.

But don't feel guilty. If you have to work, you have to work. As long as it's a decent nursery, tbh, she'll probably be fine. I just don't like them for babies as I feel they don't get enough attention.

and it is fine to work you know

but you must be happy with your childcare, well as happy as you can be, because not have peace of mind over that while you are working will drive you insane

and as I said on another thread, if the OP is in London, as I am, a 50 hour week once you take into account the commute is not unusual at all

ssd.. thats exactly what the nursery staff do in my nursery

ds is there 3 days a week 7.45 till 5.30/5.45. He loves the balance of time at home and time at nursery. But he had a wobble last week said he didnt want me to go The staff were brilliant, not only did they distract and engage him , they called me mid morning to say he was having a ball

When I picked him up at night the staff took time to tell me how smiley he was all day and that he was just trying me and not to feel bad

glad you are not one of the staff in my nursery ...

I think it's a real shame that any discussion of childcare isn't allowed to be in the least bit critical in case in upsets working mothers. It's important to discuss childcare and what can be done to improve it for children.

I have worked full time in a nursery, and I agree that full time nursery care for babies in not the best choice. There were babies doing longer hours than I was, and it did make me and other nursery nurses sad for them. Obviously we do our absolute best to care for them, but group care is just not geared up to meet a baby's needs - that's the unpleasant truth of it. As children get closer to about three you see such a change in how they cope with the environment and actually enjoy and get lots out of being in nursery. Under 2s don't generally. Some of the more robust ones cope really well, but most don't. It's certainly not an environment I would choose for a baby of mine, and certainly not full time.

A crap nursery is probably better than a crap childminder, but a good childminder is better for babies than the best nursery in my opinion.

Btw, I don't think all mum's should stay at home. I don't think there is anything wrong in working full time. I think good childcare can be a really positive force in a child's life, and I'm not at all anti-nurseries!

But, we do have to consider what kind of childcare is best for children, and I do not believe that nurseries are in a baby's best interests.

this is such an emotive topic.

My dd has been in nursery f/t since she was 4 months old.

Please believe me when I say I can't work reduced or flexible hours. My dh and I earn the same money and we also have to support his children from his first marriage. To work p/t in my company I would have to take a much less senior job - so salary would reduce in both ways (then we couldn't afford our bills). We don't go on holiday or have an extravagant lifestyle.

IMO it is easier to jack in your career/job to be a sahm if you earn less or have a partner who earns loads. Women like me have a much harder choice. I also like working.

I agree that maybe nursery is not a great environment for a baby (but my dd has always loved it) but how many sahms or grannies give a perfect environment either? We should support other mums/ parents not constantly bloody think we are always right - it pisses me off.

OP - fwiw my dd (18mo) is happy, sociable, confident and loving. She adores the staff at nursery but I am pleased to say she is far more attached to her mummy and daddy (that was one of my biggest fears).

I try not to get involved in this debate too much but I'd just like to offer a different perspective. The key I think, is knowing whether your baby and you are happy. Everything else is just noise. If you're not, and she/he is not, then perhaps a change is warranted.

But everyone else staing bluntly 'it's fine' or 'it's too much' have no real idea aout what is fine in your situation.

Most nurseries are good, some are awful. Are the staff loving and caring to your child? Does she have a keyworker who pays attention to her needs? And to yours? Is she stimulated and having a routine that works for her and enough sleep and the right food? Does someone pick her up when she cries and cuddle her? Do they follow the suggestions and patterns you want for her, within reason? Do the staff stay on or do they constantly change? Do they have training and breaks and a good manager who is responsive to comments?

'Too long' for a baby is often based on personal gut feelings but which are in reality based on ideologies of parenting, motherhood in particular. The 'stay at home' mother is a peculiarly modern phenomenon since the Victorians invented it. Before middle class women had husbands wealthy enough to keep them at home, they simply went out to work with their kids, farmed them out to their mothers or other mothers or older kids. Communal childrearing in this sense is far more 'natural' and historical than the individualist, romanticised version people idealise today. It doesn't mean it is better or worse either way but I don't think the choice of a well-regulated, kind nursery with enthusiastic staff should make anyone feel guilty.

wow what a kick off! I used a private nursery with dd1 once she hit 2 years old as she was bored at nannys house I worked as alittle as I could, and hated leaving her there tbh. I work less hours with dd2 now and it works for us.
I know OP said she had no choice but to work FT but sometimes it is possible to change some things. Like cutting back, working though lunch hours, working from home ect. Its a long day for little ones, and having worked in some terrible nurseries, its not always nice But there is also some fab ones too.

PS second what others have said about having some flexibility if you can: could you work your lunchtimes in order to take Friday afternoon off? Or work weekend evenings in order to do 4 days midweek? You might find this just makes `you happier.

it does look like the Op has fled, which is a shame.

But nine hours in a nursery for a baby is a very, very long time. that's actually a longer day than most adults work.

I don't know what - but there has to be a better solution doesn't there? The mum is distressed and the baby is missing out - nobody's happy so why continue?

I always find this is the only topic on mn in which anyone with a less than completely supportive attitude to the op is flamed.
The only posters given a 'real kicking' on this thread have been the ones who asked the op if she had really considered every option with regard to working hours and childcare.

And as for the 'luxury' lifestyle of sahms, it is, ime, often sahms who have sacrificed luxuries in order to be at home.

I have lots of symathy for the op, who clearly has few choices, but find it very irritating that giving your opinions on this subject deems you unsupportive/unsisterly.

frasersmummy, to ssd "glad you are not one of the staff in my nursery", I don't work in a nursery now so I won't be working in your nursery so you can stop worrying!!

but just ask yourself, if your son was crying all day do you really think the staff would tell you? how would you react? would you think "oh, I'll cut down on the amount of time ds is at nursery" or would you think "they can't handle him well, I'll try him elsewhere"? hmmm, I'm glad your son is settled, but don't ever forget, these nurseries are run for profit and they won't make any profits without a good quota of kids attending, so its in their interests to tell the parents how happy their kids are there.

I don't see many examples of totally supportive posts, saying 'well done you, your baby's fine, stop worrying'. Most of them are asking about the possibility of more flexible working or asking about other ways the OP might manage things, alternative childcare etc. But what isn't helpful is a blanket 'that's far too long for a baby to be in childcare'. What is the point of that? To make the OP feel more guilty? She's feeling like that already. Of course the OP has fled - what's the point of her posting again when she's already been tried and convicted of being a dreadful mother on the strength of three sentences?

And it is a luxury to be a full time SAHM - not all families can afford the additional expense of having children and drop a wage. I'm not talking about having holidays, for a lot of people it's about having a roof over your head.

And Lupisina - thank you for making the point about Victorian constructs - I've made that point several times in the past on these sorts of threads and they always get ignored unfortunately.

Knew this would kick off. I totally empathise with the OP. My ds was in nursery four full days a week as a baby, I had no choice, we needed my wage, being a SAHM was not an option for me.

Some women do not work for pocket money, they work to contribute to keeping the roof over the head of the family and pay the bills. If I geive up work we do not have enough money to live in the house we are in, and before anyone asks it's a modest 3 bed terraced house, not a mansion.

So it's not always about giving up a few luxuries.

And being able to have the choice to be a SAHM is a bloody luxury imo.

Snap Spicemonstor!

spice, the only folk I know who never have holidays, wear Oxfam clothes, have 1 car and a house too small for their family (thats never done up with new furnishings) are SAHM's who gave up an income to be at home for their kids or who changed jobs eg. working term time for crap money to be there at the school gates.

all the 2 income families I know live a more comfortable lifestyle than than the 1 income families

its a hard choice but to be told you have the luxury of being at home really grates

Agree ssd.

The only WAG style sahms I have ever seen have been in the media.
Spicemonster, we couldn't 'simply afford to drop a wage',we downsized our house in order for me to be able to stay at home, I gave up my car and cut back on luxuries.

Not for everyone, I'm sure, but I find it irritating that those sacrifices are dismissed by those who have chosen not to or are unable to make them.

I'm not dismissing the sacrifices you've made to stay at home! I know it's hard for some people. But although all the SAHMs I know are very wealthy, it isn't beyond my wit to know that it isn't the case for everyone. Just as I'd hope it isn't beyond you ssd/frank to realise that it isn't always the case that all two working parent families live the life of reilly.

Best not to make assumptions that everyone is the same as you really

Agree spicemonster

Where I live, wealthy one income families are few and far between (I am in Yorkshire btw)

I would just like to add that when I was agonising about leaving my job, I would have been relieved to have some support in that. As it was I was surrounded by people telling me how it would be foolish, that we couldn't afford it, that I would regret it, that I would be bored, that my child would be okay and I was being self-indulgent. All things of that kind.
I did eventually find someone who didn't think that I was mad to consider sahm and I found that a huge support when I finally did make the decision.

despite my earlier ranting post I want to say that this is exactly what I meant.

We ought to support all parents in whatever choices they make for the families. There is no right or wrong answer to any of this.

silkcushion - I disagree, there are better and worse choices to be made. The quality and funding of childcare in this country needs to improve massively, but there are still better and worse options.

obviously some nurseries/childminders/parents are better than others at looking after children.

Parents generally try and do what they feel is right given their particular circumstances though. There is no 'one size fits all' solution to this problem.

I went back to work when my DD was 10 months old. For the first 5 months she went to nursery 2 full days, had 1 day at home with daddy and had 4 days with me. That was the ideal for me but it could only be temporary (we were lucky to be able to get a mortgage payment break, or I couldn't have done it at all).

Me and DH earn the same so cutting down or giving up work loses us a huge % of our income. With 3 older children at home we couldn't "downsize" from our 3 bed terrace. I think it's great that some people can do it, but just because you can doesn't mean other people's circumstances will enable them to do so. It's not a case of cutting out luxuries but losing the roof over our head.

DD has been in FT 8-4.30 nursery since she was 15 mo. She goes in with a smile every morning and is full of what she has been doing. I'd rather not have her in FT daycare but I'm happy with her nursery and the staff there.