GF: Love her or hate her? the Great Debate. Please leave all weapons at the door and NO stomping off, offended. OK?

[SoupDragon]

OK, to avoid the Great Debate cluttering up other threads where pro-GF mums are asking for help, I've started this one. It may have been done before...

If you read another thread and have nothing helpful but want to share your GF feelings, do it here!

I guess it could get heated here so please don't get offended and storm off in a huff as has happened elsewhere with other contentious issues - just avoid this thread

OK, for what it's worth, I have no problems with GF except for the fact that all babies are different so her rigid routine may not fit in with your baby. You should maybe see her routines as flexible - half an hour or an hour either way isn't going to make much difference is it? And I think that before 6 weeks is way too young to be messing with feeding routines, especially if you're breastfeeding. It can mess up your supply in theose important first weeks and I think this is why breastfeeding counsellors seem to hate her so much.

Right, I'm off to duck beneaththe parapet and let you get on with it!

I am a SAHM who gave up a good career in teaching to be that. I went back after dd was born, and I hated it. What had been a fulfilling, interesting, stimulating career was a drudgery to get over so I could be at home with dd. In fact, my work suffered as I would no longer stay late or do tha amout of evening work necessary to do a good job. I stuck at it for over a year, but when I was pg with ds and really ill, we decided (dh and I between us) that I would quit. In fact, I was so miserable I didn't even wait and take maternity leave, I just quit. It was the most liberating experience of my life.
I love being a SAHM. I keep up professional interests by running inservice courses on my particular interests, marking exams, doing very odd days of supply if needed. I am also training to be a bfc, and I run a tourism business and a small, not very profitable craft business. My children have a day a week at the childminder, so I can do these things.
My husband earns enough for us to live, although not very extravagently. I was amazed at comments on being 'supported' and that someone said her ds did, or had considered, paying her half his salary. All our money goes into one pot. From that, bills and mortgage are paid, savings come out, we each take some 'mad money' into a personal account and spend the rest as we see fit. He earns money out of the home, I work (hard) in it, and the money he is able to make is ours, as we both earn it.
I think I would have been happy to be part time, if dh was also part time. But he can't, and we couldn't have lived on my salary. For me personally it was important that one parent (and because it was more important to me, as I was miserable leaving dd with a childminder) was eith the children while they were tiny. I am really glad things have worked out the way they have.
I do plan to go back to pain employment outside the home when they are at school themselves, but that wont be for 5 years, hoooray!!

Good typo at the end there. I did mean paid, not pain employment!

Wow, leave a little thread alone for a few days and see where it got too!

I don't expect that only women should mind the wee bairns, or see a problem with men giving up careers to mind kids, and indeed, I know men who have done and very enjoyably. I cheered when HIllary Clinton snapped, "What should I have done? Stayed home and baked cookies?"

I think nobody read the bit where I said I try not to judge when people say they have to work for financial reasons. Because sometimes that's hard truth, and sometimes people are saying it when really, they barely make enough to cover childcare/commuting costs. It's only when I talk to someone at length that I realise whether they really "had" to, or just decided to work.

I just honestly would like to hear from parents where both work full time, but don't necessarily "have to" because of financial reasons, how they view their roles as parents, and their children's place in their lives. I don't know if it's "right" or "wrong" for both parents to choose to work full time, but I am curious how 2 FT working parents justify all that time away from their young children. Don't you feel detached & usurped? I would.

I appreciated reading JanZ post.

I seriously wondered if I should have a child and if it would all feel like a terrible mistake. I seriously considered aborting my first baby because the nausea was horrible and I didn't know if I could be a good mother. Heck, still don't know if I'm a good mother. But I am dedicated. I might not have been. I might have decided it was a mistake after the baby was born. I'm not saying that's why all FT working mothers work, but it could have been a motive for me.

My mom worked full time from when I was 4 months old. Broke her heart to leave me, but had to because she was supporting a family of 5. She had to work; some women choose to work full time, that's what I was curious about.

I disagree that women have always left their young children in the care of others and this is suposed to be some sort of species norm; I know my DS is never willingly parted from me. If we worked on the land, he might play nearby, but he wouldn't willingly stray miles away from me.

I got very bored being a 100% SAHM. I have friends but it's a small town & I get bored easily. I feel very guilty about working 2days/week because my kids sometimes wail when I leave them at nursery, but I'd be a miserable mother if I didn't work at all. I would hate to work full time, though. It just wouldn't feel like I was much of a mom at all (MY PERSONAL FEELINGS).

Incidentally, DH supports the family to end of this month, but after will be my turn to support him while he tries to start a business; he'll have to mind kids 2 mornings a week. I'm really pleased he'll be spending much more time with the kids.

Oh, and for the record: I have no views on MMR!!

Zebra I do know of a woman with a baby aged about two who works full time and so does her husband. They are incredibly wealthy so it is not for financial necessity. They have a full time nanny because at the weekend both partners go off to do their own hobbies.They see very little of their child.
I probably should not say this as it has no relevence to this discussion but the child is NOT the world's most appealing. (that is me being tactful)
They are quite an odd couple OMO and in no way typical of families where both parents work.
In lucid moments she has expressed the notion she should not have had a child because she does not "enjoy" it. So yes, such families do exist .
I was considering recommending mumsnet to her but maybe I had better not

Zebra, can I just say that whether women work full time through necessity or choice, the suggestion that by doing so you risk felling "detached or usurped" from your children is not helpful. Presumably your partner works full time - do you feel detached and usurped from him?

"I disagree that women have always left their young children in the care of others and this is suposed to be some sort of species norm".
Zebra, since the 18th century and the Industrial Revolution in the developed world, working class women have had to leave their children from a young age. Usually this was in the care of older children, who of course had no education themselves or no-one more responsible to take care of their own needs. That's a tradition of over 200 years, like it or not, of hundreds of thousands of women being obliged to work outside the home in order to prevent starvation or eviction. And in those days, there was no Social Security, no NHS and no interest whatsoever in the wellbeing of these working families. Managing to house and bring up a family on one income has been the province of the middle and professional classes in the UK for much of that time.
At least these days we are fortunate enough to have childminders, inspected daycare and qualified nannies (OK, not nearly enough of them, and tax relief on childcare costs would be nice). So those of us who do have to work outside the home, so that we actually have one to come home to, can at least be sure that their children are well looked-after and happy. And there are finally also some state benefits to help parents who are not able to work outside the home.
Prior to the Industrial Revolution, it was the upper classes who almost universally handed their children over to wet-nurses, often far away in the country rather than the "unhealthy" cities; the children were then raised by governesses and tutors; until the end of the Middle Ages boys were sent away from their parents' home at 7 or 8 to be squires to a knight elsewhere.
Of course there are documented exceptions to this pattern of behaviour - but entrusting children (willingly or not) to others' care has been done for hundreds of years.

Hooray for Marina!. I just wanted to say how nice it is see so many positive accounts of women combining work with motherhood on this thread. The media coverage is so often so negative that it is refreshing to hear the alternative viewpoint for once.

My new job is fantastically busy so I am pushed for time but also wanted to say that of all the qualms I have had about being a working mother, none of them have related to the happiness and well being of my children. This is so self-evident that it has just never been an issue.

Just to confirm - dh and I don't NEED to work ft - we choose to. In fact ds was planned on the condition that I DID intend to return to work - a condition I was happy to agree to, as I knew my own character.

As it happens, as of Friday, dh is a free man. BUT, this is only because he wants to explore opportunities to develop his own business, and the time was right to leave his work (in fact, he got a package, but he had been wanting to leave for ages, which was the reason why it was important I went back to work). After a couple of months off (I'm insisting on a minimum of a month, as he's been really stressed), he'll start "working" again - he's already had loads of offers, but will take his time to make the right decision. We're fortunate in that we have a good financial cushion.

Ds is going to continue to go into the childminder's full time during this period - but dh's intention is to take him out when he feels like it, maybe to go swimming or to take a walk to the swing park or over to my parents.

My personal ideal would be to work 4 days a week - but the extra "free" day not necessarily (but would often be) dedicated to ds - but also for time for ME! Unfortunately, the nature of my work is that I would probably work 5/5 of the time for 4/5 of the pay. However, I may review that if/when we have another one.

I have to say that my comfort with being a full time (paid) working mum (NOT that SAHMs aren't working mums too!) is helped by the fact that
a) I enjoy my job,
b) I have a very supportive boss (who is herself a mum to 2 young kids and works hard to maintain a healthy work/home balance)
c) dh is very much a hands on dad and we share ds' upbringing equally (in fact I can go days without changing ds' nappy, as dh does it every weekday morning and we take it in turns to get him ready for bed in the evening),
d) the childminder is literally the house next door and is more like a mini nursery as there are three of them (her, her mum and her MIL) who run it, so there is never any problem with cover/illness etc,
e) We live close to work, so I can drop ds off at 8 am and be in the office by 8.15 (8.30 once I start cycling!) and leave just after 5 and be home by 5.30 (the Kingston bridge is more of a problem on the way home)
f) ds is a manifestly happy, contented, alert, intelligent and confident child, who has benefited from the contact with the other children next door, but still knows who his mum and dad are and gives us special affection - but also the special tantrums (he is 2 after all!)
g) My parents and dh's sister/mother are happy to provide back-up when we need it - which in fact is not that often (so infrequently in fact that we are worrying that ds is not having ENOUGH time with his grandparents!)
h) My own parents worked when I was young - my mum going off to uni when my db started school (until then we couldn't afford it as she wouldn't have got a grant and my dad, as a "foreigner" was already paying his way through medical school) and they always gave us an excellent role model of balancing home and work life. Dh had the same example from his own parents.

But again, I want to emphasis that this is what works for US - dh, ds and me. Everyone has their own individual characters and circumstances to take into consideration.

I have to admit to one fly in the ointment: I would dearly love a cleaner (as in, there are better things to do with what time I DO have at home!), but dh won't entertain the idea. He thinks he does most of the cleaning - but although he hoovers and thinks he's the tidy one, he doesn't really realise how much else needs to (or should!) be done!

Sending 8 year old boys away from home to become squires or knighs ... now there's a thought!

Thanks for that entertaining and thought-provoking history lesson, Marina.

I agree with a great deal that has been said about the historical need for women to work outside the home. In addition we now live very isolated lives. In the past our children would have been surounded by all their cousins, and women would have shared the child care between sisters, sisters in law and often mothers. Now that we have the geographical isolated, nuclear family, this sort of thing no longer happers, or at least, is far less common. So SAHM are often far more stressed as the support network is not there, and part time work is harder to organised than in the past.

I have been skimming through this thread but haven't time to read it all at the moment but thought I would add my pennys worth.

I work part-time (actually increasing my days in the office from 2 to 3 as from next week) but what would you suggest otherwise in my situation?

Am now on my own (husband left on 02.09.02) leaving me with 3 children - aged 10, 5 and just turned 1. I have always worked part-time but am obviously now in a worse situation financially than I have been before.

I have never been on benefits (and I am not criticising anyone that is or has been) and because I am a house owner would not qualify for a council house. Although saying that, I do now qualify work WFTC and husband has transferred children's tax credit from himself to me so I am getting more help financially than I was.

I am now in the process of selling the family home (to pay off ex-husband) and am buying somewhere smaller to live. Have swopped to an interest only mortgage but, by buying somewhere smaller, will be able to revert back to a repayment mortgage.

I have two options in my life at the moment - carry on as I am - live in the same house, work same hours, etc. etc. or try and improve my life and I have decided to try and improve my (and my children's lives) and this will be done by moving somewhere smaller (although still 3 bedrooms), therefore less money on bills, less mortgage to pay, more disposable income each month and also working 1 extra day a week in the office.

My mum looks after my children the days I work and will have them the one extra day for me too.

I would have loved to have been a SAHM but, unfortunately, ex-h was never well enough paid for it to even be a consideration and, even before DD1 was born, I always knew I would have to work (even if only part-time).

Just to clarify Zebra - I didn't mean that it was the norm to leave your child with others, but rather that the capacity to care for and bond with a child was common to all humans - not just the ones you gave birth to - as some here have implied. What I dislike are the comments that it is somehow human nature for mothers to stay at home and not go out to work. While clearly lots of mums here feel it's in THEIR nature, it's not a universal thing - it's human nature to bond with a child and care for it, but it's also human nature to enjoy doing a job and to seek status and wealth from it (not just male nature). In our society, that sometimes means sharing childcare. My parents had five kids and worked full-time (nights as well) - no question that I feel bonded to them, and in no way detached, despite being cared for when young by other people.

And the obvious answer to your question of why have kids if you're not with them 24/7 is, of course, to pass on your genes!!!

Zebra

You said you would be interested in the feelings of those who work full time and their views on their relationship with their children.

Here are mine, although I guess one person does not make a representative sample.

My DS (now 9 months) was not quite planned but welcome. I had some severe problems adjusting to his presence in my life for the first two months (looking back on it, probably mild PND) so I got a part-time helper to lift the burden from me a little and give me some space. This was a great success and has probably given me the confidence that DS enjoys being cared for by others.

Since then, he went to nursury (at 4 months old) and I work full time. For the record, I probably don't have to, although giving it up would mean large sacrifices.

I do not feel, in any way, remote or usurped from him. He responds well to several carers which in my view is a positive thing but he knows his mum and dad and obviously loves us (when we're not changing his nappy ).

I do sometimes regret what I have sacrificed to have him (don't we all) but I can say categorically that he is not a mistake that I am trying to undo.

My decision to work is to me so uncontroversial that I don't generally discuss it. I'm not cut out to be a full time mum (don't know how you do it) and I know that with the same strength of feeling that many mums know they could not bear to part with their babies.

So there it goes - strange but true - some working mothers do it because they're happy and their babies are happy. It's not the only reason, but it's still a true one.

Lots of mothers here have given their reasons to return to work, but maybe we should hear why SAHM's do not work? As a SAHM myself, I can see where Zebra is coming from and think her posts are being unfairly judged. She is speaking from her own experience and only putting forward her views, she is not judging anyone as she has repeatedly said. I could have gone back to work when dd was born, I didn't feel I was 'cut out' to be a mother, still don't! But (my opinion only) I didn't want to leave my dd in charge of a woman or women I did not personally know, who could not possibly have the same regard and love for my child that I did. At least I know that if I don't want my child to be reared on a diet of Teletubbies then she won't be. No disrespect to childminders here.

My dd has always been a clingy child and very nervous of strangers, she would scream and cry if left with my own family, let alone anyone else! This was another reason I decided to stay at home with her. Now she is 2 I figure she needs to interact with other children and find her independance, I also need time away from her. So she goes to a nursery once a week for three hours whilst I'm at college. She has been 6 times now and absolutely loathes it, she screams and cries before we even turn the corner to where the nursery is, they have to peel her off me! This breaks my heart every week and I simply cannot imagine doing this to her more than once a week, but this is my experience of my child, not a judgement of others.

And as I have said on another thread, I have heard so many horror stories about nurseries and childminders that I wouldn't trust anyone! Some nursery nurses are notoriously under-paid and seem to attract only those under 21. Mothers have told me tales of nurses meeting boyfriends whilst leaving their charges unsupervised, of little ones coming home with cuts and bruises that are unaccounted for, and just recently in the paper there has been the childminder who deliberately fed an allergic boy peanut butter after telling the others his mother was paranoid, and burning a little girl's hand. In the states there are cameras hidden in teddy bears to keep tabs on the children and their carers. Personally I wouldn't trust ANYONE with my dd apart from myself and dh. Even her granny feeds her sweets when told not to (hence choking incident). I know from my experience I would not work unless I absolutely had to. But I know some of you enjoy your work and don't want to give it up, that's your perogative, but equally do not condemn those who choose to have differing views than yours. None of us are judging here, we are just putting across our own views and opinions which have every right to be heard.

So the second most controversial topic after GF is Working vs SAHMs and the thread has morphed into that! Fantastic

I went back to work when my dd was five months - had to to pay the mortgage. (oh, and once I had got used to the idea, actually enjoyed being back, bad mother me!) I feel I was lucky that her childminder was my neighbour's so even before I was pregnant I had heard wonderful reports. I DO and always have, trusted her with everything from safety to tv watching hours. OK, so she's not me, but things can happen when mummy and daddy are looking after our children can't they, and we all need to leave our children playing on their own sometimes to do the chores, make lunch, go on mumsnet etc!

I think what I am trying to say is that we all have to do what works for us, we should not generalise at all about people's choices, childminders, nannies etc. I think that the majority of people in these professions do it because they genuinely love children and if it fits in with their lifestyle, well great. Why not?

OOh, I think I'm rambling. dh out at gig, dd played up until 10.00pm, and I'm destressing courtesy of Mumsnet!

I echo so many of the sentiments expressed here, even those that are opposites! I have had similar experiences to you, Rhubarb, in that DS had apoplexy on being left at nursery and never settled. Before that, we had a baptism of fire with the (registered) childminder from hell. We've just been unlucky I guess. Now we have a lovely minder, but it still doesn't come naturally to me to leave him, even though I need to for my sanity (and to get the work done, but not F/T). So I feel very much on the fence here. Those for whom it works, well done, but I seem to have a very clingy little man, who takes after his mum (I hated being in F/T daycare when I was a child.)

I think some of the comments below on childminders / nannies etc need to be seen in the context that one child a week in Britain is murdered by its parents. The story about the Australian Nanny feeding a child a peanut butter made big news precisely because it is relatively uncommon. Yes we have all heard stories about childcarers but so we have about parents/ relatives. Some people are unlucky but in my experience, parents generally become alert to potential problems with the quality of childcare early and react quickly.

SAHM?s often refer to child carers as ?strangers? or people they ?hardly know?. Nothing could be further from the truth. In our own case, our Nanny is the adult after my husband and I who knows and possibly loves our children the most, having known and looked after them since they were very young. And I do believe that it is impossible to spend a lot of time with a child on a daily basis without forming a very strong bond of affection. This of course applies to keyworkers at nursery and childminders too. Nonetheless, children never lose sight of who their parents are and just like you still know your partner better than anyone despite him spending the bulk of his time at work, so it is with your children.

And finally, it seems to me that to have a truly successful home life where both parents work full time requires parents to take a partnership approach to both child care and home life generally. Whatever the other issues are, I personally think this is a very good thing.

Rhubarb, I haven?t seen any condemnatory comments from working mothers re SAHM?s on Mumsnet.

I have to agree on the childcare thing. I have had to work full time and have had a variety of childcare. I finally have gone for a nanny and this was the best choice I ever made. To start with she was a stranger, but now she is a moved loved and totally trusted member of the household. She makes my life possible and knows that, therefore I can go to work knowing my kids are with the person who loves them almost as much as me.

I agree with Bells and Crunchie. We are lucky to have a small nursery with a low staff turnover and high calibre, mature, qualified staff. Thanks to the settling in period, when I was welcomed into the nursery routine and had a lot of opportunity to talk to the staff and observe their procedures, they were people I felt I knew well before ds even started there. Three years on, they love him and he loves them. They bring their pets to the nursery, sometimes their older children visit and talk about big school to the top class, they share lovely toys and equipment that their own children have outgrown. Because they are pros and mostly mothers (and one father!) themselves, they have given us a lot of useful advice about child psychology and rearing. They have been much more of a support to us than any of our family members because they are on the spot. They are NOT strangers and never have been.

I work part-time but it is not out of financial necessity but more for my own personal wellbeing. I love my job, love getting my working "uniform" on and spending a few days a week doing the stuff I've always done.
Thought Marina's piece about the origins of working mothers was excellent but its worth noting that the use of wet nurses was not just restricted to the upper classes but was widespread accross all classes. Women working in cottage industries: milliners, seamstresses, bakers, washerwomen etc. etc. all used wet nurses and these were one of the many causes of high infant mortality. Even rural workers either had to take their babies with them or leave them with a neighbour, relative etc who was also breastfeeding.
I also agree with those who refute the view of leaving their baby with "strangers" when they talk about a child carer. I spent time getting to know my childminder before my ds spent any time with her alone and she quickly became a huge source of advice and support. I also spent a couple of sessions at various nursery schools before I put ds down for a place at one so that I would feel confident about who my child was being left with.
I think one of the great things about families is how flexible they can be. I think it is great that we have so much flexibility today to work out lots of different arrangements that suit our lives. I am probably missing some really key point here, but I just can't see what the big deal is. Life is out there for the living and you only get one crack at it, some mums go out to paid work and some don't. If you are happy with your childcare then where's the problem?
PS: Bells what's the new job?

rhubarb, you describe the problems you have with your daughter crying when left in the college creche. Faced with that scenario, I can well see why you feel worried about leaving your child in the care of others.

My sons on the whole have loved their time at nursery and at their childminders, running away from me with hardly a backward glance. However, I've always had more problems with settling them into creches, either at college or at leisure centres, especially when they were around age 2 years. If your daughter does not settle at your college creche, it might be worth considering other childcare options.

IMO it is a great mistake to think one unhappy experience means any other childcare is out of
the window.

Rhubarb, if your daughter was not upset with being left, do you think you'd still hold the views you express in your last message? You seem very negative about the idea of 'strangers' looking after your daughter, yet reading posts here it must be clear to you that many other parents have had good experiences.

It seems a great shame, for you, your daughter and dh, if you dismiss the idea of childminding/nursery entirely.

Agree completely with Bells, Marina et al about childminders. My daughter has 2 childminders and sees them, especially the one she has had from being 4 months old, as extra mummies. Frankly, I don't feel usurped or pushed out by this at all, I think it's great that she has more people she can love and who care for her. Her first childminder certainly sees her as the daughter she never had and, in fact, babysat for me last night, for no charge!

For me, bringing my daughter up alone, it's been particularly useful because my daughter has experience of 2 very warm, close, loving families who have their own kids, who play with and look after my daughter as well (in a caring way, not on their own I mean! ) I felt it would have been a very intense and, possibly, not too healthy experience if it had just been me and her all the time - have no family close by and would have loathed mother and toddler groups.

Having said all that, I work because I have to, no-one else is going to support us, certainly not her father! However, if I had the choice, I wouldn't work, I really WOULD love to spend all day lounging in front of the telly, especially now my daughter is at school!

Rhubarb, just another thought. Do you think that, possibly, your daughter is upset at nursery BECAUSE it is only 3 hours per week? Maybe if it was longer she would have more time to establish friendships and feel more at ease. Maybe!