Am I disadvantaging my baby by not sending him to nursery?

[nurserydilemma3]

My baby boy is six months old and I’m starting to think about going back to work. Financially it would make the most sense for me to become a SAHM until he’s three and gets the 30 free hours - and this is what I’d ideally like to do from a personal POV as well. However, a lot of my friends put their children into nursery from age 1 or 2, in most cases so they could go back to work.

I was chatting to one friend yesterday who said it has been very beneficial for her boy to go to nursery early as it’s something he really enjoys and it has made him more confident socially.

So my question is - would I be actively disadvantaging my child by not putting him into nursery before the age of 3? Should we try to find some extra money so we can send him one or two days a week when he’s 1 or 2? Or will it be ok just to keep him home with me for the first three years of his life?

Any thoughts/advice welcome.

But snuggy it's absolutely possible not to be a 'high flying' woman and yet still enjoy your job, get satisfaction from it, and enjoy the sort of adult relationships you get at work, and which you won't get spending all day with a baby/toddler.

@CrunchyNutNC

But snuggy it's absolutely possible not to be a 'high flying' woman and yet still enjoy your job, get satisfaction from it, and enjoy the sort of adult relationships you get at work, and which you won't get spending all day with a baby/toddler.

No but its equally possible to enjoy being a SAHM more than work. I don't get the negativity towards SAHMs on here at all.

I'd say the only advantage my two received from nursery was interacting with different adults. The nursery staff would often rotate, meaning they would have multiple "key workers". This has helped massively at school as we've had many supply teachers, and my girls just crack on with it. I've seen many children cling onto their parents legs when they realise it isn't their normal teacher. Academically wise they were at the same points of those who didn't go to nursery.

@Hardbackwriter

Totally agree with everything you wrote. I feel so guilty sometimes when I even go and have a shower or drink a cup of tea when I should be PARENTING.

But the whole concept of parenting is really a relatively new concept.

"The nursery staff would often rotate, meaning they would have multiple "key workers". This has helped massively at school as we've had many supply teachers, and my girls just crack on with it."

But you don't know how they would have been if they hadn't had a variety of key workers.

A child that has a secure bond with one or several carers is the best advantage they can have. It doesn't matter who they are loved by really, as long as they are loved.

Children under the age of 2 don’t “benefit” from nursery but a good nursery won’t do any harm.

From about 2 there are definite benefits especially if children come from a deprived home, which is why the government funds part time nursery for deprived 2 year olds.

From 3 almost all children will benefit from at least part time nursery/preschool.

Having worked in early years for decades I think 2/3 is better. Hardly any other professional I know has sent their child to nursery before 3. My ds didn’t go til 3 and dd 2 hasn’t gone yet. Both sociable in groups of children and adults.

Personally my child adored nursery and still talks about it and has nursery friends we still see.
I think you also need to think about your career. How easy will it be to enter the labour market after a lengthy absence?
I also found it much easier to work when ds was at nursery .... it's when they start school that you need the flexibility. As i was established in my workplace it was relatively easy to negotiate flexible working when DS started school.

My son starts nursery next month, he's 9 months. I don't think there will be huge benefits for him at this age but I don't think it will disadvantage him either. If your friend has a baby at nursery she'll be invested in finding the positives.

This, it's always presented as SAHM vs high flying career woman on here with nothing in between

It's also a lot of rosy-reminiscence/ wishful thinking from women who did give up on or cut down on work. Apparently everyone on MN would be a CEO if it weren't for those pesky kids, as they were all the most promising minds of their generation on a path to greatness (but also still earning loads less than their DH, so of course they'd have considered him being the SAHM, but it just didn't make sense)

Probably not disadvantaging him if you are a good parent, or it's a shit nursery, probably are if the reverse is true. Children benefit from secure attachments to primary care givers and safe exploration away from them however this is achieved.

@Hardbackwriter maybe so, but I was talking about language development specifically, in response to a poster who said nursery would have helped their child with their speech.

You can be a SAHM without hovering around your child constantly. For speech development in particular, what a child needs is someone to listen and respond to them directly. That is much much harder to achieve in a nursery environment.

@DancingCatGif no I don't, but I'm sure it set them up not to depend on just one person. They know that the person is there to teach and nurture them, and that it doesn't need to be the same person everyday. Some kids at my school have meltdowns if it isn't the same teacher.
My kids have never done that.

Honestly it all depends on what you will and can do with him. If you take him to see family / friends and you play with him and take him out and about regularly then chances are he won’t be disadvantaged much if he stays with you until 3. He may not have the early experiences preschoolers at good nurseries have have like football lessons / french lessons / prep for school / forest school but those things are nice to haves rather than necessary.

If you’re just going to plonk him in front of the TV most days or he will be expected to exist around your housework then it might be better for him to go to nursery.

@mylittlesandwich

My son starts nursery next month, he's 9 months. I don't think there will be huge benefits for him at this age but I don't think it will disadvantage him either. If your friend has a baby at nursery she'll be invested in finding the positives.

This is true. My son will be approx 10 months when he starts. In many ways he may be disadvantaged by going to nursery because I do so much with him. But I have picked the best nursery possible and I’m the breadwinner so need to work. Those nappies don’t pay for themselves!

I think it completely depends on your own individual situation.
My DD went to nursery at 13 months.
In terms of the benefits:

1. peer pressure is real! After about a week she was confidently using a spoon and fork.
2. She is better at sharing - this does take time though
3. They do lots of messy play and she does activities there we wouldn't be able to do at home (plus it follows a curriculum and they explain her development to me).

That said:

1. I have family who didn't send their kids to nursery and they are well-adjusted and sociable
2. During lockdown - at home with us her speech really improved - maybe because she had one-to-one attention?
3. In the same way she does activities at nursery we couldn't do at home, it works the other way too. She is massively into baking and cooking now.

I think it probably all evens out and really, it's
about your own situation. Nursery is right for us but I certainly don't think that's the same for every parent.

My little girl started nursery 3 full days a week around 11 months.

That first year, looking back was very very hard. She was ill a lot, very tired and overstimulated. It broke my heart some days but other days she had a great time and they did so many activities with her.

She just turned 2 now, and she LOVES nursery. She does so many fun things, learns so much everyday and I feel really proud when I see updates of what she has been up to. I couldn’t imagine waiting until 3. She’s a little whirlwind and is very sociable, and nursery suits her personality.

If I was a SAHM I would want to structure my day, and do playgroups, play dates and spend lots of time outside. Like I do on my days off with DD. I think if we have another one I might consider waiting until age 2.

I think it’s up to you OP. To be honest, I have a friend who makes a point of saying to me that she’s not sending her child to nursery until she’s 3. And her little girl just stays inside most days watching TV- which I think is obviously a disadvantage.

"no I don't, but I'm sure it set them up not to depend on just one person. They know that the person is there to teach and nurture them, and that it doesn't need to be the same person everyday. Some kids at my school have meltdowns if it isn't the same teacher.
My kids have never done that."

Yes but what I mean is that is a sample size of one family so it's meaningless.

I could just as easily say "my child stayed at home til they were three and so we formed a very strong bond and they feel extremely secure with me and so when they have a variety of teachers they feel secure in the knowledge I'll come back for them. They've always been fine with a variety of people as a result."

We tell ourselves these stories to make ourselves feel like we made the right decision but the truth is we just don't know what is personality and what is circumstance. Of course some outcomes can be applied across populations or groups but on an individual level, it doesn't work.

We tell ourselves these stories to make ourselves feel like we made the right decision but the truth is we just don't know what is personality and what is circumstance. Of course some outcomes can be applied across populations or groups but on an individual level, it doesn't work.

Agree totally, is a much better expression of what I tried to say at the top! You can't compare your real choice with anything, so just look at your child and ask are the happy and well? If so, all is well.

Personally I think it's good for babies to go to nursery, my DD went from 1.5 but only 2 mornings a week - It help set her up for preschool and did help build her confidence and relationships with people outside of the family

But obviously it's a personal choice

ifstudies.org/blog/measuring-the-long-term-effects-of-early-extensive-day-care

Other research shows that children from disadvantaged backgrounds do benefit from very good early child care - boys more than girls, immigrant children and those living in poverty particularly.

You forgot to mention that ifstudies.org is a right wing US conservative think tank focused on "family values".

Not exactly a good source for objective research on women, children and work. They regularly misrepresent studies showing the importance of the quality of childcare as showing childcare per se is the problem and women should stay homee.

C8H10N4O2 Yes they are 'family based' so not entirely objective, but if you read beyond that into the actual research, it is interesting. I don't think a decision can only be made with factual information rather than 'it didn't do my children any harm' when of course, nobody can say one way or another for individual children.

Yes they are 'family based' so not entirely objective

They are not "family based" they promote a very conservative right wing line on family values/structure which consists of one male married to one female, female at home.

I've read a lot of the original research they quote and they consistently misrepresent studies on quality of childcare as showing childcare itself is a problem. They also misquote studies on child development and poverty/income to claim that single parents/gay parents will produce delinquent children when the disparity is income, not the number or type of parents. Its little more than red pill with a veneer of academic language.

To claim that they are anything other than a conservative lobby group is fundamentally misleading.