What on earth is wrong with Oliver James?

[SpeedyGonzalez]

I'm reading his latest book "How Not To F--- Them Up", and I think it's rather good.

(did my thread title fool you? )

So far I've not read anything I disagree with (am about 5 chapters in) and much of what he's said has been echoed on the pages of MN. So apart from the fact that he sometimes has a cack-handed way of talking to people, I think that what he says is generally sound.

Anyone else read this book?

Ah, the old "google it yourself" - defence.
To be honest, I can't be bothered to search for things to back up your claims.

I still think that you can't compare the case of a primary carer who suddenly disappears to go to hospital (also a stressful situation) to going to nursery, where - usually - a child is introduced gently, with a settling in period, and learns that mum/dad/whoever comes and picks him up.

Ok, thought you were asking a genuine question.

Sorry I can't provide links from the phone.

I think you're thinking of Robertson and Robertson Laurie?

Not quite the same situation as a nursery.

I think you should read the research but always remember that it generalises. It has to. So if the results of a piece of research goes against what you observe in your own child, it doesn't mean that the research is wrong. Just because most children benefit from childcare option A doesn't mean your child will.

Families have to choose what's best for them. Imo, the important thing is to have as many options as possible, and the other important thing is not to criticise other people's choices.

And the other other important thing is not to feel guilty about what you've chosen for your family!

I find the research fascinating, and I like reading Oliver James' column. If he misinterprets some research or the research he cites is flawed, then that's a pity, but it's still interesting and I would still discuss it with my (grown up) kids who are having to make their own choices now.

Yes and 'over extrapolated' for other uses.

"I think dads do care differently - but again is that a bad thing?" - My thoughts exactly, Norman. I know several SAHDs who are fabulous carers.

Re Bowlby - I'm sure he wrote about the relationship with the mother, so he can't have been researching orphans when he came up with his original attachment theory. We have teh book somewhere...no idea where though.

Franca - I've never had a 'gentle' settling-in period with my son. It's always been planned as such, of course, but each time he's always cried his eyes out and taken a long time to settle. And at his current nursery almost all the new children are exactly the same. So the 'learning' proces which you mention is simply not gentle, not from the child's perspective.

Yes it was research on neglected orphans that formed the basis of attachment theory which then goes on yo form a theory that maternal love is crucial fir emotional and physical development. This is a well established theory. How you extrapolate it to cared for western children in a day care setting - I don't know.

Hum. Tis many years since I studied this, however I had assumed that when he referred to the type of attachments to the "mother" he meant the "mother". I recall my uni profs using the word "caregiver" as a more appropriate alternative, but I'm sure they pointed out that he, in his 1950s setting, was saying "mother".

wasn't it evacuated children Bowlby also did research on? Finding the stronger the family attachment the hard the child found it?

The point is that the lack of primary caregiver (and the other neglect that probably went on) had repercussions for the orphans' development. In those days he msy well have said 'mother' but I don't see what difference it makes.

Are you thinking of Mary ainsworth's 'strange situation' test?

Anyway am tired must go yo bed (smile)

I doubt if children in typical childcare situations where they go home to their parents at the end of the day can be likened to children in orphanages, long term hospital stays, evacuees.

It is a wild extrapolation to say the effects are the same but that seems to suit some agendas.

The sensible thing is if you are using childcare is to investigate the setting, observe how the child adjusts and be prepared to change it if the child is not settling after a reasonable adjustment period or you feel the child is not getting the appropriate care.

There are good settings and bad settings as are good parents and bad ones. Always pays to be vigilant and trust your instincts, not the wanker OJ.

No, not confusing it with the strange situation - though thanks for reminding me of another aspect of my student lectures!

It makes a difference, quite a significant in that if it was orphans then they would have contributing factors such as experience of 'abandonment' which children brought up by their parents would not have. So you'd expect that that would skew the outcome of the research.

Nighty-tight!

Singing - nicely said.

Brave thread, Speedy! I got totally flamed recently for providing a link to "how not to fuck them up" while having the cheek to not be able to say exactly which piece of peer-reviewed research he quotes backed up the point I was trying to make! OJ is definitely a bit of a pet hate figure on Mumsnet.

I bought "how not to.." because I enjoy OJ's columns in the Guardian and I had seen him on telly and thought he seemed very measured, a voice of reason in an extremely polarised debate. I don't think he is a misogynist at all, and neither is he against women working. In fact he concludes in "how not to" that fathers taking more of a role in childcare will be the best way to ensure more children get better quality care in the future.

I don't like the way he refers to "parenting" as "mothering". Similarly I wish Mumsnet was called Parentsnet (how ironic that this is a big thing many mners have against poor old OJ). And he's a bit odd and skinny, and appears to sport a rather silly ponytail. I agree that he does cherrypick his research somewhat. I've been generally happy to overlook that as his conclusions tend to chime with my beliefs and experiences.

As a feminist who grew up believing that my career would be the most important thing in my life, and that I somehow had a right to get my kids to fit around that, believing that the best thing for my kids in their early years is for me to be at home is massively inconvenient, uncomfortable and expensive. Frankly I'd far rather believe that my kids would be much better off at nursery while I get on with my career (or what's left of it ). I'm going to get a bit controversial and suggest that a lot of the OJ-bashing you see on here is maybe born out of a teensy bit of defensiveness? Sorry! Where has the pombear emoticon gone??

Good post, Rod! Have DD on lap so must go as she can't understand why I won't let her type with me!

Me too Speedy! (DS on lap) Nighty night!

Speedy, I appreciate that there are children who find it more difficult than others to settle at nursery (I also believe that the ease with which one adapts depends on the age and various developing stages), but still starting nursery is a different thing than a long stay in hospital, or other examples.

I have been volunteering in a nursery for a while now (I am now in Italy) and the settling in stage is taken very seriously. It usually takes two weeks, with the mother/caregiver staying with the child for a bit, going for 30 mins, then 1 hr, then 2 etc etc.

It'd be silly to deny that starting nursery can be stressful/sad for a child, but children evolve and it is quite possible that the whole nursery experience becomes a positive one, most of the time.

Btw, I don't have a full time job, but I've always believed that for my children a mix of nursery and time at home has been very beneficial. I am much more worried about school, to be honest!

rodformyownback - I'm amazed that you think his perspective is measured. I think he ploughs the same furrow in all his writing and has a worldview which he finds research to back up.

And yes, I am quite happy to admit that I am defensive about his POV because it does make me feel guilty. And confused at the same time, because my DS is a happy healthy loving child despite spending hours in childcare.

But then, as the link I posted earlier makes clear, the evidence behind his assertions is extremely weak. And so what I'm left with is anger that he's peddling a load of pseudo-scientific claptrap which achieves nothing other than making working women feel guilty as far as I can see.

Hello Franca

My ds went into ft nursery from 11 months. I can concur about the seriousness with which his nursery took the settling in period. He had an 8 - week settling in period, with graduated separation as you described. Within a few weeks, he was fine with being left.

Ds is of the breast-fed, co-sleeping, spent a whole year with me at home, clingy-type baby. Of course, if he did not settle, I would have looked at alternatives. But I never had to cross that bridge.

Interesting talk.

If you believe that childcare can be good for infants, or if you have your child in childcare and have no other option my opinions (theyre only my opinions) may upset you. This isnt my intention.

I believe that it should be openly acknowledged that there's more to putting young children in childcare than people think.

If your child is already in childcare and settled there, depending on their age, they may be just as well sticking with it, but if you havent started them, I would hold off for as long as possible (unless youre unwell or there are circumstances that mean you have to put them in). The longer they can stay with people they know and love the better.

Ive read his book and think what he's saying rings true with my gut instincts on what we should be doing (if possible, in an ideal world) as parents.

If you read the books youll find that his use of "mother" instead of carers or parents is explained right at the start... majority of carers at home are mothers etc. Icant see the issue.

When we speak to other parents who do things differently, for example, send their kids to childcare, we often automatically try to reassure them that their decision is ok and theyre not in anyway harming their kids, their kids will be ok, we may even say that childcare might be good for them!?????

There are studies that have found higher stress hormone (cortisol) levels in those young children attending childcare BUT PUT THOSE studies to one side, forget the books youve read, the advice from another mother, look deep inside yourself and ask yourself whats your natural instinct on this? Leave your child to be cared for in a group setting, it could be a well run plush, group day orphanage or childcare centre (I imagine they'd have v similar setups) OR have family look after them.

If I had any choice as either the child or parent I know what i would do. Some people dont have a choice, some have been lead to believe that childcare from infancy is ok... we all have our own opinions.

Its not until you step into the shoes of a child, really take the time to imagine their world, that you will find that no, it's not ok, no it's not easy for them, that it's traumatic, scary and leads to confusion and lack of trust in the world (depending on when you commence childcare, obviously the later you do the less this is the case).

I dont see Oliver James' book as an attack on mothers/parents but more as helping those who are yet to make these decision aware of some of the issues. Currently some may blindly go along with the childcare idea, knowing that it's a frequently used option and that other than the initial settling in period and adjusting to the different routine that it'll be fine... of course I'll miss them, but theyll be ok, parents are told that as soon as they left they were happy, the parents are reassured...
anyway, im personally convinced that there's a lot more to it than that. Just for starters, 20mins is a long time for a child, 4 hours must seem like forever... is it ok to leave them without their carer for that long?

Im sure they do get used to it and adapt and appear to cope, but forced into this situation they dont have any choice. Children can and do adapt to extreme circumstances and survive, but would you be confident that they wouldnt be adversely effected by the experience.

If we look to evidence based medicine and randomised control trials we may find (if the studies existed) clear evidence that categorically tell us that childcre is having a negative/positive influence on our children's past, present and future life. I dont think the evidence is really out there either way so we can look at other evidence (which isnt strictly so robust)... how many of your current peers attended childcare when they were youngsters? How many attended from 9-5pm 5 days a week. Im 30 and I dont know any of my peers who experienced such childcare. so where's the evidence to say these kids who we're experimenting on will be ok?

I think this world is becoming more difficult to live in, not easier, anxiety and depression are increasing... the children being born today are most in need of a secure base, a good sense of who they are and the world around them... if it's within your control dont do anything that might make life harder for them.

Speedy and Rod, I just wanted to say I enoyed reading your posts and am glad I'm not the only one who thinks he's ok.

It's very easy to pick only one or two things he says and take them out of context and if anything he has given me more confidence in my parenting despite feeling I neglected my first born due to PND and using nursery-based childcare.

I guess I have to admit I cherry-pick the bit where he says about "happy mothers being important" and I did find the bit in his earlier book about how vulnerable new mothers are quite moving. You can see evidence of it on here every day.

Thanks for starting the thread Speedy, I might look out for his new book now.

I have read the book and his Guardian columns and get bored of his preach-y style. While I don't dismiss his work entirely, he makes use of a few specific studies in a fairly non-scientific way to make his points.
Yes, the world would be a better place if we were all well-off and had fantastic childcare options, but that's not my reality just now.

Tis late so will come back to this thread tomorrow...

Rod - yes! Re 'Parentsnet' hypocrisy! How funny!

Happy7 glad you're finding this thread interesting! Oh, and you might find the book at the library, like I did...cheaper that way!