Are you offended when someone says they “didnt want someone else to raise my kids”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

It might be shocking to the SAHP crew, but have you ever considered it’s actually developmentally superior for a few hours of the day for the child not to be attached to the parent at the hip?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is not an acceptable turn of phrase.

But I am not offended because it shows the low character of the speaker. Just as if they had said they work FT because “I wanted to use my brain”

Literally been said to my face numerous times, during the times when it didn't work full time.

And also, BOTH statements have truth in them. I DO use my brain more when I work full time and there IS someone else raising your child when you outsource childcare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's an insensitive thing to say because as women we are all supposed to be empathetic to the fact that no matter what women do regarding work and motherhood someone is going to judge us and we're going to feel guilty.

But also I think people say this sometimes because they are just being honest and it's how they feel. Just like I think women who go back to work actually sometimes do it because they are bored out of their minds at home with babies and want to "use their brains." I also know women who have said that they went back to work because they believe their kids are better off being raised by nannies or caregivers who are "experts" as opposed to a sahm.

All of these things will be hurtful to hear to someone who made a different choice and they are also things people actually think and feel. Women are presented with this impossible choice (if they are fortunate to even have a choice at all which most are not) and there is no answer that will ever be right for everyone so we all do this dance with each other about our choices and we offend each other constantly because there's no way for us to all validate each other and ourselves at the same time unless we all make the same choice.

But we cannot all make the same choice because we are different people with different kids and different professions and different finances and different partners and different resources.

I just try to remember all that whenever I talk to other women about this stuff and when they say things that can be viewed as an insult to my choices. They aren't really talking about me. It's just about them. And that's fine.

But why do we need to be validating our own choices to other people? DH and I made the decisions right for our family (career choices, number of kids, where to live, what schools to send them to, etc.) based on our own personal life circumstances and priorities. I am under no illusion that our choices are the “best ever” or even “better” than what other families have chosen. But I am secure we’ve made decisions that make our family happy.

I can have a conversation with another parent who made different choices than me without needing to justify/explain things in a way that belittle their choices. For instance I have a friend who is a SAHM with a big law DH. When talking to her I 100% understand why it would be logistically a nightmare for her to try to be the primary parent for 3 kids and work since he is gone long hours. Whereas I work FT but my DH also has a super flexible remote job and can help with a lot of the morning routine, shuttling kids around, etc. We can both discuss our lives and the situational decisions we’ve made without making generalized conclusions that our choice is better than the other.

I feel sorry for those who lack the ability to understand their life choices are not necessarily the best choices for others and that we do not need validate ourselves at the expense of putting down others.

Because not everyone has great choices and a lot of people wind up forced into whatever route they took. Good for you that you liked your available choices and made one that worked great for you family. Lots of people are not in that situation and feel inherently defensive about their situation because they wish they'd had other choices but didn't.

A lot of the problem here is that we frame this as a choice when it's actually not for a significant portion of the population. If you genuinely got to choose and all of the available options were financially and logistically realistic for your family then you are are an extreme outlier. Even among upper middle class families people don't always have choices -- there are huge differences depending on what kind of work you and your partner do and how your incomes are distributed between partners and what kind of family help you have and where you live.

We act like women are choosing off a menu but in reality most people are kind of pushed into one option or another and tryign to make it work for their families. Of course people are defensive and seeking validation.

[Anonymous]

If I said, I want to be the primary caregiver as a reason behind my choose to stay home, would that be offensive?

There is a saying in the medical field "the care of the patient is in the care of the patient" and I think that the same is true of children. Pumping breast milk and having a third party give it to your child is not the same as nursing your baby. The same way that you can't care for a patient with the same efficacy via email.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

It might be shocking to the SAHP crew, but have you ever considered it’s actually developmentally superior for a few hours of the day for the child not to be attached to the parent at the hip?

Depends on age of child. A three year old -- yes. And infant -- not really. It's not *bad* for the infant as long as whoever they are with is also a loving and attentive caregiver. But no it is not bad for babies under age 1 to spend all their time with their parents and it's definitely superior to any situation in which they will be spending any signficant amount of time without 1:1 attention and contact.

A lot of SAHPs put kids in play groups or part-time preschool starting at age 2 or even 18 mo specifically to start helping them socialize and get through stuff like separation anxiety. But no if you tell someone "maybe it would be good for your 6 months old to spend some time away from you" you sound dumb. Again that doesn't mean a baby spending the day with a great nanny or a grandparent or at really good daycare with 1:1 ratios is getting substandard care -- they aren't. But the baby at home with the SAHP (assuming the SAHP is engaged and attentive) is also getting top level care from a developmental standpoint. It's ideal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not an acceptable turn of phrase.

But I am not offended because it shows the low character of the speaker. Just as if they had said they work FT because “I wanted to use my brain”

+1 it's a rude thing to say but I'd also roll my eyes at their myopic view

Pretty much, yeah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not an acceptable turn of phrase.

But I am not offended because it shows the low character of the speaker. Just as if they had said they work FT because “I wanted to use my brain”

Literally been said to my face numerous times, during the times when it didn't work full time.

And also, BOTH statements have truth in them. I DO use my brain more when I work full time and there IS someone else raising your child when you outsource childcare.

There is someone providing care for your child when you outsource that care. That care is based on the requests and desires of the parents, who are raising the kids. It's like school or preschool in many cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is not an acceptable turn of phrase.

But I am not offended because it shows the low character of the speaker. Just as if they had said they work FT because “I wanted to use my brain”

Literally been said to my face numerous times, during the times when it didn't work full time.

And also, BOTH statements have truth in them. I DO use my brain more when I work full time and there IS someone else raising your child when you outsource childcare.

Another mom once told me -- a sahm at the time -- that she went back to work because she realize she was not qualified to care for her children and they needed to be with an expert in childhood development. And I was definitely insulted and also I know there are situations in which an actual expert in childhood development would have handled certain aspects of raising my kids better than I did.

Sometimes the truth hurts. Everyone needs a thicker skin here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the fundamental misunderstanding is that “raising your kids” doesn’t need to be either a compliment or a put-down. It’s just a neutral description, and you’re all bringing your own baggage to it.

My kids were in daycare full time, and every single one of their caregivers absolutely has had a hand in raising them. That’s where they learned how to use a toilet, how to eat with utensils, how to diffuse conflict with other kids, etc. It’s dishonest to pretend that the function of the daycare was just to keep them alive until my spouse and I could pick them up at 5:30 and start raising them that day.

Similarly, my children are lucky enough to have four living grandparents who spend significant time with them. I have no problem acknowledging that their grandparents are also helping to raise them.

Of course my husband and I are also raising them, but no, we’re not doing it by ourselves. This is a team effort and there’s no shame involved.

I think the issue is the implication that if someone says their choice is:

SAH —> so I can raise my kids

this means the alternative is

Working —> I cannot raise my kids.

Because if you can still “raise your kids” while working then why would being able to raise your kids be a reason to SAH?

It’s totally stupid logic. SAH because you want to or because it works for your family or whatever. But unless you’re an absentee parent (e.g. a working parent who makes no effort to spend more than 10 min/day with their kid or an alcoholic SAHP who parks their kid in front of the iPad all day) you are raising your kids. Employment status is not the determinative factor and also there is a reason “working dad” isn’t a commonly used saying. Any SAHM who uses this “raising my own kids” phrasing is dealing with a lot of internalized misogyny and I feel bad for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

It might be shocking to the SAHP crew, but have you ever considered it’s actually developmentally superior for a few hours of the day for the child not to be attached to the parent at the hip?

Depends on age of child. A three year old -- yes. And infant -- not really. It's not *bad* for the infant as long as whoever they are with is also a loving and attentive caregiver. But no it is not bad for babies under age 1 to spend all their time with their parents and it's definitely superior to any situation in which they will be spending any signficant amount of time without 1:1 attention and contact.

A lot of SAHPs put kids in play groups or part-time preschool starting at age 2 or even 18 mo specifically to start helping them socialize and get through stuff like separation anxiety. But no if you tell someone "maybe it would be good for your 6 months old to spend some time away from you" you sound dumb. Again that doesn't mean a baby spending the day with a great nanny or a grandparent or at really good daycare with 1:1 ratios is getting substandard care -- they aren't. But the baby at home with the SAHP (assuming the SAHP is engaged and attentive) is also getting top level care from a developmental standpoint. It's ideal.

Nobody said "bad" but it is "superior" for even a baby/infant to have access to "others" during their infant time. Also it is good for moms to have a break, be rested, etc to be a (as you put it) loving and caring caregiver. It's also superior for dad to be home and not working 60 hours a week and never bonding with an infant.

An infant with a mom with a 2 year old and a 5 year old is not giving them nearly as much 1-1 attention as a day care who only can have 2 infants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the fundamental misunderstanding is that “raising your kids” doesn’t need to be either a compliment or a put-down. It’s just a neutral description, and you’re all bringing your own baggage to it.

My kids were in daycare full time, and every single one of their caregivers absolutely has had a hand in raising them. That’s where they learned how to use a toilet, how to eat with utensils, how to diffuse conflict with other kids, etc. It’s dishonest to pretend that the function of the daycare was just to keep them alive until my spouse and I could pick them up at 5:30 and start raising them that day.

Similarly, my children are lucky enough to have four living grandparents who spend significant time with them. I have no problem acknowledging that their grandparents are also helping to raise them.

Of course my husband and I are also raising them, but no, we’re not doing it by ourselves. This is a team effort and there’s no shame involved.

I think the issue is the implication that if someone says their choice is:

SAH —> so I can raise my kids

this means the alternative is

Working —> I cannot raise my kids.

Because if you can still “raise your kids” while working then why would being able to raise your kids be a reason to SAH?

It’s totally stupid logic. SAH because you want to or because it works for your family or whatever. But unless you’re an absentee parent (e.g. a working parent who makes no effort to spend more than 10 min/day with their kid or an alcoholic SAHP who parks their kid in front of the iPad all day) you are raising your kids. Employment status is not the determinative factor and also there is a reason “working dad” isn’t a commonly used saying. Any SAHM who uses this “raising my own kids” phrasing is dealing with a lot of internalized misogyny and I feel bad for them.

Also the logic here is

SAH parent -> raise my kid but my H is an absentee parent.

I think, why would you get pregnant with a man who doesn't want to raise children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a reason for why one spouse chose not to work or works from home/at a flexible part time job? Or is this an acceptable turn of phrase?

It's an absolutely valid statement. Many of my friends didn't want their children to be raised by strangers, some had the privilege to do it themselves or get family to support while others had to send them to daycare or leave them with nannies.

It might be shocking to the SAHP crew, but have you ever considered it’s actually developmentally superior for a few hours of the day for the child not to be attached to the parent at the hip?

Depends on age of child. A three year old -- yes. And infant -- not really. It's not *bad* for the infant as long as whoever they are with is also a loving and attentive caregiver. But no it is not bad for babies under age 1 to spend all their time with their parents and it's definitely superior to any situation in which they will be spending any signficant amount of time without 1:1 attention and contact.

A lot of SAHPs put kids in play groups or part-time preschool starting at age 2 or even 18 mo specifically to start helping them socialize and get through stuff like separation anxiety. But no if you tell someone "maybe it would be good for your 6 months old to spend some time away from you" you sound dumb. Again that doesn't mean a baby spending the day with a great nanny or a grandparent or at really good daycare with 1:1 ratios is getting substandard care -- they aren't. But the baby at home with the SAHP (assuming the SAHP is engaged and attentive) is also getting top level care from a developmental standpoint. It's ideal.

That’s because you are starting from the position that the parent is the best at giving care to an infant. I don’t know that I agree- it certainly doesn’t account for a mother who has post partum depression or anxiety who may not be the best at care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the fundamental misunderstanding is that “raising your kids” doesn’t need to be either a compliment or a put-down. It’s just a neutral description, and you’re all bringing your own baggage to it.

My kids were in daycare full time, and every single one of their caregivers absolutely has had a hand in raising them. That’s where they learned how to use a toilet, how to eat with utensils, how to diffuse conflict with other kids, etc. It’s dishonest to pretend that the function of the daycare was just to keep them alive until my spouse and I could pick them up at 5:30 and start raising them that day.

Similarly, my children are lucky enough to have four living grandparents who spend significant time with them. I have no problem acknowledging that their grandparents are also helping to raise them.

Of course my husband and I are also raising them, but no, we’re not doing it by ourselves. This is a team effort and there’s no shame involved.

This. Every person who provides us childcare on a regular basis is helping raise them. That's kind of the point--kids are HARD and you need a village. I did stay home for a year and I was really struggling by the end, so I ended up going back to work earlier than planned. In doing that I am choosing to have other people help raise them, and I'm pretty grateful I can do that.

[Anonymous]

What happened to "it takes a village"?

I'm not offended. I just say that I had to go back to work for my sanity, and that my kid *loved* daycare. They had friends to play with, and the family (including their adult kids) seriously loved my kid. They treated my DC like a family member.

[Anonymous]

I think this is very offensive and would wonder if anyone who said this was on the spectrum.
I work half time and when my kids were little they were with one of their grandmas. I pumped the milk, left the prepared meals and so on. I did all the dirty work like potty training, ped appointments and speech therapy.
I can only think of one situation where I internally judged some parents (and I was intimate with this family.) They were both teachers and sent their baby to daycare all summer for 8 hours a day because "they paid for it" and they were relaxing at home. I think they could have shortened the day or skipped some days.