NY Mag: Daycare is Broken

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

You are attributing beliefs to me that I don't have. I think it is unlikely that a child will be harmed by daycare if their parents don't want to be a stay at home parent. You are simply deflecting by calling me the aggressor and judgmental when you own that yourself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

You are attributing beliefs to me that I don't have. I think it is unlikely that a child will be harmed by daycare if their parents don't want to be a stay at home parent. You are simply deflecting by calling me the aggressor and judgmental when you own that yourself.

You said you think it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent. You obviously believe daycare is bad for kids and are backtracking because I called you out on it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

You are attributing beliefs to me that I don't have. I think it is unlikely that a child will be harmed by daycare if their parents don't want to be a stay at home parent. You are simply deflecting by calling me the aggressor and judgmental when you own that yourself.

You said you think it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent. You obviously believe daycare is bad for kids and are backtracking because I called you out on it.

I believe it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to care for them, or next optimal option might be cared for by a relative who loves them completely. If those are not an option they are better off in daycare. You can, and obviously will, interpret that any way you want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

You are attributing beliefs to me that I don't have. I think it is unlikely that a child will be harmed by daycare if their parents don't want to be a stay at home parent. You are simply deflecting by calling me the aggressor and judgmental when you own that yourself.

You said you think it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent. You obviously believe daycare is bad for kids and are backtracking because I called you out on it.

I believe it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to care for them, or next optimal option might be cared for by a relative who loves them completely. If those are not an option they are better off in daycare. You can, and obviously will, interpret that any way you want.

No interpretation needed, your meaning is obvious. It's also pretty simplistic and wrong for many families as already elaborated on this thread. But carry on with your judging. I'm sure it gives you satisfaction.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

In all of this, I was lucky that my DH made enough money, that he was healthy and that we had a good marriage. If any of these three things were not ok, I would have been screwed as a SAHM. So, if the govt cannot fix childcare and education, perhaps the govt can pay SAHMs to stay at home so they do not become vulnerable.

This is huge. It’s just a big risk. We could cover the basics on DH’s salary, but not save nearly enough for college and retirement. This is what happened to my parents- SAHM until she became a para when I was in high school, no college savings and now they are in a precarious state in retirement where any health problems will mean that we will probably have to start contributing financially.

Because of a pre-existing health condition, life insurance for DH is extremely expensive, so we don’t have as much as would need for me to feel comfortable quitting the workforce either.

To be fair, your average UMC white woman has an extremely high chance that everything will end up okay with DH. Divorce for this demographic is low, the DH should earn enough money if they live a frugal lifestyle and they should have multiple types of insurance for health issues.

Ok, but now you need to purchase lots of insurance on one income too to cover all the possibilities? Not everyone is UMC, on one income we definitely would not be.

Exactly. As much as I’d like to work only part time, we both make $70-80K per year. It’s a solid middle class lifestyle but on one income, I wouldn’t be able to save anything for emergencies or unexpected expenses. Like the $500 bill I just received for kid bloodwork to rule out some health issues.

That's not middle class. Middle class cannot pay the $500 bill. $160K a year is very comfortable. $120 is manageable too but some of it is your housing and other expenses which are all choice. Funny how some of us do fine on less.

PP that’s a pretty grim definition of middle class. But anyway my point was that I can’t live comfortably on half of that. So we both have to work for a comfortable lifestyle. I’m just glad I’m on my last daycare kid. No more!

We also have family help which makes it so much easier. However, there is a lot of tv with grandma.

On half, no, on $120, you can do it. Real middle class don't have much savings and cannot pay a $500 medical bill easily.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

In all of this, I was lucky that my DH made enough money, that he was healthy and that we had a good marriage. If any of these three things were not ok, I would have been screwed as a SAHM. So, if the govt cannot fix childcare and education, perhaps the govt can pay SAHMs to stay at home so they do not become vulnerable.

This is huge. It’s just a big risk. We could cover the basics on DH’s salary, but not save nearly enough for college and retirement. This is what happened to my parents- SAHM until she became a para when I was in high school, no college savings and now they are in a precarious state in retirement where any health problems will mean that we will probably have to start contributing financially.

Because of a pre-existing health condition, life insurance for DH is extremely expensive, so we don’t have as much as would need for me to feel comfortable quitting the workforce either.

To be fair, your average UMC white woman has an extremely high chance that everything will end up okay with DH. Divorce for this demographic is low, the DH should earn enough money if they live a frugal lifestyle and they should have multiple types of insurance for health issues.

Ok, but now you need to purchase lots of insurance on one income too to cover all the possibilities? Not everyone is UMC, on one income we definitely would not be.

Exactly. As much as I’d like to work only part time, we both make $70-80K per year. It’s a solid middle class lifestyle but on one income, I wouldn’t be able to save anything for emergencies or unexpected expenses. Like the $500 bill I just received for kid bloodwork to rule out some health issues.

That's not middle class. Middle class cannot pay the $500 bill. $160K a year is very comfortable. $120 is manageable too but some of it is your housing and other expenses which are all choice. Funny how some of us do fine on less.

PP that’s a pretty grim definition of middle class. But anyway my point was that I can’t live comfortably on half of that. So we both have to work for a comfortable lifestyle. I’m just glad I’m on my last daycare kid. No more!

We also have family help which makes it so much easier. However, there is a lot of tv with grandma.

On half, no, on $120, you can do it. Real middle class don't have much savings and cannot pay a $500 medical bill easily.

Well it is in the 120s so far as AGI goes…. but that 2 incomes, plus a small rental income.

We went through 2008 on one income of about $55k ad a seasonal job bringing in $6k. We had a lot of good luck to get us to comfortable. In our society I don’t think it makes sense to put all your eggs in one earners basket unless you have a lot of eggs.

I know parents who do it though…..and I admire them. But we are also good parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

You are attributing beliefs to me that I don't have. I think it is unlikely that a child will be harmed by daycare if their parents don't want to be a stay at home parent. You are simply deflecting by calling me the aggressor and judgmental when you own that yourself.

You said you think it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent. You obviously believe daycare is bad for kids and are backtracking because I called you out on it.

I believe it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to care for them, or next optimal option might be cared for by a relative who loves them completely. If those are not an option they are better off in daycare. You can, and obviously will, interpret that any way you want.

Your posts are disgusting. Suggesting parents send their kids to daycare because they don’t want to care for them or don’t want a loving relative to care for them is horrible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

You are attributing beliefs to me that I don't have. I think it is unlikely that a child will be harmed by daycare if their parents don't want to be a stay at home parent. You are simply deflecting by calling me the aggressor and judgmental when you own that yourself.

You said you think it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent. You obviously believe daycare is bad for kids and are backtracking because I called you out on it.

I believe it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to care for them, or next optimal option might be cared for by a relative who loves them completely. If those are not an option they are better off in daycare. You can, and obviously will, interpret that any way you want.

Your posts are disgusting. Suggesting parents send their kids to daycare because they don’t want to care for them or don’t want a loving relative to care for them is horrible.

I find it amazing that you don't know that millions of people choose to work rather than take care of their own infants and toddlers. There are also many who would prefer to care for their kids themselves but can't make it happen. But to pretend like that's not true is just you in denial.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

You are attributing beliefs to me that I don't have. I think it is unlikely that a child will be harmed by daycare if their parents don't want to be a stay at home parent. You are simply deflecting by calling me the aggressor and judgmental when you own that yourself.

You said you think it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent. You obviously believe daycare is bad for kids and are backtracking because I called you out on it.

I believe it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to care for them, or next optimal option might be cared for by a relative who loves them completely. If those are not an option they are better off in daycare. You can, and obviously will, interpret that any way you want.

Your posts are disgusting. Suggesting parents send their kids to daycare because they don’t want to care for them or don’t want a loving relative to care for them is horrible.

I find it amazing that you don't know that millions of people choose to work rather than take care of their own infants and toddlers. There are also many who would prefer to care for their kids themselves but can't make it happen. But to pretend like that's not true is just you in denial.

DP I find it amazing that you don't get that not every parent can be a great SAHP and not every relative can be a great caregiver. Most abuse and neglect of children occurs at home, not in daycares. Caring for infants and toddlers is exhausting and monotonous. And some babies are easier than others. The best parents are those that figure out what will work best for their families, not those that go to unreasonable lengths (like trying to WFH full time and care for an infant) simply to avoid daycare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

For someone who is so anti-daycare, it’s interesting you spend so much time in this sub-forum. Are you bored?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

With this viewpoint, I’m curious how you advise your daughters, if you have any, on their educational, career, and family choices.

She cares for their children herself. They are learning a lot from watching Peppa Pig all day.

To be fair, my kid learned more from Daniel Tiger than me. Why would you listen to my yapping face when there's a tiger?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

For someone who is so anti-daycare, it’s interesting you spend so much time in this sub-forum. Are you bored?

I was intrigued to see in Recent Topics a thread that indicated that NY Mag agrees with me, that Daycare is Broken. I spend time regularly in sub forums with threads that interest me. No I'm not bored.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that it is normal and expected that women want to have a career and maximize their potential. But, it also seems normal to want to care for your own baby when they are infants and toddlers, until they are old enough to self report about their day and also to attend actual school full time. What I guess I don't understand is that the career and self actualization seems to have become more important than that time spent with your young children. I think the reason there are "mommy wars" is because these two things are both very important. Each of us prioritizes according to our beliefs but there is no one correct answer.

I don't personally think it is the government or society's obligation to satisfy one or the other of these choices, especially when it actually is a choice.

The difference between you and me is that I completely understand why you want to SAH, but you don't understand why I don't want to SAH and are blatantly and unapologetically judging my choice.

I guess so because I do definitely believe that it's important and very valuable to families and society for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to be doing that. I don't think you "completely understand" that at all given your judgmental tone in your reply.

Think what you like. I will say I do not think SAHMs harm their children simply by staying home. I do not think SAHMs are lazy or selfish. My mother was SAHM. She was very unhappy and angry until she started WOH, so for her I don't think being a sahm was great for her or for us.

Clearly, you think I have harmed my child be sending her to daycare. You are the aggressor in the "mommy wars", not me. Call that judgmental if you like.

You are attributing beliefs to me that I don't have. I think it is unlikely that a child will be harmed by daycare if their parents don't want to be a stay at home parent. You are simply deflecting by calling me the aggressor and judgmental when you own that yourself.

You said you think it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent. You obviously believe daycare is bad for kids and are backtracking because I called you out on it.

I believe it's important for infants and toddlers to be cared for by a parent who wants to care for them, or next optimal option might be cared for by a relative who loves them completely. If those are not an option they are better off in daycare. You can, and obviously will, interpret that any way you want.

Your posts are disgusting. Suggesting parents send their kids to daycare because they don’t want to care for them or don’t want a loving relative to care for them is horrible.

I find it amazing that you don't know that millions of people choose to work rather than take care of their own infants and toddlers. There are also many who would prefer to care for their kids themselves but can't make it happen. But to pretend like that's not true is just you in denial.

DP I find it amazing that you don't get that not every parent can be a great SAHP and not every relative can be a great caregiver. Most abuse and neglect of children occurs at home, not in daycares. Caring for infants and toddlers is exhausting and monotonous. And some babies are easier than others. The best parents are those that figure out what will work best for their families, not those that go to unreasonable lengths (like trying to WFH full time and care for an infant) simply to avoid daycare.

+100. It takes a village.

I stayed home for a year with my kid due to a variety of circumstances. SAHP would never have been my first choice. My own mom was a great SAHM. I am not. I met her needs and was generally kind and warm but I didn't like the "job" and it showed. Some people are not adept at the baby/toddler stage. I'm one of them. She was better off in daycare and is thriving

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's broken is an economy that forces a majority of parents to work full-time in order to make ends meet.

This. Institutionalized child care is never a good thing for babies and young children. It’s just a sad result of our economic system.

I agree totally that institutionalized child care is never a good thing for babies and young children. However, while the economic system often seems to make this inevitable for many families, I also wonder why so many people do not consider this hard fact when planning, or failing to plan, their families. The attitude in this country seems to be that everyone is entitled to have as many children as they want rather than encouraging people to figure out what they actually can afford, what daycare options they can reasonably plan for, before bringing children into the world. So many new mothers and many new fathers as well are quite surprised by how much they would prefer to care for their own infants at least the first few years but find they have failed to anticipate this and therefore can't economically find a way to do it.

I don't disagree with you, but would argue that this cuts both ways. I took time off when my child was born (and chose not to have another child) specifically because I did not want to put her in institutionalized care as an infant or toddler, nor did I want to do that with a subsequent child. We adjusted our financial planning to accommodate this and have never regretted it.

But I also have empathy for people who struggle with this because I know better than most that when you take time off to SAH, there are serious career consequences. It's really hard that these consequences almost entirely fall on women since that is most often who is going to stay home with a very young child due to breastfeeding and how infant bonding generally works. Plus men face a ton of stigma for taking time off. I get why not everyone is able to do this. And I'm not willing to argue that you should only have children if you can afford a full time nanny -- I think that's really limiting and classist.

We need to make it possible for middle and working class people to be good parents without having to rely on institutional care for very young kids. That means mandating longer parental leaves, creating more part-time options for parents of young kids, or maybe reconfiguring our social structure to enable extended family to help more with children.

The model of the dual-income family with kids in insitutationalized daycare was not invented by parents. It's the result of a very capitalist society that encourages people to move far from family in order to have profitable careers, and then to outsource childcare to professionals. It benefits corporations and people who sell things, because it puts more people into the workforce and increases family incomes to buy stuff. But families themselves have been complaining about this set up for decades now. A lot of people want out. But it's not something that can be solved via personal choice.

slow clapping. This is the absolute truth right here.
And I did not know how things would turn out or how I would feel about this until I became a parent who actually had to buy my own things for my own children. I can afford it but boy does my heart feel something different than what it did before I had kids.