Why even bother having kids? (Flame away)-- nanny ad, hours 3:30-8pm

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that OP has posted many times on this thread. It's not hard to figure out the IP address.

I have also posted several times on this thread. I find it amazing that so many people are willing to bend over backward to find unlikely reasons that FT professionals would need these hours of childcare, rather than assuming the obvious -- that ALL of their children's physical parenting needs are being met by hired help.

I don't have a problem with that because they aren't my kids. I don't see why anyone else would even care. Obviously they are cared for by qualified providers. I would prefer to have hired care over uninvolved parents. That's how long hours working parents manage. Many people who work long hours or have to work multiple jobs have hired help or other relatives to take care of the kids. I'm absolutely fine with it. In areas like NYC, this is the norm.

Personally, my wife and I don't get home until 6pm each night. Our son goes to sleep from 7:30pm to 7:30am and doesn't wake up in the middle of the night. So we only get 90 minutes with him during the week. I don't consider us to be bad parents but I'm sure many would. I gladly admit this because I couldn't care less what anyone else thinks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People have children for all kinds of selfish reasons. I know I did. But for many people, once you have kids you are forever a different person because you are no longer the most important thing TO YOU -- your children are. Some people never experience that. And many people experience it and are told to stuff those feelings away and ignore them -- it will get easier to leave your baby with someone else; it will get easier to hear your baby cry at night. Etc, etc, etc. Being a good parent means making huge sacrifices, your own 'self' as paramount is the first one.

Why does being a parent mean having to make "huge sacrifices"? Yes - your life changes a lot and you put someone else's needs first, but it doesn't mean you have to become a martyr or give up your entire identity.

So what if they need childcare bc/ neither parent is home until 8 at night? That's their call and maybe their children will be better off for it - having two strong parental role models, having money for the best schools, etc.

Wow. So sad that these are your views on what is best for the child. The best schools over parental involvement.

actually that isn't my view on what's best - i've made career sacrifices to spend more time with my kids bc/ I think parental involvement is more important. But the point of my post is that maybe i'm wrong. maybe for that family, this is a better decision for them and for their children. choosing not to sacrifice your career when you become a mom does not by default make you a bad parent.

[Anonymous]

I have also posted several times on this thread. I find it amazing that so many people are willing to bend over backward to find unlikely reasons that FT professionals would need these hours of childcare, rather than assuming the obvious -- that ALL of their children's physical parenting needs are being met by hired help.

This is my second post, to reiterate that I know families with this kind of afternoon help, and your assumption (as well as the OP's) is just flat out incorrect in these cases. The afternoon help is more like a mother's helper - someone to run errands and give the parents a hand with the chaos of the witching hours. Yes in some cases both parents are not home early every night, but there is always at least one parent there doing dinner, bath and bedtime. They can afford an extra set of hands, so they hire someone. Nothing close to subcontracting your parental responsibilities. I really don't get why an advertisement for PT help would provoke such pointless nastiness toward the parents.

And btw Jeff Steele thanks for outing the OP's sock puppetry!! I really don't get what provokes someone to smear their neighbors on a separate website or pretend to be someone else when they post again, but appreciate your efforts to keep these discussions somewhat sane.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that OP has posted many times on this thread. It's not hard to figure out the IP address.

I have also posted several times on this thread. I find it amazing that so many people are willing to bend over backward to find unlikely reasons that FT professionals would need these hours of childcare, rather than assuming the obvious -- that ALL of their children's physical parenting needs are being met by hired help.

Is this OP too perhaps?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that OP has posted many times on this thread. It's not hard to figure out the IP address.

I have also posted several times on this thread. I find it amazing that so many people are willing to bend over backward to find unlikely reasons that FT professionals would need these hours of childcare, rather than assuming the obvious -- that ALL of their children's physical parenting needs are being met by hired help.

Is this OP too perhaps?

She'd be pretty dumb to try more that again after Jeff busted her. I assume she crawled into a hole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a SAHM of 3 and I have a full time live in nanny. I prefer her to start the work day later so that she can help me with dinner, bath time and bed time so she works from 12:30-8:30. I guess if I had advertised for those hours the OP would have had some very choice words to describe me and she would be totally off base.

lazy!

Why did you bother to have kids? How did our mothers raise children without paid help?

It was FREE! Family members helped ALL THE TIME.

16 year old babysitters would practically raise you.

Parents didn't PAY THAT MUCH ATTENTION.

That's how.

[Anonymous]

I am not very computer savy, so I don't know what an "IP" address is, but thank God Jeff knows who this OP slob is....I still cannot believe quoting a local neighborhood listserv (my neighborhood too!?) on DCUM in such a bitchy judgemental manner...Next time I am walking with my baby in stroller and I pass a woman with little kids I am going to wonder if it is the OP...

[Anonymous]

why even bother having the internet if you're not going to dis SOMEONE?

[Anonymous]

What neighborhood is the OP in?

[Anonymous]

if the two workaholic parents are such horrible people then maybe we should be happy that the kids they decided to have are being raised by other people. Maybe it IS in their best interest!

[Anonymous]

Well, my friend hired a nanny for those hours because she had cancer and was too damn tired by the end of the day to do dinner / bath / bed. I say judge when you've walked a mile in someone's shoes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am a SAHM of 3 and I have a full time live in nanny. I prefer her to start the work day later so that she can help me with dinner, bath time and bed time so she works from 12:30-8:30. I guess if I had advertised for those hours the OP would have had some very choice words to describe me and she would be totally off base.

lazy!

Why did you bother to have kids? How did our mothers raise children without paid help?

It was FREE! Family members helped ALL THE TIME.

16 year old babysitters would practically raise you.

Parents didn't PAY THAT MUCH ATTENTION.

That's how.

The dummy that asked the bolded question knows the answer. And, it was pointed out quite well by the person who responded. Does anyone dispute this?

In my own case -as well as that of about EVERY kid I grew up with- we had two sets of grandparents, cousins, numerous aunts/uncles, all of who babysat for us ALL the time. All for free. When my parents used babysitters, they weren't paying $10/hr. for one kid like we do here. So, it was easy. And they took advantage of that. A lot. That is how they did it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's so much easier for a man to reply in such an idealistic way. Men just don't seem to have as much guilt with respect to childcare as women do. Based on my own personal experience, my husband works 90+ hours a week and is literally not around during the week to spend any time with the kids. He does love the kids and spends time with them during the weekend days when he's not traveling. But he feels no guilt whatsoever about not spending much time with the kids - and society also seems to be okay with that. He's incredibly successful in his business and people applaud the fact that he spends time with the kids during the weekends. As a mom, if I were to do that, people would think I was an evil selfish monster who shouldn't have kids. I think our society puts incredibly unreasonable demands on our moms and offers relatively little support. I have an Ivy League law degree and I have been home with my kids (ages 9,7 and 3) for the last 9 years because with my husband's schedule, I didn't think it would be fair to the kids for me to be away (and in the US, unlike other countries - Europe in particular, it's extremely difficult to find a fulfilling part-time or even 40-hours-a-week legal job). And it sucks that every time I want to do anything during any time of the day (hair cut, doctors appt, etc.), I have to hire a sitter. It makes every decision more challenging. I envy people who live near grandparents who want to be involved in their grandkids' lives. That seems to be the ideal solution. It seems that it does take a village ... or you have to hire one and deal with the guilt.

I personally hate the posts that imply the last word has been said (with their post) and that means there is nothing more to add to the thread. I always wondered if they were posted by men....

PP, I believe that men and women have truly different sets of emotions regarding their children. I don't think it has anything to do with society -- I think it is hormonal. But society does leave women high and dry when it says they can have serious careers AND have kids -- and when the kids sacrifice because of that it is somehow justified by a woman's right to do that, or when the mothers feel they wish they could spend more time with their kids, then they are somehow not being feminists. It is not a test of emotional endurance for men to have serious careers with long hours and know their kids are taken care of by someone else, the way it is for (many) women, no matter what society says. It's just not.

That's just not true. I know many men who suffer emotionally when their children suffer, and one who scaled back a great career to avoid the childrens' suffering. In that case, it's the mom who has a tin ear for the kids' needs. You simply cannot generalize like that in 2011.

Yes, there are many women who have tin ears, as is obvious from this thread and others like it. But in general, women who want to be mothers vs. those who do it just because it is expected of them, are more likely to suffer from not being able to raise their kids themselves than men are.

But a mother working full time does NOT mean that she is not raising her kids herself. Nannies don't give moral guidance or money for tuition.

Nannies may not pay tuition, but they do give moral guidance. Anyone caring for a child--even a teenaged babysitter--gives moral guidance, one way or another, as they speak to the child in different situations and show by example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that OP has posted many times on this thread. It's not hard to figure out the IP address.

I have also posted several times on this thread. I find it amazing that so many people are willing to bend over backward to find unlikely reasons that FT professionals would need these hours of childcare, rather than assuming the obvious -- that ALL of their children's physical parenting needs are being met by hired help.

I don't have a problem with that because they aren't my kids. I don't see why anyone else would even care. Obviously they are cared for by qualified providers. I would prefer to have hired care over uninvolved parents. That's how long hours working parents manage. Many people who work long hours or have to work multiple jobs have hired help or other relatives to take care of the kids. I'm absolutely fine with it. In areas like NYC, this is the norm.

Personally, my wife and I don't get home until 6pm each night. Our son goes to sleep from 7:30pm to 7:30am and doesn't wake up in the middle of the night. So we only get 90 minutes with him during the week. I don't consider us to be bad parents but I'm sure many would. I gladly admit this because I couldn't care less what anyone else thinks.

Just curious--since you don't care what anyone else thinks, do you think it matters how much or how little he sees you each evening?

[Anonymous]

The OP is a sockpuppet. Why is the argument continuing? If you don't think nannies are good for your kids, then don't hire one. It's as simple as that. This is what the troll OP was looking for and so many posters are happy to play along.

This is stupid, just as stupid as it was 10 pages ago.