Some thoughts on daycare

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ok not to fuel the fire, but you are outsourcing if the kid spends the vast majority of waking hours being cared for by someone else. Saying otherwise is like having a heavy duty house cleaner once a week and then claiming you do t outsource cleaning because you wipe down the counters between cleanings. You are paying someone to take care of your kid. That is not a controversial point. My confusion comes when type a successful people claim that others are better at it. Really, so being with someone with less education, no parental connection, no real stake in it, possibly different values, is actually better for the kid? As an Ivy League graduate, really you cannot do as good a job at child care? Hard to believe. I am a lawyer but am taking time off to take care of my kids because I know that as a competent, smart, conscientious person (i.e. what made me good at my job), I am in fact the best person for the job. I was bad at delegating at work, and quickly found that delegating the child care was impossible. Many perfectionist a types (like me) claim to be less equipped than their less educated nannies with poor language skills at taking care of their children, and I call bullshit. You just don't want to do it. That's fine, but really, try something a little more believable.

Nanny + parents was better for our family than one WOHP + one SAHP. It's not that a parent isn't "better" at childcare, it's the huge career, lifestyle and financial sacrifices and changes that would have to be made to "maximize" childcare. I'm a lawyer too. I worked 9 years in the field before I had my first. No way was I going to take one or two years off and try somehow to get back up to speed. Made no sense for my career goals.

[Anonymous]

I guess one important difference is that some people don't care as much about their work/career as others do. I worked as a government contractor up until the birth of DC; now I stay home, but plan to return to work once DC is in school. Sure, I liked my job, I worked hard and it was important to me, but not so important that I was willing to put DC in daycare. I know that I may have lost ground by leaving the workforce, and that when I return, I may be at the same salary as when I left, but this sacrifice was worth it for me. I figured, DC is only a baby once; I have the rest of my life to 'catch up' at the office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, yes, we downsized a lot. We rent a smaller place now in a good school district. Home ownership in this area required that I work at the law firm, and so we decided to get out of it. That was our choice. I encourage others to be happy with their choices. All I am saying is shut up with the "I really could not take care pf children" crap. It really is a very small point I am making. Sorry it is getting everyone so agitated--probably because working moms say this shit all the time.

Of course I could have taken better care of my kids than our English nanny did. However, the marginal improvement in the care of the kids would have been greatly outweighed by certain things: (1) I never had any desire to SAH, but on the contrary, have always been quite ambitious in a career sense; (2) DH and I believe strongly that being equal partners, both in money earning as well as childrearing is really foundational to our marriage and (3) we are able to achieve our financial goals much more easily because we both WOH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, yes, we downsized a lot. We rent a smaller place now in a good school district. Home ownership in this area required that I work at the law firm, and so we decided to get out of it. That was our choice. I encourage others to be happy with their choices. All I am saying is shut up with the "I really could not take care pf children" crap. It really is a very small point I am making. Sorry it is getting everyone so agitated--probably because working moms say this shit all the time.

You gave up home ownership so you could SAH? That's not a very smart choice in the long run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, they are in preschool a few mornings a week, not for 45 to 55 hours per week of daycare.

Who cares? My children were in othercare for 45 to 50 hours a week from the age of 3 months until they started kindergarten. So what? And we could have afforded to have one of us SAH but chose not to.

[Anonymous]

There have been a couple of posts touching on the theme of women being able to do everything men can do, women can be members of the workforce alongside men, etc. I whole-heartedly agree with this. There have also been some posts surrounding the role of working dads when it comes to childcare. My next comment refers to infant/young toddler care: I didn't used to think this (when I was young, attending an all women's college), but don't you think that, in general, women are better-suited for caring for an infant? We're wired for it. Frankly, it's what we have been designed to do, evolutionarily speaking. So that's my response to the "what about the working dads" thing. It's the mom who's needed for infant care, much much more so than the dad.

[Anonymous]

Oh ffs.
Why don't you just open a spin off thread pp?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sorry but if you wake up, get the child ready, take them somewhere, stay out all day long, pick them up feed them dinner and put them to sleep you're NOT raising your child.

Oh really? Just who is paying for everything, planning developmentally appropriate activities, instilling abstract values like religion? I guess you're not really married, since you only see your husband at nights and weekends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Who cares? My children were in othercare for 45 to 50 hours a week from the age of 3 months until they started kindergarten. So what? And we could have afforded to have one of us SAH but chose not to.

See, that's something that I could never do, and have a difficult time understanding. But yes, I know, it's not my job to understand it - just to respect that people make different choices, even if I don't understand or agree. So, I respect that you make a different choice than I would.

[Anonymous]

God, are you serious?? Next it'll be that only men should be doctors and scientists because science is too hard for the female brain!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've posted earlier. My opinion is that women should take a year or two off after baby's birth, at this critical time when baby really wants/needs mom, baby is (ideally) breastfeeding, etc. Then mom returns to work. I don't think that moms should not be part of the workforce - they should. But a break in those important few years after birth would benefit baby (and probably mom, too).
And yes, i am aware that our country doesn't make this easy for women, that it could be hard to re-enter the workforce, etc.

I didn't want a one to two year break. And with each kid? No way. I would have lost so much traction with my career. It's not like I had my kids in my early 20s or something. Moms in their late 30s or early 40s may not have much interest in a career break. I plan to retire when my youngest is 18!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:God, are you serious?? Next it'll be that only men should be doctors and scientists because science is too hard for the female brain!

I think you're referring to my comment about women being "wired" for infant care. Your example above is a huge leap, one that I would never make. I am not sure how to respond to it except to say that there aren't any reasons, biologically, evolutionarily, or otherwise, why men are 'better-suited' to be doctors, scientists, etc. There are, however, reasons why a woman is better suited to infant care (she produces the milk, she carried the baby, she has the softer voice and body, which research has shown are preferred by a newborn, etc.). I mean, if you look at daycare settings (either homes or facilities), I would venture to say that you see women working here almost to the complete exclusion of men. I am just saying that there is a biological reason for this. I am not at all saying that women can't do everything else as well -- they can! That's why women are incredible - we are the best ones for the hardest job there is - plus, we can do all other jobs, too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess one important difference is that some people don't care as much about their work/career as others do. I worked as a government contractor up until the birth of DC; now I stay home, but plan to return to work once DC is in school. Sure, I liked my job, I worked hard and it was important to me, but not so important that I was willing to put DC in daycare. I know that I may have lost ground by leaving the workforce, and that when I return, I may be at the same salary as when I left, but this sacrifice was worth it for me. I figured, DC is only a baby once; I have the rest of my life to 'catch up' at the office. [/quote

But how many kids are you planning to have? How much of your household's income do you make? And how old were you when you had your child? These are all key questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There have been a couple of posts touching on the theme of women being able to do everything men can do, women can be members of the workforce alongside men, etc. I whole-heartedly agree with this. There have also been some posts surrounding the role of working dads when it comes to childcare. My next comment refers to infant/young toddler care: I didn't used to think this (when I was young, attending an all women's college), but don't you think that, in general, women are better-suited for caring for an infant? We're wired for it. Frankly, it's what we have been designed to do, evolutionarily speaking. So that's my response to the "what about the working dads" thing. It's the mom who's needed for infant care, much much more so than the dad.

Where's the "dislike" button? Totally disagree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've posted earlier. My opinion is that women should take a year or two off after baby's birth, at this critical time when baby really wants/needs mom, baby is (ideally) breastfeeding, etc. Then mom returns to work. I don't think that moms should not be part of the workforce - they should. But a break in those important few years after birth would benefit baby (and probably mom, too).
And yes, i am aware that our country doesn't make this easy for women, that it could be hard to re-enter the workforce, etc.

Obviously your kid(s) are still little. A more seasoned mom will tell you that if you are going to take a year or two off, it should be for 7th and 8th grade. Leaving my babies in daycare was a cake walk compared to not being home after school for junior high.