The Research on Various Childcare Options

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish this issue wasn't so polarizing. I don't think the PP was saying "why have a baby if you don't want to SAH?" Or at least that's not how I read it.

Rather, I think sometimes it IS sad how disinterested parents (not just moms, but parents) are in spending more 1:1 time with their babies. I think it's sad because we've structured that phase of parenthood to be miserable and feel "wrong" so that people get anxious to "return to normal". But I do actually think there is something profound about caring for an infant and learning to adopt a different pace of life with a very different set of goals and parameters.

I'm a pretty career oriented person who wound up taking an extended maternity leave somewhat by accident. I was happy to return to work. But I loved my time with my baby. It's not just that I loved my baby (though I did and do) but it was such a refreshing change of pace. During that time, life got stripped down to essentials. Goals were things like "feeding myself and the baby" or "resting" or "spending some time outside." I took walks. I read books. I went to museums and went out for coffee. My schedule was dictated by naps and feedings. I know some people find this confining. For me it was like spending 8 months at some kind of mindfulness retreat where I had to learn how slow down, calm down, appreciate the present moment for what it was. As someone who is generally super goal oriented and has worked in very high stress environments, I found it cathartic and meaningful. It changed me in a profound way. What I learned is that it's okay to just be. I still carry these lessons with me, even though I'm not a SAHM.

I'm sorry to be the weirdo Pollyanna who is like "but staying home with my baby taught me to live in the now" but... it actually did. I think it would be nice if more parents (men and women) got the chance to experience that. I think we often portray life at home with a baby as lonely, miserable, and unfulfilling. I don't think it has to be that. Perhaps I was primed to view it differently because I wound up unexpectedly unemployed during that time, instead of just on a break from my job. But it wound up being a magical time for me that I would never in a million years give back. And not just because it was time with my baby. Because it was time with me. Now that I'm back at work and my child can talk and interact with me, getting to just spend time with myself is rare. I'm glad I got a bunch of it back then.

It’s polarizing because some people look out on the wide vistas of difficulty and criticism that women— and it’s women, regardless of your “parents”— get and think to themselves the best use of their time is to crap on them and their choices some more, as is if you and any of the hand wringers and concern trolls and worriers about how “irresponsible” day care is have one second of care about the best interests of other people's children.

You just want to crap on other women because you think they feel guilty. It’s tedious, it’s counterproductive and most damming it’s boring. Get a hobby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish this issue wasn't so polarizing. I don't think the PP was saying "why have a baby if you don't want to SAH?" Or at least that's not how I read it.

Rather, I think sometimes it IS sad how disinterested parents (not just moms, but parents) are in spending more 1:1 time with their babies. I think it's sad because we've structured that phase of parenthood to be miserable and feel "wrong" so that people get anxious to "return to normal". But I do actually think there is something profound about caring for an infant and learning to adopt a different pace of life with a very different set of goals and parameters.

I'm a pretty career oriented person who wound up taking an extended maternity leave somewhat by accident. I was happy to return to work. But I loved my time with my baby. It's not just that I loved my baby (though I did and do) but it was such a refreshing change of pace. During that time, life got stripped down to essentials. Goals were things like "feeding myself and the baby" or "resting" or "spending some time outside." I took walks. I read books. I went to museums and went out for coffee. My schedule was dictated by naps and feedings. I know some people find this confining. For me it was like spending 8 months at some kind of mindfulness retreat where I had to learn how slow down, calm down, appreciate the present moment for what it was. As someone who is generally super goal oriented and has worked in very high stress environments, I found it cathartic and meaningful. It changed me in a profound way. What I learned is that it's okay to just be. I still carry these lessons with me, even though I'm not a SAHM.

I'm sorry to be the weirdo Pollyanna who is like "but staying home with my baby taught me to live in the now" but... it actually did. I think it would be nice if more parents (men and women) got the chance to experience that. I think we often portray life at home with a baby as lonely, miserable, and unfulfilling. I don't think it has to be that. Perhaps I was primed to view it differently because I wound up unexpectedly unemployed during that time, instead of just on a break from my job. But it wound up being a magical time for me that I would never in a million years give back. And not just because it was time with my baby. Because it was time with me. Now that I'm back at work and my child can talk and interact with me, getting to just spend time with myself is rare. I'm glad I got a bunch of it back then.

I would write over the infant stage like a tape if I could. And I had an *easy* baby. It is REALLY hard for some moms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wish this issue wasn't so polarizing. I don't think the PP was saying "why have a baby if you don't want to SAH?" Or at least that's not how I read it.

Rather, I think sometimes it IS sad how disinterested parents (not just moms, but parents) are in spending more 1:1 time with their babies. I think it's sad because we've structured that phase of parenthood to be miserable and feel "wrong" so that people get anxious to "return to normal". But I do actually think there is something profound about caring for an infant and learning to adopt a different pace of life with a very different set of goals and parameters.

I'm a pretty career oriented person who wound up taking an extended maternity leave somewhat by accident. I was happy to return to work. But I loved my time with my baby. It's not just that I loved my baby (though I did and do) but it was such a refreshing change of pace. During that time, life got stripped down to essentials. Goals were things like "feeding myself and the baby" or "resting" or "spending some time outside." I took walks. I read books. I went to museums and went out for coffee. My schedule was dictated by naps and feedings. I know some people find this confining. For me it was like spending 8 months at some kind of mindfulness retreat where I had to learn how slow down, calm down, appreciate the present moment for what it was. As someone who is generally super goal oriented and has worked in very high stress environments, I found it cathartic and meaningful. It changed me in a profound way. What I learned is that it's okay to just be. I still carry these lessons with me, even though I'm not a SAHM.

I'm sorry to be the weirdo Pollyanna who is like "but staying home with my baby taught me to live in the now" but... it actually did. I think it would be nice if more parents (men and women) got the chance to experience that. I think we often portray life at home with a baby as lonely, miserable, and unfulfilling. I don't think it has to be that. Perhaps I was primed to view it differently because I wound up unexpectedly unemployed during that time, instead of just on a break from my job. But it wound up being a magical time for me that I would never in a million years give back. And not just because it was time with my baby. Because it was time with me. Now that I'm back at work and my child can talk and interact with me, getting to just spend time with myself is rare. I'm glad I got a bunch of it back then.

I'm so happy for you that you had a good maternity leave. But it's bizarre you feel the need to frame it as you doing motherhood correctly and others doing it wrong.

Everyone's experiences with a new baby are different, for so many different reasons. It's not because of how people "portray" it, it's just people's experiences. Maybe you should recognize that what other people experience does not invalidate your experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish this issue wasn't so polarizing. I don't think the PP was saying "why have a baby if you don't want to SAH?" Or at least that's not how I read it.

Rather, I think sometimes it IS sad how disinterested parents (not just moms, but parents) are in spending more 1:1 time with their babies. I think it's sad because we've structured that phase of parenthood to be miserable and feel "wrong" so that people get anxious to "return to normal". But I do actually think there is something profound about caring for an infant and learning to adopt a different pace of life with a very different set of goals and parameters.

I'm a pretty career oriented person who wound up taking an extended maternity leave somewhat by accident. I was happy to return to work. But I loved my time with my baby. It's not just that I loved my baby (though I did and do) but it was such a refreshing change of pace. During that time, life got stripped down to essentials. Goals were things like "feeding myself and the baby" or "resting" or "spending some time outside." I took walks. I read books. I went to museums and went out for coffee. My schedule was dictated by naps and feedings. I know some people find this confining. For me it was like spending 8 months at some kind of mindfulness retreat where I had to learn how slow down, calm down, appreciate the present moment for what it was. As someone who is generally super goal oriented and has worked in very high stress environments, I found it cathartic and meaningful. It changed me in a profound way. What I learned is that it's okay to just be. I still carry these lessons with me, even though I'm not a SAHM.

I'm sorry to be the weirdo Pollyanna who is like "but staying home with my baby taught me to live in the now" but... it actually did. I think it would be nice if more parents (men and women) got the chance to experience that. I think we often portray life at home with a baby as lonely, miserable, and unfulfilling. I don't think it has to be that. Perhaps I was primed to view it differently because I wound up unexpectedly unemployed during that time, instead of just on a break from my job. But it wound up being a magical time for me that I would never in a million years give back. And not just because it was time with my baby. Because it was time with me. Now that I'm back at work and my child can talk and interact with me, getting to just spend time with myself is rare. I'm glad I got a bunch of it back then.

I'm so happy for you that you had a good maternity leave. But it's bizarre you feel the need to frame it as you doing motherhood correctly and others doing it wrong.

Everyone's experiences with a new baby are different, for so many different reasons. It's not because of how people "portray" it, it's just people's experiences. Maybe you should recognize that what other people experience does not invalidate your experience.

Yeah…just because you don’t enjoy taking care of a baby all day doesn’t mean something is wrong with you and you’re just not trying hard enough. Maybe some people just find it rather monotonous and don’t want to be “on call” all day until their spouse gets home (and maybe even after that). I’m sure we all WANT to really enjoy it and find it magical and everyone just has a different experience of how magical it actually is.

Personally, I’m glad I got to spend 6 months with each baby. It was hard work but I think it creates a bond and appreciation for your baby like no other. But I was also kind of relieved to go back to work and I was happier after that. Because I got fo go and pick up lunch and eat it in silence whenever I wanted to without worrying about my baby might wake up early from nap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The elephant in the room that no one has mentioned - is the higher prevalence of daycare over time partially responsibility for increasing misbehavior in schools?

The “my rich friends chose daycare so it must be an great option” argument does not hold water with me. Some parents do what is best for themselves, not their kids. They may prioritize getting more hours of childcare (daycares are often open 10 hours, nannies rarely stay that long), they may not like the hassle of managing an employee and giving them access to their home, they may not like lowering HHI and cutting their budget so one spouse can quit. And they tell themselves through sickness after sickness after sickness that their child “loves” their daycare teachers and friends and that the child will “gain immunity” before starting Kindergarten.

Most daycare parents stagger their schedules to reduce the amount of time the child is in care.

As far as parents doing what is best for themselves,.yeah that is absolutely true. And sometimes, what is best for the parents is also good for the family as a whole. The research all shows having a depressed mother is as bad if not worse for children than daycare. I had a depressed mother who was a SAHM and that was a huge factor in me choosing daycare.

I don't know that this is true. We use the full 9 hours. You can't stagger your schedule if both parents (unfortunately) work a traditional 9-5 where office presence daily is required.

But I should add, I agree with the rest of PP's reply. I was a SAHM (by circumstances, not by choice) for a year and trust me it was much better and more enriching for my child to be in daycare. I was not happy with the arrangement and it showed.

But like why? Why do people have kids that they aren't happy to spend time with during their most vulnerable and significant years? Everyone keeps saying "If mom's not happy, it is bad for the kid' which seems to me like an excuse to not do what needs to be done. It is so sad that in so many cases neither parent is willing to make any kind of pause or sacrifice for this human being that they chose to create, that didn't ask to be here. It is months of your lives, but the foundation of theirs. And then to get upset about nannies not doing their job well enough when you, the parent, didn't even want to do it. It is insane. You're not required to have them you know.

You homeschool right? Because early elementary is in some ways even more significant for cognition and early-mid teens is SUPER vulnerable so you’re totally 1:1 with them for those major and vital periods of childhood? Cause otherwise like why have kids?

[Anonymous]

Btw to the extent that people choose daycare over having a SAHP because of their baby's temperament that raises red flags about the research. It means the children who go to daycare are different than those who do not, in ways that are difficult to measure.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish this issue wasn't so polarizing. I don't think the PP was saying "why have a baby if you don't want to SAH?" Or at least that's not how I read it.

Rather, I think sometimes it IS sad how disinterested parents (not just moms, but parents) are in spending more 1:1 time with their babies. I think it's sad because we've structured that phase of parenthood to be miserable and feel "wrong" so that people get anxious to "return to normal". But I do actually think there is something profound about caring for an infant and learning to adopt a different pace of life with a very different set of goals and parameters.

I'm a pretty career oriented person who wound up taking an extended maternity leave somewhat by accident. I was happy to return to work. But I loved my time with my baby. It's not just that I loved my baby (though I did and do) but it was such a refreshing change of pace. During that time, life got stripped down to essentials. Goals were things like "feeding myself and the baby" or "resting" or "spending some time outside." I took walks. I read books. I went to museums and went out for coffee. My schedule was dictated by naps and feedings. I know some people find this confining. For me it was like spending 8 months at some kind of mindfulness retreat where I had to learn how slow down, calm down, appreciate the present moment for what it was. As someone who is generally super goal oriented and has worked in very high stress environments, I found it cathartic and meaningful. It changed me in a profound way. What I learned is that it's okay to just be. I still carry these lessons with me, even though I'm not a SAHM.

I'm sorry to be the weirdo Pollyanna who is like "but staying home with my baby taught me to live in the now" but... it actually did. I think it would be nice if more parents (men and women) got the chance to experience that. I think we often portray life at home with a baby as lonely, miserable, and unfulfilling. I don't think it has to be that. Perhaps I was primed to view it differently because I wound up unexpectedly unemployed during that time, instead of just on a break from my job. But it wound up being a magical time for me that I would never in a million years give back. And not just because it was time with my baby. Because it was time with me. Now that I'm back at work and my child can talk and interact with me, getting to just spend time with myself is rare. I'm glad I got a bunch of it back then.

I'm so happy for you that you had a good maternity leave. But it's bizarre you feel the need to frame it as you doing motherhood correctly and others doing it wrong.

Everyone's experiences with a new baby are different, for so many different reasons. It's not because of how people "portray" it, it's just people's experiences. Maybe you should recognize that what other people experience does not invalidate your experience.

This. I took a year and a half off (unexpectedly). It was during Covid, first pre-vaccine for everyone, and then we had a long wait for vaccines for kids under 5. There was no in-person anything available. On top of that, DC had multiple health issues that necessitated lots of specialist visits for diagnoses and treatment. It’s not that I bought into some societal narrative that this period is hard and miserable. It WAS hard.

[Anonymous]

Quality of daycare/nanny/SAHP is everything. I chose to send my kids to daycare at 4 months even though we easily could have afforded a nanny (gasp!) because my work had an on-site center that that allowed me to maximize my time with them, and it made me nervous to put all my trust into one person alone with my baby all day. I do know several people who had bad experiences with Nannies (including a family who switched to our center after their daughter was seriously injured while in the care of their nanny) so the idea that a nanny is always/usually preferable is absurd. I’m sure there are many low quality daycares where kids are ignored, overstimulated, or poorly supervised—also bad.

We’ve now done a variety of things (center based daycare, home daycare, full day preschool, brief stints with nanny, grandparents, and SAHM) and there are pluses and minuses to each. I did SAHM for a few months in between jobs and was surprised at how many Nannie’s at the park in the middle of the day seemed totally disengaged. Sure, I look at my phone when my kids are occupied, but I don’t leave them strapped in their strollers with zero interaction for 45 mins while doing so. So based on my experiences, the pro-nanny/anti-daycare view is off base. I think it would be marvelous if families had access to high quality subsidized daycare, similar to the French crèche system.

[Anonymous]

Some nannies are really bad. Some are excellent, however. Mine is wonderful. And I have occasionally caught them on walks or at the playground when I was able to come home early. Always engaged. Maybe chatting with other nannies, but keeping an eye on the kids. Not scrolling on the phone. In fact wears an Iwatch and leaves phone at home when she takes the kids out.

[Anonymous]

^ if I could only afford a bad nanny, I would quit and stay home with my kids too. No question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^ if I could only afford a bad nanny, I would quit and stay home with my kids too. No question.

So you wouldn't consider daycare at all...? How old is the baby we're talking about?

I don't know if a bad nanny necessarily charges less than a good nanny. I love my nanny and I pay her a "regular" amount. She goes above and beyond and I think it's just in her nature to do that, irrespective of how much I'm paying her.

[Anonymous]

The thing is, the people with the bad Nannies don’t realize it (until they do and fire their nanny). This has happened with friends who are thorough, diligent, check references, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing is, the people with the bad Nannies don’t realize it (until they do and fire their nanny). This has happened with friends who are thorough, diligent, check references, etc.

Yes, people don't know when they have a bad nanny or a bad daycare. Otherwise, they would remedy the situations quickly. But moms are hard on themselves and don't hesitate to label themselves as bad moms/SAHMs. I mention moms specifically because practically all dads seem super confident in their parenting skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is, the people with the bad Nannies don’t realize it (until they do and fire their nanny). This has happened with friends who are thorough, diligent, check references, etc.

Yes, people don't know when they have a bad nanny or a bad daycare. Otherwise, they would remedy the situations quickly. But moms are hard on themselves and don't hesitate to label themselves as bad moms/SAHMs. I mention moms specifically because practically all dads seem super confident in their parenting skills.

A bad licensed daycare will still be inspected more and subject to much more scrutiny than a bad nanny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing is, the people with the bad Nannies don’t realize it (until they do and fire their nanny). This has happened with friends who are thorough, diligent, check references, etc.

Yes, people don't know when they have a bad nanny or a bad daycare. Otherwise, they would remedy the situations quickly. But moms are hard on themselves and don't hesitate to label themselves as bad moms/SAHMs. I mention moms specifically because practically all dads seem super confident in their parenting skills.

A bad licensed daycare will still be inspected more and subject to much more scrutiny than a bad nanny.

I think not needing to oversee or supervise a nanny is probably the main reason why "wealthy" people might use daycare. It's relatively higher risk and higher reward - you might get a bad nanny who puts your child in danger, but on the flip side you will hopefully get a good nanny who provides better care than a daycare.