Does SAHM make a difference during infant years?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
+1. Not to mention that even if you want to make such a silly argument it's not relevant here, where we are talking about the "infant years." |
Anonymous
Why? I mean I’m not that poster but it’s being with your children the majority of the day means you’re raising them that all the teachers start raising them once they start kindergarten? Especially in this time of virtual learning most working mothers would be with their kids maybe an hour or two less a day then mom said stay home. And most kids are in extracurricular zone anyway. So what’s the difference? |
Anonymous
If you want to talk about the infant he was literally all the research says it doesn’t matter. Try harder. |
Anonymous
| *years |
Anonymous
I’m not dressing anything up. You are welcome to look back through this thread and critique the studies posted. Or you can remain an ignorant fool. |
Anonymous
No. Not at all. Study after study shows that kids do better with high quality care, the kids are better off with a working mom if the alternative is living in poverty, and that kids are better off with a SAHM in middle class and UMC homes. It’s really very clear. This is accross a population though, and it doesn’t necessarily mean anything for one particular child, |
Anonymous
Ding ding ding! And this is why the arguing is kind of pointless. You can see it in the comments. The WOHMs who are militant that it's the right choice almost universally cite their very hiqh quality childcare they paid for. And many of the SAHMs talk about being able to find quality care within their budget. So basically these two groups who are yelling at each other are making THE EXACT SAME CHOICE in different contexts. They are both selecting the higher quality care option. For some people, that's going to be a really good nanny or any exceptional day care (which will cost $$$ -- there are no bargains to be had in childcare, at least not in the DMV). And for others, that's going to be the loving SAHP who will put in the time and the effort to making sure their child gets what they need. I seriously don't know why this isn't obvious to everyone. People have different resources and therefore have to make different childcare arrangements. Everyone tries to maximize benefit to their child. We all have way more in common than we are willing to admit. |
Anonymous
| ^SAHMs talk about being UNable to find quality childcare within their budget |
Anonymous
Google “The Hell of American Daycare” (Atlantic). |
Anonymous
It's not *very clear*. There are many factors like maternal education and SES that matter much more than whether or not mom works. And, you point out, these studies have no predictive value for an individual child. So again, each family makes the choice that is best for them, and kids will be fine. |
Anonymous
There have been three studies cited, as far as I can see. One meta analysis that concluded, "Analyses of studies that spanned 5 decades indicated that, with a few exceptions, early employment was not significantly associated with later achievement or internalizing/externalizing behaviors." and "The small effect size and primarily nonsignificant results for main effects of early maternal employment should allay concerns about mothers working when children are young", one 16 year old study that showed increased chance of aggression in kids that were in daycare more than 45 hours a week, and one article about the work of Kathleen McGinn, who is the one everyone was buzzing about a few years ago who says her work shows benefits for the careers of daughters of working mothers. So what are you talking about? There are *no* studies that definitively say that kids raised by SAHMs are better off than kids who go to daycare/have nannies. There just aren't. There are some trends, but many of them go IN FAVOR of daycare. But at the end of the day, the big daycare study by the NICHD concluded this: "Features of the family and of children’s experiences in their families proved, in general, to be stronger and more consistent predictors of child development than did any aspect of child care." https://www.nichd.nih.gov/sites/default/files/publications/pubs/documents/seccyd_06.pdf The ignorant fool is you. |
Anonymous
DP. That's not what that article says. |
Anonymous
|
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1325770/Children-better-school-mother-stays-home-year.html "Youngsters are less likely to succeed at school if their mothers return to work within a year of their birth, according to a major study." "The child’s success was particularly affected if the mother’s work was full-time, the study spanning five decades found." "Children of middle-class and two-parent families were more likely to be affected negatively than those from working-class or single-parent families, according to the research." "Middle-class and upper-class youngsters suffer if their mothers return to work within their first three years. This was ‘significantly associated with decreases in formal measures of achievement’, it said." |
Anonymous
Are you seriously quoting the Daily Mail??? |
Anonymous
It seems to know more about this than you do. |