NYT article about baby who died first day of daycare

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/a-baby-dies-at-day-care-and-a-mother-asks-why-she-had-to-leave-him-so-soon/

Pretty gut-wrenching.

I think all mothers should get a minimum of one year at home with their infant, if they so choose.

This choice is currently available to mothers. What are you talking about?

The choice is availabke. Most women want the paycheck and wont give it up.

If by "want the paycheck" you mean "want to eat and have a roof over your head" than yes, I guess those selfish women just won't "give up" that paycheck.
DCUM has such a skewed view on this. This isn't about people refusing to SAHM because they want big house, lots of vacations, etc. They work because they have to work. Period. We need to accept this is the reality for the vast majority of mothers, and develop a system of maternity leave and childcare that acknowledges this reality.

[Anonymous]

Seriously - what the hell is wrong with PPs blaming the mom and saying it was her choice to go back to work? Sure - she had the choice to do it but it meant foregoing her job and healthcare for their family. You really think that's a real choice? With a newborn, just screw health insurance I guess? You people are assholes and if anything shitty ever happens in your lives, I hope you receive the same amount of empathy and kindness that you show others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seriously - what the hell is wrong with PPs blaming the mom and saying it was her choice to go back to work? Sure - she had the choice to do it but it meant foregoing her job and healthcare for their family. You really think that's a real choice? With a newborn, just screw health insurance I guess? You people are assholes and if anything shitty ever happens in your lives, I hope you receive the same amount of empathy and kindness that you show others.

I'm pretty conservative and I agree with this. How many of you claiming this (that it was her choice to go back, etc) are living off of your husband's salary, on his insurance? Be honest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a horrible thing that happened. That being said, she made the choice, no one forced her. If she wanted a year off, take the year off and all of the sacrifices and consequences that come with it. She chose not to, you can't blame "the system" because you are not willing to do whatever it takes. Yes, she kept her job for the insurance, but only because the other parent did freelance work. One of the solutions would be have that parent get a job with insurance, etc.

Victim blaming much? How many women do you really think can take a whole year off work (which, BTW, most women would be fired for -- you only get 12 weeks protected leave WITHOUT PAY with FMLA -- so it would effectively be leaving their job permanently)?

You sound like you're trying to blame the mom so you don't have to face the possibility this could happen to any mom, even one who really, REALLY loved her baby and made a ton of sacrifices.

You can't claim she made a choice when it's not a choice for most people. It's a necessity for most Americans to have two working parents. Get off your privileged high horse and GTFO.

Did you read the article? She is blaming the fact that she had to go back to work sooner and could't take 2 more months off, on the "culture" that demands it, and has no system in place to let her take more time off. That is BS. She could have taken more time off, but did not want to risk losing her job or healthcare, she chose not to. No "culture" forced her to return to work.

By definition having to make the choice between a few extra months with your child and keeping a job and health insurance is "cultural." Plenty of other countries provide support so that families do not have to make that choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seriously - what the hell is wrong with PPs blaming the mom and saying it was her choice to go back to work? Sure - she had the choice to do it but it meant foregoing her job and healthcare for their family. You really think that's a real choice? With a newborn, just screw health insurance I guess? You people are assholes and if anything shitty ever happens in your lives, I hope you receive the same amount of empathy and kindness that you show others.

I agree! Incredible that people could be so ignorant and so heartless. Either trolls or insulated, stupid rich people who really have no clue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/a-baby-dies-at-day-care-and-a-mother-asks-why-she-had-to-leave-him-so-soon/

Pretty gut-wrenching.

I think all mothers should get a minimum of one year at home with their infant, if they so choose.

This choice is currently available to mothers. What are you talking about?

The choice is availabke. Most women want the paycheck and wont give it up.

If by "want the paycheck" you mean "want to eat and have a roof over your head" than yes, I guess those selfish women just won't "give up" that paycheck.
DCUM has such a skewed view on this. This isn't about people refusing to SAHM because they want big house, lots of vacations, etc. They work because they have to work. Period. We need to accept this is the reality for the vast majority of mothers, and develop a system of maternity leave and childcare that acknowledges this reality.

+1. "Wanting" a paycheck is not the same thing as needing a paycheck. The author and many many other moms in this situation need that paycheck. So staying home for a year is actually not an option available to them. And let's face it - the same people criticizing her for not making the choice to SAH would have criticized her if she had stayed home and then needed some kind of financial assistance from the government. Seriously why is this so confusing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously - what the hell is wrong with PPs blaming the mom and saying it was her choice to go back to work? Sure - she had the choice to do it but it meant foregoing her job and healthcare for their family. You really think that's a real choice? With a newborn, just screw health insurance I guess? You people are assholes and if anything shitty ever happens in your lives, I hope you receive the same amount of empathy and kindness that you show others.

I agree! Incredible that people could be so ignorant and so heartless. Either trolls or insulated, stupid rich people who really have no clue.

Yes, the smugness is astounding...seems it's usually from women of the "well, I'm so grateful that my DH and I *planned* for a parent to stay at home by choosing the right college/major/savings strategy/home/career/fill-in-the-blank" ilk. As though all of their perfect planning could somehow prevent anything terrible from happening to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seriously - what the hell is wrong with PPs blaming the mom and saying it was her choice to go back to work? Sure - she had the choice to do it but it meant foregoing her job and healthcare for their family. You really think that's a real choice? With a newborn, just screw health insurance I guess? You people are assholes and if anything shitty ever happens in your lives, I hope you receive the same amount of empathy and kindness that you show others.

I agree! Incredible that people could be so ignorant and so heartless. Either trolls or insulated, stupid rich people who really have no clue.

Yes, the smugness is astounding...seems it's usually from women of the "well, I'm so grateful that my DH and I *planned* for a parent to stay at home by choosing the right college/major/savings strategy/home/career/fill-in-the-blank" ilk. As though all of their perfect planning could somehow prevent anything terrible from happening to them.

Agreed. These are the type of people that only learn empathy when something terrible happens to them personally. They are too small-minded to understand that tragedy doesn't care about our plans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/a-baby-dies-at-day-care-and-a-mother-asks-why-she-had-to-leave-him-so-soon/

Pretty gut-wrenching.

I think all mothers should get a minimum of one year at home with their infant, if they so choose.

This choice is currently available to mothers. What are you talking about?

The choice is availabke. Most women want the paycheck and wont give it up.

If by "want the paycheck" you mean "want to eat and have a roof over your head" than yes, I guess those selfish women just won't "give up" that paycheck.
DCUM has such a skewed view on this. This isn't about people refusing to SAHM because they want big house, lots of vacations, etc. They work because they have to work. Period. We need to accept this is the reality for the vast majority of mothers, and develop a system of maternity leave and childcare that acknowledges this reality.

+1. "Wanting" a paycheck is not the same thing as needing a paycheck. The author and many many other moms in this situation need that paycheck. So staying home for a year is actually not an option available to them. And let's face it - the same people criticizing her for not making the choice to SAH would have criticized her if she had stayed home and then needed some kind of financial assistance from the government. Seriously why is this so confusing?

+1. There are a lot of people who just don't get it.

[Anonymous]

She says right in the article that she's not making much, so she does not "need" the paycheck. She needs the insurance because the other parent works freelance and does not have insurance. The other parent could get a regular job, but obviously prefers freelancing. That's fine, but it is a choice.

She is blaming "the system", that's my issue. "The system" did not force her to go back to work.

No one "needs" to live in an expensive area, or "needs" to drive a nicer car. They choose to, and make the sacrifices in order to do so. That's fine, but don't act like you are forced to do it.

[Anonymous]

I feel really bad for the mom. But if the baby was going to die of SIDs honestly it's probably better it happened at the daycare. She was cosleeping with that baby in her bed, not putting him to bed "correctly." He was already sleeping in a high risk situation at home according to the article. She'd blame herself a lot more if her son died on her watch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it's a horrible thing that happened. That being said, she made the choice, no one forced her. If she wanted a year off, take the year off and all of the sacrifices and consequences that come with it. She chose not to, you can't blame "the system" because you are not willing to do whatever it takes. Yes, she kept her job for the insurance, but only because the other parent did freelance work. One of the solutions would be have that parent get a job with insurance, etc.

If you need money to live, childcare is not a choice.

FFS

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She says right in the article that she's not making much, so she does not "need" the paycheck. She needs the insurance because the other parent works freelance and does not have insurance. The other parent could get a regular job, but obviously prefers freelancing. That's fine, but it is a choice.

She is blaming "the system", that's my issue. "The system" did not force her to go back to work.

No one "needs" to live in an expensive area, or "needs" to drive a nicer car. They choose to, and make the sacrifices in order to do so. That's fine, but don't act like you are forced to do it.

So everyone that freelances can just "get a regular job?" That supports a family?

Pray tell, PP, what do you do for a living? Where do you live? What do you drive?

[Anonymous]

Ugh sitting here crying at work. So sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She says right in the article that she's not making much, so she does not "need" the paycheck. She needs the insurance because the other parent works freelance and does not have insurance. The other parent could get a regular job, but obviously prefers freelancing. That's fine, but it is a choice.

She is blaming "the system", that's my issue. "The system" did not force her to go back to work.

No one "needs" to live in an expensive area, or "needs" to drive a nicer car. They choose to, and make the sacrifices in order to do so. That's fine, but don't act like you are forced to do it.

She *needs* to preserve her ability to have a job which she determined based on her experience of the local job market/her experience/education to be greatly at risk by a long break. I don't think any of us are better able to determine if that was a reasonable conclusion. There are long-term implication of taking that short-term break to avoid childcare.