Does SAHM make a difference during infant years?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stay home all the way. Your baby is only your baby once, for a few years, which is maybe 3% of a lifetime. It is not worth the extra few years of income to drop off your infant with someone else, unless 1. you can’t afford otherwise or 2. you are curing cancer.

But that’s for your, the parent’s, benefit. Not necessarily the child. My parents are brilliant scientists but couldn’t engage or play with us as babies and toddlers. Our nanny, a teacher, could and did. She also taught us French and all about art and music.


And yes, I still am in close contact with my nanny.

[Anonymous]

There is no way to truly know what difference a SAHM will make in YOUR infant's life. I am a SAHM who was raised by a SAHM (for most of my childhood). I loved and appreciated that my mom was home with us, and I feel very fortunate that I am able to SAH especially now. I am content and know this is the right decision for my family. I do not believe or trust that a paid provider can or will give my child better can than I can but I don't feel that is true for every family's situation.

[Anonymous]

I don’t know and my sample size is small.

But based on observations and a little personal experience I think that staying home with toddlers imparts a personality/sense of humor that’s more like the primary caregiver (if the attention is focused), and if the child is talked to directly very frequently they will be more likely to speak more coherently, have a larger vocabulary, and sometimes develop early literacy skills.

That said late elementary and middle school are important years to be there before and after school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it really depends on the mother. I loved staying home with my DD between 0 and 3 and think we both got a lot out of it. I feel really in tune with who she is as a person and what she needs, both now and moving forward, that will help me make parenting decisions moving forward.

We also have a really great relationship and I feel confident that we've laid the groundwork for a solid parent-child relationship moving forward. She trusts me, she talks to me about what is troubling her and we've developed a good vocabulary for discussing stuff. I definitely think you could do that while working but for me, it was helpful to be together more to get to that place.

But ultimately, I stayed home because I wanted to. I was an older mom and I knew this would be my only child. I worked for 20 years before becoming a mom. I was ready for a break and wanted to soak up the baby and toddler years while I could because I'm not going to get to do it again. I think if I'd had a baby at 32, or if I'd been planning to have 2 or 3, I might have made a different choice. I don't think it benefits a baby to be home with a mother who wishes she was at work or is bored or feels isolated. And I think those feelings are valid and don't mean you are a bad mom, at all! It's not how I felt but I could see how someone might.

The point is, make the choice that makes sense for you and that's what's best for your baby. I know that sounds selfish, but the truth is that your baby needs a happy, well-adjusted mom. If that means going back to work and finding a great nanny or a great daycare, do it! If it means quitting and staying home, and that works for your finances and your career, do that. I don't think either choice is best for everyone, because everyone has a different family set up, different personality, different work situation, etc. Heck, some people don't have access to high quality childcare and that influences their choice -- if you can't find a daycare you like and you can't afford a nanny, then staying home might feel like the best option. But it's so, so person dependent.

The benefits you cite are because you have an only child. I have one too and a commonality with all of parents of onlies I know is a precociousness with being about to talk about emotions, knowing your kid’s thought processes well, and having a super close relationship. It’s a thing with only kids, even those that spend 45 hours a week in daycare. Just FYI because I thought it was funny how you were describing only child-parent relationship traits, then went on to say you had an only.

Actually, it's not limited to onlies or kids w SAHMs. I have two kids and always worked full time. I am so close with both of my kids, feel we really connect. They both confide in me. They are 10 and 13. Both well-adjusted, loving kids who do well in school.

The fact that they both were in daycare as little kids did nothing to impair my relationship with them...or their father.

Somehow no one talks about dad.

[Anonymous]

If you really dig into the literature, the truth is, kids do well if they have a compassionate caregiver who bonds with them, usually mom whether she works or not.

There are so many possible situations and outcomes. For every anecdote you give me, I'm sure I can find one to counter.

So, do what will work best for your family. If you want to stay home and you can financially handle it, do it. And don't feel guilty and don't worry about justifying it to anyone else. And if you want to work, put your energy into finding the best childcare situation you can afford. And don't feel guilty about it and don't worry about justifying it to anyone else.

As long as you and your other parent are in agreement, go forth.

[Anonymous]

For those who talk about baby’s brain development- is it possible that one could (inadvertently) cause their baby to have ADHD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it really depends on the mother. I loved staying home with my DD between 0 and 3 and think we both got a lot out of it. I feel really in tune with who she is as a person and what she needs, both now and moving forward, that will help me make parenting decisions moving forward.

We also have a really great relationship and I feel confident that we've laid the groundwork for a solid parent-child relationship moving forward. She trusts me, she talks to me about what is troubling her and we've developed a good vocabulary for discussing stuff. I definitely think you could do that while working but for me, it was helpful to be together more to get to that place.

But ultimately, I stayed home because I wanted to. I was an older mom and I knew this would be my only child. I worked for 20 years before becoming a mom. I was ready for a break and wanted to soak up the baby and toddler years while I could because I'm not going to get to do it again. I think if I'd had a baby at 32, or if I'd been planning to have 2 or 3, I might have made a different choice. I don't think it benefits a baby to be home with a mother who wishes she was at work or is bored or feels isolated. And I think those feelings are valid and don't mean you are a bad mom, at all! It's not how I felt but I could see how someone might.

The point is, make the choice that makes sense for you and that's what's best for your baby. I know that sounds selfish, but the truth is that your baby needs a happy, well-adjusted mom. If that means going back to work and finding a great nanny or a great daycare, do it! If it means quitting and staying home, and that works for your finances and your career, do that. I don't think either choice is best for everyone, because everyone has a different family set up, different personality, different work situation, etc. Heck, some people don't have access to high quality childcare and that influences their choice -- if you can't find a daycare you like and you can't afford a nanny, then staying home might feel like the best option. But it's so, so person dependent.

How old is your kid right now? I’m going to guess younger than 5, just from how idealistic you sound. Check in again when you have a school age child.

She’s 4 (and I’m back at work full time) but how can my lives experience be “idealistic”? I took time off, it was the right choice for me, it seems to have been good for my kid, but I’m sure other options would have worked for her too. Not sure why any of that would change— no matter what the future holds, I can’t think of any reason I’d suddenly regret my very positive SAHM experience later.

I’m not questioning your choices, good for you. I just noticed a couple phrases in there that are typical of a FTM with a young child. Wait until your child gets a little older and more complex. You’ll see that 0-5 is a golden period, regardless of whether you WOH or SAH. There’s a reason older women get misty eyed when they see a young child. It’s easy to be that child’s whole world and to feel like you’re doing everything right. Wait a bit, you’ll see what I mean.

Oh, a “just you wait— you’ll see.” Moms of young kids never hear that.

Yes, of course things will change as my child ages. Thank you for explaining *the effect of time on humans* to me. As a person in my 40s, that has never occurred to me before.

Honey, you’re the one who said this bond is going to help you make parenting decisions going forward and that you feel confident about this great groundwork you’ve laid. Sorry but only moms of young children say that kind of thing. That’s not a mindset that shows consciousness about how things change. You will be dealing with a completely different kid in a few years. It’s fine if you want to congratulate yourself about the lifelong effects of these few years, but just own that this isn’t really realistic given that it’s early in the marathon. The truth is you don’t know yet what your child or your relationship with your child is going to look like, and that’s ok. Embrace the fact that you had some good years. Don’t make it into an expectation for how things will go.

Ooooh, a “Honey” — now I know you really do know what you are talking about.

I see that you have been triggered by some of the words in my originally post and I would encourage you to raise that with your therapist at your next session. However, if you had actually read my whole post, who would have seen that I point out that I think someone WOH could develop the same bond, but this is what worked for me. And when I say it helps me make decisions for my kid, I’m talking about PK programs and whether to sign her up for gymnastics, not college. But you read into what you wanted so that you could climb up on your high horse and explain parenting to me.

Sorry you are struggling with your school age kids, but that’s not really relevant to my comment or this thread. The OP asked if SAHM during infant/toddler years made a difference, and I explained that in my case, it made a difference *for me*. It’s what I wanted so it’s what I did and I don’t regret it. I was arguing that it’s the solution to all parenting issues or that it will ensure your child does well at every age, just that in the microcosm of ages 0-3, it worked for me.

I have no idea why you feel the need to tell me that my kid will change as she ages. Thanks, I know? Nothing you’ve said helps anyone (not me, not OP). You are just enjoying telling a mother of a younger child that you know more (and yet, mysteriously, this vast experience has produced not a single nugget of wisdom). But whatever your motivation, it’s AAAALLLLL about you and has nothing to do with me.

Trust me. You’ll see.

NP. No, sweetheart, the PP nailed you. You threw in your SAHMs-have-better-relationships-with-their-kids dogwhistles in the beginning of your post and then tried to give the PC lines. She called you on your naivete and you have to start throwing darts about her "struggles" with her kids, which you know absolutely nothing about.

You're a relative newby but too smug.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is no way to truly know what difference a SAHM will make in YOUR infant's life. I am a SAHM who was raised by a SAHM (for most of my childhood). I loved and appreciated that my mom was home with us, and I feel very fortunate that I am able to SAH especially now. I am content and know this is the right decision for my family. I do not believe or trust that a paid provider can or will give my child better can than I can but I don't feel that is true for every family's situation.

You can’t measure a negative. Your kids might have been better off with an engaged and educated nanny. No one will ever know and it would be unethical to even test it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For those who talk about baby’s brain development- is it possible that one could (inadvertently) cause their baby to have ADHD?

yes, I would like to know the answer to this.

[Anonymous]

A nurturing environment is all that matters, whatever form that takes. No one-size-fits-all-here.

Also lol at the PP claiming kids are screwed up by only seeing parents for a few waking hours during the week. Setting aside the issue of sleep, let's say children spend 40 or 50 hours/week with a nanny. They're still cared for more than twice as many hours by the parents, who are the ones who care for them first thing in the morning, at bedtime, in the middle of the night whenever they wake up, and all weekend, holidays etc. It's absurd to suggest they develop confusion about attachment. I've never met a baby who doesn't know who their parents are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the tipping point for me was that a child develops a primary attachment, and if a nanny was going to be with my child for 7-8 of their waking hours and I would get 2-4 of those waking hours, the baby would be more attached to the nanny. Then, when the inevitable time comes to let your nanny go, your child has lost a huge part of their family. That's traumatic if you have a good nanny, and if you don't then that's traumatic in its own way. Sure, they may not remember consciously, but their body does.

Also, I guess part of it was having a balanced and relaxed life. I don't understand the point of doing anything if you're not enjoying yourself. With one parent home (would've just as easily been DH but he made 1.5x my salary) your life is just so very relaxed and low stress. That's the point! Have fun!

So not true regarding nannies. I was raised with a wonderful nanny who stayed in my life after she stopped working for my parents and my brother and I spoke at her funeral. My primary attachment was still with my parents.

My kids also have a brilliant, loving nanny who sees her former charges so I know she’ll see my kids once she moves on unemployment. And my kids are very bonded with DH and me. There is no confusion at all.

With all due respect, you do not know this. You were an infant and toddler during this time. It switches. It is a deeply rooted psychological state of attachment, not a conscious "this is my mom" kind of thing.

Ok, what is the evidence for any of this? The infant can't tell you, and you're basically arguing that as soon as a kid can talk and/or remember they will have switched attachment anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know and my sample size is small.

But based on observations and a little personal experience I think that staying home with toddlers imparts a personality/sense of humor that’s more like the primary caregiver (if the attention is focused), and if the child is talked to directly very frequently they will be more likely to speak more coherently, have a larger vocabulary, and sometimes develop early literacy skills.

That said late elementary and middle school are important years to be there before and after school.

+1.

SAH, WAH, WOH mom

[Anonymous]

Mother and baby are a dyad for the first year, and maternal depression and anxiety can impact the baby. So taking your own mental health into account is important. Not everyone is cut out to do 24/7 care for a person who can’t move themselves, might be in pain frequently from digestive or teeth issues, and essentially needs help to eat, sleep, and go to the bathroom. If I told you you would be doing that for a miniature elderly person for a year, I doubt you would romanticize it.

I WAH for the first year and nursed on demand, with the help of nannies and babysitters. My baby did not get confused about who mom was. But my more extroverted baby really enjoyed playtime with the creative and energetic young women who would swoop in with fun ideas and games. My second slept a lot and probably was only awake with the nanny when not eating for 2-3 hours a day. They had a close bond and at the same time, the child was definitely not confused about who the parents were. I liked being able to be there with them and help read their cues for the first few weeks until I could see their caregivers were very attuned to them.

Think about it — in an organism as complex and intelligent as a human being, the addition of another interesting person to interact with in the environment is probably quite stimulating and enhances their social development just by modeling a different way of being in the world. If you have a good nanny, it’s like having another close auntie or friend. Who wouldn’t want that for their child?

Finally, I think a bit depends on you as a person. I felt like I had more go give energy wise to my kids when they were 2, 3, 4 because I wasn’t drained from having been with them round the clock the first year. It’s definitely a marathon and they need you at every stage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t know and my sample size is small.

But based on observations and a little personal experience I think that staying home with toddlers imparts a personality/sense of humor that’s more like the primary caregiver (if the attention is focused), and if the child is talked to directly very frequently they will be more likely to speak more coherently, have a larger vocabulary, and sometimes develop early literacy skills.

That said late elementary and middle school are important years to be there before and after school.

Funny, all the kids in our family (and by this I mean all the cousins, not just my own kids) have gone to daycare and all are funny, have great vocabularies and were able to read as preschoolers. Maybe it's just because they all have well-educated, intelligent, funny parents who read to them every night. Who knows?

And my kids love aftercare at school. They love playing with their friends for a little while. But I'll bet there are kids who don't

The point is...Stop all the generalizing!

As one of the PPs said earlier, there is no one size fits all. If you love your kid and create a safe and stable home for them, they'll be fine. They'll know who their parents are and they'll bond with their parents.

[Anonymous]

I never had the choice of a nanny. We could not even find a nanny share within our budget. And even the nicest daycare we looked at, I couldn’t imagine leaving my baby there at 3 or 4 months old.

For me, the choice between SAH or returning to a job I didn’t particularly love, with limited potential for advancement, so that I could hand over my entire take home pay to a daycare I didn’t totally trust was an easy one. My DH was supportive and fortunately I loved being home with my DD and really enjoyed the baby and toddler stages.

But I think context is everything. The PPs saying they found an amazing nanny they loved? That’s great but not an option for everyone— a FT nanny who is well qualified will cost 40k+ annually. And I would have loved to WAH with help from a nanny, but that arrangement is so rarely available (pre-Covid at least).

One reason I hate how much judgment women have of one another on this subject is that for most of us, our choices are pretty limited. It’s hurtful to judge people harshly for doing their best with what they have. There is so much meanness and vitriol on this thread, and for what? What goes that get you?

Do what makes sense for you and is within your means, OP. That’s the right choice for you and your baby. Anyone who will tell you otherwise is not worth listening to.