Are you offended when someone says they “didnt want someone else to raise my kids”?

[Anonymous]

I have to say, I was significantly more open to SAHP for my next child until reading this thread. The train of thought that leads one to believe that it’s an absolute truth that SAHP is superior to daycare is so twisted and unfounded that it’s been a real awakening to me that it’s not a perspective I subscribe to at all. Imagine thinking the only way to do something well, is to be the only one doing it. I alone can fix it!! The arrogance, self-centered ness, and unfounded confidence for people who have experience doing this, 0, 1, or at best 2 times in their lives? They think this experience puts them as better than anything else? Wow!!

It’s funny because we moved to an area that a lot of posters on here love to put down. But we have excellent early childhood education from 0-12 years old. Apparently, all that big city living that you value so much comes with some drawbacks when it comes to finding quality child care?

There are so many ways to do things correctly! Just because you picked something that works for you, doesn’t make it “best” or the “only”way or even better. It’s just the way you picked.

Unless you’re going to be able to produce a large population study showing kids who were the product of a SAHM have lower incidence of mental health, higher performers athletically, academically, and professionally, lower incidence of drug and alcohol abuse, and lower rates of committing crimes than kids who didn’t, I’m not interested in your theories.

It’s just a choice. Stop being so damned insecure about it.

[Anonymous]

People who are secure in their choices don't need to argue with people defending those choices.

This goes for both sides.

[Anonymous]

It’s not rocket science. What would a child want if he or she could choose? It doesn’t mean the alternative is horrible. But no child would choose separation at 3 months or even 12 months. The problem is kids have no lobby, no voice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People who are secure in their choices don't need to argue with people defending those choices.

This goes for both sides.

But this thread is about a statement that clearly puts down the working parents side.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not rocket science. What would a child want if he or she could choose? It doesn’t mean the alternative is horrible. But no child would choose separation at 3 months or even 12 months. The problem is kids have no lobby, no voice.

My child would choose to eat ice cream for every meal. So I should do that too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who are secure in their choices don't need to argue with people defending those choices.

This goes for both sides.

But this thread is about a statement that clearly puts down the working parents side.

Maybe the original topic was, but it quickly devolved into insults from both sides. Also, the OP is made up anyway. No one actually says that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not rocket science. What would a child want if he or she could choose? It doesn’t mean the alternative is horrible. But no child would choose separation at 3 months or even 12 months. The problem is kids have no lobby, no voice.

My child would choose to eat ice cream for every meal. So I should do that too?

Poor analogy. Ice cream every meal is unhealthy. Having a loving, caring SAHM is not.

[Anonymous]

I'm was a sahm and am totally secure in my choice. I don't judge working women at all—in fact my own amazing mom put me in daycare from early infancy. But I truly, deeply wish more American could children delay daycare and enjoy higher-quality care as they do in peer nations. It sounds disingenuous to all the vipers on here but that's honestly my agenda. And I hate that caring about kids is somehow anti-feminist or right-wing. (Also, every OT, ST, PT, etc. I have seen with my children feels the same way about early childhood.)

Sometimes you have to move beyond your defensiveness and see the bigger picture. For example: I wasn't able to breastfeed. I loathed and resented the lactivists for their arrogance and meddling and felt enormous guilt (this was back when this was *the* hot issue). BUT even I can acknowledge that the lactivist movement probably helped millions of children enjoy healthier, happier lives. It's not always about our egos.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not rocket science. What would a child want if he or she could choose? It doesn’t mean the alternative is horrible. But no child would choose separation at 3 months or even 12 months. The problem is kids have no lobby, no voice.

My child would choose to eat ice cream for every meal. So I should do that too?

Poor analogy. Ice cream every meal is unhealthy. Having a loving, caring SAHM is not.

It’s not a poor analogy at all. Who cares what a kid would advocate for if they had a voice? And if you think it’s a bad analogy, you’re also saying it doesn’t matter what the kid wants (the kid definitely wants ice cream). The parent is making the decision in the end… you said kids have no voice and no one to lobby “for them” as if it mattered?

And, please, show me convincing outcomes based evidence that a “loving, caring, SAHM” is superior to not staying at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not rocket science. What would a child want if he or she could choose? It doesn’t mean the alternative is horrible. But no child would choose separation at 3 months or even 12 months. The problem is kids have no lobby, no voice.

My child would choose to eat ice cream for every meal. So I should do that too?

Poor analogy. Ice cream every meal is unhealthy. Having a loving, caring SAHM is not.

It’s not a poor analogy at all. Who cares what a kid would advocate for if they had a voice? And if you think it’s a bad analogy, you’re also saying it doesn’t matter what the kid wants (the kid definitely wants ice cream). The parent is making the decision in the end… you said kids have no voice and no one to lobby “for them” as if it mattered?

And, please, show me convincing outcomes based evidence that a “loving, caring, SAHM” is superior to not staying at home.

I'm the PP above this, but not the PP above that. I didn't say that a loving caring SAHM is superior to not staying home. But if a woman desires it, and a child desires it, and its possible for the family, I don't know why any family would not choose it if they could. I'm very thankful that it worked out for us, and for that my husband will have my eternal gratitude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm was a sahm and am totally secure in my choice. I don't judge working women at all—in fact my own amazing mom put me in daycare from early infancy. But I truly, deeply wish more American could children delay daycare and enjoy higher-quality care as they do in peer nations. It sounds disingenuous to all the vipers on here but that's honestly my agenda. And I hate that caring about kids is somehow anti-feminist or right-wing. (Also, every OT, ST, PT, etc. I have seen with my children feels the same way about early childhood.)

Sometimes you have to move beyond your defensiveness and see the bigger picture. For example: I wasn't able to breastfeed. I loathed and resented the lactivists for their arrogance and meddling and felt enormous guilt (this was back when this was *the* hot issue). BUT even I can acknowledge that the lactivist movement probably helped millions of children enjoy healthier, happier lives. It's not always about our egos.

The bolded claims need sources because they sound a lot like opinions.

If you’re referring to “peer nations” as Western Europe, I work with a ton of Western Europeans and even lived there for a time. Americans glamorize and romanticize the parental leave but it’s a major f’ing problem for their economies and, it’s not so straightforward that every mom stays home for free for ____ months/years (fill in the blank with whatever myth based number you want)

As for breast feeding, surely you know the very same countries you put on a pedestal for this free SAHM child care system (that doesn’t exist) also rely extremely heavily on formula.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not rocket science. What would a child want if he or she could choose? It doesn’t mean the alternative is horrible. But no child would choose separation at 3 months or even 12 months. The problem is kids have no lobby, no voice.

My child would choose to eat ice cream for every meal. So I should do that too?

Poor analogy. Ice cream every meal is unhealthy. Having a loving, caring SAHM is not.

It’s not a poor analogy at all. Who cares what a kid would advocate for if they had a voice? And if you think it’s a bad analogy, you’re also saying it doesn’t matter what the kid wants (the kid definitely wants ice cream). The parent is making the decision in the end… you said kids have no voice and no one to lobby “for them” as if it mattered?

And, please, show me convincing outcomes based evidence that a “loving, caring, SAHM” is superior to not staying at home.

I'm the PP above this, but not the PP above that. I didn't say that a loving caring SAHM is superior to not staying home. But if a woman desires it, and a child desires it, and its possible for the family, I don't know why any family would not choose it if they could. I'm very thankful that it worked out for us, and for that my husband will have my eternal gratitude.

How the F does a 6 month old desire a SAHP vs a working parent? Seriously. How deluded are you that you think there’s some complex cost/benefit analysis being done by a newborn?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not rocket science. What would a child want if he or she could choose? It doesn’t mean the alternative is horrible. But no child would choose separation at 3 months or even 12 months. The problem is kids have no lobby, no voice.

My child would choose to eat ice cream for every meal. So I should do that too?

Poor analogy. Ice cream every meal is unhealthy. Having a loving, caring SAHM is not.

It’s not a poor analogy at all. Who cares what a kid would advocate for if they had a voice? And if you think it’s a bad analogy, you’re also saying it doesn’t matter what the kid wants (the kid definitely wants ice cream). The parent is making the decision in the end… you said kids have no voice and no one to lobby “for them” as if it mattered?

And, please, show me convincing outcomes based evidence that a “loving, caring, SAHM” is superior to not staying at home.

I'm the PP above this, but not the PP above that. I didn't say that a loving caring SAHM is superior to not staying home. But if a woman desires it, and a child desires it, and its possible for the family, I don't know why any family would not choose it if they could. I'm very thankful that it worked out for us, and for that my husband will have my eternal gratitude.

How the F does a 6 month old desire a SAHP vs a working parent? Seriously. How deluded are you that you think there’s some complex cost/benefit analysis being done by a newborn?

I guess yours never cried when you left?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who are secure in their choices don't need to argue with people defending those choices.

This goes for both sides.

But this thread is about a statement that clearly puts down the working parents side.

I guess but does it put them down enough to get this worked up over it if you are otherwise totally happy and secure in your life choices?

If someone says to me "I prefer to provide my own medical care because I don't trust doctors" I guess I might see that as a judgment of me for going to the doctor. But since I'm extremely happy with my choice to go to doctors and doing my own medical care sounds like a bad idea for me personally I wouldn't be offended by this.

I think if people are getting this worked up over this comment it is at least partially because they worry it might be true.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not rocket science. What would a child want if he or she could choose? It doesn’t mean the alternative is horrible. But no child would choose separation at 3 months or even 12 months. The problem is kids have no lobby, no voice.

My child would choose to eat ice cream for every meal. So I should do that too?

Poor analogy. Ice cream every meal is unhealthy. Having a loving, caring SAHM is not.

It’s not a poor analogy at all. Who cares what a kid would advocate for if they had a voice? And if you think it’s a bad analogy, you’re also saying it doesn’t matter what the kid wants (the kid definitely wants ice cream). The parent is making the decision in the end… you said kids have no voice and no one to lobby “for them” as if it mattered?

And, please, show me convincing outcomes based evidence that a “loving, caring, SAHM” is superior to not staying at home.

I'm the PP above this, but not the PP above that. I didn't say that a loving caring SAHM is superior to not staying home. But if a woman desires it, and a child desires it, and its possible for the family, I don't know why any family would not choose it if they could. I'm very thankful that it worked out for us, and for that my husband will have my eternal gratitude.

How the F does a 6 month old desire a SAHP vs a working parent? Seriously. How deluded are you that you think there’s some complex cost/benefit analysis being done by a newborn?

I'm a working parent and this is a weird comment to me. My kid has definitely always preferred me or my DH over daycare. It was one of the reasons I decided to switch to a nanny share -- DD was able to develop a stronger bond with the nanny than she could with the daycare workers and that made her clearly happier to be there than in the daycare.