Does SAHM make a difference during infant years?

[Anonymous]

Am deciding whether to stay at home for 1-3 years with my baby as my maternity leave comes to a close. On one hand, I’ve read that the most brain development happens from age 1-3 and I love the idea of being able to interact with the baby as much as possible during this period as he learns so much. I can’t imagine anyone being as invested in his development as me. On the other hand, baby’s needs seem so simple during this period and likely could be easily outsourced to a well qualified nanny. Is there really any benefit to the baby if a mom stays at home during the early years? Not looking to debate what is best for mom re savings, career etc., just what is best for baby.

[Anonymous]

I think people really overstate the importance of any specific person on a baby's brain development. Barring abuse or neglect, your baby's brain is going to develop the way it's supposed to -- babies are very good at getting what they need from their environment, and a lot of it is hard-wired. They've been successfully developing for centuries before the word "neuroscience" was coined. And he's not a high-performance automobile you can fine tune.

If you want to stay home because that's what works for your family, not because it's going to make your baby smarter. Your baby will thrive so long as he's fed, and cared for, and loved, as long as people smile at him and talk to him and sing him songs.

[Anonymous]

It’s odd that you don’t see as what is best for the mother as linked to what is best for the baby. Not that best for mom automatically mean best for baby, but the two are connected.

[Anonymous]

You can ask here, search SAHM and read various posts or any Google search lays out the debate or ask your pediatrician, but in the end, it's not what's "best for baby," but what's best for you and your baby. Only you will know. Just pick what helps you sleep at night without least worry and that's the right decision for you and then don't compare. What works for some on DCURBAN may not work for you & what works for your relatives and friends may not work for you-- for all kinds of reasons, whether child development or money or whatever.

[Anonymous]

It depends on the parent and child. For some, yes, for others no. I can see the benefit of me being a SAHM. If my mom stayed home, it would have been a disaster as she hated being mom and valued her career and image more than her kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s odd that you don’t see as what is best for the mother as linked to what is best for the baby. Not that best for mom automatically mean best for baby, but the two are connected.

Op here. I agree with you completely but didn’t want to turn this into a usual sahm v wohm debate with the same tired arguments on savings, career, DH cheating , boredom etc rehashed endlessly

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It depends on the parent and child. For some, yes, for others no. I can see the benefit of me being a SAHM. If my mom stayed home, it would have been a disaster as she hated being mom and valued her career and image more than her kids.

Lots of women who WOH don’t hate being moms.

OP, I agree that this is a very personal decision. If kids have good childcare, whether daycare, nanny, or SAHM, they will do great. Lots of kids end up being great in even less than ideal situations. And of course there are bad daycares, nannys, and parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s odd that you don’t see as what is best for the mother as linked to what is best for the baby. Not that best for mom automatically mean best for baby, but the two are connected.

Op here. I agree with you completely but didn’t want to turn this into a usual sahm v wohm debate with the same tired arguments on savings, career, DH cheating , boredom etc rehashed endlessly

Except that this is exactly what will happen because any evidence that this is beneficial to child will be (and has been) stomped out of the conversation by working parents who feel that this threatens their status as "good parents" for making a different choice. So it's really a non-starter.
Do what you want to do and feel confident in your decision, OP.

[Anonymous]

My kids are nearly grown, but I simply could not hand my newborn over to strangers at a daycare, who were managing my baby in addition to five or six others lined in their infant car carriers in the baby room waiting for individual attention. Just couldn't do it. That is the decision that worked best for me at the time.

Follow your gut. Looking back, I feel I did the right thing for me and my child(ren). Zero regrets. Work will always be there to go back to, but you only get one chance to raise your children. My kids are well-adjusted, calm, thoughtful young people who do me proud.

[Anonymous]

Apparently, it doesn’t matter at all who takes care of a baby, as long as they are fed and their diapers are changed.

So parents can just do as they choose, because pretty much anyone can take care of your baby and it will make no difference at all in the long run.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think people really overstate the importance of any specific person on a baby's brain development. Barring abuse or neglect, your baby's brain is going to develop the way it's supposed to -- babies are very good at getting what they need from their environment, and a lot of it is hard-wired. They've been successfully developing for centuries before the word "neuroscience" was coined. And he's not a high-performance automobile you can fine tune.

If you want to stay home because that's what works for your family, not because it's going to make your baby smarter. Your baby will thrive so long as he's fed, and cared for, and loved, as long as people smile at him and talk to him and sing him songs.

This. With one caveat...I stayed home when my kids were babies-5yrs and I think the biggest impact was that my kids certainly got more sleep than they would have if I had to work a full day, pick them up, get home, make dinner, spend a little time with them, baths, etc. My DS, in particular, turned into a raging mess if I tried to keep him up past 7pm. When DH started having to work late he asked me to try to keep DS up a bit longer so he could see him and it was awful. After a couple days I said, nope, you need to see him in the morning or do your work from home at night or something else but he needs to be in bed at 7 or we all pay the price. I recall that one sleep book strongly advocated for a 7pm or even earlier bedtime for babies/toddlers and that bedtime just doesn't work for most working parents. Sleep is really important. So, if both parents are working, be mindful of that and is there a way to adjust your schedules to be sure you build in plenty of time for sleep.

Other than that, my kids are teens now and they certainly don't remember anything about my years at home but I LOVED having that time with them. But we could handle it financially on DH's salary and I had no trouble getting back to a similar-level job when my youngest started kindergarten so it all worked out for me.

[Anonymous]

This is so dependent. Is it better for a baby to spend their entire day with a mother who is suffering from PPD worsened by losing her sense of purpose in a job she loves?

Is it better for the baby to be left in an unlicensed care setting that is over ratio so that the mother can go to a relentless job that she hates?

I mean there’s so many different scenarios that this is impossible to answer (which is why the SAHM vs. working mom trope is so tired).

[Anonymous]

In retrospect I don't think it would have been detrimental for my extremely sociable and outgoing baby to be in daycare. Even as a baby she was a full steam ahead sort of individual. She would have thrived in daycare. It depends on the situation at hand, I guess.

[Anonymous]

I’m a SAHM. I will say it was deeply satisfying for ME. But my kids are tweens now and there is no difference between them and those whose mothers who worked. The kids who had SAHM are no more confident or secure or happy. In fact, kids who had working moms are Probably more independent!

I think the idea that kids suffer if their mothers work is utter hogwash. I hated leaving my baby and that’s the only reason I stayed home. (Very personal choice!)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Apparently, it doesn’t matter at all who takes care of a baby, as long as they are fed and their diapers are changed.

So parents can just do as they choose, because pretty much anyone can take care of your baby and it will make no difference at all in the long run.

Literally no one is saying that. Babies need loving, responsible caregivers. But whether that person is a SAHM or not, or whether there is more than one such person, isn't that critical.