Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that influenced my decision to SAH was that on my maternity leave I was around nannies a lot and many of them were mediocre at best. I remember going to story times at the library and the majority of nannies just ignored the kids (and the people from the library) and stared at their phones or chatted with one another, rather than engage with the kids during the story time. Same at parks and playgrounds. It wasn’t everyone — there were some engaged nannies. But most were bored and inattentive.

When I read the posts on here but everyone’s amazing nannies... I’m sure some people really did have great nannies who engaged your children and cared for them in a really attentive way. But IME that’s not how most nannies are. It was very obvious to me that I was way more focused on my child’s well being than most of the nannies I encountered were on that of the kids they were with. And particularly for children under 18 months (at which point they are fully mobile and not only can handle more independence but need it) there’s no question that a child benefits from being with a truly living and attentive caregiver.

I will say that the most engaged caregivers I encountered during my leave and SAHM days were the grandmas. Even more than most moms, who also get bored and stare at their phones a lot. If that’s an option for you, I’d seize it!

How did you know these unengaged women were nannies? Because they were Brown?

For the record, our wonderful nanny is 65 and white. Everyone things she’s my child’s grandmother.

My experience in story time and music class with my kids is that it’s the mothers who are talking to each other constantly, ignoring their kids, or on their phones.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that influenced my decision to SAH was that on my maternity leave I was around nannies a lot and many of them were mediocre at best. I remember going to story times at the library and the majority of nannies just ignored the kids (and the people from the library) and stared at their phones or chatted with one another, rather than engage with the kids during the story time. Same at parks and playgrounds. It wasn’t everyone — there were some engaged nannies. But most were bored and inattentive.

When I read the posts on here but everyone’s amazing nannies... I’m sure some people really did have great nannies who engaged your children and cared for them in a really attentive way. But IME that’s not how most nannies are. It was very obvious to me that I was way more focused on my child’s well being than most of the nannies I encountered were on that of the kids they were with. And particularly for children under 18 months (at which point they are fully mobile and not only can handle more independence but need it) there’s no question that a child benefits from being with a truly living and attentive caregiver.

I will say that the most engaged caregivers I encountered during my leave and SAHM days were the grandmas. Even more than most moms, who also get bored and stare at their phones a lot. If that’s an option for you, I’d seize it!

This is so true. I guarantee you that most of the moms on here raving about their "amazing nannies" have no idea what goes on during the day.

No, I know what goes on during the day with our amazing nanny. I’ve always worked from home and have watched her with our kids. I see the fun they have and know that my oldest is far, far ahead of his milestones and has an amazing vocabulary. Even WOH parents hear from other parents and neighbors about their nannies.

You can guarantee nothing, PP.

Anonymous wrote:One thing that influenced my decision to SAH was that on my maternity leave I was around nannies a lot and many of them were mediocre at best. I remember going to story times at the library and the majority of nannies just ignored the kids (and the people from the library) and stared at their phones or chatted with one another, rather than engage with the kids during the story time. Same at parks and playgrounds. It wasn’t everyone — there were some engaged nannies. But most were bored and inattentive.

When I read the posts on here but everyone’s amazing nannies... I’m sure some people really did have great nannies who engaged your children and cared for them in a really attentive way. But IME that’s not how most nannies are. It was very obvious to me that I was way more focused on my child’s well being than most of the nannies I encountered were on that of the kids they were with. And particularly for children under 18 months (at which point they are fully mobile and not only can handle more independence but need it) there’s no question that a child benefits from being with a truly living and attentive caregiver.

I will say that the most engaged caregivers I encountered during my leave and SAHM days were the grandmas. Even more than most moms, who also get bored and stare at their phones a lot. If that’s an option for you, I’d seize it!

Anonymous wrote:It's funny that everyone talks about the importance of SAHM during the baby years but, really, when you think about it, it makes sense that it would be more impactful on the elementary-teen years. That's when they're turning into real people who make choices that will impact the rest of their lives.

Of course, there's the issue of what to do during the day while they are at school but if you are lucky and thoughtful about how you set up your career, you'll have an option to work part time or just during school hours.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing that influenced my decision to SAH was that on my maternity leave I was around nannies a lot and many of them were mediocre at best. I remember going to story times at the library and the majority of nannies just ignored the kids (and the people from the library) and stared at their phones or chatted with one another, rather than engage with the kids during the story time. Same at parks and playgrounds. It wasn’t everyone — there were some engaged nannies. But most were bored and inattentive.

When I read the posts on here but everyone’s amazing nannies... I’m sure some people really did have great nannies who engaged your children and cared for them in a really attentive way. But IME that’s not how most nannies are. It was very obvious to me that I was way more focused on my child’s well being than most of the nannies I encountered were on that of the kids they were with. And particularly for children under 18 months (at which point they are fully mobile and not only can handle more independence but need it) there’s no question that a child benefits from being with a truly living and attentive caregiver.

I will say that the most engaged caregivers I encountered during my leave and SAHM days were the grandmas. Even more than most moms, who also get bored and stare at their phones a lot. If that’s an option for you, I’d seize it!

This is so true. I guarantee you that most of the moms on here raving about their "amazing nannies" have no idea what goes on during the day.

Anonymous wrote:One thing that influenced my decision to SAH was that on my maternity leave I was around nannies a lot and many of them were mediocre at best. I remember going to story times at the library and the majority of nannies just ignored the kids (and the people from the library) and stared at their phones or chatted with one another, rather than engage with the kids during the story time. Same at parks and playgrounds. It wasn’t everyone — there were some engaged nannies. But most were bored and inattentive.

When I read the posts on here but everyone’s amazing nannies... I’m sure some people really did have great nannies who engaged your children and cared for them in a really attentive way. But IME that’s not how most nannies are. It was very obvious to me that I was way more focused on my child’s well being than most of the nannies I encountered were on that of the kids they were with. And particularly for children under 18 months (at which point they are fully mobile and not only can handle more independence but need it) there’s no question that a child benefits from being with a truly living and attentive caregiver.

I will say that the most engaged caregivers I encountered during my leave and SAHM days were the grandmas. Even more than most moms, who also get bored and stare at their phones a lot. If that’s an option for you, I’d seize it!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Sorry, I don't understand this. How could staying home or not cause ADHD?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Assuming you are a relatively normal, decent person, you have a lot of love for your baby, and you like the idea of spending time with an infant, I would say your baby will definitely benefit from having a SAHP during the infant and young toddler years. You mention brain development which is obviously important but an equally if not more important factor is emotional health and development. Spending the early years with someone who loves them more than anything is really good for babies. It's a launch pad for a healthy childhood once they are pre-school age and helps insure a good transition to non-parent care. There are some here who will argue with this but I think it's pretty hard to refute.

This is absolutely laughable! Only a parent can love your baby?! What a sad, limited world you live in.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We talk about SAHM vs WOHM like it's some kind of dichotomy, but it really isn't.


When my first was born, DH was working 60-70 hours/wk, and I was working 50-60. It was NOT working. I remember reading articles and going to message boards to see how women did it. I eventually realized that the "being a working mom is wonderful" articles/posts were NOT from women in my position, but from women who were working PT or had a spouse who had a very flexible schedule or was a SAHD.

I have found, in my own family, in my circle, and reflected back on the internet, that most families do best when both parents, combined, work 80 hours or less every week. Whether that's two 40 hour jobs, or one person working PT while the other works a more demanding schedule, or one parent staying at home while the other works depends on circumstances.

Now, DH works 50-60 hours/wk, I work 15-30 hours/wk, and we are all much happier.

+1 My choice to stay home was strongly influenced by regularly seeing my coworker calling her husband and begging him to try to keep the baby awake so she could see him when she got home. Our job was a lot of hours + a commute. Looking for a new, flexible, FT job while pg seemed daunting. Instead, I was able to set up some freelancing work and happily did that through two babies and had no trouble finding a FT job ( decent, flexible hours with ability to regularly with at home) when my youngest started school.