Anonymous wrote:I agree with OP.....sort of. For most of human history, we lived in close-knit tribes where children played with multiple other children (and adults) all day, every day. The nuclear family is a very recent - and a Western - concept, designed to increase productivity from workers. Before the agricultural and industrial revolutions, hunter gatherers “worked” (search for food) only 3-4 hours a day. The rest of the time was engaged in rest, hobbies, and social interactions. Bottom line is we’re primates, and most primates live in larger social groups.

Multiple studies have shown that social interaction is the #1 predictor of health and happiness. My grandmother grew up in the isolated, “little house on the prairie” nuclear family. She had extreme anxiety and depression her entire life. Sure, she survived, but we owe our children so much more than just survival.

The problem is that parents already have so many burdens on them because we live in a system designed to extract all of our energy for profit. Between work, the second shift at home, and our other obligations, there’s not energy or time left for socializing.

Telling parents they need to fit in socialization (beyond an hour at the park- it’s not enough) in their already packed schedules doesn’t work. There needs to be childcare and opportunities for children available at no cost, plus the entire work system needs to be overhauled to not be exploitative and to allow for work-life balance. (Which is why it boggles my mind that the most pro-life people I know are also the ones who are most against providing support for families - but that’s another discussion).

We also need to give grace to those who fall short, because we are all operating in a broken, unjust system. Bickering over who’s the better parent doesn’t help us reach our goal of providing a better life for our children.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You do realize that for much of history before the industrial revolution families were often isolated on farms far away from other families? Those kids survived.

People socialized on Sundays at church and on other occasions. People lived in extended family households. Often, siblings or cousins had adjoining farms. Kids had many opportunities to play with children outside of the nuclear family. Also, people often had 4 or more children.

Anonymous wrote:So parents who can’t afford preschool / daycare are now child abusers? Gotta love the push for increased criminalization of poverty. You a Trumpster, Op? That would explain it.

Anonymous wrote:Exactly. My parents were born during the Great Depression. My mother's family lost their home. They had to ask their church for food. My mother received supplemental food at school because she was so thin the school was pretty certain she was starving. My mother still talks of the shame of "accepting relief" and she is nearly 90 now.

My father and his family of 5 lived in a one-bedroom apartment their entire lives until he left to serve in the Army in the Korean Conflict (war). His mother had emigrated from Ireland and his father was raised in an orphanage because his parents died in the influenza pandemic in 1918. His father refused til the day he died to ever talk about life in the orphanage.

These circumstances were not relieved until the economic opportunities of WW2 came about.

*We were raised middle class and we were raised to respect these circumstances*. In other words, *Put things in perspective.* Having to stay home -- hey! you have a home! -- with your parents is actually a privilege. That means you have food on the table -- or are you standing in line at the food bank?

This.is.not.hardship.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP is nuts. You do realize that it wasn't until very recently in society that we started sending kids under 6 to school at all, right?

Until K or 1st grade, the vast majority of kids in the vast majority of the world were at home with family the vast majority of the time. Some still are. This is...not a big deal, socially or developmentally speaking.

Kids at home til K in the past had at least some of the following: neighborhood friends, music/art/sports class, siblings, nearby extended family, playgrounds, events, holidays/birthdays with guests.

For 5 months, my young child had none of the above, just mom and dad. Not normal.

Music, arts, and sports for preschoolers are a pretty new idea. Historically many families lived in rural areas without neighborhood friends and every one of those families that didn’t have twins had an oldest child who at 3 or 4 didn’t have a sibling old enough to really play with, given that kids don’t move past parallel play until 3.5 or so.

This is just not true. Where do people get the idea that in “the olden days” everyone was a farmer or a homesteader? Nope, people have always congregated and formed social groups. Cities and towns are the norm, not isolated farmhouses (and on a truly isolated farm, there would be tons of kids from the numerous families who lived on and worked the farm). Raising kids has also historically been a social activity shared among relatives, neighbors, and other community members. How do you all think children survived all these wars and famines you keep referring to? Through community.

What is ahistorical is nuclear families living far from relatives and isolated from their neighbors and communities. It is atypical for communities in crisis to ignore the needs of children in favor of hedonistic activities and raising capital— this runs counter to the human impulse to protect children for the sake of society. It’s weird. What is wrong with us?