From my personal experiences, as a parent, I'd never want to miss the first moments the kids come off the bus or in the door from school or big event.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:0-3 for sure

"For sure," huh? If you're going to say that, you better cite some studies.

Also, OP, what do you mean by "impact?" There is attachment theory research that applies from basically 0-1. Most neurological research on children, though, reveals that there is a memory "purge" around age 4, so everything they carry around from before that age is largely unconscious and pertains to whether they felt safe, rather than what actually happened or what they can consciously remember. So if you are talking about forming memories or teaching your children as being "impactful," very little prior to the age of 4 is going to stick content-wise.

OP, your question is way too vague.

The attachments that babies and toddlers form determine so, SO much of who they are as an older child, teenager, and adult. It does not just affect their physical growth and health, but also for their cognitive and emotional growth and development, their social skills and confidence as adults, and their future romantic relationships. Discounting the importance of parenting an infant/toddler because “they don’t remember it anyway” is incredibly misguided and runs contrary to virtually every piece of literature on the subject.

None of which says this loving, consistent care need be provided by the parent.

OP, I'm not sure your question is the right one.

I had a SAHM for my whole life, and my dad was home until I was about 11, when he started to travel full time. It was very "impactful" to have my mom around all the time, from a young age--mostly in a bad way--because she wasn't great at parenting and certainly wasn't good at meeting the basic needs of her children. Even though my dad was gone a lot, though, thank goodness he was around some, and what little time he was around was positively "impactful."

What matters is what kids need at different stages generally and what particular kids need at different times in particular. Whether you're a SAHP or not, the point is to be attuned to those needs as best you can. Some kids will be more "needy" for more time at different times, depending on the kid, and perhaps then it would be better to SAH than WFH, at least if working takes you away a ton. The time isn't the decider though. You can positively impact your kid with very few hours or negatively impact them through many. Or vice versa.

(FYI - I am speaking in general, and not Covid related, since that is obviously another situation entirely.)

I have been a SAHM since my first was born. My kids are now in late ES - HS. If were forced to choose, I absolutely would have chosen to stay home when they were small, 0-3ish. My kids love school and the socialization of it all, so it really wouldn't be that big of a deal for them to go to a little bit of aftercare each day. We're in LCPS, so by the time the MS and HS students get home from school, they'd be alone 60 minutes or less before I got home. Not at all if they stay after for activities.

I mostly continue to SAHM now as a household manager, because I am lucky to have that option. I do also supervise homework, drive to activities, and cook dinner (usually from scratch or close to it.) It works for us. But again, if I had to choose, I would choose the early years.

Anonymous wrote:Development aside, 0-2.5 works for many families as a practical and financial consideration because that is usually the age for which childcare is the most 1. scarce (there are a lot more spaces/programs for 3s and up around me than infant rooms) and 2. expensive, generally speaking.

This. For us it made the most sense bc infant care is so freaking expensive and I would’ve been working for like no money. For a lot of families, it doesn’t make sense financially speaking for both parents to work when the kids are babies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:0-3 for sure

"For sure," huh? If you're going to say that, you better cite some studies.

Also, OP, what do you mean by "impact?" There is attachment theory research that applies from basically 0-1. Most neurological research on children, though, reveals that there is a memory "purge" around age 4, so everything they carry around from before that age is largely unconscious and pertains to whether they felt safe, rather than what actually happened or what they can consciously remember. So if you are talking about forming memories or teaching your children as being "impactful," very little prior to the age of 4 is going to stick content-wise.

OP, your question is way too vague.

The attachments that babies and toddlers form determine so, SO much of who they are as an older child, teenager, and adult. It does not just affect their physical growth and health, but also for their cognitive and emotional growth and development, their social skills and confidence as adults, and their future romantic relationships. Discounting the importance of parenting an infant/toddler because “they don’t remember it anyway” is incredibly misguided and runs contrary to virtually every piece of literature on the subject.

Anonymous wrote:Developmentally speaking, 0-3. It's when the brain grows the most (in a very short period of time). Consistent, responsive care giving (whether from a parent or another adult) literally shapes their brain development at this stage and their ability to form healthy attachments. It's definitely the most labor intensive and time consuming for parents/caregivers but has the greatest impact on them as people.

Yes, this can be interpreted as this is the best age to have a fantastic nanny who is 100% devoted to the care and attention of your kids. Many SAHMs are rather overwhelmed with all the household duties plus the full time child care. Others can do it all.

Development aside, 0-2.5 works for many families as a practical and financial consideration because that is usually the age for which childcare is the most 1. scarce (there are a lot more spaces/programs for 3s and up around me than infant rooms) and 2. expensive, generally speaking.

Developmentally speaking, 0-3. It's when the brain grows the most (in a very short period of time). Consistent, responsive care giving (whether from a parent or another adult) literally shapes their brain development at this stage and their ability to form healthy attachments. It's definitely the most labor intensive and time consuming forparents/caregivers but has the greatest impact on them as people.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:0-3 for sure

"For sure," huh? If you're going to say that, you better cite some studies.

Also, OP, what do you mean by "impact?" There is attachment theory research that applies from basically 0-1. Most neurological research on children, though, reveals that there is a memory "purge" around age 4, so everything they carry around from before that age is largely unconscious and pertains to whether they felt safe, rather than what actually happened or what they can consciously remember. So if you are talking about forming memories or teaching your children as being "impactful," very little prior to the age of 4 is going to stick content-wise.

OP, your question is way too vague.

Ummm, it’s still extraordinarily important! Those unconscious memories last well into adulthood.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:middle school age

For those saying middle school is that because it's when activities really begin to pick up and the shit hits the fan if your kid needs extra support or monitoring with academics or behavior/keeping of trouble?

All of the above. All the balls are in the air and you don't know which is going to drop. Driving your kid to every activity is a benefit because it's often the time they let their guard down and will want or need talk about something.

Yeah, I do all of that without being a SAHM...

They you have it all figured out. Good job mama!

Anonymous wrote:0-3 for sure

"For sure," huh? If you're going to say that, you better cite some studies.

Also, OP, what do you mean by "impact?" There is attachment theory research that applies from basically 0-1. Most neurological research on children, though, reveals that there is a memory "purge" around age 4, so everything they carry around from before that age is largely unconscious and pertains to whether they felt safe, rather than what actually happened or what they can consciously remember. So if you are talking about forming memories or teaching your children as being "impactful," very little prior to the age of 4 is going to stick content-wise.

OP, your question is way too vague.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:middle school age

For those saying middle school is that because it's when activities really begin to pick up and the shit hits the fan if your kid needs extra support or monitoring with academics or behavior/keeping of trouble?

All of the above. All the balls are in the air and you don't know which is going to drop. Driving your kid to every activity is a benefit because it's often the time they let their guard down and will want or need talk about something.

Yeah, I do all of that without being a SAHM...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Middle school.

I think *flexibility* is extremely important when your kids are middle school age (eg being home when they get home, having the time to be involved in their life, drive them and friends to activities, etc.) but staying home full time? Nah.

This. I have a 5th grader and 8th header. I am home at 3 every day (well, pre Covid.). Kids get home at 3:30. Why do I need to be home beyond that?! I can definitely see the argument that late ES/MS/HS is the most important time to have a flexible job, but I’m just not buying that that’s the most important time to be a SAHM.

You have a very flexible job with good hours. Most of us didn't have that option. For me part time would be paid for 20-30 hours and working 40-45. Full time would be paid for 40 hours and working a minimum of 50 plus work home. Its nice as I can get the shopping, cooking, cleaning done while they are at school and then do all the transportation and other stuff after school as we have daily activities (though Dad does a lot now that he's work at home).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:middle school age

For those saying middle school is that because it's when activities really begin to pick up and the shit hits the fan if your kid needs extra support or monitoring with academics or behavior/keeping of trouble?

All of the above. All the balls are in the air and you don't know which is going to drop. Driving your kid to every activity is a benefit because it's often the time they let their guard down and will want or need talk about something.