Anonymous wrote:
There is no argument, just your opinion which is, an opinion, and one that I couldn't disagree more with. As the parent of two high achieving, college bound teens, my kids are involved in sports, voluneering, and of course studying. We are their parents and we are there for them, but there is plenty of time for both my husband and I to pursue careers, get a healthy, homemade meal on the table that we all share every night, and be involved in their school, education, and other aspects of their life. I supposse you are planning on having your kids live with you in college (if they are college bound)?
And sorry, it's hard to breast feed your kids if they are in daycare. I have NOTHING against parents working when their kids are young and no issue with high quality care in the infant and toddler years, but there are some things that a provider can't do that a mom can. Not to mention, economically it makes more sense to not pay for infant daycare if you have the choice and desire to stay home. Stats wise, there are a lot more moms home in the early years than in the teen or elem. school years, no doubt because if my children will be out of the home between 30-40 hours anyway, I might as we well be earning a living.
Anonymous wrote:
There is no argument, just your opinion which is, an opinion, and one that I couldn't disagree more with. As the parent of two high achieving, college bound teens, my kids are involved in sports, voluneering, and of course studying. We are their parents and we are there for them, but there is plenty of time for both my husband and I to pursue careers, get a healthy, homemade meal on the table that we all share every night, and be involved in their school, education, and other aspects of their life. I supposse you are planning on having your kids live with you in college (if they are college bound)?
And sorry, it's hard to breast feed your kids if they are in daycare. I have NOTHING against parents working when their kids are young and no issue with high quality care in the infant and toddler years, but there are some things that a provider can't do that a mom can. Not to mention, economically it makes more sense to not pay for infant daycare if you have the choice and desire to stay home. Stats wise, there are a lot more moms home in the early years than in the teen or elem. school years, no doubt because if my children will be out of the home between 30-40 hours anyway, I might as we well be earning a living.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Our plan: private ps-8 to establish good study habits, love of learning. If it works and kid is a good student, good public HS. If not, private HS as well.
Just curious. How does a private school help a child establish good study habits?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think your best money spent will be on one parent staying home FT until school starts.
Disagree. I think the most crucial time for one parent to be at home is when your child is in middle school. Their peers have become far more influential then; their hormones are going crazy; and those are the years that they can get into really bad stuff. Being present is essential then.
I don't understand this point. If the teen is in middle school and has afterschool activities (sports, etc), then why is it important for a parent to be home? That's a bit extreme. You just need at least one parent to get home at a resonable time to have dinner, help with homework, etc. Also, I doubt that one parent can just SAH for those few years.
The parent should be home when their child gets home from school. I guess you could over-schedule the child and have them do sports, etc. every single afternoon. But then you are ceding the parenting to others - the neighbor who drives them to their next activity, the school after care program coordinator, etc. And since you are barely there in your child's life, why do you think that he or she will confide in you when you are around? My sister, the SAHM, has twice been the first to learn of her dd's friends' sexual activity - before their own parents. Why? Because she is the one who is there for them to confide in.
As for your last statement, why should it be any harder for one parent to SAH those few years than it is for one to SAH for the first few years?
You can work without overscheduling your child. This is really reaching. If you don't want or need a career that's fine but many of us aren't ready to retire in our late 30s once our kids reach school age. You can't really pretend to even think you will go back after several years in your 50s. It's fine if people don't want to and don't need to work. But saying it is not an option if you want to be present for your child is BS. Quit stating your opinion as if it's an definitive fact. We are all in the real world and we all know parents who work with kids in school and parent who don't - it's a mixed bag how their kids are navigating through those tough teen years and not totally dependent on working vs. SAH.
If you read carefully, the argument is not that you can't work while your child is in middle school - just that a parent should be home when the child gets home from school. How is that inconsistent with having a career? The only argument was that it is more important to be there for them in adolescence than toddlerhood.
How many careers let you work only until 3 pm each day?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think your best money spent will be on one parent staying home FT until school starts.
Disagree. I think the most crucial time for one parent to be at home is when your child is in middle school. Their peers have become far more influential then; their hormones are going crazy; and those are the years that they can get into really bad stuff. Being present is essential then.
I don't understand this point. If the teen is in middle school and has afterschool activities (sports, etc), then why is it important for a parent to be home? That's a bit extreme. You just need at least one parent to get home at a resonable time to have dinner, help with homework, etc. Also, I doubt that one parent can just SAH for those few years.
The parent should be home when their child gets home from school. I guess you could over-schedule the child and have them do sports, etc. every single afternoon. But then you are ceding the parenting to others - the neighbor who drives them to their next activity, the school after care program coordinator, etc. And since you are barely there in your child's life, why do you think that he or she will confide in you when you are around? My sister, the SAHM, has twice been the first to learn of her dd's friends' sexual activity - before their own parents. Why? Because she is the one who is there for them to confide in.
As for your last statement, why should it be any harder for one parent to SAH those few years than it is for one to SAH for the first few years?
You can work without overscheduling your child. This is really reaching. If you don't want or need a career that's fine but many of us aren't ready to retire in our late 30s once our kids reach school age. You can't really pretend to even think you will go back after several years in your 50s. It's fine if people don't want to and don't need to work. But saying it is not an option if you want to be present for your child is BS. Quit stating your opinion as if it's an definitive fact. We are all in the real world and we all know parents who work with kids in school and parent who don't - it's a mixed bag how their kids are navigating through those tough teen years and not totally dependent on working vs. SAH.
If you read carefully, the argument is not that you can't work while your child is in middle school - just that a parent should be home when the child gets home from school. How is that inconsistent with having a career? The only argument was that it is more important to be there for them in adolescence than toddlerhood.
Anonymous wrote:Our plan: private ps-8 to establish good study habits, love of learning. If it works and kid is a good student, good public HS. If not, private HS as well.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think your best money spent will be on one parent staying home FT until school starts.
Disagree. I think the most crucial time for one parent to be at home is when your child is in middle school. Their peers have become far more influential then; their hormones are going crazy; and those are the years that they can get into really bad stuff. Being present is essential then.
I totally agree with you. If you look at a bunch of 4-5 year olds, there is no way you would know which of them was in daycare, had a SAHM or had a nanny. The important thing is that they be given quality childcare, but you can find that in any of those settings (and in any of those settings, you can also find that the care isn't so great).
But I think moms in general are fooling themselves if they think it is more important to be home during the baby years. Anybody who has an older kid will tell you that this just isn't the case.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think your best money spent will be on one parent staying home FT until school starts.
Disagree. I think the most crucial time for one parent to be at home is when your child is in middle school. Their peers have become far more influential then; their hormones are going crazy; and those are the years that they can get into really bad stuff. Being present is essential then.
I don't understand this point. If the teen is in middle school and has afterschool activities (sports, etc), then why is it important for a parent to be home? That's a bit extreme. You just need at least one parent to get home at a resonable time to have dinner, help with homework, etc. Also, I doubt that one parent can just SAH for those few years.
The parent should be home when their child gets home from school. I guess you could over-schedule the child and have them do sports, etc. every single afternoon. But then you are ceding the parenting to others - the neighbor who drives them to their next activity, the school after care program coordinator, etc. And since you are barely there in your child's life, why do you think that he or she will confide in you when you are around? My sister, the SAHM, has twice been the first to learn of her dd's friends' sexual activity - before their own parents. Why? Because she is the one who is there for them to confide in.
As for your last statement, why should it be any harder for one parent to SAH those few years than it is for one to SAH for the first few years?
You can work without overscheduling your child. This is really reaching. If you don't want or need a career that's fine but many of us aren't ready to retire in our late 30s once our kids reach school age. You can't really pretend to even think you will go back after several years in your 50s. It's fine if people don't want to and don't need to work. But saying it is not an option if you want to be present for your child is BS. Quit stating your opinion as if it's an definitive fact. We are all in the real world and we all know parents who work with kids in school and parent who don't - it's a mixed bag how their kids are navigating through those tough teen years and not totally dependent on working vs. SAH.
If you read carefully, the argument is not that you can't work while your child is in middle school - just that a parent should be home when the child gets home from school. How is that inconsistent with having a career? The only argument was that it is more important to be there for them in adolescence than toddlerhood.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think your best money spent will be on one parent staying home FT until school starts.
Disagree. I think the most crucial time for one parent to be at home is when your child is in middle school. Their peers have become far more influential then; their hormones are going crazy; and those are the years that they can get into really bad stuff. Being present is essential then.
I don't understand this point. If the teen is in middle school and has afterschool activities (sports, etc), then why is it important for a parent to be home? That's a bit extreme. You just need at least one parent to get home at a resonable time to have dinner, help with homework, etc. Also, I doubt that one parent can just SAH for those few years.
The parent should be home when their child gets home from school. I guess you could over-schedule the child and have them do sports, etc. every single afternoon. But then you are ceding the parenting to others - the neighbor who drives them to their next activity, the school after care program coordinator, etc. And since you are barely there in your child's life, why do you think that he or she will confide in you when you are around? My sister, the SAHM, has twice been the first to learn of her dd's friends' sexual activity - before their own parents. Why? Because she is the one who is there for them to confide in.
As for your last statement, why should it be any harder for one parent to SAH those few years than it is for one to SAH for the first few years?
You can work without overscheduling your child. This is really reaching. If you don't want or need a career that's fine but many of us aren't ready to retire in our late 30s once our kids reach school age. You can't really pretend to even think you will go back after several years in your 50s. It's fine if people don't want to and don't need to work. But saying it is not an option if you want to be present for your child is BS. Quit stating your opinion as if it's an definitive fact. We are all in the real world and we all know parents who work with kids in school and parent who don't - it's a mixed bag how their kids are navigating through those tough teen years and not totally dependent on working vs. SAH.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I think your best money spent will be on one parent staying home FT until school starts.
The parent should be home when their child gets home from school. I guess you could over-schedule the child and have them do sports, etc. every single afternoon. But then you are ceding the parenting to others - the neighbor who drives them to their next activity, the school after care program coordinator, etc. And since you are barely there in your child's life, why do you think that he or she will confide in you when you are around? My sister, the SAHM, has twice been the first to learn of her dd's friends' sexual activity - before their own parents. Why? Because she is the one who is there for them to confide in.
By the time kids get to high school sports are every single afternoon. If they are going to do a school based team sport that is the drill. I don't consider that ceding parenting.
Anonymous wrote:Our plan: private ps-8 to establish good study habits, love of learning. If it works and kid is a good student, good public HS. If not, private HS as well.