Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many times a SAHM is bad for a child. It makes them extremely clingy and they are used to 24-7 attention. The moms often let them get away with murder and don’t do things like sleep train because they don’t have to be at work in the morning. I don’t think 10 hours a day of daycare is good for a kid either, but not convinced that SAHMs are any better. I’d argue a mom working part time is best for a child.

I’d argue that SAHMs are less likely to let their children “get away with murder” because they actually have to be around them all day. Therefore, discipline is essential to make the job of being at home tolerable. All of the non-disciplining parents I know have their kids in full-day school (whether the parent works or not).

The SAHMs I know give in to their kids because they're tired and don't want to hear them whine, so the kids are technically getting away with murder.

And the WOHMs give in to their kids because they feel guilty and don’t want to hear them whine, so the kids are technically getting away with murder.

Ok, if that makes you feel better.

I e also noticed that WOHM potty train way latter because there’s less incentive to try since someone else is with their kid all day. It’s also harder to notice the signs that your kid is ready when you don’t spend much time with them. Flame away.

Despite your curious need to provoke people with the corny "Flame away" line, I don't really feel outraged by your opinion or the previous posts. I'm not offended by it because it's sounds so ignorant. If you're just here to pick fights, maybe you should spend more time with your kids, eh?

Any blanket statements about an entire demographic is ridiculous. I'm sure there are both SAHM and WOHM that don't discipline their children at all. Maybe those SAHM would still not discipline if they worked, and WOHM would still not discipline if they stayed at home. Sometimes it's just a personality thing. Let's stop generalizing about moms, daycares, and nannies. There's an anecdote or a personal experience that can prove or disprove any radical opinion.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many times a SAHM is bad for a child. It makes them extremely clingy and they are used to 24-7 attention. The moms often let them get away with murder and don’t do things like sleep train because they don’t have to be at work in the morning. I don’t think 10 hours a day of daycare is good for a kid either, but not convinced that SAHMs are any better. I’d argue a mom working part time is best for a child.

I’d argue that SAHMs are less likely to let their children “get away with murder” because they actually have to be around them all day. Therefore, discipline is essential to make the job of being at home tolerable. All of the non-disciplining parents I know have their kids in full-day school (whether the parent works or not).

The SAHMs I know give in to their kids because they're tired and don't want to hear them whine, so the kids are technically getting away with murder.

And the WOHMs give in to their kids because they feel guilty and don’t want to hear them whine, so the kids are technically getting away with murder.

Ok, if that makes you feel better.

I e also noticed that WOHM potty train way latter because there’s less incentive to try since someone else is with their kid all day. It’s also harder to notice the signs that your kid is ready when you don’t spend much time with them. Flame away.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Our kids have strict bed times at 7:00 (2.5 yo) and 7:30 (5 yo). We make every effort to be home and ready for bed at those times. Kids to get stay up a bit later on rare occasions, maybe 2-3 times per year. They need their sleep and their behavior is noticeably bad if they stay up too late or don't get enough sleep the night before. Most kids we know have flexible bedtimes that are much, much later.

So the kids never see the parents?

I SAH and DH gets home in time for bed most nights. No need to worry.

Anonymous wrote:I cuss constantly in front of my kids. Did before, always will. I just tell them they’re “adult” words instead of “bad” words and they can say them when they’re older.

My kids have about 2 hours of screen time a day.

I only bathe them twice a week.

I don’t care if they eat sugar. I care about overall diet.

I don’t push my kids to read or write- I don’t want to such the fun out of it so they actually enjoy doing it.

You sound like me but my son may only bathe once a week. Every time I pop him in the shower I will think to myself, "you're a great mom!"

Anonymous wrote:cosleeping at 5 and 7 with no end in sight

Update us at 18

Anonymous wrote:Our kids have strict bed times at 7:00 (2.5 yo) and 7:30 (5 yo). We make every effort to be home and ready for bed at those times. Kids to get stay up a bit later on rare occasions, maybe 2-3 times per year. They need their sleep and their behavior is noticeably bad if they stay up too late or don't get enough sleep the night before. Most kids we know have flexible bedtimes that are much, much later.

So the kids never see the parents?

Screen time is a positive learning experience.

I think sleep training is not good for kids. I think it’s good for their parents for sure. But I think it forces a baby to “get” Somewhere before they are ready. How can you hear those stories about silent orphanages and think it’s ok to do? Babies cry for a reason. Babies need reassurance and comfort to feel safe. Signed, WOH mom of 2. One great sleeper and one horrible sleeper who didn’t sleep through the night until 14 months old. Yes it was hard and some days I felt like I was dying. But i survived WHILE meeting babies needs.

Anonymous wrote:Liberalism will lead us to fail. True. Because the right will move further away and result in disfunction. Result of unchecked and biased liberals.

How does that translate to parenting?

Liberalism will lead us to fail. True. Because the right will move further away and result in disfunction. Result of unchecked and biased liberals.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I despised having potty trained kids. It's so annoying having to run to the bathroom every time we are in a public place. Diapers were so easy.

I'm the OP of the freakishly early thread and totally think this too!!!!

I don't know if it is against the grain but the other one I think I have is a pretty casual attitude towards letting my kids try/get hurt/be independent. Even my 18 month old I try to let him do things without interference even if it is uncomfortable for me (within reason, he's not chopping onions or anything). I know this is popular but I feel like out in public people always look at me like I have 10 heads when I watch my kid fall and cry and then wait for them to come to me or decide to ask for me or things like that.

I do the same thing. My kid is pretty indestructible and I think it's good for him. He was an early walker and I let him walk alone quiet a bit. I was always there, but I didn't hold his hand, I just let him explore and followed him - and people would look at me like i was nuts.
Also cosleeping.

Have you ever read someone's generalization of something you are (sahm, wohm, race, gender, ses, location) and they describe the exact opposite of you and/or your family?

I don't think I go against the grain at all. Do people make generalizations to guard their own insecurities?

Anonymous wrote:I believe in spanking a child if they truly deserve it...

Trust me.
As a parent you will know when that time is.

I see many three-year olds kick their parents & only get yelled at.

Nothing else.
Their generation may turn out to be a nightmare if they are not held responsible for their actions.

No.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many times a SAHM is bad for a child. It makes them extremely clingy and they are used to 24-7 attention. The moms often let them get away with murder and don’t do things like sleep train because they don’t have to be at work in the morning. I don’t think 10 hours a day of daycare is good for a kid either, but not convinced that SAHMs are any better. I’d argue a mom working part time is best for a child.

I’d argue that SAHMs are less likely to let their children “get away with murder” because they actually have to be around them all day. Therefore, discipline is essential to make the job of being at home tolerable. All of the non-disciplining parents I know have their kids in full-day school (whether the parent works or not).

The SAHMs I know give in to their kids because they're tired and don't want to hear them whine, so the kids are technically getting away with murder.

And the WOHMs give in to their kids because they feel guilty and don’t want to hear them whine, so the kids are technically getting away with murder.

Ok, if that makes you feel better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Many times a SAHM is bad for a child. It makes them extremely clingy and they are used to 24-7 attention. The moms often let them get away with murder and don’t do things like sleep train because they don’t have to be at work in the morning. I don’t think 10 hours a day of daycare is good for a kid either, but not convinced that SAHMs are any better. I’d argue a mom working part time is best for a child.

I’d argue that SAHMs are less likely to let their children “get away with murder” because they actually have to be around them all day. Therefore, discipline is essential to make the job of being at home tolerable. All of the non-disciplining parents I know have their kids in full-day school (whether the parent works or not).

The SAHMs I know give in to their kids because they're tired and don't want to hear them whine, so the kids are technically getting away with murder.

And the WOHMs give in to their kids because they feel guilty and don’t want to hear them whine, so the kids are technically getting away with murder.