Anonymous wrote:This thread shows such a misunderstanding about child development and attachment. I'm a parent who has done multiple options - full time 8 hrs a day home daycare for 1.5 years, part time 4 days a week half day preschool (while I was part time) for a couple years, and now one in elementary school and one in preschool 9-3 pm each day. My career/background is in child development as well. And this whole thread is missing the point - the way attachment works means that parents still have WAY more influence over a child. Way, way. It actually isn't about hours. Most parents that work full time that are present and connected to their children when they aren't working are 100% the primary caregiver and research shows have the most influence BY FAR on the child.

Is the work that caregivers do at preschools, daycares etc important? Of course - it is important they are loving, that the care is responsive, flexible etc. but they will never have more influence than a connected parent even if there are technically more hours in a day. It just isn't how it works.

So, parents staying home can say that and it is a decision I understand - I've adjusted my career as well because it was what worked best for me. But to the PhD parent at the front of this thread claiming how smart they are, reading about how attachment works would really help. Kids with parents who work full time but have a connected, warm, loving, responsive relationship at home are absolutely just fine.

This is too simplistic. It's very dependent on individual circumstances.

This is why this "debate" always goes nowhere. People talk past each other. The person saying they "didn't want someone else to raise my kids" may not have had access to loving and responsive and flexible paid caregivers. If you are looking at daycares and all you can afford are places that don't seem like particularly great places for your kids to spend 8+ hours a day then it's actually really reasonable to say you decided you didn't want "someone else" to raise your kids when the someone else is a substandard care situation.

But then working moms who have access to the best possible childcare (like a lot of the moms on this site) hear it and take offense and talk about how great their nanny is and how they WFH three days a week and they or their husband is always home by 4:30 and so on. Great! No one is talking about that situation because it's literally ideal. If you are well off and well resourced then who cares what you do -- you're kids will be fine.

But most parents are not in that situation. I wasn't. I had to choose between staying home in order to ensure my child actually got the attentive and loving care that she needed in order to develop well and correctly or continuing to work but sending her to a daycare facility that had policies and qualities that threw up major red flags for me as someone with a background in child development. It didn't actually feel like a choice. I went back to work later and I'm glad I was able to stay home for a while (and the proof is in the pudding -- my kid got what she needed) and I'm also glad I was able to go back because I like my work and I really like earning my own money.

I know how freaking touchy everyone is about this subject so I'd never say something as triggering as "I didn't want someone else to raise my kids." But quite literally I stayed home because I didn't want someone else [who I didn't trust and who I don't think had the correct skill set for it] to raise my kid." Just because that's the situation I was in doesn't mean my choice or the reasons for my choice are a commentary on anyone else but least of all some high income working parent with tons of great childcare options! We are not the same and we didn't have the same choices. Stop being so myopic.

Anonymous wrote:It's an insensitive thing to say because as women we are all supposed to be empathetic to the fact that no matter what women do regarding work and motherhood someone is going to judge us and we're going to feel guilty.

But also I think people say this sometimes because they are just being honest and it's how they feel. Just like I think women who go back to work actually sometimes do it because they are bored out of their minds at home with babies and want to "use their brains." I also know women who have said that they went back to work because they believe their kids are better off being raised by nannies or caregivers who are "experts" as opposed to a sahm.

All of these things will be hurtful to hear to someone who made a different choice and they are also things people actually think and feel. Women are presented with this impossible choice (if they are fortunate to even have a choice at all which most are not) and there is no answer that will ever be right for everyone so we all do this dance with each other about our choices and we offend each other constantly because there's no way for us to all validate each other and ourselves at the same time unless we all make the same choice.

But we cannot all make the same choice because we are different people with different kids and different professions and different finances and different partners and different resources.

I just try to remember all that whenever I talk to other women about this stuff and when they say things that can be viewed as an insult to my choices. They aren't really talking about me. It's just about them. And that's fine.

But why do we need to be validating our own choices to other people? DH and I made the decisions right for our family (career choices, number of kids, where to live, what schools to send them to, etc.) based on our own personal life circumstances and priorities. I am under no illusion that our choices are the “best ever” or even “better” than what other families have chosen. But I am secure we’ve made decisions that make our family happy.

I can have a conversation with another parent who made different choices than me without needing to justify/explain things in a way that belittle their choices. For instance I have a friend who is a SAHM with a big law DH. When talking to her I 100% understand why it would be logistically a nightmare for her to try to be the primary parent for 3 kids and work since he is gone long hours. Whereas I work FT but my DH also has a super flexible remote job and can help with a lot of the morning routine, shuttling kids around, etc. We can both discuss our lives and the situational decisions we’ve made without making generalized conclusions that our choice is better than the other.

I feel sorry for those who lack the ability to understand their life choices are not necessarily the best choices for others and that we do not need validate ourselves at the expense of putting down others.

Anonymous wrote:I get it, because it’s true, even if people don’t want to admit that’s what’s happening when children are in full-time daycare. But in polite society we avoid saying things that might hurt someone’s feelings, regardless of whether it’s truthful or not.

Ehhh this is such lazy thinking. I have 3 kids. I’ve worked FT, PT, took extended mat leaves and used daycare, preschool, and a nanny. It has basically varied for over a decade and I can safely report that DH and I are raising all 3 of them and very involved in their lives (DH coaches their sports teams, I am room mom and volunteer through scouts, etc.)

Also during the early years it was a running joke about how we paid for full time care and our kids were never there full time. The places we went seemed to always shut down for a week at Christmas, a week during the summer, federal holidays, etc. then add in illnesses. I guess it just always felt like we spent a ton of time with them (and still do). Now they are school age and thanks to flexible hours/telework we don’t need to use extended day. I’m off every day by 3:30 to take them to extracurriculars/help with homework.

I’m sorry you lack the imagination to envision having a career and being able to raise your kids. FWIW I totally support parents SAH if they choose and I get why that may be the best option (e.g. if the primary earner has a non-flexible job). But this whole working moms don’t raise their own kids is a lame attempt for insecure people to feel better about their own life choices (no one says this to dads who work btw).

I think the fundamental misunderstanding is that “raising your kids” doesn’t need to be either a compliment or a put-down. It’s just a neutral description, and you’re all bringing your own baggage to it.

My kids were in daycare full time, and every single one of their caregivers absolutely has had a hand in raising them. That’s where they learned how to use a toilet, how to eat with utensils, how to diffuse conflict with other kids, etc. It’s dishonest to pretend that the function of the daycare was just to keep them alive until my spouse and I could pick them up at 5:30 and start raising them that day.

Similarly, my children are lucky enough to have four living grandparents who spend significant time with them. I have no problem acknowledging that their grandparents are also helping to raise them.

Of course my husband and I are also raising them, but no, we’re not doing it by ourselves. This is a team effort and there’s no shame involved.

Anonymous wrote:Its ridiculous and short sighted. Only for a very short time in the US was is possible for a woman to stay home and not work and one very specific class could provide for a life on one salary. Historically women worked, in the fields, in the barns, making supplies for winter, mending clothes etc while children were watched by aunties, grandmas, older children. Children were put to work early at the farms and other home industries so the whole long childhood filled with intellectual and fun pursuits was only for the extremely rich and they had nannies anyway.
More loving adults around children is not a bad thing and now we have so much more leisure time we actually spend with our children.

You’re literally describing the work that is done to keep a home running. Sure, the chores are different now, but do you really think the majority or SAHMs literally do nothing other than take care of the kids? For some reason we moved to SAHM as the go-to term instead of housewife, but nothing has changed in terms of the job function.

I wouldn't say that because I know people do find it offensive. If asked I'd say I just wanted to be home with my kids when they were little and enjoy those years. I was fortunate to work PT and do a little freelance so it was easy to return to my career when they were older.

And, I did really enjoy that time at home and am glad I did it. I don't think it makes me a better mom than someone else but I personally was a better mom that way than if I'd been stressed out by a job with a not-great boss and a longish commute. Others are their best mom-self by working and having great childcare (that's what my sister did).

As a PP said, now that my kids are teens, you really can't tell who had a SAHM and who had a nanny, group care, etc. Just do what works for you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it, because it’s true, even if people don’t want to admit that’s what’s happening when children are in full-time daycare. But in polite society we avoid saying things that might hurt someone’s feelings, regardless of whether it’s truthful or not.

Because a kid is "raised" by the age of 5? Is that how it works? There is nothing left to do after the age of 5? And where are all those daycare employees after the kid starts elementary school? if they were "raising kids" wouldn't they need to stay involved? Shouldn't they be paying bills and making sure the kid has shelter, clothing, goes to school, does their homework, has a moral compass?

No what people like you don't want to admit, is that the first few years are basic caregiving and essentially any kind and normal person who likes kids is equally as good as a parent at caregiving for 8 hours a day. But in polite society this will hurt feelings.

The actual raising of kids and doing the tough work starts when kids are elementary school age and older. When moral and ethical situations creep into children's lives. That's where the real parenting happens.

If you read up on brain development, you will see that the majority of the foundation that shapes you happens in the first few years of life. Of course development doesn't come to a halt but it slows exponentially in terms of the building blocks tht make someone who they are. Young children are also completely dependnet on adults and so those interactions are very impactly to their development. As they get a little older, the interactions accumulate and they have their own ability to respond to their needs so each interaction is less impactful. Understanding childhood development is important. Your child's brain is pretty much entirely determined by the time they go to school.

If you really think your “child’s brain is pretty much entirely determined by the time they go to school,” you have just told us a lot about your limited understanding of brain development and logic!

Kids have learned everything they need to know by 6, after that is just refinement.

This is true of primitive people and is true today although we infantalize our children significantly nowadays.

Daycare was great for DC#1. They had so much fun socializing.

So does that mean a person's spouse/partner (assuming not a single parent) who works isn't raising their kid? So the SAHM is raising her kid but her spouse is not?

I think most people end up in the same place...working parents/SAH parents, breastfed/formula, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I get it, because it’s true, even if people don’t want to admit that’s what’s happening when children are in full-time daycare. But in polite society we avoid saying things that might hurt someone’s feelings, regardless of whether it’s truthful or not.

Because a kid is "raised" by the age of 5? Is that how it works? There is nothing left to do after the age of 5? And where are all those daycare employees after the kid starts elementary school? if they were "raising kids" wouldn't they need to stay involved? Shouldn't they be paying bills and making sure the kid has shelter, clothing, goes to school, does their homework, has a moral compass?

No what people like you don't want to admit, is that the first few years are basic caregiving and essentially any kind and normal person who likes kids is equally as good as a parent at caregiving for 8 hours a day. But in polite society this will hurt feelings.

The actual raising of kids and doing the tough work starts when kids are elementary school age and older. When moral and ethical situations creep into children's lives. That's where the real parenting happens.

If you read up on brain development, you will see that the majority of the foundation that shapes you happens in the first few years of life. Of course development doesn't come to a halt but it slows exponentially in terms of the building blocks tht make someone who they are. Young children are also completely dependnet on adults and so those interactions are very impactly to their development. As they get a little older, the interactions accumulate and they have their own ability to respond to their needs so each interaction is less impactful. Understanding childhood development is important. Your child's brain is pretty much entirely determined by the time they go to school.

If you really think your “child’s brain is pretty much entirely determined by the time they go to school,” you have just told us a lot about your limited understanding of brain development and logic!

*absolutely just fine **and absolutely being RAISED by their parents. Meant to add that. For most those kids will have 1-3 year relationships only during the day time with those caregivers, it just is not as impactful as you all are trying to make it. The parent child relationship is unique and incredibly impactful.

Also full time working moms spend the same amount of hours with their kids that stay at home moms in the 1970s did. This is all a new phenomena - listen to The Daily yesterday on intensive parenting to get some more insight into how this thread is nuts.

Anonymous wrote:Someone said to me when my kids were little that the years to be an especially present for them were middle school years. This is so true. I now have older kids. Middle schools get out early in the afternoon with little structure offered for them in the afternoon of things to do and they are going through a ton at that age. They need and want emotional and social support and more than changing a diaper, it does make a difference if it’s you providing it vs someone you pay vs no one doing it at all.

My advice is think big picture about your career path and finances to plan for being around more during this time in their life.

So I guess to answer the post no I wouldn’t be offended. I’d think the person was kind of clueless and had a lot of ego when they haven’t really experienced parenting at all. People who are so sure of themselves and want to tell everyone about it…I’m always skeptical.

This thread shows such a misunderstanding about child development and attachment. I'm a parent who has done multiple options - full time 8 hrs a day home daycare for 1.5 years, part time 4 days a week half day preschool (while I was part time) for a couple years, and now one in elementary school and one in preschool 9-3 pm each day. My career/background is in child development as well. And this whole thread is missing the point - the way attachment works means that parents still have WAY more influence over a child. Way, way. It actually isn't about hours. Most parents that work full time that are present and connected to their children when they aren't working are 100% the primary caregiver and research shows have the most influence BY FAR on the child.

Is the work that caregivers do at preschools, daycares etc important? Of course - it is important they are loving, that the care is responsive, flexible etc. but they will never have more influence than a connected parent even if there are technically more hours in a day. It just isn't how it works.

So, parents staying home can say that and it is a decision I understand - I've adjusted my career as well because it was what worked best for me. But to the PhD parent at the front of this thread claiming how smart they are, reading about how attachment works would really help. Kids with parents who work full time but have a connected, warm, loving, responsive relationship at home are absolutely just fine.

People say it to be rude, holier than thou and hurtful.

But they’re not wrong about daycare raising your kids. In many cases, kids spend more of their waking and alert hours at a daycare than they do at home with their parents.
That’s why it’s important as parents to find a loving and quality daycare. Not just something with a curriculum, but a daycare that is nurturing and loving.

Anonymous wrote:So rude.

I’m not sure why it is rude if a woman decided to stay home to raise her kids. This is what I did. I stayed home to raise my kids.

This does not mean a working mom is not raising her kids.