"Nanny as Parent" phenomenon

[Anonymous]

The more busy parents in this world the more pay nanny can demand. Hihihihi don't you love that?

[Anonymous]

Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.


I am the PP and I never mentioned neglect. Firstly I would like to say that it seems your parents made a real effort to make sure that they spent time with you, which is awesome. However if your honest for a few seconds, if you can't remember the face or name of your babysitters it's probably because you didn't have them on a full time basis. Your working parents were the ones that actually made an effort. This thread however is for the majority of D.C parents. Who choose a career, work 50/60hr weeks, and get home to kids already eaten and in their P.J's.

Secondly your use of the term 'babysitter" was used to offend, as you well know....and leads me to believe that maybe you are not as involved as your parents were?

Thirdly using your own personal experience, and making it a fact of others is a fallacy.

So here are a few links on the detriment of working long hours outside of the home.

http://www.walearning.com/articles/children-are-af...-when-parents-work-long-hours/ (here is one just about fathers)

Here is one about full time vs part time https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/effect-parents-emplo...outcomes-children#jl_summary_0

And so as a "nanny" who is an observer of many families, and therefor a greater sample size.(oh and also actual facts^^) My experience is that choosing to peruse a career that keeps you out of the home for many hours is detrimental to your child. Especially for those children who are left in the early years 0-3. The worst is when it is for over 40 hours. It can be mitigated by a warm and loving nanny/grandparent/caregiver. But you should be so luck to have have them "babysitting" for you. Plus no matter who it is they can never take the place of a parent who decides to stay home. IMO if your going to have children you need to make them a priority, not just with feelings but with action.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. Never knew a parent who wasn't working, either for a paycheck or not for a paycheck.

2. PP says she grew up with dual office career parents, yet she has no memory who actually provided the majority of her early care. How very sad.

3. SOME absent parents ARE neglectful, depending on who is filling their shoes on the home front, and if it's adequate to meet the needs of the children.

Btw, PP, some may think what's elitist is your nastiness towards the help.

I'm a different person who posted the above, with the reference to the fact that SOME absent parents are in fact neglectful. Obviously, you can be with the children, and STILL be neglectful, but that is generally less common for most families.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The more busy parents in this world the more pay nanny can demand. Hihihihi don't you love that?

Only good nannies earn high wages from parents who can afford it, 25-35+/hr. These are the parents who depend on the top-notch expertise of a trained and experienced professional nanny. Without her, they know their job performance and earning potential will be diminished. Who wants that?

The best nannies can easily be worth their weight in gold, for parents who need them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.

I am the PP and I never mentioned neglect. Firstly I would like to say that it seems your parents made a real effort to make sure that they spent time with you, which is awesome. However if your honest for a few seconds, if you can't remember the face or name of your babysitters it's probably because you didn't have them on a full time basis. Your working parents were the ones that actually made an effort. This thread however is for the majority of D.C parents. Who choose a career, work 50/60hr weeks, and get home to kids already eaten and in their P.J's.

Secondly your use of the term 'babysitter" was used to offend, as you well know....and leads me to believe that maybe you are not as involved as your parents were?

Thirdly using your own personal experience, and making it a fact of others is a fallacy.

So here are a few links on the detriment of working long hours outside of the home.

http://www.walearning.com/articles/children-are-af...-when-parents-work-long-hours/ (here is one just about fathers)

Here is one about full time vs part time https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/effect-parents-emplo...outcomes-children#jl_summary_0

And so as a "nanny" who is an observer of many families, and therefor a greater sample size.(oh and also actual facts^^) My experience is that choosing to peruse a career that keeps you out of the home for many hours is detrimental to your child. Especially for those children who are left in the early years 0-3. The worst is when it is for over 40 hours. It can be mitigated by a warm and loving nanny/grandparent/caregiver. But you should be so luck to have have them "babysitting" for you. Plus no matter who it is they can never take the place of a parent who decides to stay home. IMO if your going to have children you need to make them a priority, not just with feelings but with action.

PP you are responding to. I'm a nanny, have been for over 10 years. Your argument kind of fails based on that fact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Women who live their children make the sacrifice and stsy home and take care of theur children--no exceptions. Single women who have children are selfish and having a child is their personal ego trips. This generation of childten will be the most acrewed up ever.

Yes, but at least they'll be better spellers than you.

Get a life, troll.

In a sense the above poster is true. While I do not think its a malicious intent at all, I know from years working as a nanny that you cannot have it all. There is no way to divide yourself into two people. So when you choose to have a career and children one usually falls through the cracks. Unfortunately it is usually the kids, because as an employee you are held accountable for a job poorly done, or chastised when you skip important steps.

The moments that you miss in your children's lives are so many that in no way can you make up for them in the few evening and weekend hours that you get. Can you still have a successful relationship with your child(en)? Yes of course, but there is a sense of not really knowing how to tend to everyday moments that is a sad fact for working parents.

It's an outsourcing of one job in order to preform another. A sad fact of life and a decision that women have to make. For me I am just glad there is a choice! But I am not deluding myself into thinking that I can have it all either, and neither should you.

Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.

Again, it depends on how well your shoes are being filled (or not) by whomever is doing the work of providing the care. It's not black or white, ok?

[Anonymous]

Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.
Again, it depends on how well your shoes are being filled (or not) by whomever is doing the work of providing the care. It's not black or white, ok?


By the way the real # of dual income parents is %60.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/famee.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.

Again, it depends on how well your shoes are being filled (or not) by whomever is doing the work of providing the care. It's not black or white, ok?


By the way the real # of dual income parents is %60.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/famee.pdf

AGAIN, I told 12:44 it depends on how well her shoes are getting filled (OR NOT) by her substitute caregiver.

Her extreme defensiveness is an indication that her shoes are not getting filled so well at all. I am sorry if that's her situation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Most parents do indeed, love their children.

But love is an ACTION word, not just a feeling you have while you're sitting in your downtown office shuffling stacks of papers. The fact that your absentee parenting provides your child with a grandiose lifestyle, does not make up for it.

The more you're away from your child, the less you know "your" child.

The more tired and stressed you are when you DO see your child, the LESS capable you are to be the parent that your child desperately needs, and deserves.

Why do you think more and more rich kids are growing up RAGING, full of anger and resentment?

"But we gave our child everything." Sure, everything money could buy. Everything, except stable and consistant care during the first three to five years of life. Why do you think they're called "the foundation years"?

Usually, (not always) when the early years go poorly (yes, rich kids often have very sad childhoods), you can have a lifetime of trying to "fix" it. Lifelong therapy and "medication". And hope that does the trick, and there won't be any REALLY serious consequences.

You can give this, any kind of pretty label you want. But whatever you call it, it magically, is NEVER correlated to early childhood care/parenting, or lack of.

This is not about a "blame game".
It's about putting some thought into our values and priorities, and asking,

Is this really the best we can do?

bp

This is for the defensive, angry poster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The more busy parents in this world the more pay nanny can demand. Hihihihi don't you love that?

Only good nannies earn high wages from parents who can afford it, 25-35+/hr. These are the parents who depend on the top-notch expertise of a trained and experienced professional nanny. Without her, they know their job performance and earning potential will be diminished. Who wants that?

The best nannies can easily be worth their weight in gold, for parents who need them.

[Anonymous]

Ah, nannying, the only profession where it's both possible and normal to make your living off someone and criticize them in the same breath for daring to make it possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.

I am the PP and I never mentioned neglect. Firstly I would like to say that it seems your parents made a real effort to make sure that they spent time with you, which is awesome. However if your honest for a few seconds, if you can't remember the face or name of your babysitters it's probably because you didn't have them on a full time basis. Your working parents were the ones that actually made an effort. This thread however is for the majority of D.C parents. Who choose a career, work 50/60hr weeks, and get home to kids already eaten and in their P.J's.

Secondly your use of the term 'babysitter" was used to offend, as you well know....and leads me to believe that maybe you are not as involved as your parents were?

Thirdly using your own personal experience, and making it a fact of others is a fallacy.

So here are a few links on the detriment of working long hours outside of the home.

http://www.walearning.com/articles/children-are-af...-when-parents-work-long-hours/ (here is one just about fathers)

Here is one about full time vs part time https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/effect-parents-emplo...outcomes-children#jl_summary_0

And so as a "nanny" who is an observer of many families, and therefor a greater sample size.(oh and also actual facts^^) My experience is that choosing to peruse a career that keeps you out of the home for many hours is detrimental to your child. Especially for those children who are left in the early years 0-3. The worst is when it is for over 40 hours. It can be mitigated by a warm and loving nanny/grandparent/caregiver. But you should be so luck to have have them "babysitting" for you. Plus no matter who it is they can never take the place of a parent who decides to stay home. IMO if your going to have children you need to make them a priority, not just with feelings but with action.
I suppose you think putting food on the table and keeping a roof over our children's heads doesn't qualify as action?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.

I am the PP and I never mentioned neglect. Firstly I would like to say that it seems your parents made a real effort to make sure that they spent time with you, which is awesome. However if your honest for a few seconds, if you can't remember the face or name of your babysitters it's probably because you didn't have them on a full time basis. Your working parents were the ones that actually made an effort. This thread however is for the majority of D.C parents. Who choose a career, work 50/60hr weeks, and get home to kids already eaten and in their P.J's.

Secondly your use of the term 'babysitter" was used to offend, as you well know....and leads me to believe that maybe you are not as involved as your parents were?

Thirdly using your own personal experience, and making it a fact of others is a fallacy.

So here are a few links on the detriment of working long hours outside of the home.

http://www.walearning.com/articles/children-are-af...-when-parents-work-long-hours/ (here is one just about fathers)

Here is one about full time vs part time https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/effect-parents-emplo...outcomes-children#jl_summary_0

And so as a "nanny" who is an observer of many families, and therefor a greater sample size.(oh and also actual facts^^) My experience is that choosing to peruse a career that keeps you out of the home for many hours is detrimental to your child. Especially for those children who are left in the early years 0-3. The worst is when it is for over 40 hours. It can be mitigated by a warm and loving nanny/grandparent/caregiver. But you should be so luck to have have them "babysitting" for you. Plus no matter who it is they can never take the place of a parent who decides to stay home. IMO if your going to have children you need to make them a priority, not just with feelings but with action.

I suppose you think putting food on the table and keeping a roof over our children's heads doesn't qualify as action?
It's "indirect" action, as opposed to doing the actual work of caregiving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.

I am the PP and I never mentioned neglect. Firstly I would like to say that it seems your parents made a real effort to make sure that they spent time with you, which is awesome. However if your honest for a few seconds, if you can't remember the face or name of your babysitters it's probably because you didn't have them on a full time basis. Your working parents were the ones that actually made an effort. This thread however is for the majority of D.C parents. Who choose a career, work 50/60hr weeks, and get home to kids already eaten and in their P.J's.

Secondly your use of the term 'babysitter" was used to offend, as you well know....and leads me to believe that maybe you are not as involved as your parents were?

Thirdly using your own personal experience, and making it a fact of others is a fallacy.

So here are a few links on the detriment of working long hours outside of the home.

http://www.walearning.com/articles/children-are-af...-when-parents-work-long-hours/ (here is one just about fathers)

Here is one about full time vs part time https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/effect-parents-emplo...outcomes-children#jl_summary_0

And so as a "nanny" who is an observer of many families, and therefor a greater sample size.(oh and also actual facts^^) My experience is that choosing to peruse a career that keeps you out of the home for many hours is detrimental to your child. Especially for those children who are left in the early years 0-3. The worst is when it is for over 40 hours. It can be mitigated by a warm and loving nanny/grandparent/caregiver. But you should be so luck to have have them "babysitting" for you. Plus no matter who it is they can never take the place of a parent who decides to stay home. IMO if your going to have children you need to make them a priority, not just with feelings but with action.

I suppose you think putting food on the table and keeping a roof over our children's heads doesn't qualify as action?

It's "indirect" action, as opposed to doing the actual work of caregiving.
So the kids are better off hungry and homeless but with their parent at home to do the "actual work of caregiving"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Absolutely false. Yet another nanny trying to make herself out to be WAY more significant than she is.
I grew up with "dual working parents" or whatever lame title the other PP gave it, and I can tell you I never felt neglected for a second. I also can not remember the name or face of ONE of my babysitters. I DO remember my dad coaching basketball, my mom taking me to piano lessons, and eating dinner with my family most nights, even if it was a casserole that my mom prepped the night before.

Working parents DO NOT equal neglectful parents. This is an incredibly elitist notion and insulting to the 90% of families where both parents choose/have to work.

I am the PP and I never mentioned neglect. Firstly I would like to say that it seems your parents made a real effort to make sure that they spent time with you, which is awesome. However if your honest for a few seconds, if you can't remember the face or name of your babysitters it's probably because you didn't have them on a full time basis. Your working parents were the ones that actually made an effort. This thread however is for the majority of D.C parents. Who choose a career, work 50/60hr weeks, and get home to kids already eaten and in their P.J's.

Secondly your use of the term 'babysitter" was used to offend, as you well know....and leads me to believe that maybe you are not as involved as your parents were?

Thirdly using your own personal experience, and making it a fact of others is a fallacy.

So here are a few links on the detriment of working long hours outside of the home.

http://www.walearning.com/articles/children-are-af...-when-parents-work-long-hours/ (here is one just about fathers)

Here is one about full time vs part time https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/effect-parents-emplo...outcomes-children#jl_summary_0

And so as a "nanny" who is an observer of many families, and therefor a greater sample size.(oh and also actual facts^^) My experience is that choosing to peruse a career that keeps you out of the home for many hours is detrimental to your child. Especially for those children who are left in the early years 0-3. The worst is when it is for over 40 hours. It can be mitigated by a warm and loving nanny/grandparent/caregiver. But you should be so luck to have have them "babysitting" for you. Plus no matter who it is they can never take the place of a parent who decides to stay home. IMO if your going to have children you need to make them a priority, not just with feelings but with action.

I suppose you think putting food on the table and keeping a roof over our children's heads doesn't qualify as action?

It's "indirect" action, as opposed to doing the actual work of caregiving.

So the kids are better off hungry and homeless but with their parent at home to do the "actual work of caregiving"?

Of course not, nobody mentioned that. It's simply a truth that if a nanny works 4+ days a week, is there to get kids up and around all the way through til bedtime, maybe an hour before, the nanny is the one parenting the children, as she's the one modeling behaviors, teaching, etc.