how many nannies is too many for a child?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We had one nanny share before second baby was born ( that nanny didnt want to add an infant to the mix for the last five months of the share, then transition to being our fulltime nanny) and then recently our nanny of 2 yrs left. She was bored and thought she could get 60+k rather than the 39k we were paying her. That is not the most competitive salary overall but we did give a lot of perks and she was only 22, so I thought that was a fair salary given her financial situation ( she is supported by well-off husband). I thought I was a good Mb, and she never mentioned any dissatisfaction. But the fact she left speaks for itself.

Maybe it is just too traumatic for me. I am going to stop working. I hate my job anyway, but felt like I needed to contribute to our household. I would much rather be with my kids.

Hold it! If your DH makes $250,000/yr would you be happy being paid $39,000/yr instead of your regular pay. You get paid for the job you DO and your spouses salaary is not even a consideration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ideally, you want your children to form secure, lasting bonds with caregivers. But, sometimes that's not possible and other needs take over.

One thing I would ask is how many nannies have left you or you've fired (and not for reasons like moving away or a dramatic change in hours)? I think it's pretty normal for families to have fired one nanny. But, once you've fired three or four (or that many leave you), you have to start looking at the parents' ability to manage. You might be an awful boss.

The biggest problem is parents who can't make up their minds about what they want:

A. A professional who knows how to do her job

OR

B. A newbie you can... and need to train.

In their dreams they think they can have both, hence the wild success of this forum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh really?? Attachment issues? Must fire nanny ASAP now before the bond gets too strong because the nanny job ALWAYS ends. Nanny is not going to be around when my baby goes to college.

Better get rid of the nanny now and just be SAHM....

Thanks everyone!!

The job may end, but the established bond should continue. Isn't that common sense? Everyone knows that well-established bonds that get severed are a horrific thing.

No intelligent parent wishes that upon her own child. None.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh really?? Attachment issues? Must fire nanny ASAP now before the bond gets too strong because the nanny job ALWAYS ends. Nanny is not going to be around when my baby goes to college.

Better get rid of the nanny now and just be SAHM....

Thanks everyone!!

The job may end, but the established bond should continue. Isn't that common sense? Everyone knows that well-established bonds that get severed are a horrific thing.

No intelligent parent wishes that upon her own child. None.

Horrific? Are you kidding me here? I think this could go in the dictionary next to white people problems. Nannies, caregivers, teachers, grandparents, siblings, friends, and all manner of people with whom "well-established" bonds exist leave everyone's lives. If it is going to be horrific every time the poor kid you care for is in for a world of hurt (and pathology).

Stop trying to bolster your role in a child's life and stop trying to trick parents into keeping nannies for the mental health of their children. It is natural and healthy for children and adults to learn how to deal with loss and does not inevitably lead to horrific separation issues or life-long scarring. Your parroting of this notion on nearly every thread just makes you seem unbalanced and deranged.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh really?? Attachment issues? Must fire nanny ASAP now before the bond gets too strong because the nanny job ALWAYS ends. Nanny is not going to be around when my baby goes to college.

Better get rid of the nanny now and just be SAHM....

Thanks everyone!!

The job may end, but the established bond should continue. Isn't that common sense? Everyone knows that well-established bonds that get severed are a horrific thing.

No intelligent parent wishes that upon her own child. None.

Horrific? Are you kidding me here? I think this could go in the dictionary next to white people problems. Nannies, caregivers, teachers, grandparents, siblings, friends, and all manner of people with whom "well-established" bonds exist leave everyone's lives. If it is going to be horrific every time the poor kid you care for is in for a world of hurt (and pathology).

Stop trying to bolster your role in a child's life and stop trying to trick parents into keeping nannies for the mental health of their children. It is natural and healthy for children and adults to learn how to deal with loss and does not inevitably lead to horrific separation issues or life-long scarring. Your parroting of this notion on nearly every thread just makes you seem unbalanced and deranged.

Just how early in life do you think it's "healthy" for a young child to "deal with loss" of a primary caregiver? Six months? Perhaps twelve months? Wait, please don't tell us. Your ignorance and selfishness are astounding and shameful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh really?? Attachment issues? Must fire nanny ASAP now before the bond gets too strong because the nanny job ALWAYS ends. Nanny is not going to be around when my baby goes to college.

Better get rid of the nanny now and just be SAHM....

Thanks everyone!!

The job may end, but the established bond should continue. Isn't that common sense? Everyone knows that well-established bonds that get severed are a horrific thing.

No intelligent parent wishes that upon her own child. None.

Horrific? Are you kidding me here? I think this could go in the dictionary next to white people problems. Nannies, caregivers, teachers, grandparents, siblings, friends, and all manner of people with whom "well-established" bonds exist leave everyone's lives. If it is going to be horrific every time the poor kid you care for is in for a world of hurt (and pathology).

Stop trying to bolster your role in a child's life and stop trying to trick parents into keeping nannies for the mental health of their children. It is natural and healthy for children and adults to learn how to deal with loss and does not inevitably lead to horrific separation issues or life-long scarring. Your parroting of this notion on nearly every thread just makes you seem unbalanced and deranged.

Just how early in life do you think it's "healthy" for a young child to "deal with loss" of a primary caregiver? Six months? Perhaps twelve months? Wait, please don't tell us. Your ignorance and selfishness are astounding and shameful.

You wish you were this indispensable. Us MBs see the kids long after you are gone. No, they are not affected that way at all, I'm afraid. They ask for grandparents who went back to their state more than former nannies. They know the difference between nanny and family.

Don't get me wrong. We treat the nanny well. She is not so critical thAt if she has performance issues, we have to keep her around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh really?? Attachment issues? Must fire nanny ASAP now before the bond gets too strong because the nanny job ALWAYS ends. Nanny is not going to be around when my baby goes to college.

Better get rid of the nanny now and just be SAHM....

Thanks everyone!!

The job may end, but the established bond should continue. Isn't that common sense? Everyone knows that well-established bonds that get severed are a horrific thing.

No intelligent parent wishes that upon her own child. None.

Horrific? Are you kidding me here? I think this could go in the dictionary next to white people problems. Nannies, caregivers, teachers, grandparents, siblings, friends, and all manner of people with whom "well-established" bonds exist leave everyone's lives. If it is going to be horrific every time the poor kid you care for is in for a world of hurt (and pathology).

Stop trying to bolster your role in a child's life and stop trying to trick parents into keeping nannies for the mental health of their children. It is natural and healthy for children and adults to learn how to deal with loss and does not inevitably lead to horrific separation issues or life-long scarring. Your parroting of this notion on nearly every thread just makes you seem unbalanced and deranged.

Just how early in life do you think it's "healthy" for a young child to "deal with loss" of a primary caregiver? Six months? Perhaps twelve months? Wait, please don't tell us. Your ignorance and selfishness are astounding and shameful.

It isn't healthy for a child to be separated from his/her primary attachment figure. If that is you, then the parents you work for are terrible parents, and they should keep you for as long as possible. If that is mom (or dad), then the child will be fine keeping that primary attachment and forming other relationships with new nannies/teachers/coaches.

[Anonymous]

Children need stability.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Children need stability.

Exactly. Smart parents do what they can to maintain a good stable caregiver for their young children.

It matters big time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh really?? Attachment issues? Must fire nanny ASAP now before the bond gets too strong because the nanny job ALWAYS ends. Nanny is not going to be around when my baby goes to college.

Better get rid of the nanny now and just be SAHM....

Thanks everyone!!

The job may end, but the established bond should continue. Isn't that common sense? Everyone knows that well-established bonds that get severed are a horrific thing.

No intelligent parent wishes that upon her own child. None.

Horrific? Are you kidding me here? I think this could go in the dictionary next to white people problems. Nannies, caregivers, teachers, grandparents, siblings, friends, and all manner of people with whom "well-established" bonds exist leave everyone's lives. If it is going to be horrific every time the poor kid you care for is in for a world of hurt (and pathology).

Stop trying to bolster your role in a child's life and stop trying to trick parents into keeping nannies for the mental health of their children. It is natural and healthy for children and adults to learn how to deal with loss and does not inevitably lead to horrific separation issues or life-long scarring. Your parroting of this notion on nearly every thread just makes you seem unbalanced and deranged.

Just how early in life do you think it's "healthy" for a young child to "deal with loss" of a primary caregiver? Six months? Perhaps twelve months? Wait, please don't tell us. Your ignorance and selfishness are astounding and shameful.

You wish you were this indispensable. Us MBs see the kids long after you are gone. No, they are not affected that way at all, I'm afraid. They ask for grandparents who went back to their state more than former nannies. They know the difference between nanny and family.

Don't get me wrong. We treat the nanny well. She is not so critical thAt if she has performance issues, we have to keep her around.

"Us"? Where did you learn English?

[Anonymous]

Some parents are simply insecure.

Others will often say, "Nanny is just like family." They recognize their child's bond, and aren't afraid to acknowledge it and even appreciate the healthy nature of that bond with the nanny. That's exactly the relationship they were hoping for.