Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Seeing as nannies are not most children's primary caregivers (even the 40/50 hour week ones) they are not really even a factor here. These disorders are seen in cases of extreme abuse and neglect and in children who have spent their earliest years in orphanages. Attachment disorders are severe and require major cognitive, emotional, and behavioral therapy. It is appalling that one poster keeps using this term to try to bolster the grossly inflated opinion she has of her significance in a child's life.
Really? For an infant that has a nanny 50 hours a week, the baby maybe sees his parents 2-3 hours a day not including weekends. That definitely makes the nanny the primary caregiver.
How do you figure that? Even if the nanny is 40- 50 hrs a week, there are 168 hours in a week. So the parents are with the baby more than three times the amount of time the nanny is there. Even if the baby is sleeping 8- 10 hours at night (and napping 2 hours a day with the nanny) the time is still significantly in the parent's favor. Not to mention "time" is not the only thing that qualifies one as the primary caregiver.
The truth of the matter is, when you hire someone to care for your child 50 hours a week, that person is the primary caregiver. I've seen MBs and DBs get extremely upset when their baby chooses to cling to nanny instead of them, but what do they expect when that nanny is spending he majority of baby's waking time with the nanny? Calculating sleeping hours doesn't change the fact that baby is predominantly cared for by someone who isn't you.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Seeing as nannies are not most children's primary caregivers (even the 40/50 hour week ones) they are not really even a factor here. These disorders are seen in cases of extreme abuse and neglect and in children who have spent their earliest years in orphanages. Attachment disorders are severe and require major cognitive, emotional, and behavioral therapy. It is appalling that one poster keeps using this term to try to bolster the grossly inflated opinion she has of her significance in a child's life.
Really? For an infant that has a nanny 50 hours a week, the baby maybe sees his parents 2-3 hours a day not including weekends. That definitely makes the nanny the primary caregiver.
How do you figure that? Even if the nanny is 40- 50 hrs a week, there are 168 hours in a week. So the parents are with the baby more than three times the amount of time the nanny is there. Even if the baby is sleeping 8- 10 hours at night (and napping 2 hours a day with the nanny) the time is still significantly in the parent's favor. Not to mention "time" is not the only thing that qualifies one as the primary caregiver.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
Seeing as nannies are not most children's primary caregivers (even the 40/50 hour week ones) they are not really even a factor here. These disorders are seen in cases of extreme abuse and neglect and in children who have spent their earliest years in orphanages. Attachment disorders are severe and require major cognitive, emotional, and behavioral therapy. It is appalling that one poster keeps using this term to try to bolster the grossly inflated opinion she has of her significance in a child's life.
Really? For an infant that has a nanny 50 hours a week, the baby maybe sees his parents 2-3 hours a day not including weekends. That definitely makes the nanny the primary caregiver.
Anonymous wrote:Omg Comma Lady (aka OP) you are a poor excuse of a nanny and a embarrassment. PLEASEEEEE GO AWAY!
Anonymous wrote:The frequent change of primary caregivers (during a child's first three years, for example) can't result in attatchment disorder?
The issue of your being "offended" is certainly worthy of discussion, in my opinion.
No, the simple change, even frequent change, of nannies during a child's first three years doesn't not result in attachment disorder in the absence of extreme trauma.
The issue of my being offended is pretty simple. My clinical work involves work in attachment disorders. I see the effects every day. To denigrate the challenges faced by families with a member with this diagnosis is insulting. Your ignorance is appalling.
Anonymous wrote:[quoteIt's unfortunate, 23:12, that you find the unintended consequences of poor parenting, to be "offensive". Your personal feelings, however, don't change reality.