Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is unheard of, but I had been placed by one of the more “elite” nanny agencies to bring along my child to work. The parents who hired me were both physicians, so they could afford whatever they thought was the best care their child could get.

Which agency is this?

I cannot imagine an elite agency allowing a nanny to take her child to work with her.

If one of the employer’s conditions for hire is that nanny has a child and brings the child, they will.

Why in the world would any employer set that as a condition for hire?

I’ve seen it as a condition. As I don’t have kids, I don’t bother applying. But although rare, the positions do exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is unheard of, but I had been placed by one of the more “elite” nanny agencies to bring along my child to work. The parents who hired me were both physicians, so they could afford whatever they thought was the best care their child could get.

Which agency is this?

I cannot imagine an elite agency allowing a nanny to take her child to work with her.

If one of the employer’s conditions for hire is that nanny has a child and brings the child, they will.

Why in the world would any employer set that as a condition for hire?

I doubt it'd be a condition, but it could be that people who come from large families don't feel threatened by a nanny bringing her compatible child.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is unheard of, but I had been placed by one of the more “elite” nanny agencies to bring along my child to work. The parents who hired me were both physicians, so they could afford whatever they thought was the best care their child could get.

Which agency is this?

I cannot imagine an elite agency allowing a nanny to take her child to work with her.

If one of the employer’s conditions for hire is that nanny has a child and brings the child, they will.

Why in the world would any employer set that as a condition for hire?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is unheard of, but I had been placed by one of the more “elite” nanny agencies to bring along my child to work. The parents who hired me were both physicians, so they could afford whatever they thought was the best care their child could get.

Which agency is this?

I cannot imagine an elite agency allowing a nanny to take her child to work with her.

If one of the employer’s conditions for hire is that nanny has a child and brings the child, they will.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, many parents seek out a nanny with a similarly or slightly older child, to provide companionship and a pseudo-sibling bond.

Companionship is available a la carte without the complications the nanny's child may incur. Not all children get along, either.

Not all siblings get along (most fight at least a few times per day), and it’s less likely with step-children. Many parents of only children recognize that opportunities to teach sharing, patience and taking turns occur naturally when children grow up together, while only children have to seek them out. Nanny shares with child of any other family (including the nanny’s children) offers as close as possible to having a sibling.

These are not siblings or stepchildren and reality is nanny will be bias to hers.

It's "biased" not "bias."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is unheard of, but I had been placed by one of the more “elite” nanny agencies to bring along my child to work. The parents who hired me were both physicians, so they could afford whatever they thought was the best care their child could get.

Which agency is this?

I cannot imagine an elite agency allowing a nanny to take her child to work with her.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, many parents seek out a nanny with a similarly or slightly older child, to provide companionship and a pseudo-sibling bond.

Companionship is available a la carte without the complications the nanny's child may incur. Not all children get along, either.

Not all siblings get along (most fight at least a few times per day), and it’s less likely with step-children. Many parents of only children recognize that opportunities to teach sharing, patience and taking turns occur naturally when children grow up together, while only children have to seek them out. Nanny shares with child of any other family (including the nanny’s children) offers as close as possible to having a sibling.

These are not siblings or stepchildren and reality is nanny will be bias to hers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know this is unheard of, but I had been placed by one of the more “elite” nanny agencies to bring along my child to work. The parents who hired me were both physicians, so they could afford whatever they thought was the best care their child could get.

You have no idea what they could afford. Med school is expensive, they may have up to their eyeballs in student loan debt. Even if they "lived in a big house" and "drove expensive cars," they may have just been trying to keep up with the joneses.

You have no clue how much I knew about them. You’re just mad they could afford the best.

The best is a professional who has child care for her own kids and is focused only on her job. This isn't a nanny share. Its a nanny bring her child to work. Nanny share is different.

FYI, a nanny who has her own young child actually has two jobs:
1. Caring for her charge
2. Caring for her own bio child
My pediatric psychiatrist employer loved how well I accomplished both jobs.

A pediatrician and a psychiatrist most def can’t afford the best. Those are some of the lowest paid specialties.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a professional in early childhood development, I doubt I would outsource my toddler’s care to a stranger, while I provided the care of another’s person’s child.

Of course some parents may want their child to be the one and only, but I know parents who have different preferences. One must consider their own child and circumstances, and proceed accordingly.

Well your employers are outsourcing their toddler's care to you, and you're a stranger. Did you tell them your professional opinion that what they're doing is a bad bad thing?

They were smart enough to pick me. That was a good thing.

Yet you too are a stranger, and you wouldn't leave your child with a stranger but your employers left their child with you. Did you tell them you look down upon their choice?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, many parents seek out a nanny with a similarly or slightly older child, to provide companionship and a pseudo-sibling bond.

Companionship is available a la carte without the complications the nanny's child may incur. Not all children get along, either.

Not all siblings get along (most fight at least a few times per day), and it’s less likely with step-children. Many parents of only children recognize that opportunities to teach sharing, patience and taking turns occur naturally when children grow up together, while only children have to seek them out. Nanny shares with child of any other family (including the nanny’s children) offers as close as possible to having a sibling.

If real siblings and stepchildren fight, what chance does a stranger's child have? At least with a sibling there is a permanence factor. The nanny's child will be gone soon.

Look, if your employers put such a great emphasis on their children to learn sharing, patience and taking turns, they would had another. They had an only. That tells you what's important to them.

A good nanny ought to be able to teach sharing and patience without dragging another child into it.