Have you ever put your kid(s) in daycare? - Page 3

[Parthenia]

Originally Posted by playdoh

Why does so much of Attachment Parenting literature (Sears and API come immediately to mind) emphasize that part of Attachment Parenting is avoiding prolonged mother-child seperation, especially when the child is under three?

If it isn't part of Attachment Parenting to have the mother-baby relationship protected against seperation, then why do the majority (if not all) of these AP authors include it in APing? Are they misinformed/wrong?

Honest questions.

Are we back on the AP Rules vs. Ideals trip?
Yes, it's a nice ideal. The thing is, Dr. Sears isn't going to pay for my mortgage, insurance, gas, electric water, groceries, retirement, my children's college education, car maintenence, or to have my eyebrows shaped at the day spa. The writers of these books aren't in my family and don't support us financially.
The people who write those books don't know me or my family, and while I appreciate the guidance these people provide, I don't take everything they say as gospel truth, or as an absolute way to conduct my life. Nor do I think the authors of AP books intend their advice to be followed to the letter. As you states, it's a *part* of AP, and there are lots of parts of AP. We pick and choose what works best for our families. If no one can get a good night sleep while co-sleeping, why would someone continue to do it? If a woman had a mastectomy before she had children and can't breastfeed....You see where I'm going with this.
I should add that dd was not in full time day care all the time. When an oppurtunity to work a great part time job came up, I took it, and we reduced dd's day care time. That worked for 4 years until we had to move out of our apartment, buy a house, and found we were expecting another child. Our situation changed, and so did we.

Our culture has no interest in protecting the mother-baby relationship either. But I think that's a whole nother thread.

[PurpleBasil]

No, I'm not back on any trip.

If I see something consistent in the bulk of AP writings, then I will ask about it.

If there are no drawbacks other than mom feeling torn up, and possibly bottle refusing on the part of the baby why not put the child in childcare? I haven't read any negatives for the child in this thread, as a result of maternal seperation.

So the warnings from AP authors are unfounded? That is my question.

Or are there drawbacks for the child?

If the whole lot of AP writers are lying through their teeth about maternal seperation, then everyone should hear about it. If truly there are no negatives to the child or to the mama-infant bond, when the child/baby is in childcare, even from an early age and for many hours a week, then people should hear that from AP literature.

It isn't fair to families to be warned against something that really isn't risky at all. I'm talking about good childcare, btw and from every post I've read here from moms who utilize childcare, their children 'LOVE' it and are the better for it. Which means that mama is hopefully better for it and the family, too.

[Moon]

Sophie goes to the creche at Church every Sunday morning. She loves going to "church" cause to her it means she gets to play in the church playground, or the nursery classroom, for an hour..she just about throws herself through the door.

It makes me wonder, sometimes, if she would benefit from being in some kind of play group, but I know I am not ready to put her into day care.

[crysmomofthree]

My children are in day care on average 2 days a week, I work a rotating schedule of 2 on four off, I have two older boys in school and my ds 14 months is in a loving family daycare. I couldn't be happier with my choice of childcare providers. I think the daycares you pick have a really strong influence on how your children adapt to the situation.
My older boys like daycare they get to play with friends and hang out at the park and do things that only older boys can do (something that is hard when you have a little baby brother around)
the baby is really happy at daycare I phone twice a day and childcare provider loves to gush about all the exciting things he has done that morning (like climb into the swing all by himself, or nursing a doll) I know she loves him and will protect him and educate him. That does not make it easier to leave him there though. When I come home at night it is a marathon nursing session and a tired out baby.

I had a year maternity leave and I was required to go back to my previous post. I am not planning on working after we have the next baby at least for a couple of years.

I think it is horrible that people actually think you are less of a parent if your kids are in childcare, Daycare serves a purpose for people who choose or are required to work for all sorts of reasons, I just wish that there were social programs in place around the world that provided for a modestly paid maternity leave for about six months, It is not fair that working parents have to leave their new babies so early. It would increase the success of breastfeeding rates immensely I believe
crystal

[wednesday]

I am doing the best for my family that I can, as a nurturer and as a provider, and I am proud of that.

[Dechen]

Originally Posted by dancingmama

If you are truly happy, you are generous with others.

I almost want put that in my sig as a reminder. What a beautiful and true statement.

[chalupamom]

Mostly, I feel like if you are happy, TRULY happy, in your life, you don't feel the need to do this. You don't feel the need to come on these boards and state why you love yourself so much and you just don't understand anyone who does it differently. If you are truly happy, you are generous with others. If you are truly happy and comfortable in your skin, you not only accept others, but welcome them and all you can learn from them (because everybody has something to teach). You don't put up barriers. You don't us-and-them everything.

Sing it, dancingmama.

[kimmysue2]

Nope never will. I made darn sure that I can do something to make good money and be the only one to care for my son. I choosed to have him, he is my responsiblity, he comes first before me before my DH.

My brother and sil refuse to take for they child. They put him in childcare until they have to pick him up. They both could easily work different schedules so one could watch at any time but they do not like being around their own kid.

[Viola]

Originally Posted by playdoh

If it isn't part of Attachment Parenting to have the mother-baby relationship protected against seperation, then why do the majority (if not all) of these AP authors include it in APing? Are they misinformed/wrong?

Honest questions.

Well, what I always come back to is does it really matter if you use the AP description or not, as long as you are parenting in the best way you can? I try not to see AP vs. mainstream as good vs. bad, but that has been a prevalent notion ever since I've been involved in AP groups. I started participating in AP groups not because I felt like I embraced the ideals of attachment parenting, but just because I wanted to meet other moms who breastfed and cloth diapered (and co-slept and used slings, I guess), and I knew there would be some both at LLL and AP groups. Along the way I feel like I embraced more of the ideals because they made sense to me. The biggest thing for me is loving attachment to your child. If you work, the child needs to have a loving bond with another caretaker. The things that I completely reject are the methods people use to train and separate their children from themselves that can be abusive. Spanking and sleep training involving CIO are just plain wrong to me and they aren't AP methods. And I say this having experience with both things, so I'm not pointing finger at other people.

Anyway, to answer your question, I believe that groups like API and LLL and some of the authors of attachment parenting literature promote the benefits of mothers staying at home with their infants based on attachment theory science as well as observations in nature. It just seems like we got so far away from loving attachment that we need a philosophy to say "Your baby needs you, you should stay home with your baby." Maybe it isn't possible or desirable for everyone, but promoting that idea is better for society in the long run. In other countries, mothers and fathers get to take more time off to be with their infants. The policymakers in those countries must see a benefit in it. My big bias is that I believe every baby who can be breastfed should be breastfed, and many workplaces don't support this idea. I see the lack of bonding time in the early months coupled with lack of support for breastfeeding mothers in many jobs as detrimental to our children.

When I worked in retail, I knew a mom who had a baby on Saturday and was back to work on Monday. Pumping wasn't even an option for her. At that point I wasn't a breastfeeding advocate, but even then it disturbed me that this mother was able to have so little time to recover from her birth and to bond with her child.

In every AP group I've been involved with, there has always been a mom who couldn't breastfeed or had to return to work after a few weeks. I have never considered them to be anything less than AP moms--I figured they were committed to the ideals of attachment parenting and forming a loving bond. There is a benefit for parents who have to be separated from their babies for long periods of time to use some of the things associated with the AP/NFL lifestyle, like slings or family bed. And at the same time I don't think that I, as a sahm, should become too complacent, because I've noticed this tendency in myself to shut down emotionally after awhile and I have to prod myself into remembering what I am doing and why I am doing it. For me, at least, if I let my children go to a loving caretaker once in awhile, it is a positive thing for both of us. Very often that loving, enthusiastic other caretaker is not my dh. LOL

I don't know, I hope I'm not being condescending. I got very little sleep last night. I just am wary of this laundry list of things you do or don't do as AP and feeling like you are a good parent because you do certain things. I think it's understandable to feel proud that you had a homebirth, have never used a disposable diaper or that your baby has never had a drop of formula. But it seems so divisive when parents get caught up in this being the only acceptable way. And it works in many directions--I mean, I've seen mothers get very indignant about people who vaccinated or used disposable diapers or a babysitter, but those mothers might make choices that I haven't or don't want to make. I try (I'm not perfect) to go dancingmama's route and not put up barriers.

[Parthenia]

Originally Posted by playdoh

No, I'm not back on any trip.

If I see something consistent in the bulk of AP writings, then I will ask about it.

If there are no drawbacks other than mom feeling torn up, and possibly bottle refusing on the part of the baby why not put the child in childcare? I haven't read any negatives for the child in this thread, as a result of maternal seperation.

So the warnings from AP authors are unfounded? That is my question.

Or are there drawbacks for the child?

If the whole lot of AP writers are lying through their teeth about maternal seperation, then everyone should hear about it. If truly there are no negatives to the child or to the mama-infant bond, when the child/baby is in childcare, even from an early age and for many hours a week, then people should hear that from AP literature.

It isn't fair to families to be warned against something that really isn't risky at all. I'm talking about good childcare, btw and from every post I've read here from moms who utilize childcare, their children 'LOVE' it and are the better for it. Which means that mama is hopefully better for it and the family, too.

Sorry Playdoh, I didn't mean to sound so b****y re: the trip. I had a flashabck from a previous thread that ended badly, which I don't even remember if you were involved in. I'm sorry. I'm dealing with the here and now, now.
I don't think the writers are lying about maternal-baby separation. I meant to say, in a less pissy way, that it just can't work for everyone.
Bad childcare is bad child care, and unfortunately good childcare seems to get lumped with the bad. This is where I disagree with the AP writers who badmouth all childcare. I am there for my child 24-7. We are not in constant view of each other, but if she needs me--even if she's just having a hard day and needs to be home--dh or I leave work. We have jobs where we can do that. My career and lifestyle choices have revolved around my family. It may not look like it to someone not in my situation, but whatever.
If my child was in a bad child care situation, where the caregiver did not respect and uphold my parenting beliefs, we'd seek alternatives.

[Sandrine]

I'm a SAHM and I can't wait for my children to go to school so that I can work. I hate, just realise this, being at home. I'm so bored. I need the interaction with other adults not just kids. I love the rush of deadline and customer services. My dds will both go to daycare for 1 day or so the yr before school. This way they get to know a dif environment and learn social behavior and such. For dd1 that by next yr and dd2 in about 2-3 yrs from now.

I'll probably get a p/t job one day but it won't help with finance and expenses.

[Leatherette]

My 2 and a half year old went to daycare for 6 months 30 hrs a week. I covered my friend's maternity leave so that she could bond with her baby and not have to worry about her other kids (we worked at a children's hospital), since I knew the job from when I worked before having my son.

I don't regret it for a minute. She got to establish a good nursing relationship and successfully pumped when she returned to work. My son (and me) had some tearful drop-offs, but he had a great time with the other kids and loved it overall. He is now 4 and very attached and well-adjusted. And I learned that while I missed some aspects of my work while I was being a SAHM, the grass was not greener on the other side, and now I am more content in my SAHM role.

So I am mostly a SAHM. I was a WOHM for those six months and it did not affect my son's attachment in any way I could see. And it was hard. And so is being a SAHM.

Ugh, I hate this conversation. I love my WOHM friends, and they would love to have the opportunity to be home, if not full time, then definitely more than they are. I help them out and support them in any way I can. I am waiting to go back to work until my daughter is three (I hope). I am lucky to have that choice.

And.....I use some childcare even when I don't work, because neither of my children ever sleep during the day :, and I can't get anything done otherwise. Sometimes I have to let the rest of the world experience the magic that is my children.

L.

[WonderWild]

Originally Posted by DestinysMama

I love being a sahm and wouldn't have it any other way. To be honest I have a hard time understanding wohm's. Obviously single parents have no choice but to put your kids in daycare just so you can afford new cars and a huge house? Or so you can feel fullfilled or useful by working? I never really wanted a big career I guess so I just don't get it, to me my career is my family. My heart breaks for the moms who would love to be sahm's though and just can't for financial reasons. I would probably cry my eyes out every day if I had to do it.

My dh and I both work full time and we do NOT have a huge house or new cars. We don't even have a car payment. Can't afford one. I also do not do it to feel fullfilled. I would be thrillled to be with my ds every minute of every day. Unfortunately I cannot. I try to make up for it after work and on the weekends by never leaving him. I have only left him twice, once so dh and I could go out and once to go to my 10 year class reunion. But I love his daycare and most importantly HE loves his daycare. He is happy to go there everyday and has even made his first little best friend.

[Evan&Anna's_Mom]

I am not quite sure where to start -- there is so much I want to cover and I'm so angry I'm not sure I can do any of it without sounding like a true b****.

First, my 2 kids are in part-time daycare. And they have been since they were tiny infants (in fact, my daughter was only 5 weeks old when I went back to work). I have never once cried about it. I've been sad and frustrated on occassion, but never enough to cry about it or regret my decisions. If that gets my AP parenting credentials revoked, so be it. If half of you think I'm the next worst parent to the Pearls, so be that too.

I know I shouldn't feel defensive because I am doing the best for everyone concerned (in balance and considering the entire family, not just the kids). But I do.

Why do I do this?
1. Because I love what I do at work and I think it contributes to the greater good.
2. Because I would probably badly abuse or kill my kids if I were a 24/7 SAHM. There may be disadvantages for the kids with daycare/preschool. But they are nothing compared to the problems they would face if they were with me all the time. I was not cut out to be a SAHM. At least I am honest about it and recognize my own limits. Still though, I'm a darn good mom with the situation as it is now. I can be patient, kind, caring, attentive, gentle, a good role model, all those things -- but not 24/7.
3. We could get by with just my husband's salary, but why should we? We don't live extravagent lives, but we do live in one of the most expensive places in the country. What I get from living here I wouldn't be willing to give up just so I could stay home but live someplace that I disliked (and I've lived in lots of other places, so I know what it would be like elsewhere). Life would be miserable for the entire family without my income and I don't think its worth the sacrafice. And as an older mom (I'm already 41 and my youngest isn't even 2 yet), I can't afford to wait before worrying about retirement and life after the kids are gone. I have to face the fact that college and retirement are going to happen at the same time for me.
4. It is not possible for everyone to work odd shifts to avoid daycare. My husband is an attorney -- courts are on a pretty set schedule. I work for the church, and the office hours are pretty set here too. I don't want to take just any job for money, I want to do what is meaningful to me.

It is all about balance. Yes, there may be some disadvantages to the kids to be separated from me so young. But that doesn't mean that the best solution for the entire family is for me to stay home all the time at all costs. I found the best possible solution for my family and I'm really happy with it. All families are different, what works for some does not work for others. I believe very strongly that the parents here have spent a great deal of time, thought, prayer or whatever helps you make good decisions, about what their lives should look like. The "why would you ever do that?" question is insulting to intelligent, caring parents who have thought through the issues involved and made the right decision for their family and their circumstances.

[Misti]

Originally Posted by DestinysMama

T I would have thought on an AP board there would be more SAHM's

As a working Mamma who has done the SAHM thing, I can tell you that AP is even more valuable to us working away Mammas, whatever the reason we work. After all, if you're always there, presumably bonding comes pretty easy. When you have to be apart 10 hours a day, every waking moment counts.

And I am a much better Mamma this time because I have more energy for my little guy when we're together. I was stressed, exhausted, and in way over my head as a SAHM.

[zeldabee]

Originally Posted by Misti

When you have to be apart 10 hours a day, every waking moment counts.

Even the sleeping moments, for me.

[Celtain]

I have been a SAHM and I have put my kids in daycare full time. I totally prefer SAHM. In my family no one benifits from me being out of the home.

[HelloKitty]

Yes with my first two I was a single mother and had to work so I had them in daycare after the age of 6 months. It sucked and I hated having to do it but had to.

With my youngest I work 3 days a week and DH is home with him on those days (he's a firefighter and works 2 24 hour shifts every eight days so his schedule accomodates that). I work those three days because DH can not afford to make our mortgage payment on his salary alone - it's not for extras it's to keep our home. We are actually in the process of selling our home and downsizing to a smaller house with a lower mortgage payment so that I can become a SAHM. I can't wait - it's always been my dream to be able to stay home with my kids. I feel really bad for the women that have to work to pay the bills because I've BTDT and it's heartbreaking.

[Destinye]

I seem to remember Dr. Sears saying some of the most attached mothers he has worked with worked out of the home (paraphrasing here - sorry Dr. Sears) and AP becomes even more important as some others have posted here.

Anyhow everyone's situation is different and only we can make the best choices for our familes, whether that is day care or not day care, WOHM, SAHM, WAHM, SAHD, WAHD, WOHD...whatever acronym you like, it does not make us better or worse than anyone else who makes different choices. But learning to interact with other adults and children can be a valuable thing in any case.

What about those attached fathers who work all those hours!?

For the record I am a WAHM and have my own business I don't use a daycare.

[nuggetsmom]

If I hadn't been a WOHM I probably wouldn't be AP in a weird way. I would have just gone with the flow of the local mothers group and not tried so hard tomake up for my working which I wanted to do in the end. So I read and researched and happily found the baby book and the longer I am a mother the more AP I get.
ANd right now DD1 still goes to "daycare" parttime because it is her preschool and her social life and it makes me a better mommy with more patience if I have some time with only the baby.