or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Have you ever put your kid(s) in daycare?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Have you ever put your kid(s) in daycare? - Page 4

Poll Results: Have you ever put your child(ren) in daycare?

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 44% (109)
    never have, never will
  • 6% (17)
    no but I plan on it
  • 24% (60)
    yes, part-time
  • 24% (60)
    yes, full time
246 Total Votes  
post #61 of 221
I work, and during the summers I am a SAHM. I work because we need the money, and until recently because we needed the insurance, and because I am driven on a spiritual level to do what I do. You don't get to decide whether I really "need" to work -- I get to decide that. My family has two cars because my DH and I work 1.5 hours away from each other and can't share (otherwise we would), and there is no public transport that comes out here. We have one car that is several years old, and the other is one I have been driving since high school (and I'm nearly 30 years old). So I'm not working for new cars. We don't have a huge house either, though we do own a house. I feel we "need" that for a variety of reasons, all of which relate to our son's needs in some way. So I don't fit your mold.

What I do outside the home is very, very, very valuable -- not just to me but to society as a whole. It is, most days, very frustrating and not very fulfilling, but I am driven to do it because I am very good at it and it is very important. Trust me, being home would be easier, and it's not as if I'm getting any "glory" from my career -- if anything, in general society it causes me to be looked down upon. I don't feel a need to have some big career either -- never have. Instead, I feel a need -- a calling, as much as anything else -- to serve society and children in the way I do. I could be doing something else, for a lot more money and glory and the "big career." So again, I don't fit your mold.

I'm lucky that my calling puts me in a very family-friendly profession and I have never, ever, ever left my child while he was crying. I exclusively bf for six months, pumped for a year, and am still bf'ing and cosleeping. My child has spent 5 nights in his life not touching me while he slept, and for three of them I was in the hospital. My child is the most attached child I know, and also the most independent and social child I know at his age.

But you know what? I don't really want to claim the AP label, so it doesn't bother me that since I don't SAH full-time I fail the AP test. I didn't set out to be an AP parent. I set out, every day, without fail, to do the best thing for my son.

So far, it's working, regardless of what you call it.

And my son is in a traditional daycare center.
post #62 of 221
Destinye says at the bottom of page 3 of this thread,
Quote:
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.
I think Destinye may be referring to Dr.Sears's comments such as:
Quote:
Put your baby to sleep in your bed or in a crib right next to your bed. This allows you to reconnect at night and make up for the day's missed touch time. If babies could talk, I'm sure this would be one of their first requests. In fact, in our practice we prepare working mothers to expect their baby to wake up more at night because they missed mommy during the day. Sleeping close together will help you get more sleep, and still allows some extra contact for your baby.
(from his 1/15/04 column at http://www.parenting.com/parenting/e...4,9521,00.html)

In the same column Dr. Sears adds his personal history:
Quote:
While I was still a young infant, my mother was a single mom and needed to return to work. My caregivers were my grandparents. To this day, I still remember my mother doing the best she could in less-than-ideal circumstances. As a parent, you can't plan for every circumstance. Just do the best you can and make the most of those precious hours you have together.
Seems like Dr. Sears turned out okay in "daycare," and must really admire his single mom's parenting skills, as he's making parenting his life's work.
post #63 of 221
As a WOHM I could get defensive at the tone of most of this thread. But all I will say is I do what is BEST for my family.

If that means ds spends 45 hours a week with his sitter then that is what needs to happen. That in no way makes me any less AP than anyone who has ever wandered through the MDC forums.
post #64 of 221
The one thing that I keep thinking about as I read this thread is how screwed up America is..... Hear me out.

In other cultures the *Village* actually raises the child. Many mothers will nurse many children, children know they can go to any adult when they need something.

Daycare is our countries version of Village, and I see good and bad points to it. The good points is that I think it is good for many adults to raise children, the bad points is the manner in which the system is set up. Having to exchange money, making sure to find the *right* provider, providers that can turn out to be really, really bad for our kids, government involvment and many more things.

But in essesence, this is the way that the village raises the children and while I choose to stay at home with my kids, I don't feel bad about leaving my kids with someone else if I feel like it.
post #65 of 221
I have worked full time since ds was a year by choice.

Partly for financial... not bigger or better things... but the idea that we could save for retirement while owning a house. Partly for enjoyment. Partly to retain a sense of freedom.

My son has been in a day care the entire time. There has been some drawbacks but a lot of positives as well.

I dont' think that it has interfered with my relationship with my son in anyway. AP philosophies have been a big part of that.

I have never regretted going back to work once and i say that with my 4 yr old son in my arms nursing and cuddling. I get home every day and he is my world.
post #66 of 221
Just had to pipe in and give my 2 cents...

DH is in university full-time. We have already maxed out our student loans and I have had to start paying mine back. We are poor. We are very poor. So, I need to work and ds needs to go to daycare.

It's that simple.

lilgreen
post #67 of 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seasons
Destinye says at the bottom of page 3 of this thread,


I think Destinye may be referring to Dr.Sears's comments such as:

(from his 1/15/04 column at http://www.parenting.com/parenting/e...4,9521,00.html)

In the same column Dr. Sears adds his personal history:


Seems like Dr. Sears turned out okay in "daycare," and must really admire his single mom's parenting skills, as he's making parenting his life's work.
Thanks - could'nt have put it better myself! Furthermore Dr. Sears and his wife raised 8 kids (I believe) and managed to have more than 2 very successful careers between them, writing all the books and also being an MD (and a nurse in his wife's case) and I am sure he would still call himself a very attached parent.
post #68 of 221

somewhat long rant

Quote:
Originally Posted by DestinysMama
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?
New cars? Huge house?

Let me tell you something. When I met my dh I was a single mother. After we married, I still worked full time. Not for a new car or a fancy house, or even for fulfillment. I worked because we couldn't get by on his pay. Here's why....

My first child was an "oops." He was conceived on the pill, while I was in the Navy. I got pregnant two months after finishing boot camp, and I had a six-year obligation to the government. So my choices were to give up my kid, have an abortion, or keep my child and continue working. What would you do?

When I met my dh (who is also in the Navy), he had just bought a new car. Payments last five years, typically. His was over $300 a month, and this was back in '93. He was an E-2 when we married. Do you have any idea how little an E-2 makes? I was an E-3. Not much better.

I had some pretty high legal bills from my divorce. My ex-husband hid from me and it took a lot of time and $$$ to locate him, and then more time and $$$ to get rid of the jerk because he contested the divorce. I never got any child support, either. My husband petitioned to adopt my son after we'd been married about two years. Guess what? The b*****d ex contested that, too. More legal bills.

I was finally able to work only part-time when my oldest was six and the youngest was three. We don't go on fancy vacations or expensive dinners. We never have. We've been married ten years and have never been on a vacation together; not even a honeymoon. We don't have any expensive habits like cigarettes or alcohol. We've been homeschooling our kids for five years, and for 2.5 of those years, I still worked 30/hrs week. You might be happy pinching every penny, but some of us like a cushion to fall back on. I want to be able to take my kids to activities, to buy them decent books, and to feed them quality food. Participating in sports and such costs money, too. All of our family lives far away from us. It's nice to be able to visit them once or twice a year. We've had four family members die in the past six years. Traveling to funerals costs money, too. I have three cats. I don't want to feed them the cheapest garbage food they sell at Mall*Wart. If one of them is sick, I want to be able to afford veterinary care. If we have car trouble, it's nice to be able to fix it. If these things are considered "luxuries," then I guess we're guilty of being indulgent. Maybe we should just eat beans and rice every night for dinner and never leave the house.

Your notions that all dual-income families are living high on the hog is incredibly off the mark. Your child is only 18 months old and her needs are fairly easily met. Babies really don't cost a lot of money. Babies don't care about what their clothes look like. Babies don't want bikes or scooters or skateboards. Babies don't want to play soccer or basketball or hockey, nor do they want to take swimming lessons or gymnastics.

I'm beginning to think I don't want to spend time on these boards anymore. The only other boards I've ever encountered this sort of judgemental attitude is on religious forums. I've only been here a short while and this isn't the first time I've seen this sort of thing. It seems like hard-core APers tend to have a holier-than-thou disdain for those not like them.
post #69 of 221
Thought I'd chip in my 2 cents -

I am a SAHM. DH is a teacher so that should tip you off to how little he makes. We are not "happy pinching every penny", as someone else described it. It would be great to have more money, we are barely scraping by and it's kind of stressful at times. But we do it because we are both committed to me being a SAHM.

I am a little tired of the stereotype of SAHMs as one dimensional Susie Homemakers happily clipping coupons. Just as I am sure WOHMs are tired of the stereotype of themselves as heartless materialists, paying someone else to raise their kids.

Here is what I find ironic - that it's OK to say that you made a "choice" to work for personal reasons, but if someone were to say they made a "choice" not to breastfeed for the same reasons, they would be flamed to a crisp. Just something to think about.
post #70 of 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by famousmockngbrd
Here is what I find ironic - that it's OK to say that you made a "choice" to work for personal reasons, but if someone were to say they made a "choice" not to breastfeed for the same reasons, they would be flamed to a crisp. Just something to think about.
Well, breastfeeding is best for just about every baby (with rare exeptions for certain medical conditions). IMO, childcare isn't nearly so black and white, especially for children past infancy. Throughout most of human history, care of young children has been shared within a family or tribal group. The paradigm of a woman single-handedly caring for her children for most of the day (untill Daddy comes home) is a relatively new one.

Rain really loved certain childcare situations when she was little. Right after her second birthday, she started going one morning a week to a childcare center, and she looked forward to it every single time, and had a great time there. By the time she was 3 or 4 I think it would have been optimal, for her, if I could have dropped her off at childcare 2 or 3 afternoons a week. She went to a great center on-campus then, with high adult-child ratios, a world of cool things to do, and the kids were pretty much free to do the things that interested them. Unfortuately, most job and school schedules aren't set up on a drop-in basis, and some days or weeks Rain really would have preferred to stay home... but all in all, she remembers that center fondly.

Dar
post #71 of 221
DestinysMama, let me ask you this; Do you ever, in your life, have need for professional contact, say with a homeopath, a naturalist, a doctor, a doula, a midwife, a lactation consultant? Do any of those professionals ever happen to be women? Can you imagine one of those trusted individuals with whom you interact on this professional basis not being available to you because they decided to be SAHMs? Can you imagine not ever coming into contact with any female professional with whom you jived and felt understood because we were all at home tending to our children instead of out there mixing with the world and society at large? Because to me, that's what you're implying. Aren't you, in effect, saying that women shouldn't work once they've chosen to bring a child into the world? Think of all the really good women working in our world, many of whom are also good mothers, that would be left out of society. Then where would we be?

And while I'm on the subject of choosing, why is it that women are the only ones making these choices to have children and raise them? What happened to the other partner in the union? There are often two parents at the outset. Not always, but often and it seems to me that in choosing to procreate, they should be held in obligation to continue to partake in the raising of them.

Also, keep in mind that the United States lags the most in terms of caring for children as a whole society. Throughout Europe families receive child allowances, helping the parents together to care for their children, pay their bills or childcare or whatever, allowing both parents to take an active role in the raising of the children. I can't imagine this not being a good thing...you know, to have one parent caring for you unreservedly is great, why not more than one?

The United States is the only country that has absolutely no entitlement to paid time off after the birth of a child. And now that we've gotten rid of welfare, many women have no choice but to work and put their children in harm's way during the day with substandard daycare. I can't quite figure out how that's good.

It seems to me that if we valued the work that women do in all areas of our lives--and put an actual financial value on the raising of children, we would have less warring regarding SAHM/WOHM/WAHM etc. It's not about whether I work and you don't. It's not even about whether I put my child in daycare or not. It's about me valuing the work you do and you valuing the work I do. Obviously I work. I work eight hours four times a week. I work two hours before that making breakfast and lunch for my two kids, myself and my dh, getting my kids up and out of bed, dressed combed and cute as buttons to increase their protection factor while they're out of my hands and decrease their vulnerability to abuse. I work several hours after I come home playing with my kids, seeing to dinner, baths and bed. I certainly am still the primary caregiver even though I've entrusted carefully chosen people to assist me during the eight hours I'm at work. I know you do these things too. That's why you and I are actually more alike than you think we're different. I love my children so much I'm blind to all other things. Don't ever question that again.

See my signature, you know how I voted. I'm probably one of the luckiest working women in America though. I work 158 days out of the year (a little math will tell you that I'm actually home with my kids more often than I'm at work) and I'm paid quite handsomely to do that. Since you haven't been in my shoes, but I'm in yours a little more than half of my life, I think I have a better sense of how much work it takes to stay at home with kids (tons) and to work out of the home with kids (tons). The argument that I somehow don't care as much about my own because I work is ridiculously false and yet it continues to be put forward, and has it ever occurred to you that the males who run our country want it that way? This way, if your dh decides to divorce you, you're screwed. Terribly. You won't have welfare to help you continue to stay at home (and I mean this sincerely not snarkily, because I think our government absolutely should support mothers to stay at home with their wee ones) and particularly if your dh goes on to marry again and have a second set of children, you can be sure your standard of living will drop dramatically--but it will even if he doesn't remarry. All because you've stayed at home to care for your children, probably the single greatest responsibility any human undertakes. But we live in a country where women who are doing this are making one of the riskiest choices there is to make and that's wrong. It should just be a given that all women get a paid year off to stay home with their kids, and then have additional time off to raise them until they can enter school, as in Sweden where they can then work 80% without punishment until their children are eight years old--the men and the women. But it's not a given, and instead, raising children is purported to be only because of the love we feel for them. We're contributing to society by raising thinking individuals folks! Let's not downplay that and risk losing everything by point our fingers at each other! Instead, let's figure out a way to value the work that mothers do by making our partners do it too and evening the playing field a bit more!

I support your decision. Think about it a little bit more and learn to support mine even if it's not the one you'd make. Try reading The Price of Motherhood by Ann Crittenden. It'll open your eyes. You'll also see that my arguments aren't unique or original. They're the way things are.
post #72 of 221
Great post, LiamnEmma.

I just want to clarify - I don't think I was clear in my previous post. I am comparing women who enroll their 6 month old baby in daycare to go back to work full time because they are "unfulfilled" to women who stop breastfeeeding at 6 months because they "want their body back". Both these viewpoints are selfish, IMO. I do not think this is the same thing as someone who enrolls their 2 or 3 year old in a childcare program once or twice a week.

Personally, I do think that it is good for young babies to be with their mothers in the same way that it is good for them to be breastfed. While I agree that it is unnatural for mothers to have to care for their young children alone, I think it is just as unnatural for them to be separated from their mothers for 8 or 9 hours a day. I know this sounds like a slam on mothers of little babies who *have* to work and I don't mean it to be. It is certainly possible to find a good childcare provider and "make the best of a bad situation", as Sears says. But I do think that mothers (or fathers) should make every effort to SAH with their children until they are 2 or 3 years old. JMO.
post #73 of 221
LiamnEmma.

I loved everything about your post, especially this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by LiamnEmma
And while I'm on the subject of choosing, why is it that women are the only ones making these choices to have children and raise them? What happened to the other partner in the union? There are often two parents at the outset. Not always, but often and it seems to me that in choosing to procreate, they should be held in obligation to continue to partake in the raising of them.
It's attachment PARENTING, not just attachment MOTHERING. (sorry for shouting, this just gets me )
post #74 of 221
Quote:
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?

Oh, ya' gotta love the stereotypes.

Dh and I both drive a 1980 car. Our house was built in 1935 (and it's definitely not huge.) Although I do like teaching, it's not the only reason I work. It's a tough economy, and sometimes it really does take two incomes just to get by! But dh has a variable schedule, so ds is only in daycare two or three days a week.

We managed to keep him out of daycare the first year of his life with the help of MIL. And I pumped that first year, so ds was fully breastfed (never had any formula.) And dh wore ds in the sling, ds never had to CIO, we left ds intact, etc. It is possible to WOH and AP, to the best of your ability.
post #75 of 221
PS. As my dh said recently, "Our society expects good teachers. But are all of them supposed to be spinsters?"
post #76 of 221
And one more PS. -- I do get the summers off with my children, and I love being a SAHM then.

My best friend is a SAHM, as well. I'm really glad it works for her. I don't "get" the "Mommy wars" where we have to judge each other.
post #77 of 221
Originally Posted by DestinysMama
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 just wanted to add this point. I am a SAHM because my husband and I wanted one parent to be at home 24/7 with our child. Since he has a job that he likes and the job has the potential for growth, he opted to stay at his job. And, I quit the job I hated and stay home with my son (who is now a toddler).

But, for goodness sake, we are barely barely BARELY making ends meet. We economize at every turn. We have no extra expenses beyond our groceries and our fixed expenses. We have had no vacations, nothing. For groceries, I am as the frugal shopper - our bills are cut as low as we can get them. Our fixed expenses (like our insurance, hydro, gas, property taxes) keep getting higher. We have savings but they dwindle when we have a property tax bill or something large like our car needs new brakes. My husband does not earn enough money to carry the 3 of us - it's that simple. A friend suggested I read Tightwad Gazette, so I did and I thought the book was no help at all as I already do the things the book's author suggests. We are very very frugal and yet it just doesn't seem to be enough. Please don't assume that everyone who has two parents working does so because they want luxury cars and homes - some people do need extra money to cover their living expenses. Not every person's income is high enough to cover living expenses for 1,2,3 or more people. And, for instance, our cost of living in our province and our provincial income tax system maybe very very different from someone else's.
post #78 of 221
I have never put my dd in daycare. I had 3 month maternity leave and went back to work part-time with flexible hours ONLY when my dh was home. I worked in the evening, 2 evenigs one week and 3 the next and 5 hours on a Sat.(every 5th Sat.) basically I job shared with someone for a few months and then ended up quitting. I have been a sahm since then and would not have it any other way. I was at my other job for like 7 years and had great insurance and all but we got relocated due to dh's job. This is much easier I think; instead of tag-teaming and he comes home, I leave it is a lot less stress. I do not plan on putting her in daycare.
post #79 of 221
Quote:
Originally Posted by famousmockngbrd
Great post, LiamnEmma.

I am comparing women who enroll their 6 month old baby in daycare to go back to work full time because they are "unfulfilled" to women who stop breastfeeeding at 6 months because they "want their body back". Both these viewpoints are selfish, IMO. .

I am going to make one attempt to reach out to you famousmockngbrd, and those who think as you do. If I do not succeed, I am giving up, as I fear these mommy-wars cannot be won. It's so sad.

If you stay home with your kids because you love it and it makes you fulfilled and you feel it is for the greater good, is that not inherently as "selfish" as combining working and mothering because you love it and it makes you fulfilled and you feel it is for the greater good?

For the record, I work 2.5 days per week, and have since dd was 3 months old. But I hope to speak also for women who work full-time. My work is important. It is important in the world, and directly affects people's lives. I have worked very hard to become quite good at what I do, and that MATTERS to a lot of folks -- namely, my patients. So.... what if your sweet little babies grow up to suffer chronic daily debilitating headaches? Or what if one is severely injured in an auto accident, and suffers pain and impairments permanently? Would you not be SOOOOO happy that I, or someone just like me, decided to keep working and contributing our important skills to people other than (and in addition to) our children? Because you know what? Just because we are women, and just because we have children, does not mean we are not needed in other ways, in other realms. And I assure you, the women I know that work full time have worked HARD to be sure their babes are in great situations, and they are VERY bonded with their kids, and they are great moms. And they feel that their work is important. To society. To other people (read: other people's children, because everyone is somebodies child!). To their own families in the income and resources they provide. To their children in the role model they present. To themselves.

There is plenty of research that suggests that having children and babies bond with many adults is a GOOD thing (check out the research on the Israeli kibbutz's). Enough to reassure these women that our choices are not BAD for our children. So my suggestion is, be happy with your choices. And be happy that not everyone makes the same choices you do. Because diversity is BEST for this country and this world and this society.
post #80 of 221
I never said women should not go back to work at all, ever. I do think it is best for BABIES to bond with one primary caregiver, and I think that person should ideally be one of the parents. I understand that this is not always possible, for a variety of reasons.

And no, I don't think it is selfish to enjoy caring for your baby.

I don't like where this is going - I do not want to contribute to feelings of ill will between mothers. I feel that what I am saying is not being understood and I'm afraid that by continuing to talk about it I am throwing up walls so I'm just going to leave it at that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Have you ever put your kid(s) in daycare?