anyone else think its good. . . - Page 2

[Rainbow Brite]

Originally Posted by oceanbaby

I think it's fantastic for kids to be exposed to all sorts of different people and situations. But I don't think it's necessary for the child to be left by the parents in order to obtain the benefits of these interactions.

:

[Rainbow Brite]

Originally Posted by Willowrose

I agree 100% that children need a support network of family and friends who love and care about them. I disagree that these people need to be regular caregivers. My boys are seldom without DH and I. We have a lot of family who are regular components to their lives. We have friends, who have never babysat the boys, who love them and have great bonds. I don't think that a bond is formed based on whether these people provide care for the children. Rather, it is based on investing time to establish a relationship with them. Loving them unconditionally and having a genuine interest and concern for their lives.

[meemee]

well i think progress is not good for the family. nuclear families are total BS. unfortunately thats what we have now. if u look at the other tribes or even different nations - mostly third world for lack of a better term, it IS the community raising the child. u dont see many locked in their room playing video games geeks.

having a bunch of people raising a child, of the child having to figure out everyone has a different discipline policy really develops life skills. my almost 3 year old actually chooses to spend time with my neighbours while i clean house.

[srain]

Originally Posted by oceanbaby

But I don't think it's necessary for the child to be left by the parents in order to obtain the benefits of these interactions.

At older ages, I think it is beneficial for kids to be around adults other than their parents who love them. Their parents may unknowingly limit their interactions- additional people always change the dynamic. My son has gotten much more out of being with my mom alone than he would have if they were always with me.

For young kids, I think the benefits are only there if the caregiver truly loves the child. Babysitters and child care center workers may be "loving," but they rarely actually "love" the children in their care.

[Black Orchid]

another in agreement with you, here! We have very non-tradional roles at our house. My DH shares (and always had) equally in my DD's care. Grandparents are a big part, as are our close friends. My DD thrives and loves having many people around. I would never "force" it though. I think different things work for different families, but I think having a "village" of caretakers would benefit nearly any family at some point!

[fiddledebi]

I absolutely think it's wonderful that my dd has such a close, loving relationship with my MIL. She has sleepovers at her house about once every month or so. Both DD and MIL totally love it. DD hugs us goodbye and then gets busy with her grandmother with no visible upset or discomfort. We call her a few times during the evening and then in the morning, and arrange when we'll come get her or when her grandmother will bring her home. Once she's back with us, she will often cry that she misses her grandmother, and for a few days afterwards, will get sad from time to time and say, "I miss Daddy's Mommy!" She will ask to call her, and we do that as often as she wants. Truly, this is someone she loves to be with, and the time they spend alone together is very very special to both of them.

On the other hand, being alone with my parents is something she doesn't do often. They live out of town, which is most of the reason, but there are some other issues too, and we don't really leave her with them that often. HOWEVER, when they visit us or we visit them, she insists on THEM putting her to sleep at night. We get hugs and kisses goodnight, and then THEY read her stories and sing her songs and tuck her in...all at her request. My parents love this and drag bedtime out as long as they can, which is ok with us for as often as it happens.

I think the key to our happiness with the situation is that DD really is enthusiastic about it, in both cases. The few times we've left her with a neighborhood sitter, she's not even remotely as happy. She'll tell us later that she liked the person, that she had fun, that she wants that person to come back and play, but she cries when we leave. I think the key is, as a previous poster said, that the neighborhood sitter doesn't love DD like her grandparents do. THAT'S the major difference.

[Leatherette]

My kids love their babysitter, whom they have had a long time (8 months). They are so excited when she comes. She loves them and can totally devote all of herself to them for those 3-4 hours. She gets a full nights sleep every night, and is definitely more fun than I am in the late afternoon.

My son's preschool teacher is very imaginative and artistic (much more so than I), and I value the time he has with her. She raves about him, and I can tell that he is loved there. Not in the way I love him, of course, I am his mom. But she is a mom, too, and she really values children.

I only leave my kids with people if they are excited about it and I trust the person completely, and yes, I think it is great for all parties involved.

L.

[Parker'smommy]

Originally Posted by oceanbaby

I think it's fantastic for kids to be exposed to all sorts of different people and situations. But I don't think it's necessary for the child to be left by the parents in order to obtain the benefits of these interactions.

I totally agree here. Why do I or my dh have to be removed from the situation for my children to benefit from being exposed to others?

My children are around many other different types of people, lifestyles, and cultures, but usually experiencing this with dh or I with them. I don't need to be absent from them for them to "truely experienc" anything. In fact, this is something I am at odds with with my own mother. She feels the need to take my ds away for an extended amount of time away from me next year. I don't understand why dh or I need to be away from ds for her and my dad to enjoy their time with ds. The two just aren't mutally exclusive, and she doesn't see that. I have allowed ds to spend time alone with them and he even spent the night a few times in preparation of the birth of my dd where he would have to spend a few nights away from us. All of it has been a very positive experience and I totally trust my parents. That is not the issue. But I just don't feel that my young child ( and I don't know how I will feel when he is older, so I can't really comment) needs to be away from me to be a fully enriched person. We are very close to my entire family, but ds ( and definitely not dd) doesn't lose out on anything by spending time with them while dh and I are present.

[soposdedi]

Yes, very much so. I think that other adults, primarily family members, can be a great support to a child AND its parents and bring things out in the child that parents could not. I think it is absurd to wall a child up in with its family and never trust anyone outside your four and no more. Also i don't think that the whole AP thing goes nearly as well as it could without someone coming in and lending a hand. I am a much better parent because of my mother and a few trusted friends who help me out with my child from time to time, and i wouldn't have it any other way .

[mountain]

Originally Posted by thismama

I agree, provided the child is ready to go with someone else.

I don't leave her if she is crying.

Yes! thismama! I truly don't understand how we think we're going to raise secure, loving people if we don't demonstrate secure, loving parenting to them!

My dd is 3 and goes to a co-op 1 day a week. I stay with her each morning until she announced she didn't want me there anymore. My son went to the same co-op and I was always floored by people who would "sneak out" on their kids or leave them crying...both are demonstrating a non-trusting relationship IMO. It broke my heart to see these children cry for the mom/dad, and not emotionally recover all day. I even heard one parent tell the other "oh, they stopped crying right after you left", when it was clear the child was unhappy and insecure all day.

So to the OP, I agree with exposing kids to different kinds of loving people---I think a co-op setting is the way to do it in terms of all the sexual/emotional abuse that can go on I believe in the power of numbers. I think I'd go more with Oceanbaby's view of being there with the exposure...daycares are too risky for me. I would not leave my dc with anyone outside of family if they couldn't talk, either.

[EnviroBecca]

It's not that the parents have to leave for the child to get ANY benefit, just that the benefits may be different if the child is alone w/the other adult. When parents and their adult friends/relatives all are around, they're likely to talk to each other as well as to the child. This can benefit the child by providing an opportunity to hear adult conversation and see that adults' lives don't revolve around the child all the time. OTOH, when alone w/the other adult the child can develop a one-on-one rapport and may be included in activities that the parents don't like and which therefore the other adult wouldn't do when the parents are around. No, I don't mean things the parents wouldn't want their child to be exposed to! I mean, for example, when I stayed overnight w/my dad's best friend while my brother had surgery, friend and his wife took me bowling; they'd never have gone bowling w/my parents because my parents hate bowling, but when it was just me they had the opportunity to introduce me to one of their favorite hobbies.

[*LoveBugMama*]

I wholeheartedly agree with what Oceanbaby, Willowrose and Parker`s mommy!

[LoveChild421]

I'm so glad I found this thread- I was just feeling a bit conflicted about this issue- I am quite AP- but as I was raised in a large family- being cared for during the day by my great-grandmother and spending lots of time with my grandparents who all lived in the same town- I feel like that time with my relatives was so valuable- I really had a sense that so many people loved me

Since having my son I have moved to the same town my parents and parents-in-law live in- and it seems like this is just the way it should be- a mom surrounded by loving people to lend a hand and shower the baby with love- I think of it as "extended family AP"- plus I am much calmer and happier because I get a couple of hours a day to just meditate, exercise, or otherwise relax.

To me it only makes sense, most tribes and other cultures realize it "takes a village" not only because the child develops a sense of being loved and accepted by the community around them but also because the mother is not isolated and overwhelmed.