Who is "raising" your child- terminology that matters - Page 6

[thismama]

For us, I am DD's primary attachment figure, the safe nest she crawls into when she needs retreat from the world. When she is hurt she runs to me, sick, at night she wants/needs me, when she wants to regress into babyhood and stay there for awhile. I am her soft landing place.

Her Dad she adores too, she doesn't want him for those things so much but for intellectual stimulation, growth, creativity, a love/attachment relationship with someone just one more step outside herself... that is him. She adores him by day, he is like her 'sun' and I am her 'moon' if that makes sense.

Then thirdly she has a cherished and loved teacher, an older woman with lots of patience who is teaching her about the world... numbers, letters, calendars, etc. She has a very special relationship with her too, and when important things happen when she is with me, she often exclaims that she needs to tell Daddy and her teacher. When she is with her Dad, it's me and her teacher.

So we all have different roles, but all are really valuable. There are also other folks in DDs life who enrich it in their various ways, too numerous to really list here, but I would say we are all raising her really.

[Azuralea]

Originally Posted by skybluepink02

I'm a nanny and I watch two little boys 10 hours a day. I like to think that I'm helping to raise them. Of course I'm not raising them completely, nor do I in any way think that I take the place of Mommy or Daddy, but they are attatched to me, to their mom, their dad, ect. It's a bit unreasonable to think that the person that they spend most of their waking hours with has no affect on their value system or moral code. This is why it's so, so important to interview your nannies and care providers about their basic beliefs and philosophies. It's nearly impossible for you own moral code not to make an impression on other people that you spend lots of time with, toddlers included, even if you never mention what your beliefs are.

I think this is definitely true, but "helping to raise" is not usually what people mean when they say "somebody else is raising your kids." If they did, I'd have no problem with the phrase. I think my DS's life has been totally enriched by the caregivers he's had and I'd say they helped to raise him, but if the phrase is used to mean that I'm *not* raising him during the hours he's in daycare or school, then I think it's a silly thing to say.

[PennyRoo]

Originally Posted by siobhang

true dat.

A friend of mine, when faced with "how could you face putting your kids in daycare!!!" deadpanned, "because boarding schools won't take kids under age 8."

Oh, goodness, I love that one - something to store up in the arsenal of priceless comebacks.

[savithny]

Originally Posted by woobysma

and "what's the point in having a dwarf if he doesn't do chores?"

LOL!!

That was my dad's favorite movie quote ever, when I was a teenager.

The day I passed my mother in height I announced that I guessed I wasn't the dwarf now

[thismama]

Originally Posted by Azuralea

I think this is definitely true, but "helping to raise" is not usually what people mean when they say "somebody else is raising your kids." If they did, I'd have no problem with the phrase.

Yeah, no it's a total dig, absolutely. I find the whole SAH vs. WOH mama thing such a false polarity. I personally dont think either situation is ideal for most people. Full time WOH and we are exhausted and especially with a young baby, we don't get enough time with them, nursing is harder, etc. But likewise, SAH means we lose social status and financial independence to be in our individual boxes all day with our children doing only the mindnumbing work of childcare.

I wish for a less industrialized, work/home-divided society, where more balance would be possible for more of us (those who feel a need for it, which I am guessing would be most mamas).

[woobysma]

Originally Posted by thismama

Yeah, no it's a total dig, absolutely. I find the whole SAH vs. WOH mama thing such a false polarity. I personally dont think either situation is ideal for most people. Full time WOH and we are exhausted and especially with a young baby, we don't get enough time with them, nursing is harder, etc. But likewise, SAH means we lose social status and financial independence to be in our individual boxes all day with our children doing only the mindnumbing work of childcare.

I wish for a less industrialized, work/home-divided society, where more balance would be possible for more of us (those who feel a need for it, which I am guessing would be most mamas).

I'm with you!

I started my own personal revolution last year (became a "part-time" corporate accountant ) I wish everyone else would jump on my bandwagon already!
I think a 3-4 day work week or 4 hour work days should be the norm. Our capitalistic "suck as many hours as you can out of your employees and pay them as little as possible" mentality is killing us (literally, imo).


Evidently, Canada isn't much better. (since, as everyone knows, Thismama speaks the gospel )

[Vortexing]

Originally Posted by thismama

I wish for a less industrialized, work/home-divided society, where more balance would be possible for more of us (those who feel a need for it, which I am guessing would be most mamas).

Bingo!!!! I'm battling to balance right now, and DH and I both have decided that what's perfect for us, in our divided work/home lives is about 30 hours WOH time each week. That way DD is still raised by us, with help from a loving sitter. That's what I think is ideal for us, but it'd be hard to do that financially in the world as it is now.