Staying at Home "On Welfare" - Page 5 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-26-2007, 09:52 PM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 6,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Aura_Kitten View Post
Ahhhhh.... Boarding schools look like a tempting option on some of my rougher days.... :

do they have financial aid?

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 05-26-2007, 10:30 PM
Banned
 
2Sweeties1Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 3,042
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Like I said(and you left out), at least in my state. Also were they allowing you and your husband to just stay home, or was at least one of you required to go to work? The misconceptions I am talking about are the ones that say people are just living it up on welfare. I am glad you were able to get that much in fs, I bet you ate well while it was available. I get just $15 more than that for a family of five, and it helps tremendously!!
What do you mean by let us stay home? We were both layed off so it's not like we were at home by choice--we were both required by unemployment to look for work. As long as you're getting unemployment, you don't have to be working, although DH did manage to find a job within 2 months. We kept the $513 until we went up for re-cert in February. And yes, we ate pretty well during that time. We also stocked up on canned goods.

My BIL and his wife are the type of people everyone's complaining about and yes, they do cheat the system. I've reported them but apparently it does no good. They make the rest of us who do legitmately need help look bad.
2Sweeties1Angel is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 10:39 PM
 
skueppers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Takoma Park, MD
Posts: 1,725
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
One of the things this thread has made me realize is that my own feelings about this issue would depend on my earning power.

If for some reason I were in a position where I expected to have a long-term need for public assistance, I'd get a job. I expect I'd be able to find a position with a reasonably family-friendly employer earning a minimum of $65,000 a year, with good health insurance benefits, vacation time, flexible work schedules, etc -- and I would expect to be making substantially more within a few years. Yes, my kids wouldn't have a SAHM anymore, but I feel like the tradeoff would be worth it. We'd probably even be able to keep the house, depending on what other money we might have coming in.

If, on the other hand, I were in a position where getting a job wouldn't lead to a substantially better standard of living than staying home with the help of public assistance programs -- I'd be a lot more likely to decide to stay home.

Sonja , 40, married to DH (42) since 5-29-93, DD born 11-3-2004, DS born 1-18-2007.
skueppers is offline  
Old 05-26-2007, 11:46 PM
 
savithny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,732
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azuralea View Post
However, there is big BUT here, which is that the phrase has become a weapon, when used by some people. Not all mamas who use the phrase mean to use it as a weapon, but enough do that it's a phrase I'd tread very carefully with. I didn't use it when I was SAH with my son. Not once did I say "I wanted to raise him myself" because it IS used so often as a weapon, and I do NOT believe WOHMs are not raising their kids, so I didn't even want to appear to endorse that thought.

There are phrases I won't use as a WOHM, either, because rightly or wrongly they're used as insults to SAHMs by a lot of people, and even if I didn't personally mean them as an insult, I wouldn't want to take the risk.
Exactly, exactly, exactly.

This whole discussion is reminding me of a housemate I had in college.

There were 9 people in the house, and the "House rule" was that if you had food you wanted to share, you put it on teh table in the kitchen. There were always people with food they were seeking to get rid of before it went bad (several people were dishwashers at the sorority next door)..

One housemate kept leaving his stuff on the table and then pitching snits because it would get eaten. He refused to accept that the meaning, within our house, of "food on the table" was "please eat this." And so he kept getting mad because the rest of the world was not going by his definitions.

Similarly, you can talk about the definition of "raising" all you want, but the phrase "Raising my kids." has been used SO much and SO inflammatorily as an anti-working-mom thing that it is practically cliche. You can say "Oh, well, we're definiing "raising" as THIS, so we're not dissing WOHMS.

But it doesn't matter. "Raising my own child" or "other people raising my child" has become a trope. It is cliche, and a few people on one board cannot change the cultural meaning of it now. I find the attempt to make it "Okay" to say that somewhat disingenuous, too.

savithny, 42 year old moderate mom to DS Primo (age 12) and DD Secunda (age 9).

savithny is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 12:50 AM
 
Tigerchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle Eastside
Posts: 4,737
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by savithny View Post
But it doesn't matter. "Raising my own child" or "other people raising my child" has become a trope. It is cliche, and a few people on one board cannot change the cultural meaning of it now. I find the attempt to make it "Okay" to say that somewhat disingenuous, too.
Thank you. Especially the last sentence.
Tigerchild is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 03:15 AM
 
phathui5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,019
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by MamaNosBest View Post
Day care providers are not raising other peoples children.

Women who use childcare are raising their children

Can you honestly not see how unbelievably offensive and hurtful such a statement is?
Many daycare providers do feel that they are raising the children that they watch. I attended a childcare training class a few weeks ago and several of the providers were talking about how they were raising the kids they take care of. Think about it from their perspective, they have the kids for about 10 hours, five days a week. Small children sleep 10-12 hours. That does mean that they're the ones doing the nurturing, teaching, etc.

This isn't to say that working parents aren't raising their children, but the daycare providers are raising them as well. You don't spend 40-50 hours a week with a child and not have a hand in raising them. It's not possible.

Midwife (CPM, LDM) and homeschooling mama to:
14yo ds   11yo dd  9yo ds and 7yo ds and 2yo ds  
phathui5 is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 03:28 AM
 
phathui5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,019
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
The government could save itself so much money if it would cover homebirths for low-income mothers who'd like to go this route. Could it be that Medicaid is somewhat of a subsidy for the medical system (just as someone said WIC is a subsidy for dairy farmers)? If it isn't, then WHY won't Medicaid cover homebirths? It would save them a tremendous amount of money ... so all I can think is that the medical system doesn't want to lose the government money.
Here in MD, the children's health program (medical assistance for pregnant women and children) covers both birth centers and homebirth.

Midwife (CPM, LDM) and homeschooling mama to:
14yo ds   11yo dd  9yo ds and 7yo ds and 2yo ds  
phathui5 is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 03:35 AM
 
Azuralea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 973
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by phathui5 View Post
You don't spend 40-50 hours a week with a child and not have a hand in raising them. It's not possible.
Well, as one of those kids myself, I can tell you that I sure didn't feel like I was raised by the wonderful teachers and care providers I encountered. Honestly, if you'd asked me that question when I was eight or so (who is raising you?), I probably would have looked like you had two heads.
Azuralea is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 11:33 AM
 
thismama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Nursing the revolution
Posts: 12,099
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This 'raising' talk to me is ridiculous. Yes people contribute to the care of the child. But this is an attachment parenting site, no? Are people who are spouting this crap familiar at all with attachment theory?

Children's primary attachment is to their parent, usually their mother. This attachment is what teaches them about love, about attachment to other people. And from their they branch out, usually attaching to their other mother or to their father secondarily.

Parenting is a lifetime relationship, and children know this. Daycare is transient, they know this too. Children are not stupid. They may spend weekday daytimes in daycare, but they return to their family, their primary attachment figures, at night and on weekends. There are 168? hours in a week. If a child spends 40 in daycare, there are still like 128 hours in the week that they spend with their family.

This "oh noes daycare won't raise *my* baby" theory is not only offensive, but it makes no sense at all.
thismama is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 11:35 AM
 
ShadowMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by phathui5 View Post
Many daycare providers do feel that they are raising the children that they watch. I attended a childcare training class a few weeks ago and several of the providers were talking about how they were raising the kids they take care of. Think about it from their perspective, they have the kids for about 10 hours, five days a week. Small children sleep 10-12 hours. That does mean that they're the ones doing the nurturing, teaching, etc.
Well lots of them also generally feel that the parents of the children are buffoons who know nothing about raising, whereas they the daycare provider know what children really need in order to be raised correctly. Pretty common attitute from what I've seen. So, just because they believe it that doesn't make it so.

I do think they assist in raising the children... but to what degree I think depends on a lot of factors.
ShadowMom is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 03:11 PM - Thread Starter
 
mammal_mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Urban Midwestern USA
Posts: 6,378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by savithny View Post
Similarly, you can talk about the definition of "raising" all you want, but the phrase "Raising my kids." has been used SO much and SO inflammatorily as an anti-working-mom thing that it is practically cliche. You can say "Oh, well, we're definiing "raising" as THIS, so we're not dissing WOHMS.

But it doesn't matter. "Raising my own child" or "other people raising my child" has become a trope. It is cliche, and a few people on one board cannot change the cultural meaning of it now. I find the attempt to make it "Okay" to say that somewhat disingenuous, too.
Honestly, the work some of us have been doing to identify what it really means to raise a child -- is in no way an attempt to make it "okay" for people to disparage working mothers by saying, "At least I'm raising my own children, not letting the daycare raise them."

Nor is it an attempt to make it "okay" for anyone to disparage parents who get financial help for not completely "paying their own way."

It's actually the complete opposite -- an attempt to spread the realization that most or all of us receive outside help in fulfilling our parental responsibilities. I think defining the term actually makes it harder for one group of people to smugly point the finger at another.

If I'm disingenuous to think that -- well, I've certainly been wrong before. I'm willing to take that risk.

Susan -- married unschoolin' WAHMomma to two lovely girls (born 2000 and 2005).
mammal_mama is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 03:26 PM - Thread Starter
 
mammal_mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Urban Midwestern USA
Posts: 6,378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by phathui5 View Post
Here in MD, the children's health program (medical assistance for pregnant women and children) covers both birth centers and homebirth.
Wow! I think I've heard something similar about Chicago -- or was it New York City? I think an article in "Mothering" years ago talked about the discovery that immigrants in New York City, who birthed at home, were having better outcomes than middle class women who birthed in hospitals. So that's affected public policy in that area.

I wish this were the case where I live in the midwest. In my state of Missouri, it's illegal for a licensed midwife to attend a homebirth, meaning they do so at their own risk, with a deep trust that the families they serve won't betray them to the authorities. My midwife said she'd accompany me as a friend in the event that we had to transfer to hospital -- but she'd prefer I not introduce her as my midwife, and of course I wouldn't have. As is the case with most homebirths, nothing went wrong and there was no need to transfer.

Now, there's nothing illegal about having a homebirth in my state. The parents aren't breaking any laws by doing this, or even by hiring a midwife -- it's just illegal for the midwife to do it. I guess the idea is to rob people of the option of having their homebirth attended by a certified midwife, and make them go unassisted -- or simply assisted by family and friends, not anyone trained.

The only midwife services that are covered by insurance, are the ones offered in hospitals and birthing centers.

Susan -- married unschoolin' WAHMomma to two lovely girls (born 2000 and 2005).
mammal_mama is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 04:28 PM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 6,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2Sweeties1Angel View Post
What do you mean by let us stay home? We were both layed off so it's not like we were at home by choice--we were both required by unemployment to look for work. As long as you're getting unemployment, you don't have to be working, although DH did manage to find a job within 2 months. We kept the $513 until we went up for re-cert in February. And yes, we ate pretty well during that time. We also stocked up on canned goods.

My BIL and his wife are the type of people everyone's complaining about and yes, they do cheat the system. I've reported them but apparently it does no good. They make the rest of us who do legitmately need help look bad.
But let you stay home I just meant that in a two parent household receiving food stamps they usually make one of the parents work, but "allow" one fo them to stay home. Right now they are allowing me to stay home because of severe back/hip/pelvis problems due to my pregnancy that keep me from being able to stand/sit/walk for any length of time. Full time job search also counts as full time employment, so it is not like they were "allowing" you both to just "sit around and do nothing"(like many people believe of the system).

It is really sad that people cheat the system. It does suck for people who are using it correctly. I think it really depends on the workers, and who you talk to, and what their man power is like a tthe moment too. We were on food stamps a long time ago while living with my sil and her hubby. They came to our door to inspect my food to make sure it was all labeled and seperated(which it was not because I didn't understand I needed to do that, as we all know what each others food was, we actually ate healthy, and they ate mostly fast food). They took our fs away the very next month.


Quote:
Originally Posted by savithny View Post
Exactly, exactly, exactly.

This whole discussion is reminding me of a housemate I had in college.

There were 9 people in the house, and the "House rule" was that if you had food you wanted to share, you put it on teh table in the kitchen. There were always people with food they were seeking to get rid of before it went bad (several people were dishwashers at the sorority next door)..

One housemate kept leaving his stuff on the table and then pitching snits because it would get eaten. He refused to accept that the meaning, within our house, of "food on the table" was "please eat this." And so he kept getting mad because the rest of the world was not going by his definitions.

Similarly, you can talk about the definition of "raising" all you want, but the phrase "Raising my kids." has been used SO much and SO inflammatorily as an anti-working-mom thing that it is practically cliche. You can say "Oh, well, we're definiing "raising" as THIS, so we're not dissing WOHMS.

But it doesn't matter. "Raising my own child" or "other people raising my child" has become a trope. It is cliche, and a few people on one board cannot change the cultural meaning of it now. I find the attempt to make it "Okay" to say that somewhat disingenuous, too.
I seriously had no idea that this phrase was a bad thing until all of teh threads on pverty and stuff came up. I think it's aweful that anyone can say at least I raise my kids, or at least I don't live ont eh system, when everyone should realize on these boards(at the very least) that we are all just trying to do what is best for our families.

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 05:25 PM
 
Hootandflutter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 33
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by pitter_patter View Post
Do you think it is best to raise children to believe that it is better to rely on handouts than to work? I know many people who would qualify for assistance if they quit their jobs. They sleep better at night knowing they are teaching their children that we all have to work for things rather than rely on handouts.
Unfortunately, that is not what a baby in day care learns. He isn't capable of reasoning on that level. The baby learns to feel alone and powerless. The baby struggles with attachment (mental health) as well as being more likely to get sick, to be violent, and to do poorly in school later. He doesn't understand handouts -- he just learns, by practice, that life feels wrong.

(P.S. Please, mamas w/ babies in care, don't take my response as a condemnation. I know that you are doing the best you can.)
Hootandflutter is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 05:39 PM
 
Aura_Kitten's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Down by the River...
Posts: 6,832
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootandflutter View Post
Unfortunately, that is not what a baby in day care learns. He isn't capable of reasoning on that level. The baby learns to feel alone and powerless. The baby struggles with attachment (mental health) as well as being more likely to get sick, to be violent, and to do poorly in school later. He doesn't understand handouts -- he just learns, by practice, that life feels wrong.

(P.S. Please, mamas w/ babies in care, don't take my response as a condemnation. I know that you are doing the best you can.)
Then why even say it?

Aura_Kitten is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 05:56 PM
 
sonrisaa29's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 892
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by RiverSky View Post
And yet, I've heard of people on MDC who say they didn't qualify for food stamps, despite having no food, children, no money and having lost their jobs, because their car was worth a little bit too much. I remember another MDCer who said that they felt guilty using their foodstamps once, because they didn't have a vehicle and got a relative who had a fancy car to drive them to the supermarket. Just because someone looks nice, might have nice clothing or do their hair nicely and even walk out to a fancy looking car, doesn't mean anything about when the last time they had any money was.


Also, one of my SILs is on social security (can't work) and she is really careful with her small amount of social security payments so that she can buy Xmas presents and have a small vacation every once in a while but if her savings get to be over $400, her guardian tells her that she has to go shopping otherwise her benefits will be reduced. Trust me, this woman is not living anymore than frugally. She buys 3 or 4 cheap outfits a year and does not have a car and is careful with her food spending.

I can't imagine how in the world your BIL and SIL could possibly have tons in savings. I've heard that able people have a really tough time getting public assistance, even if it's a single mom with a baby who is nearly homeless (like another SIL of mine, she applied 3 times and was turned down each time, didn't even get accepted into the food stamp program).

There are so many conflicting stories about public assistance and food stamps online, that I'm pretty skeptical when I hear stories about people living well on them.
The state where my BIL and SIL live only ask you what the income that you are currently earning from a job. Apparently they don't ask about savings accounts (or maybe their worker was new on the job)

Look, I did say that there is a time and place for welfare and the programs that go along with it. I know there are good people turned down for it everyday and thats why I think its sad when I do see it being abused.

I know that personally if I had a nice expensive car that was paid off (or whatever) and I had then lost all of my money somehow, that car would be the first thing I would sell/ trade to get something way cheaper. At this point I would save on insurance too.
sonrisaa29 is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 06:01 PM
 
phathui5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Oregon
Posts: 17,019
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootandflutter View Post
Unfortunately, that is not what a baby in day care learns. He isn't capable of reasoning on that level. The baby learns to feel alone and powerless. The baby struggles with attachment (mental health) as well as being more likely to get sick, to be violent, and to do poorly in school later. He doesn't understand handouts -- he just learns, by practice, that life feels wrong.

(P.S. Please, mamas w/ babies in care, don't take my response as a condemnation. I know that you are doing the best you can.)
I guess that depends on the daycare. The baby I watch two days a week got as much AP attention (minus the nursing) as my own did as babies. I had her in the sling until my pregnant belly got too big and now we use a Mei Tai when I take her out somewhere. She's never had to cry it out or been punitively disciplined. Her mom is a nurse and her dad's in school. When she's not with one of them, she's here at our house. My family is part of their team for taking care of her.

Midwife (CPM, LDM) and homeschooling mama to:
14yo ds   11yo dd  9yo ds and 7yo ds and 2yo ds  
phathui5 is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 06:22 PM
 
Momma2SoSweet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montana
Posts: 311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I haven't read this whole thread but wanted to throw in my $.02 before dd wakes from her nap.

I grew up on welfare. My sisters are all now on welfare. Coincidence? Or proof that our government is not working properly re: economy? One of my (single mom) sisters goes to college, works whenever she's not in class and has to send her 5 yo to daycare (which, fortunately, is grandma's house). This sister has state paid daycare, so she only pays a co payment (phew). She has financial aid and still had to take out a personal loan so she could pay her bills. She's on cash assistance, food stamps, section 8 housing. She is still broke. She works her butt off -"contributes"- but still needs welfare and even that isn't enough.

We, on the other hand, do not qualify for any assistance. I sah and dp works about 10 hours a day at $4 over minimum wage. And we receive an inheritance-type income every month. That inheritance money is poo some months and great other months. We are drowning in bills here. We have no insurance, no assistance and all of our bills are at least a month behind. I wish desperately that we did qualify for welfare. I would take advantage (not in a bad way) of the paltry help.

It sucks that even with help many struggle and also that there are those of us who could really benefit from it and don't qualify. We make just barely over the max that a family of three can make to qualify. But that is before taxes. The welfare program doesn't add in necessary bills that make a huge difference in how much you *actually* bring home every month. After bills we are lucky if we have $40 to last us 2 weeks- and that's before groceries, household stuff, etc.

I stay home because, for one, I bf and dd won't take it any way but from the tap. Also, I feel she deserves to have her mother being there all the time. She deserves that stability. (My mom was single and worked and I never felt stable in my homelife.) Not to mention, I don't want to work. *gasp* I want to stay home with my daughter and be her provider and play with her all day and not miss a second of her life.

Anyway, sorry for the novel. The fact of people who look down on 'welfare moms' really ruffles my feathers. I agree that people just need a scapegoat.

: co sleeping, babywearing, cloth diapering SAHM to two beautiful girls.
Momma2SoSweet is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 07:58 PM
Banned
 
2Sweeties1Angel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 3,042
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
But let you stay home I just meant that in a two parent household receiving food stamps they usually make one of the parents work, but "allow" one fo them to stay home.
Ahh, got it. In that case, I'm "allowed" to stay home until my youngest is 5 and still get food stamps. I won't be doing that as I'm currently looking for a PT job and will be looking for a FT job when I finish school in a couple of years, but the option is there. Actually, if I get a PT job we'll probably still be able to get FS because DH doesn't make very much money at all
2Sweeties1Angel is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 09:52 PM
 
DreamsInDigital's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by phathui5 View Post
I guess that depends on the daycare. The baby I watch two days a week got as much AP attention (minus the nursing) as my own did as babies. I had her in the sling until my pregnant belly got too big and now we use a Mei Tai when I take her out somewhere. She's never had to cry it out or been punitively disciplined. Her mom is a nurse and her dad's in school. When she's not with one of them, she's here at our house. My family is part of their team for taking care of her.

That baby is so lucky to have you.
DreamsInDigital is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 10:59 PM
 
ShadowMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 4,264
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hootandflutter View Post
Unfortunately, that is not what a baby in day care learns. He isn't capable of reasoning on that level. The baby learns to feel alone and powerless. The baby struggles with attachment (mental health) as well as being more likely to get sick, to be violent, and to do poorly in school later. He doesn't understand handouts -- he just learns, by practice, that life feels wrong.

(P.S. Please, mamas w/ babies in care, don't take my response as a condemnation. I know that you are doing the best you can.)
I think you are taking some small differences in behavior outcomes and making a big leap there.

The baby "learns, by practice, that life feels wrong"?? The baby "learns to feel alone and powerless"? Do you have anything to back that up or are you just kinda adding those parts in?
ShadowMom is offline  
Old 05-27-2007, 11:58 PM - Thread Starter
 
mammal_mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Urban Midwestern USA
Posts: 6,378
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
I agree that there's a vast difference between caregivers, and not all babies being cared for by someone other than a parent are feeling alone and powerless. But Hootandflutter was directly responding to a pp who was being very insulting to those of us who stay home and draw public assistance.

I think Hootandflutter opens up an interesting idea: that maybe people shouldn't make assumptions about what babies and young children "learn" from our various behaviors. I'm sure some children of working mamas are learning that "we all have to work for things" -- but I believe my children are learning that, too.

And while some children in daycare probably do feel neglected -- some children of sahm's also feel neglected. Maybe Mama thinks her scrupulous housecleaning is teaching her baby a strong work-ethic, when really he's learning that scrubbing out the oven is more important than holding him.

I think pitter_patter (the pp quoted by Hootandflutter) expressed one extreme viewpoint -- and Hootandflutter countered that with an equally extreme viewpoint. Two wrongs (or two exaggerations) certainly don't make a right (or an accurate statement) -- but this is just another example of how attacking one group of people just kind of "starts the whole (adversarial) ball rolling."

I just believe we can discuss these issues without abandoning respect for one another.

Susan -- married unschoolin' WAHMomma to two lovely girls (born 2000 and 2005).
mammal_mama is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 01:22 AM
 
DreamsInDigital's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 12,020
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Beautifully said mammal_mama.
DreamsInDigital is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 02:19 AM
 
mamamoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Eastern WA
Posts: 6,920
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by phathui5 View Post
I guess that depends on the daycare. The baby I watch two days a week got as much AP attention (minus the nursing) as my own did as babies. I had her in the sling until my pregnant belly got too big and now we use a Mei Tai when I take her out somewhere. She's never had to cry it out or been punitively disciplined. Her mom is a nurse and her dad's in school. When she's not with one of them, she's here at our house. My family is part of their team for taking care of her.
That baby is so lucky! If only that type of childcare was available to everyone.



Quote:
Originally Posted by DreamsInDigital View Post
Beautifully said mammal_mama.
for sure.

Single mama to Alex(13), Maddy(12), Sam(8), Violet(6), and Ruby(3). fly-by-nursing1.gif
mamamoo is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 02:50 AM
 
Azuralea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 973
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well said, mammal_mama. I was sad to see what to me has been a mostly thoughtful discussion (barring the flames about SAHMs on welfare and a few other posts I dismissed out of hand) add an ignorant and uninformed description of daycare, especially with the fatuous "oh but I'm really not attacking you WOHMs" at the end.

It saddens me to see so much fighting about various types of caregiving, especially when the stuff that really makes a difference and causes clear and proven developmental and emotion damage is swept under the carpet. There are lots of things that damage kids, but it's not being on welfare or in daycare. It's the biggies: untreated and unaddressed alcoholism and drug abuse, emotional instability, uncontrolled rage and anger, lack of safe living conditions, lack of decent food, violence in the family, untreated mental health issues, etc.

These are problems that transcend all types of family structure. They afflict families with two WOHPs, a SAHM and a WOHD, single mamas, lesbian and gay families, basically any kind of family you can imagine. These are the things that tear families apart from the inside, that make kids cower, that are proven predictors for future unhappiness and misery on the part of the children.

What's frustrating is that I think a lot of these problems could be tackled if we put our minds to it. But instead we get caught up in the mommy wars.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mammal_mama View Post
I agree that there's a vast difference between caregivers, and not all babies being cared for by someone other than a parent are feeling alone and powerless. But Hootandflutter was directly responding to a pp who was being very insulting to those of us who stay home and draw public assistance.

I think Hootandflutter opens up an interesting idea: that maybe people shouldn't make assumptions about what babies and young children "learn" from our various behaviors. I'm sure some children of working mamas are learning that "we all have to work for things" -- but I believe my children are learning that, too.

And while some children in daycare probably do feel neglected -- some children of sahm's also feel neglected. Maybe Mama thinks her scrupulous housecleaning is teaching her baby a strong work-ethic, when really he's learning that scrubbing out the oven is more important than holding him.

I think pitter_patter (the pp quoted by Hootandflutter) expressed one extreme viewpoint -- and Hootandflutter countered that with an equally extreme viewpoint. Two wrongs (or two exaggerations) certainly don't make a right (or an accurate statement) -- but this is just another example of how attacking one group of people just kind of "starts the whole (adversarial) ball rolling."

I just believe we can discuss these issues without abandoning respect for one another.
Azuralea is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 12:02 PM
 
PreggieUBA2C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: foothills, farm, deep wilderness
Posts: 1,808
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by savithny View Post
It is cliche, and a few people on one board cannot change the cultural meaning of it now.
How many people does it take to make a change? Why do you feel helpless to make an attempt?


Quote:
Originally Posted by savithny View Post
I find the attempt to make it "Okay" to say that somewhat disingenuous, too.
Why do feel equipped to judge the motives of others? Doesn't this very sentiment oppose the meaning you are trying to convey, as in, you use a phrase with specific intent to judge in order to convey that another's motive to judge is improper (by your assumption that they- or I- have made a judgement, which as your comment pertains to my participation will never be substantiated; you did read the posts that followed, I hope.).

This is a double standard. Why do you perpetuate a victim mentality by conveying that change is not possible? There are myriad examples of revolutions that have changed not just individuals, cultures and nations, but the whole world as well. I do not agree with your defeatism. I won't allow language to oppress me; you can choose to if you desire, but I fail to see how that could be understood as having any modicum of purpose towards betterment.

In case you don't think this is a category of importance, realise that language is the first vehicle for governmental agencies to change public perception; it is called 'social engineering' and it happens every day, all day. There are highly compensated individuals whose work is to do exactly that- change the language to change perception. If you are going to fight for something, why not something worthwhile rather than the right to continue to be victimised by your own language, and to do violence to others with accusation based upon fallacious reasoning and emotional reaction?

Why hold onto this? Are you trying to protect something? Do you feel that your needs are not being met somehow? Wouldn't it be liberating to just express that and see how people will respond? My guess is that you'd be surprised how much and how often others actually enjoy bettering another's life; try to assume the best, even when your initial reaction is negative- that's your response to your past. Wouldn't you rather live here in the present?

Saying no to positive change won't stop it; it'll just mean you remain part of the problem while others who desire positive change are incidentally having to work against you. Change will happen with or without you. Where do you stand? Or will you move forward?

I'm on the way right now.

Well, I've been absent for 8 months, and during that time, it turns out that I have completely transformed. You are all precious. Thank you for being here and sharing your lives. You are truly a gift. namaste.gif Jan. 23, 2012

PreggieUBA2C is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 02:25 PM
 
Tigerchild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Seattle Eastside
Posts: 4,737
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
*
Tigerchild is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 03:07 PM
 
Brisen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 6,777
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by PreggieUBA2C View Post
WARNING! Grade-school math back to haunt you all. Mooohahahaha!

I'm not on welfare, but I do receive child tax benefits (CTB) and child care supplement for working families (CSWF) every month and they are only available to low income families here and the more money we earn outside the home, the less we recieve, so I'll treat them the same way as welfare.


SAHM Scenario (monthly)- Dh works FT, I stay home with 3 dc
CTB payment= $750
CSWF payment= $275
Childcare subsidy= $0
Taxpayer's paycheque contribution= $1025


WOHM Scenario (monthly)- Dh and I both work FT
CTB payment= $295
CSWF payment= $0
Childcare subsidy= $1890
Taxpayer's paycheque contribution= $2185




Clearly it costs taxpayers less for me to stay at home than it would for me to go out to work, assuming, of course that I don't land a job for $100K/yr
Thanks for posting -- I'm also in Canada and receiving the CTB and CSWF, and I didn't know how the numbers added up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azuralea View Post
You have a much broader definition of "raising your kids" than most people I know. Just a personal anecdote, I went to daycare as a child (which, btw, I thought was a lot of fun), and I have never once, not in my entire life, not even in my teen years when I was questioning everything, thought I was raised even in part by the childcare workers. Or my teachers, for that matter. I did appreciate them and love them, but the people who raised me are my parents, full stop.
I think that varies with the individual. I was cared for by a sitter from the time my mom had to return to work (not later than 6 months) but it was in her home, with her grandchildren & a few other kids, and was always the same woman except when she took time off (very, very rare). I have more childhood memories of being there (and then school once I was old enough) than of being at home until I was old enough not to need a sitter. Yes, I have a greater attachment to my parents; however, I do feel that this sitter had a large hand in raising me. As much as I loved my sitter, I still wished my mom could stay home with us instead of having to spend so much time at school/the sitter's.

Mom to DS(14), DS(12), DD(9), DS(6), DS (4), and DS(2)  

***4***8****13***17***21****26***heartbeat.gif****35****40

Brisen is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 03:39 PM
EVC
 
EVC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 4,252
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Unfortunately, that is not what a baby in day care learns. He isn't capable of reasoning on that level. The baby learns to feel alone and powerless. The baby struggles with attachment (mental health) as well as being more likely to get sick, to be violent, and to do poorly in school later. He doesn't understand handouts -- he just learns, by practice, that life feels wrong.

(P.S. Please, mamas w/ babies in care, don't take my response as a condemnation. I know that you are doing the best you can.)
Wow...I was going to stay out of this discussion, but this is just so unbelievably insulting : Especially the "disclaimer" which makes it sound as if "the best I can" is somehow inferior or substandard to what full time SAHMs do. : : :

And, btw, these are NOT the things my child is learning in daycare. She is learning that other people are capable of loving her and caring about her, she is learning new skills, she is learning arts and crafts, she is experimenting daily with new ways of moving in a huge outside play area filled with sunshine and fresh air, and she is learning social skills such as sharing and playing nicely with other children. She loves her daycare and is THRIVING there. She also gets plenty of mama time in the mornings, evenings, weekends, and all summer long (I am a student mama and I SAHM in the summers). And I assure you, she has no "attachment issues." Nor is she sickly or violent :

Quote:
and to do poorly in school later.
Actually, the studies I've read show that, on average, children who have been in daycare do BETTER academically

So, no, I don't think I'm just "doing the best I can." I think I'm doing a darn good job of raising a happy, healthy child for whom, I daresay, life for the most part, feels RIGHT.

Anyway, I realize this is already fairly off topic, so I will go back to lurking now. But I just could not let such an insulting and misinformed post go. My apologies.

PhDin' mama to dd (Oct. 2005)
EVC is offline  
Old 05-28-2007, 03:49 PM
 
PreggieUBA2C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: foothills, farm, deep wilderness
Posts: 1,808
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think the offense taken to the idea of sharing the raising of one's children is largely a north american phenomenon. My background is eastern european and if my great-grandmother had said she was raising her children and meant to the exclusion of others, not only would she have been grievously wrong, she would have caused great insult to the extended family and small community she relied upon for her family's survival. I also know aboriginal canadians, people from asia, and south america who would never even dream of saying that the parents are the ones who raise their children, 'full stop.' Saying that their parents are raising their children is not an offense to their own raising of their children. Saying that the community is raising their children is not an offense to their raising of their children. That offense seems to be pretty localised, which begs the question about the idea that we should refrain from using phraseology that offends- to whom is it offensive? How are we to know without dialogue? How can we even consider changing it if the ones who find offense are unwilling to participate in the conversation except to stake a claim and malign those who desire to understand, stop the cycle, and progress together?

Why so protective of this idea that we don't need or want anyone's participation in our lives? What do we gain by this? Mommy wars aside (since they are clearly- now that I have become aware of the 'issues'- largely irrelevant, IMO), what is the big threat to our need for reassurance that we are doing what is best for our families? Are we not reassured by the resulting love in our homes and confidence in the relationships therein?

Is there really no possibility for dialogue unless all participants adhere to the unspoken and even irrational limitation of phrases and words preferred by a few people (as they are in comparison to the number of people the world over who wouldn't and do not find offense to the same)? Do north americans have it right to the exclusion of all other cultures?

(It's possible that I have asked 100 questions so far and recieved very few responses to my questions, though much maligning of my character and motives. Perhaps someone who finds offense would be willing to enter into a dialogue that is respectful and peaceful?)

Well, I've been absent for 8 months, and during that time, it turns out that I have completely transformed. You are all precious. Thank you for being here and sharing your lives. You are truly a gift. namaste.gif Jan. 23, 2012

PreggieUBA2C is offline  
 
User Tag List

Thread Tools


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off