24 -hour daycare centers

[Melissa W.]

May 14, 2012 15:25:25 GMT -5 @habbsies said:

The thing is you might not know or have expected your employment situation to be such when you made the decision to have children.

I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand.

word

[wawa]

May 14, 2012 15:25:25 GMT -5 @habbsies said:

The thing is you might not know or have expected your employment situation to be such when you made the decision to have children.

I'm not sure why this is difficult to understand.

OK...yes, shit happens. But that's different from making a deliberate choice. "deliberately having a child in situation X not the decision I would make" =/= "people who find themselves in situation X after conceiving a child are idiots."

Every time this topic comes up, everybody wants to try and back Chi into a corner as if she said the 2nd, when she's just saying the 1st.

[sb]

Pamela, I always assume when people say they work 4-10s to cut down on day care/get more time with kids, they have a partner who's not working the same schedule.

I work a 9-80 schedule, and my H works similar (4 hours each Friday), but we're offset, so he could dropoff around 8 and I could pickup around 4:30. If I did 4-10s I would pickup around 5:30, so that wouldn't be terrible. But if both of us worked the same schedule, we'd be dropping off before 7 and that's just a long time.

Outages can be rough. I know when I used to work them, my H generally took care of everything at home. I don't know what we'd do if we were both on one, especially with a little one.

[Deleted]

May 14, 2012 15:34:07 GMT -5 wawa said:

OK...yes, shit happens. But that's different from making a deliberate choice. "deliberately having a child in situation X not the decision I would make" =/= "people who find themselves in situation X after conceiving a child are idiots."

Every time this topic comes up, everybody wants to try and back Chi into a corner as if she said the 2nd, when she's just saying the 1st.

It was Mrshandy's statement that gave me the shank eye. I didn't take issue with what chic said.

But as an aside, I still don't see why anyone feels they should say things like this. The idea of needing to be around to much in order to raise a functioning member of society is a relatively modern one. Would it be nice if everyone wanted to work a schedule that would keep themhome fairly often? Yes but I don't think it makes you a shit parent or an uncaring one to plan to raise a child while working a decent amount of hours.

[Melissa W.]

May 14, 2012 15:39:51 GMT -5 sb said:

Pamela, I always assume when people say they work 4-10s to cut down on day care/get more time with kids, they have a partner who's not working the same schedule.

I work a 9-80 schedule, and my H works similar (4 hours each Friday), but we're offset, so he could dropoff around 8 and I could pickup around 4:30. If I did 4-10s I would pickup around 5:30, so that wouldn't be terrible. But if both of us worked the same schedule, we'd be dropping off before 7 and that's just a long time.

Outages can be rough. I know when I used to work them, my H generally took care of everything at home. I don't know what we'd do if we were both on one, especially with a little one.

When DH works an outage, I do all the pick up and drop offs. I think it would be a lot harder if we both hard demanding schedules

[wawa]

May 14, 2012 15:45:37 GMT -5 @habbsies said:

May 14, 2012 15:34:07 GMT -5 wawa said:

OK...yes, shit happens. But that's different from making a deliberate choice. "deliberately having a child in situation X not the decision I would make" =/= "people who find themselves in situation X after conceiving a child are idiots."

Every time this topic comes up, everybody wants to try and back Chi into a corner as if she said the 2nd, when she's just saying the 1st.

It was Mrshandy's statement that gave me the shank eye. I didn't take issue with what chic said.

But as an aside, I still don't see why anyone feels they should say things like this. The idea of needing to be around to much in order to raise a functioning member of society is a relatively modern one. Would it be nice if everyone wanted to work a schedule that would keep themhome fairly often? Yes but I don't think it makes you a shit parent or an uncaring one to plan to raise a child while working a decent amount of hours.

For the first point - my bad. I think I missed mrshandy's comment entirely.

2nd - really? I mean...I know that in the uppper crust babies were handed off to a nanny/governness and kept in the nursury until they could carry on a conversation at dinner, but that wasn't the majority of people.

I fear this exposes my dreadful lack of historical knowledge - but didn't the average person take care of their kids themselves through the toddler years?

[chichimi]

May 14, 2012 15:45:37 GMT -5 @habbsies said:

May 14, 2012 15:34:07 GMT -5 wawa said:

OK...yes, shit happens. But that's different from making a deliberate choice. "deliberately having a child in situation X not the decision I would make" =/= "people who find themselves in situation X after conceiving a child are idiots."

Every time this topic comes up, everybody wants to try and back Chi into a corner as if she said the 2nd, when she's just saying the 1st.

It was Mrshandy's statement that gave me the shank eye. I didn't take issue with what chic said.

But as an aside, I still don't see why anyone feels they should say things like this. The idea of needing to be around to much in order to raise a functioning member of society is a relatively modern one. Would it be nice if everyone wanted to work a schedule that would keep themhome fairly often? Yes but I don't think it makes you a shit parent or an uncaring one to plan to raise a child while working a decent amount of hours.

But I didnt even claim that this is the sole reason for my position. Why would I go through the expense, pain of labor, and additional work of having children if I couldnt enjoy the benefit of spending time with them? I would say that has a selfish element to it. I would be jealous of another person getting to experience the joy of spending time with my child. I think this is why its more of a personal opinion and not a judgement laden statement.
I completely understand how situations can change but since I am on the childfree side, I have the luxury of not having children now in an environment that I know not to be in my or the child's best interests.
This is not a topic I discuss frequently, usually only when asked why I am not having children.

[Deleted]

It really depended on the culture and society. Even parents who took care of their own children usually left them to their own devises from a pretty early age due to the varying needs of getting by.

Day care centers are a fairly new phenomenon, yes. But it wasn't uncommon to leave your child at a baby farm, to put them in a corner of the store while you tended to customers, let them wander over to grandma's cabin while you worked the field, send them to someone else's house to raise/learn a trade, etc.

[Deleted]

But I don't understand what you mean by not being able to benefit from having your children if you work a certain amount of hours.

I suppose that for you, you feel there is a certain amount you have to spend for it to be worthwhile but that likely isn't true for a whole host of other people. Not being able to be there with them for a certain amount of hours a day doesn't detract from all the other enjoyment that comes from having children.

[Deleted]

And that's exactly what I'm referring to, Sou. Some people just aren't going to ever come by the ideal set of circumstances. There are more rewards to parenting than being able to give your kids milk and cookies when they get off the school bus.

[chichimi]

May 14, 2012 16:02:07 GMT -5 @soudesafinado said:

May 14, 2012 15:02:35 GMT -5 @chichimi said:

I wouldnt have children unless the father or I could stay home with them until they are in school. Does this mean I judge anyone who has someone else watch their kids? No, I dont think so just that its not a choice I would make. I dont tell other people what to do with their children because they are the ones that have to live with the decision, not me.

So if that perfect situation never materializes will you just choose not to have children?

I do not have a strong desire in general to have children. If that changes in the future, Im sure I would be willing to give up some of these ideals.

[hawkeye]

Why do people only care about "time with their kids" until they hit school age?

Frankly, I bet you'd be better off keeping your kids home starting around age 6 if having nice quality days with them is your priority.

Has anyone ever spent a full day with a 3 year old? They're assholes!

[Deleted]

LMAO hawkeye

And on some level, I actually agree with you. I think that while staying home with your child before age 5 can be a good thing, I think your availibility and bonding matters more once they start school than it did before.

Ugh, I'm not sure I phrased that right. I guess I feel quanity is less important than quality when they are young but as they get older, they have more needs that need to be addressed by availibility.

[Melissa W.]

May 14, 2012 16:08:19 GMT -5 hawkeye said:

Why do people only care about "time with their kids" until they hit school age?

Frankly, I bet you'd be better off keeping your kids home starting around age 6 if having nice quality days with them is your priority.

Has anyone ever spent a full day with a 3 year old? They're assholes!

lol..

I love my kids but three is by far my least favorite age. I want to sell my 3 year old to gypsies.

[basilosaurus]

I would imagine that those who work (even long hours) say they still benefit from having children. In fact, they might even say that there isn't much benefit to the day after day mind numbing hours spent with an infant or toddler.

Yes, 12 hours in daycare seems like a lot, but would you really say that a nurse who only works 3 days a week is really not getting the benefit of having a child because of those 12 hour days? Or that the child is suffering?

[Deleted]

May 14, 2012 16:15:04 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

I would imagine that those who work (even long hours) say they still benefit from having children. In fact, they might even say that there isn't much benefit to the day after day mind numbing hours spent with an infant or toddler.

Yes, 12 hours in daycare seems like a lot, but would you really say that a nurse who only works 3 days a week is really not getting the benefit of having a child because of those 12 hour days? Or that the child is suffering?

I guess military parents shouldn't have children, what with all the deployments and such.

[basilosaurus]

May 14, 2012 16:20:23 GMT -5 @habbsies said:

May 14, 2012 16:15:04 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

I would imagine that those who work (even long hours) say they still benefit from having children. In fact, they might even say that there isn't much benefit to the day after day mind numbing hours spent with an infant or toddler.

Yes, 12 hours in daycare seems like a lot, but would you really say that a nurse who only works 3 days a week is really not getting the benefit of having a child because of those 12 hour days? Or that the child is suffering?

I guess military parents shouldn't have children, what with all the deployments and such.

My hypothetical future children are fucked. H works 12 hour shifts regularly, I should soon enough. Throw in a deployment, thousands of miles from families, and my willingness to pawn off a 3 year old onto daycare, and we have a future Dahmer on our hands.

[basilosaurus]

I don't know if most are SAHMs. I know there are plenty of working moms around, especially when in the States, although I've definitely had friends who got tired of being underemployed thanks to the hit your career takes, so they eventually quit. That doesn't mean they're both active duty, though, so you can have essentially a single working mom during deployments. If they're both AD they have to have a family plan in the case of both of them deploying at the same time (it's entirely possible).

One of H's coworkers is a single mom, and she just had a kid maybe 5 months ago. She was just tasked with a one year deployment. Fun times!

[Deleted]

Right but if the theory here is that you need to be with your child a certain amount of time to be a good parent and/or reap the benefits of having children, why does the working spouse get a pass and how are you reaping the benefits as it were if you're gone for 15 months?

As to how military families are generally made up, while SAHM's are still the norm, that demographic is changing, especially with the emergence of programs to help spouses go back to school or go to school at all.

In addition, there are many single parent military families as well as increasing number of dual military couples who can and do end up deployed at the same time.

[AW]

May 14, 2012 16:08:19 GMT -5 hawkeye said:

Why do people only care about "time with their kids" until they hit school age?

This is why some choose to homeschool. Frankly, the idea of my child being in the care of a complete stranger for 8 hours a day, 5 fays a week only to come home and have to spend the evening doing homework or other sport activities would mean that I would have very little quality time with my kids. At least with daycare a choice in the teacher - with public school there isn't really that option all the time.

I think it's strange that people worry about the amount of time children spend outside of their care when they are little and then all of a sudden they hit the magical Kindergarten age and it doesn't matter anymore. All of these moms talk about mommy guilt about working and daycare, but when it's compulsory school, no one thinks twice about the amount of time "strangers are raising their kids".

[Deleted]

You know these people cease to be random strangers after a short while, yes?

For instance, pinky's teacher can eabod for all I care but I wouldn't consider her a random stranger

[basilosaurus]

Those "random strangers" teach your children, not raise them. I don't think it's abdicating parenting to send your child to freaking school with teachers who are, you know, trained to teach. I'm not knocking homeschool (entirely), but it's pretty ridiculous to call a teacher a random stranger who raises your kid.

Mr Dob, there are dual military couples who have kids. Yeah, wartime sucks. A lot of people never expected there to be 10+ years of ongoing wars, where you deploy, at least in H's field, on average 6 months out of every 12. That kind of tempo hasn't happened during volunteer force times.

But, like hab said, why does this "you're not raising your kid" thing only apply to the sahp? Why not to the active duty woman?

[AW]

May 14, 2012 16:53:50 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

Those "random strangers" teach your children, not raise them. I don't think it's abdicating parenting to send your child to freaking school with teachers who are, you know, trained to teach. I'm not knocking homeschool (entirely), but it's pretty ridiculous to call a teacher a random stranger who raises your kid.

Some would argue that teaching a child is the same as raising them. I guess it depends on your definition of parenting. I figure that anyone that is helping me to teach my child is also helping me raise them. My kids' pastor, grandparents, sitter, aunts/uncles, etc. all help me raise my child because they each disciple my child in different ways. You could argue that it's different with a school teacher because the teaching is purely academic, but I don't think it is. Children learn a lot about morality and character from school.

But regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that we worry about how much time our children spend in others' care when they are little, but suddenly stop caring at Kindergarten age just because the government tells us they have to go to school.

I'm not judging working parents. I work. I leave my children in the care of a sitter two days a week. I feel extreme guilt on those days because I absolutely feel like their sitter is raising them for me while I'm not there. When situations arise at home between my children, she is forced to address them. She teaches them appropriate behavior and disciplines them accordingly. She feeds them, rocks them to sleep, kisses their boo-boos when they get hurt, and does everything else that I would be doing if I were there. I just feel blessed that my sitter is a family friend that I know is reinforcing the values that are important in my household. I honestly don't think I would feel that way about a school teacher that I had never met before.

[AW]

May 14, 2012 17:37:57 GMT -5 @mrdobalina said:

May 14, 2012 17:12:46 GMT -5 @AW said:

Some would argue that teaching a child is the same as raising them. I guess it depends on your definition of parenting. I figure that anyone that is helping me to teach my child is also helping me raise them. My kids' pastor, grandparents, sitter, aunts/uncles, etc. all help me raise my child because they each disciple my child in different ways. You could argue that it's different with a school teacher because the teaching is purely academic, but I don't think it is. Children learn a lot about morality and character from school.

But regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that we worry about how much time our children spend in others' care when they are little, but suddenly stop caring at Kindergarten age just because the government tells us they have to go to school.

I'm not judging working parents. I work. I leave my children in the care of a sitter two days a week. I feel extreme guilt on those days because I absolutely feel like their sitter is raising them for me while I'm not there. When situations arise at home between my children, she is forced to address them. She teaches them appropriate behavior and disciplines them accordingly. She feeds them, rocks them to sleep, kisses their boo-boos when they get hurt, and does everything else that I would be doing if I were there. I just feel blessed that my sitter is a family friend that I know is reinforcing the values that are important in my household. I honestly don't think I would feel that way about a school teacher that I had never met before.

Yes, parents who send their children to school stop caring about who they are interacting with. You nailed it, AdamsWife. Oh, shequeen of the Martyr people.

No idea how douchey you sound? At all?

Not any "douchier" than the way you sounded when you said that people who work 12 hour days shouldn't bother to have children. You see, we each have our own standards for parenting and our opinions on the appropriate amount of quality time we should give our children. To you, it isn't good to be away from your child for 12 hours each day. That's fine, because it's your opinion. I feel the same way about having my 6 or 7 year old in someone else's care for 8 hours a day, 5 days a week.That's fine, it's my opinion.

The only difference is that your standard for quality time past the age of 5-6 is the norm and mine isn't. But that doesn't make my opinion any "douchier" than your opinion for a 2 year old in daycare for 12 hours.

Do what works for you. My point wasn't that putting your child in public school means you don't care about your child's interactions. My point was that we should be caring about the amount of quality time we spend with our children each day regardless of their age. I honestly do not understand the magical Kindergarten cut-off. Children still need the same amount of quality time at age 7 that they do at age 3, IMO.

BTW - I haven't been around much, but I just wanted you to know that you and your baby have been in my prayers. I hope your pregnancy is treating you well.

[savannah11]

May 14, 2012 17:12:46 GMT -5 @AW said:

May 14, 2012 16:53:50 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

Those "random strangers" teach your children, not raise them. I don't think it's abdicating parenting to send your child to freaking school with teachers who are, you know, trained to teach. I'm not knocking homeschool (entirely), but it's pretty ridiculous to call a teacher a random stranger who raises your kid.

Some would argue that teaching a child is the same as raising them. I guess it depends on your definition of parenting. I figure that anyone that is helping me to teach my child is also helping me raise them. My kids' pastor, grandparents, sitter, aunts/uncles, etc. all help me raise my child because they each disciple my child in different ways. You could argue that it's different with a school teacher because the teaching is purely academic, but I don't think it is. Children learn a lot about morality and character from school.

But regardless, it still doesn't change the fact that we worry about how much time our children spend in others' care when they are little, but suddenly stop caring at Kindergarten age just because the government tells us they have to go to school.

I'm not judging working parents. I work. I leave my children in the care of a sitter two days a week. I feel extreme guilt on those days because I absolutely feel like their sitter is raising them for me while I'm not there. When situations arise at home between my children, she is forced to address them. She teaches them appropriate behavior and disciplines them accordingly. She feeds them, rocks them to sleep, kisses their boo-boos when they get hurt, and does everything else that I would be doing if I were there. I just feel blessed that my sitter is a family friend that I know is reinforcing the values that are important in my household. I honestly don't think I would feel that way about a school teacher that I had never met before.

I get what you are saying but feel differently. To me, it takes a village and I will gladly take any help in raising my children. I often wonder how people manage without the daycare provider we have. I give her all the credit for getting DS ready for kindergarten in the fall and molding my kids into functional beings. (Okay, maybe I can also take a little credit for the latter). I see her as a part of the team, not someone taking things away from me.

I will also gladly accept the help of the school system in educating my children.

[BravoBravo]

May 14, 2012 16:35:58 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

Yeah but aren't most moms of young kids in a military family SAHMs? Or are there cases of two parents of young kids deployed at the same time?

DH used to work 12s and it was good for the time he had off.

HOWEVER, if I were to work the same 12s as he did, I would not like it for our family. One of us would have to quit or find a new job

DH is currently deployed with a husband and wife. Their two kids are with the grandparents with other family nearby. You only need to have a family care plan in place. When the mission needs you, you go.

[Deleted]

I'm sure my school teacher have had a varying influence in my life but honestly, I remember very little about them aside from the mundane. I just don't find them to be as big of a factor as the people who have a long term presence in my life.

The concern about school teachers "raising" your children would have more weight if we were talking about communities and school systems where a child has the same teacher for multiple years.

Also, not to demean homeschooling because I am a homeschool graduate and I had a good experience with that, but the value a school teacher brings in educating children far outweighs any drawbacks or concerns once might have about them "raising" your children.

I do think homeschooling is a valid choice for parents to make but I don't agree that traditional teachers are doing anything more for your kids than contributing to their education unless you're a shit parent. I think in that case, teachers absolutely help raise kids because those kids aren't getting those valuable lessons otherwise and are craving that kind of interest.

[Melissa W.]

Not only that but at least in my town, my kids are being taught by people that I know and trust. My daughter's K teacher is someone I grew up with and went to school.

I think any kind of parenting in the extreme is bad for a kid. I think it sucks that some parents are forced into extremes by the economy. I also think it sucks that people say, "Well you knew you had crappy hours... you shouldn't have kids" What if that is the only option for a family? It seems somewhat elitist because many of those people are forced into that type of job. It isn't a choice.