# Full-Time Mothers: Does this mean that women who work are only part-time mothers?



## DeeFox (9 Feb 2010)

I hate when women describe themselves as being a "full-time mother".  Does this mean that women who work are only part-time mothers?


----------



## DB74 (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*

Basically yes

If you work 8 hours a day and somebody else is effectively rearing your child(ren) during the day then how can you describe yourself as a full-time mother (or father for that matter)?


----------



## Purple (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



DB74 said:


> Basically yes
> 
> If you work 8 hours a day and somebody else is effectively rearing your child(ren) during the day then how can you describe yourself as a full-time mother (or father for that matter)?



So when you children start school you become a part-time parent?


----------



## DB74 (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*

It's just semantics though

What should women who stay at home describe themselves as?

Does "working mother" imply that those who stay at home don't work?!!!!!


----------



## Purple (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



DB74 said:


> It's just semantics though
> 
> What should women who stay at home describe themselves as?
> 
> Does "working mother" imply that those who stay at home don't work?!!!!!



Why does a label have to be attached?


----------



## DB74 (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*

It doesn't but the labels are already out there and lots of people like to have a "label" when asked what they do on a day-to-day basis.

eg - milk monitor etc etc


----------



## ali (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



DeeFox said:


> I hate when women describe themselves as being a "full-time mother". Does this mean that women who work are only part-time mothers?


 
Does that not simply imply that all their time is devoted to rearing their children  as opposed to those who have an occupation outside the home which requires them to be absent from their children whose time is divided?

Take it from me, when you are a mother, you have guilt either way. Home or not it's never enough. Children and motherhood/fatherhood equals guilt regardless of how much you do / how perfect you are / how absent or otherwise you are. It also equals so much of the good stuff, I can't quantify.

A.


----------



## Capt. Beaky (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*

What about old fashioned 'home maker'?


----------



## DB74 (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



Capt. Beaky said:


> What about old fashioned 'home maker'?


 
But then you mightn't necessarily have any kids!


----------



## Yachtie (9 Feb 2010)

OK then, I am a 3/4 time mother as I have a part-time job!


----------



## ney001 (9 Feb 2010)

I can't wait till I grow up and become a part time mother! Although if I work full time and am a part time mother where is the 'me' time? Are there any creches out there that keep kids overnight? And if I'm a part time mother and he's a part time father, combined do we count as one full parent?


----------



## ney001 (9 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



DB74 said:


> But then you mightn't necessarily have any kids!



So only kids make a home? I better get cracking so!


----------



## Caveat (10 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



Capt. Beaky said:


> What about old fashioned 'home maker'?


 
Eeeuwww!

I just immediately think of Doris Day-like compliant grinning freaks with gingham aprons.


----------



## truthseeker (10 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



Caveat said:


> Eeeuwww!
> 
> I just immediately think of Doris Day-like compliant grinning freaks with gingham aprons.


 
What!! Is the 50s stepford wife type not what all men dream of? (hurriedly removes gingham apron, deflates bazooka pointy boobs, empties oven of delicious home made bread and other goodies and tousles hair out of perfect coiffed arrangement.......)


----------



## Kine (10 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



truthseeker said:


> deflates bazooka pointy boobs


 
Now _THAT_ brought a smile to my face


----------



## Mel (10 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



DB74 said:


> Basically yes
> 
> If you work 8 hours a day and somebody else is effectively rearing your child(ren) during the day then how can you describe yourself as a full-time mother (or father for that matter)?


 
Children at school 9 to 3, doing homework/ having snacks/ playing 3 to 6; at home or at sport training for the next 15 hours. I would hardly describe them as being being "reared" by somebody else when it's really less than 3 hours a day. 

I would much prefer a child to be in after-school care than being dragged to shops, supermarkets and appointments (hairdresser, queuing for car tax, yadda yadda).


----------



## DB74 (10 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



Mel said:


> I would much prefer a child to be in after-school care than being dragged to shops, supermarkets and appointments (hairdresser, queuing for car tax, yadda yadda).


 
So you think that parents who aren't working should still put their children into a non-educational child-minders /creche instead of spending their days with their parents?

Why have children at all in that case?

I miss my 2 children every day while at work and can't wait to get home to see them every evening. My wife is currently on maternity leave and I envy her the time that she gets to spend with them during the day (although I'm sure she envies me the time at work sometimes!).

Last year I was on a 4-day week (recession etc etc) and loved the day off with my son and often took 2 half days instead so I could go to work while he was at Montessori and then have 2 afternoons with him instead of just the one.

My son (age 5) would far prefer a full day with me being "dragged" around places (B&Q, barbers, supermarket etc) than a 2-hour trip to cinema and McDonalds and then being stuck in a childminders all day.

In terms of parental time and children, it's quantity not quality that children prefer.


----------



## huskerdu (10 Feb 2010)

I was wondering how long it would take for the thread to turn defensive.
It always does, back to the guilt thing described so well above by ali. 

Some families want one of the parents to be at home with the kids, some don't, 
some mothers would love to be at home with their kids and can't afford it, some 
mothers would love a job and don't have one. 

If you have a set-up that you enjoy and is working for you and your family, be thankful.


----------



## DB74 (10 Feb 2010)

huskerdu said:


> I was wondering how long it would take for the thread to turn defensive.


 
I hope you're not referring to me!


----------



## Vanilla (10 Feb 2010)

Thank you huskerdu for a bit of sanity.


----------



## DeeFox (10 Feb 2010)

OP here - not trying to make anyone feel guilty or defensive!!
I was watching a programme the other night and when someone spoke text would appear on the screen with their name, what they do and area where they are from.  Most people had something like electrician, businessman, etc.  - but a few of them were "full time mothers" and it just irked me.  I agree that it is a full time job in itself but I think that someone who works is also a full time parent!  I suppose it is a question of labelling - not sure of alternatives though.  How about the term "stay-at-home mother/father"??


----------



## ney001 (10 Feb 2010)

DeeFox said:


> OP here - not trying to make anyone feel guilty or defensive!!
> I was watching a programme the other night and when someone spoke text would appear on the screen with their name, what they do and area where they are from. Most people had something like electrician, businessman, etc. - but a few of them were "full time mothers" and it just irked me. I agree that it is a full time job in itself but I think that someone who works is also a full time parent! I suppose it is a question of labelling - not sure of alternatives though. How about the term "stay-at-home mother/father"??


 
I think it's a valid question & it is something that has come up in my own circle. I have friends (like me) who have or want kids but also have careers. I have other friends who think everything stops the minute kids come along and if you are not at home looking after them 24/7 then you are somehow a bad parent. I have heard on numerous occasions - the old chestnut of 'letting a creche rear your child' etc and have even been asked myself why would I want kids if I intend to work??. A friend of mine is completely ignored and left out by the ladies on her road when they get together for walks or even a drink, she is the only one who works and a couple of the women have made very snide comments about this to her face. She laughs it off but when the door is closed I suspect she has the usual guilt suffered by working parents. These arguments always turn nasty and defensive because it's such as passionate subject for parents. 

I have also noticed lately that due to recession and loss of jobs, more women are staying at home - that's fine if they're happy with that - but what does grate on my nerves (as in the case of a family member) is when they act like this was a decision that they selflessly made i.e she willingly gave up work for the sake of the child - she then proceeds to preach about the joys of being a stay at home mother & how nothing compares blah blah blah - weird because I don't feel the need to preach about the joys of working!

As Huskerdu says - if you're happy with your arrangments then live and let live - every single family operates in a different way and every parent raises their child differently.

Re names for me I think stay at home parent and/or working parent should do it - sure your close friends and family know what you do - does it really matter to anyone else??


----------



## thedaras (10 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



Mel said:


> Children at school 9 to 3, doing homework/ having snacks/ playing 3 to 6; at home or at sport training for the next 15 hours. I would hardly describe them as being being "reared" by somebody else when it's really less than 3 hours a day.
> 
> I would much prefer a child to be in after-school care than being dragged to shops, supermarkets and appointments (hairdresser, queuing for car tax, yadda yadda).


 
Why would you "drag" them to your appointments when you would have time to get those things done in the morning?

My kids are not it school from 9 till 3,not for many years in some cases.
9 till 11.30 Playschool.Next 9 to half one,next 9 till half 2,next 9 till 3.45.
Who do you think helps them with their homework?
Who do you think makes the "snacks"?
Who do you think brings and collects them from after school activities?
I am the child of a full time working mother ,I know which option I want for my children.


----------



## thedaras (10 Feb 2010)

DeeFox said:


> I hate when women describe themselves as being a "full-time mother". Does this mean that women who work are only part-time mothers?


 
If someone is a " full time worker" does that mean that when they are on their lunch/breaks/holidays/sick days/weekends etc that they are part time workers?


----------



## D8Lady (10 Feb 2010)

ney001 said:


> As Huskerdu says - if you're happy with your arrangments then live and let live - every single family operates in a different way and every parent raises their child differently.



Hear, hear!
Why do we expect all women to fall into the same life once kids are involved? Some love the full time homemaker routine, others run screaming up the walls for lack of adult interaction and take their furstrations out on their children.
For many work is a necessity - children do need to be housed, clothed, fed and all that costs.  

Do whatever works for you to keep you, your family sane and healthy.


----------



## Bronte (11 Feb 2010)

huskerdu said:


> If you have a set-up that you enjoy and is working for you and your family, be thankful.


 
That just about sums it up.


----------



## Firefly (11 Feb 2010)

This is a very sensitive issue. However, I feel most families have a choice. To stay at home one parent must sacrafice a salary and probably delay career progression some what. It will mean a cutback on material items etc.

At the top of the agenda though, IMO, is *what's best for the child*. 

We spent a LOT of time making our decision that Mrs Firefly would stay at home rather than opting for the creche option. As Mrs Firefly via her qualifications will more than likely be the higher earner in our family longterm this was a big decision for us to make. 

Below are our reasons and I cannot stress that this is not a dig on parents who go the creche route. 

Before we made our decision we observed children who visited our home who went to creche. We found that they were very clingy to their parents and grabbed our baby's toys and wouldn't share. 

I think minding one or two of your own children is a difficult task. I'd question the ability/dedication to minding many more that aren't even your own.

Creches IMO operate like a production line - all the babies are fed and changed at the same time. We didn't want our baby sitting in a corner with a dirty nappy for upto an hour

Everyone has a bad day, we don't want any adult having a bad day near our child

Babies and young children aren't able to communicate what goes on in creche. If their hair is pulled etc we'll never know.

When our child is sick we want to be the ones doing the caring.

I remember as a kid in school finding the days very long. To a 9 month-old stuck in a corner it must seem an eternity

Having said that..our plan is to put our children into creche for perhaps 1 or 2 days a week when they are 3 years old as I think at that stage they will have a very solid and secure upbringing and the social development as well as art and games etc would be good at that stage. 

There are a few more if I thought about it.

Again I'd like to stress that I don't want to offend anyone and if someone can offer positives to creche etc I'm open minded.


----------



## Mel (11 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



thedaras said:


> Why would you "drag" them to your appointments when you would have time to get those things done in the morning?
> 
> My kids are not it school from 9 till 3,not for many years in some cases.
> 9 till 11.30 Playschool.Next 9 to half one,next 9 till half 2,next 9 till 3.45.
> ...


 
I've no idea why some people feel the need to bring their children to every chore they attend to, but they do. 

To answer your questions - I'm in no doubt as to who does those things: 
I check homework each evening, and we correct where necessary, therefore I help with it.
Snacks I believe do not require to made by anyone in particular? Hot dinner at home each evening, made by me. 
I bring and collect from after school activities - did you know that they are not ALL on between 3 and 6? 

I'm the child of a stay at home mother who resented her role, and I know that I'd prefer my child to have a happy parent, and this works for us. We're incredibly close. We make the very most of the time we are at home together, whether it's watching tv, or baking or whatever. 

I apologise, my original post wasn't meant to be an attack on anyone's preference; I just prefer my time with my son to be 'quality' time, not boring him senseless having coffee with friends or around the supermarket etc. Each to their own.


----------



## michaelm (11 Feb 2010)

DeeFox said:


> I hate when women describe themselves as being a "full-time mother".


"Full-time" or "stay-at-home" what does the label matter? It's just semantics.





DeeFox said:


> Does this mean that women who work are only part-time mothers?


This thread was certain to become divisive form the start. 

My own view is that, where financially practical, young children are best cared for at home with a stay-at-home parent (ideally their mother).  IMHO people feel guilt, in general, for a reason and often try to rationalise their choices so as to assuage such feelings.


----------



## annR (11 Feb 2010)

DeeFox said:


> OP here - not trying to make anyone feel guilty or defensive!!..... but a few of them were "full time mothers" and it just irked me. ....


 
DeeFox I don't think it would have irked you if you weren't feeling a tad defensive about it yourself.  Honestly none of us will never have any control over all the labels used out there (apart from not using them ourselves) - better off being happy with your own scenario so that these things don't irk you.  I'm much more bothered by some of the labels used for women in general than I am about mothers in particular.

Firefly, did you actually go and visit any creches before you made your decision?  If you did they must have been terrible to give you the impressions you seem to have of creches.  They're not all like that .. . .


----------



## Shawady (11 Feb 2010)

Firefly said:


> As Mrs Firefly via her qualifications will more than likely be the higher earner in our family longterm this was a big decision for us to make.


 
Just out of interest, why did your wife make the decision to stay at home if she is potentially the higher earner?


----------



## annR (11 Feb 2010)

michaelm said:


> "Full-time" or "stay-at-home" what does the label matter? It's just semantics.This thread was certain to become divisive form the start.
> 
> My own view is that, where financially practical, young children are best cared for at home with a stay-at-home parent (ideally their mother). IMHO people feel guilt, in general, for a reason and often try to rationalise their choices so as to assuage such feelings.


 
Plenty of mothers don't need much of a reason to feel guilty other than not being perfect.  I feel guilty if I am 10 minutes late getting my child her tea but that is not actually a big deal.

When you say rationalising their choices you make it sound like they are deluding themselves into thinking something bad is good - perhaps it's just a matter of reminding themselves of the positives as well as the negatives of a given situation, to stop unnecessary agonising about something they've already decided it's the best/only way.


----------



## liaconn (11 Feb 2010)

Firefly said:


> This is a very sensitive issue. However, I feel most families have a choice. To stay at home one parent must sacrafice a salary and probably delay career progression some what. It will mean a cutback on material items etc.
> 
> At the top of the agenda though, IMO, is *what's best for the child*.
> 
> ...


 
How can you make a post like that and say it's not a 'dig' at parents who put their kids in a creche? My nephew went to a creche and was very well looked after. I never heard of him being 'stuck in a corner' or sitting in a dirty nappy for an hour, or the carers taking their bad days out on him. Also, he was very good at sharing his toys because this is one of the things you have to learn and get used to  in a creche. It also made him less, not more, clingy as he was accustomed to other adults picking him up, changing his nappy, feeding him etc. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to stay at home when they have a baby, and I can't think they found your post very comforting.


----------



## michaelm (11 Feb 2010)

annR said:


> When you say rationalising their choices you make it sound like they are deluding themselves into thinking something bad is good


Some are.





annR said:


> - perhaps it's just a matter of reminding themselves of the positives as well as the negatives of a given situation, to stop unnecessary agonising about something they've already decided it's the best/only way.


Perhaps.


----------



## Firefly (11 Feb 2010)

To group my replies.

_How can you make a post like that and say it's not a 'dig' at parents who put their kids in a creche? My nephew went to a creche and was very well looked after. I never heard of him being 'stuck in a corner' or sitting in a dirty nappy for an hour, or the carers taking their bad days out on him. Also, he was very good at sharing his toys because this is one of the things you have to learn and get used to in a creche. It also made him less, not more, clingy as he was accustomed to other adults picking him up, changing his nappy, feeding him etc. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to stay at home when they have a baby, and I can't think they found your post very comforting. _

Again, I didn't mean to offend anyone. Whilst I agree that not everyone has the luxury to be able to stay at home I think a lot of people could. It means cutting back on spending etc, but it's still possible. I suppose you'd have to ask yourself if one of the earners lost their job and had to stay at home would you manage? I'm guessing there are a lot of people in this situation at the moment, who have lost their jobs and are minding their children at home fulltime. 

_why did your wife make the decision to stay at home if she is potentially the higher earner? _

This was a big call for us to be sure. The reason that Mrs Firefly is staying at home is that we honestly believe that she has the better skills to rear our child. I know I could do it and commend fathers who stay at home, but in our case Mrs Firefly would be better than I. We simply took money out of the equation and asked ourselves, in an ideal world, what would we do. For us it was Mrs Firefly staying at home. We then asked ourselves if we could live in this "ideal world" (excuse the expression!) and we found that we could. Not saying it's easy. If I was to lose my contract, Mrs Firefly would go back to work and I'd stay at home. 

_Firefly, did you actually go and visit any creches before you made your decision? If you did they must have been terrible to give you the impressions you seem to have of creches. They're not all like that .. . . _

I spoke to 2 creche owners (both outside our living area). Both said that for babies aged 9 months (stationary) they are put into their own area and largely left to play with themselves. One of them said it was due to constraints, the other actually thought this was a good idea. 
I think in about 30 years time we'll have a good idea on the pros/cons of the creche model as we will then be able to compare people who have spent their formative years in a creche versus those at home. Given that it is a largely recent phenominum (none of my friends etc went to creche) we don't know the longterm issues (if any) it will cause. This was another reason we didn't want to go down the creche route.


----------



## liaconn (11 Feb 2010)

Firefly said:


> I spoke to 2 creche owners (both outside our living area). Both said that for babies aged 9 months (stationary) they are put into their own area and largely left to play with themselves. One of them said it was due to constraints, the other actually thought this was a good idea.


 
Are you sure you didn't misunderstand? Babies of 9 months don't normally play with each other or even register each other. Neither would they react well to older kids pulling toys away from them. Maybe this is what they were talking about, as opposed to meaning the babies were just left in a corner and ignored, with no adult interaction or toys to play with.

By the way, I have a large number of cousins and only two went to a creche (back in the seventies when it was quite unusual). They are generally agreed to be exceptionally well adjusted, rounded, nice and successful adults - which cannot be said for all of the rest of us cousins .


----------



## truthseeker (11 Feb 2010)

I have 2 teacher friends who claim that they can spot the children who went to a creche on the first day of school as their social skills are usually much more developed than those who didnt.


----------



## Firefly (11 Feb 2010)

liaconn said:


> Are you sure you didn't misunderstand? Babies of 9 months don't normally play with each other or even register each other. Neither would they react well to older kids pulling toys away from them. Maybe this is what they were talking about, as opposed to meaning the babies were just left in a corner and ignored, with no adult interaction or toys to play with.
> .


 
I don't think I did, but because perhaps we had our mind made up I could have alright. hmm!


----------



## Firefly (11 Feb 2010)

truthseeker said:


> I have 2 teacher friends who claim that they can spot the children who went to a creche on the first day of school as their social skills are usually much more developed than those who didnt.


 
I agree & that's why we plan to send our children to creche 1 or 2 days a week when they're about 3.


----------



## Shawady (11 Feb 2010)

truthseeker said:


> I have 2 teacher friends who claim that they can spot the children who went to a creche on the first day of school as their social skills are usually much more developed than those who didnt.


 
A nurse that does developmental checks on 2 and 3 years olds told me the exact same thing.


----------



## Firefly (11 Feb 2010)

Does anyone have any solid links to research into the pros/cons of creches? I assume these might originate from the US/UK? Thanks


----------



## truthseeker (11 Feb 2010)

Shawady said:


> A nurse that does developmental checks on 2 and 3 years olds told me the exact same thing.


 
I would assume language aquisition is also slightly ahead of time with creche going children as they are exposed to a greater range of vocabulary from other daily interaction with other children also?


----------



## truthseeker (11 Feb 2010)

Firefly said:


> Does anyone have any solid links to research into the pros/cons of creches? I assume these might originate from the US/UK? Thanks


 
Despite the horror story in this article:
[broken link removed]

it does say:


> Countless research publications show that children with positive experiences in crèches and pre-schools settle more quickly and more confidently into school, make friends with greater ease, get to grips with literacy and numeracy faster, and are much more confident.


 
but unfortunately fails to mention the sources of the countless research publications.

Note the key phrase in the paragraph, 





> positive experiences


, so getting a child into a good creche that they enjoy seems to be the key.


----------



## Firefly (11 Feb 2010)

truthseeker said:


> Note the key phrase in the paragraph, , so getting a child into a good creche that they enjoy seems to be the key.


 
That's the thing...As the industry is largely un-regulated it makes the search for the best creche more difficult. 

That link was very sad btw.


----------



## truthseeker (11 Feb 2010)

Firefly said:


> That's the thing...As the industry is largely un-regulated it makes the search for the best creche more difficult.
> 
> That link was very sad btw.


 
Agreed and agreed.

I do know one family who dont send the children to creche (mother stay at home) but they do send the children to various play groups and activities so that their children will not be behind creche goers in terms of social skills etc when they start school.


----------



## Firefly (11 Feb 2010)

truthseeker said:


> I do know one family who dont send the children to creche (mother stay at home) but they do send the children to various play groups and activities so that their children will not be behind creche goers in terms of social skills etc when they start school.


 
That's exactly what we're doing at the moment. Mrs Firefly gets to chat to other mothers (mainly) whilst the kids are playing away.


----------



## ali (11 Feb 2010)

liaconn said:


> How can you make a post like that and say it's not a 'dig' at parents who put their kids in a creche? My nephew went to a creche and was very well looked after. I never heard of him being 'stuck in a corner' or sitting in a dirty nappy for an hour, or the carers taking their bad days out on him. Also, he was very good at sharing his toys because this is one of the things you have to learn and get used to in a creche. It also made him less, not more, clingy as he was accustomed to other adults picking him up, changing his nappy, feeding him etc. Not everyone has the luxury of being able to stay at home when they have a baby, and I can't think they found your post very comforting.


 
The problem to my mind is exactly that. You never heard of him being treated badly. Who is going to tell you? Absolutely not knocking creches - my sister's two kids are in a great one in Crumlin and are happy well adjusted children. (Though the not sharing rings a bell - I had linked it to having to "protect" his belongings from other kids which maybe he wouldn't have to do at home) That part wouldn't worry me though, it will all fall into place. There are many pros to creches. The cons as I see it are:
1. The children are; during the years when love is the most important, being cared for by someone who doesn't love them. They may be beautifully cared for, clean, dry, fed but when my kids are with me I spend half my time kissing or hugging them or telling them how special they are. That is absent with the most caring professional. Love.

2. Abuse / neglect are hard to police (I know some creches have webcams) .

3. The day is very long for small kids. The routine at home can be much less structured and more adaptive for little ones. 

By the way, I have worked full / part time and not at all during various stages of my childrens lives and have been lucky enough to share any necessary childcare with the grandparents. A total luxury I know.

A.


----------



## michaelm (11 Feb 2010)

Firefly said:


> Does anyone have any solid links to research into the pros/cons of creches? I assume these might originate from the US/UK? Thanks


Various longitudinal studies confirm the common sense intuition that young  children fare better at home with their mother, or father.  This BBC report refers to one such study.


----------



## Dachshund (12 Feb 2010)

Firefly said:


> That's the thing...As the industry is largely un-regulated it makes the search for the best creche more difficult.



Creches *ARE* regulated by the HSE see  for further details. Further guidelines are available [broken link removed].

The HSE conducts inspections of creches and inspection reports are made available. Horror stories are certainly out there but most responsible creche owners will address your concerns.


----------



## Firefly (12 Feb 2010)

Dachshund said:


> Creches *ARE* regulated by the HSE see  for further details. Further guidelines are available [broken link removed].
> QUOTE]
> 
> Thanks for the link. Anyone know if the workers in a creche are subject to history checks such as sex offenders register etc? Also, do workers in a creche need to sit any exams, undergo training before they mind children or can anyone apply for a job?


----------



## DB74 (12 Feb 2010)

Dachshund said:


> Creches *ARE* regulated by the HSE


 
As are nursing homes ... in theory!


----------



## Dachshund (12 Feb 2010)

To answer your questions, yes and yes. There is more information in the HSE link that I provided in my post above, this is the  which is a prerequisite.


----------



## corkgal (12 Feb 2010)

So this is now a thread about creches.

The research shows that daycare type situations cause stress in young children.  Read "The science of parenting" by Margot Sunderland
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Science-Par...=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1265976171&sr=8-1
Its not nice to know that but for most parents there is little choice. 

There are loads of compromises that we have to take when raising our children either way. Stay at home parents will end up with less money for their children in the long run, thats not a wonderful choice to have to make either. Lets not make each other feel bad about our choices.

Ideal situation for me would be extended unpaid leave from work (like some European countries who have 3 years per child) but thats not available here. I'll be talking to the politicians at the next election.


----------



## thedaras (12 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



Mel said:


> I've no idea why some people feel the need to bring their children to every chore they attend to, but they do.
> 
> To answer your questions - I'm in no doubt as to who does those things:
> I check homework each evening, and we correct where necessary, therefore I help with it.
> ...


 
This "quality " time baffles me.It seems to say that those of us at home dont have "quality " time with our children.

I live in an area where there are many many parents,some stay at home with the children and a lot more bring them to creches.

Let me give you an example of what I see:
Those who stay at home;Most if not all of these children would go to playschool or montessori,therefore they get to spend time with other kids,learn to interact,share and gives them and the parent time apart. 

Usually the parent would use this time to tidy the house,clean,prepare,iron,go to the hairdressers,gym,meet friends for coffee etc.

When the child is collected ,I often see the parent bringing them to the park.And then its the usual round of collecting other the other children from school,after school activitys,dinner,homework etc.

For those who work outside the home:
Most if not all of these children are dropped off at creche,at 7 to 7.30.
Tiny babies in the cold dark winter mornings,wrapped up in their car seats ready to spend a day at the creche.A lot of them crying/upset.

The parent whom has obviously had to get up earlier to get the baby ready and feed it ,give baby a bottle ,dress baby and get their own stuff in order,then jumps in their car to face a battle of traffic and a full on full day at work.

They then battle the traffic home,trying to get back to the creche on time to collect the baby,,whom has been there for over ten hours.

They then have to get home,cook clean,iron,perhaps do homework with siblings,afterschool activitys,same as a stay at home parent.

Baby has to get to bed at 7.30/8.00 so that gives the parent and child ,max 2 hours,during which time naturally the parents may have other siblings to attend to and do all I have written.WHERE IS THE QUALITY TIME??.

I know of parents who are working full time ,and if they have a day off,a half day etc they will still leave the child into the creche and collect them at 3 minutes to six!

Because the parents are so busy during the week,most weekends are spent playing catch up,hairdressers,paying bills ,shopping,coffee with friends etc.

I think that parents who work fulll time,have children,run a home etc have it very hard.

Obviously stay at home parents can have it hard too,but they dont have the extra pressure of someone who works full time as well,fair play to those of you that do both.I salute you.

However,I would not remain sane,with all the pressure ,nor would I like to spend so little time with the children whom I chose to have,nor would I want them to have such a rushed ,stressed parent who doesnt see them for ten hours a day.
Each to their own....


----------



## ali (12 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



thedaras said:


> This "quality " time baffles me.It seems to say that those of us at home dont have "quality " time with our children.
> 
> I live in an area where there are many many parents,some stay at home with the children and a lot more bring them to creches.
> 
> ...


 
I agree with every word. 
I also know people who, when they have a week off will let hubby drop baby or small kids to the creche while they have a (well deserved - not disputed) lie in. I simply don't get this. Why not give the child a week off the regimen as well and bum around in your jammies together. 

Also in the job I last worked in, a manager was commended in the company newsletter as being back on the job 5 days after her baby was born . *YES 5 DAYS.* She was held up as an example of dedication. I think it constitutes neglect. I mean what is the point of having the child. Some kind of trophy?

I agree working parents have it very tough but there are always choices about the amount and quality of childcare and time with your children.

A.


----------



## Bazoo (12 Feb 2010)

I'm not really sure I understand the repeated reference to it being a 'luxury' for mums to be able to stay at home or that not all parents can 'afford' to have one parent stay at home as a carer and forsake a salary as a result. 

With the cost of creches/childcare, particularly in Dublin, is it not pretty much the case in many instances that it would make more sense (at least financially) for one parent to stay at home, particularly if there are two or more youngsters? My sister pays €2,000 a month in creche fees to a very ordinary (but well run) creche in Dublin city centre. That is a not inconsiderable amount of anyone's net monthly income. She is a self-employed professional and her husband is a PAYE worker, and this arrangement with the creche works for them for the time being, but I would imagine that there are many couples who, when creche fees are taken into account, find that it makes more financial sense for one of them NOT to continue to work and to stay at home instead, rather than fork out huge creche fees.

As for the comments on this thread about working mothers effectively abandoning their kids to be reared by someone else  I hear these comments regularly from stay at home mums, the majority of whom never had any particular interest or ambition in forging their own careers. These very same women are the first to boast about how their own children (including their daughters) are going to be doctors, vets, lawyers etc. You can only laugh really.


----------



## thedaras (12 Feb 2010)

Bazoo said:


> > I'm not really sure I understand the repeated reference to it being a 'luxury' for mums to be able to stay at home or that not all parents can 'afford' to have one parent stay at home as a carer and forsake a salary as a result.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## ney001 (13 Feb 2010)

Yeah

Ye two are gone just a tad off topic.

Look, child rearing is one of those things that everybody has their own ideas about. Some agree with creches, some don't,  some get defensive because they stay at home, some get defensive because they don't stay at home.  Do you really think that you will change somebody's mind on an internet forum??? 

Just rear your children the way you see fit - you are the parent, do what is right for you and yours.


----------



## Capt. Beaky (13 Feb 2010)

Exactly!


----------



## thedaras (13 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



Mel said:


> Children at school 9 to 3, doing homework/ having snacks/ playing 3 to 6; at home or at sport training for the next 15 hours. I would hardly describe them as being being "reared" by somebody else when it's really less than 3 hours a day.
> 
> I would much prefer a child to be in after-school care than being dragged to shops, supermarkets and appointments (hairdresser, queuing for car tax, yadda yadda).



Going off topic started much earlier than my post...


----------



## Bazoo (13 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*

Yes, please try and stay on topic.


----------



## ney001 (13 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



thedaras said:


> Going off topic started much earlier than my post...


 

Nope you're not a bit defensive!


----------



## Firefly (15 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



thedaras said:


> I know of parents who are working full time ,and if they have a day off,a half day etc they will still leave the child into the creche and collect them at 3 minutes to six!


 
I just don't get this at all and find it pretty sad.


----------



## annR (15 Feb 2010)

>>Quote:
Originally Posted by *thedaras* http://www.askaboutmoney.com/showthread.php?p=1001615#post1001615 
_I know of parents who are working full time ,and if they have a day off,a half day etc they will still leave the child into the creche and collect them at 3 minutes to six!_

I just don't get this at all and find it pretty sad. <<


Maybe they are spending the day doing the housework/shopping so that they are free to spend time and go out etc with the family over the weekend?


----------



## Mel (16 Feb 2010)

*Re: Full-Time Mothers*



ney001 said:


> Nope you're not a bit defensive!


----------

