Results 11 to 13 of 13
October 24th, 2012 03:54 PM #11
Personally I think it's a no-brainer. It's like the homeschool "debate"-- how could you, as an individual, possibly mimic the resources of a full-time, professional staff?
For starters, simply the physical daycare is superior to my house. Antoine's daycare has a great deal more expensive equipment than I would ever be able purchase; it has orders of magnitude more educational toys; it has trained teachers with degrees in early childhood education who plan lessons in math, science, language, etc at an age-appropriate level (even for babies), an in-house chef who prepares 3 organic meals daily with dietary restrictions if requested, and 4 teachers per room of 9 infants. I could never, ever, ever replicate those resources for my son.
And of course, there are the innumerable cognitive and developmental benefits that come with early socialization, parallel and then serial play with other children, mimicking older children who are further along in their physical development, learning to share and wait one's turn, routine contact with others diminishing stranger anxiety, etc. Sharing everything, including minor illnesses, is even desirable: it's an immune-booster which will dramatically reduce his chances of developing allergy and asthma farther down the line.
If we have another child it will simply become cheaper to engage a nanny than to pay tuition for two, but I would really have difficulty with the decision since I greatly desire the benefits of a full professional daycare/school.
The truth of the matter re: having a young child is that it can be very, very, very boring. Like stultifyingly boring. And my very firmly held belief is that a mother who is energized, engaged and firing on all cylinders, and who can occasionally break free from the ennui that accompanies the routine, repetitive, cyclical tasks that come with caring for a young child is much better able to appreciate that child when she comes back to him.
Last edited by blade; October 24th, 2012 at 03:57 PM.Blade, MD
Aquila * Chrysanthe * Emmanuelle * Endellion * Ione * Jacinda * Lysandra * Melisande * Myrra * Petra * Rosamond * Seraphine * Silvana * Theophane / Blaise * Cyprian * Darius * Evander * Giles * Laurence * Lionel * Malcolm * Marius * Peregrine * Rainier
كنوز الصحراء الشرقية Hayat _ Qamar _ Sahar _ Maysan _ Iman / Altair _ Fahd _ Faraj _ Khalil _ Najid _ Rafiq _ Tariq
October 24th, 2012 04:38 PM #13Member
- Join Date
- May 2010
I was able to have a year home when each of my two sons were born. I was finishing up school with the first and just in between jobs with the second. I went back both times for financial reasons. I make way more than my hubby (who works way harder than I do ), but, anyways, being back at work I am conflicted.
In a perfect world there would be something where I could do half my job at half pay....there have got to be more moms in this position and I just wish our culture/economy was more accepting of this. Why can you not just have two people doing one job as long as the work is enough to go around and the two agree on a half time schedule.
I want to do what I love and what I'm good at, just not 5 days and 40 plus hours a week!
October 24th, 2012 04:40 PM #15
There are moms that work because they must for financial reasons.
There are moms that work because they love their jobs or careers.
There are moms that stay home because they believe that it's best for their children, whatever the costs.
There are moms that go to work because being a stay-at-home mom bores them, though they love their children.
There are moms that stay home because they see it as a positive for their children, but they haven't found a career that affords them the personal satisfaction and/or a significant paycheck which tips the balance.
There are moms that stay home because they feel too guilty not to.
There are moms that go to work because they feel too guilty not to.
I could go on....but the point is that every answer to the question is very personal and nuanced, and the details of one person's life which lead to one decision are not necessarily relevant to life of the person making a different decision. And the decision is never final...who knows what lies ahead that would shift the balance? The choice each person makes is based in their financial situation, education level, their emotional history, their relationship with their SO, the availability of child care, the number of children they have, their social network....Again, I could go on and on.
I know this question was not meant to be incendiary, but as a fifteen year veteran of the mommy wars, I cringed when I saw it. I think it's helpful on these boards when we talk about our perceptions of a name.....a person want to know how their child's name will be received. When it comes to the stay-at-home vs. working mom (as well as the breastfeeding vs. formula, homeschool vs. public school, etc.) question though, I've seen too many women (and a few men) tortured by their choices and limitations. People are too quick to make assumptions that the resources and choices and capabilities they have are available to all. And people are also too quick to blame themselves when they don't have the same resources, etc. available to others. That's not to say that it is a question that shouldn't be discussed. Rather, it's a question that ought to be carefully discussed.
I'd love nothing more to see a society in which every man and woman had financial independence, positive familial relationships, rewarding and satisfying careers, and every childcare and public school provided top notch care and education. Then we could discuss 'the choice' on level ground. In the real world, though, I think we are all looking at the question from different elevations.
Last edited by missmolly; October 24th, 2012 at 08:18 PM.Obsessing over names since 1964