People are freaks

I'm with you on this, Nightshade. I know it's common practice in some parts of the country and abroad where people hire au-pairs to raise their kids for them. I'm not talking about working moms and dads making ends meet needing childcare. This is the full-time nanny because we're gone for three weeks skiing in the Alps kind.

Anyhow, I know I'm prejudiced since I have six kids, and I had them to be with them, not farm them out to someone else.

I love your rant.

JoNightshade said:

I
This is utterly bizarre, to me. If you told somebody you were thinking about getting a dog, but that you had no time to take care of it and would never be home, so you were going to hire someone to look after it, people would wonder what the point of getting a dog was in the first place.

Click to expand...

You know what's even MORE bizarre, people where I live actually put their dogs into doggy daycare, special "puppy kindergarten" for pups, and these dog nannies feed them snacks, provide "socialization" and take them for walkies. My one friend paid an extra 25 dollars a week so her dog could have a "relaxing aromatherapy massage," WTF???

Sorry to derail, yes, people are freaking weird about their kids, but generally, I find people to be freaking weird about just about everything.

And people like me get called selfish because I say I know ahead of time that I do not want the responsibility of raising a child, so I choose not to have any.

When I knew a lot of people with dogs, the ones who senttheir dogs to day care were those who worked and had the more hyper breeds - Jack russells, shelties, dalmations, the ones that need several hours of excercise a day. Some send them because they can't set up play dates, they have only dogs and dogs need to be socialized with other dogs (Ceaser said so.) Dogs don't go to school and generally aren't allowed out to find their own friends. (Not a good idea in cities.)

Did my dogs go to doggie day care or have walkers? No. I'm a helicopter mom. If I'd had children, well, we won't go there. I'm with you Jo, if you have them and can stay with them, you couldn't pry me away. Okay, said not going there. Just theory anyway.

My dogs played with each other 6 to 8 hours a day. I took them on 2 mile walks each, no they couldn't be walked together because the male got a litte too protective when the female was around and being fixed, well it may have helped but not enough.

That one was long enough.

This is to say I don't think SP is selfish, but wise.

I know y'all would never think for a moment to make any disparaging remarks about anyone's decision - be it for or against having children - but I've seen so many threads just like this one dissolve into the haves and havenots squarin' off and shootin' snide at one another for their choices.

But I know y'all would never think for a moment to do that... wouldja?

I knew you'd be good. Mmmhmmm.

I know one woman that has a nanny. This woman runs a successful business from home, and has four kids. So I kinda understand why she has the nanny. And honestly, she is a very hands on mom as well. Having lots of playdates at her house (sometimes the nanny helps, but she is always there with the kids too), and volunteering at her kids schools. (Eldest is in my daughter second grade class, twin boys are in half day kindergarten, and the youngest is three). So she has a nanny for extra help, but the nanny does not raise the kids. She is their only part time, and often the mother is around too.

In that situation, I can almost see it. But for me, I would never use one. I have known families to get nannies with one baby, and the mom does not work. That seems lazy to me. Why even have the kid. I am lucky enough to be home with my kids, and it is important for me. Do I miss working? Yes. Do I plan on going back? Definitely. But I can wait until they are a little older and in school. Not everyone has that luxury, and we do struggle. But I feel it is important.

Makes me glad for my attachment parenting roots that solidified in my mind what it meant to be a parent for me. Yes, I wore my children, breastfed, co-slept, and now homeschool. Everyone knows, when becoming a parent, what will work for them, but I have to say, I am lost when it comes to understanding the nanny need mentality. What have we done to parents in our culture that make them feel so insecure as to trust their own parenting ability? And we wonder why society is becoming so dis-associative?

Personally, I think every parent has the right to choose the best method for their family when it comes to child care, career, and personal identity. There are children raised by nannies who are absolute horrors. There are children raised by both their parents in a loving home who turn out to be serial criminals.

*shrug*

So who's right? Who's wrong? Who are we to judge another family's priorities or arrangements? Child rearing is a guessing game at the best of times, and part of the very real problem with childcare in this society are the nay-sayers on both sides of the fence who are so convinced they are *right* that they feel free to criticize other people's decisions with impunity. For me, as a mother who made some very tough decisions in regards to her children, that's a problem.

My best feeling on this is that more people need to be concerned with what's going on in their own families instead of expending energy worrying about what other families are doing. Just my two cents' worth.

scarletpeaches said:

And people like me get called selfish because I say I know ahead of time that I do not want the responsibility of raising a child, so I choose not to have any.

Click to expand...

Selfish? Really? Wow. All I ever get is "You'll change your mind one day."

mscelina said:

Personally, I think every parent has the right to choose the best method for their family when it comes to child care, career, and personal identity. There are children raised by nannies who are absolute horrors. There are children raised by both their parents in a loving home who turn out to be serial criminals.

Click to expand...

I don't think anyone's judging, but doesn't it seem a little odd to you? You want children, but you never want to spend any time with them or bring them up yourself. I dunno, seems odd to me.

*stays out of the discussion*

well..there are some high-profile jobs that need to get done...and i don't think a person should have to abandon their career...at the same time...i don't believe that this is ideal either...balance can be achieved...it just isn't a "black or white" issue.

Hey, Cliff, wait for me!

If you don't have the time or interest for kids, don't have them.

Simple.

JimmyB27 said:

Selfish? Really? Wow. All I ever get is "You'll change your mind one day."

Click to expand...

Maybe it's different because I'm a woman. Forgive me if that sounds sexist, but my intention was to show the prevailing attitude (at least where I live) that "Your life doesn't begin until you have kids," and yes, I've been told that too. Women are seen are potential mothers, or mothers, or grandmothers, and that's it. Only labelled in relation to whichever male impregnated them, or who they gave birth to. "So-and-so's ex." "So-and-so's mum."

I was asked when I was a teenager, "How many kids have you got?" Not "Do you have any," but "How many." The other person's jaw dropped when I said, "I didn't realise they were compulsory.

And yep, I've had the "Change your mind when you meet the right man," thing more times than I care to mention. Suffice it to say that since I started menstruating over twenty years ago (not constantly, thank God!) I haven't changed my mind. And no-one knows my mind better than I do. Still, that doesn't stop people telling me how to deal with my own reproductive organs.

Apologies for the derail. Okay, carry on.

I don't reall understand why people with lots of free time hire a nann as I never would (also because I couldn't afford it)

But I think a lot of people wrongly assum just because you have a nann you aren't involved with the child. A friend of mine has a live in nanny since her husband died she goes to work but once home does everything for her daughter, the nanny is there to help out not be the mumm

scarletpeaches said:

Maybe it's different because I'm a woman. Forgive me if that sounds sexist, but my intention was to show the prevailing attitude (at least where I live) that "Your life doesn't begin until you have kids," and yes, I've been told that too. Women are seen are potential mothers, or mothers, or grandmothers, and that's it. Only labelled in relation to whichever male impregnated them, or who they gave birth to. "So-and-so's ex." "So-and-so's mum."

I was asked when I was a teenager, "How many kids have you got?" Not "Do you have any," but "How many." The other person's jaw dropped when I said, "I didn't realise they were compulsory.

And yep, I've had the "Change your mind when you meet the right man," thing more times than I care to mention. Suffice it to say that since I started menstruating over twenty years ago (not constantly, thank God!) I haven't changed my mind. And no-one knows my mind better than I do. Still, that doesn't stop people telling me how to deal with my own reproductive organs.

Apologies for the derail. Okay, carry on.

Click to expand...

And of course, what's right for me is right for everyone else in the world. Because we're all the same inside and out.

Besides, that psychological need to contribute to the gene pool is what everyone needs to do. Even Paris Hilton.

Wait...

OK way to early to be making jokes.

My sister was a nanny for years. She didn't like it too well because she would get to know the kids, and then after a couple of years the moms would grow out of their need for a nanny.

In the mean time my sister grew attached to the kids so she misses them when she had to move on.

I couldn't imagine letting someone else raise my kids while I sat around and did nothing. I miss being with them so much and I feel like I never get to seem them as it is now while I'm working full time. I hate, hate hate and I envy people that get to be stay at home parents.

I understand need an extra pair of hands or a day off occasionally. Right now I have an extra whiny five year old, a two year old getting molars and a six month old cutting teeth, so sometime they leave me a little frazzled and if I stayed home with them, I'd arrange for a little break every now and again, but there is no way I'd miss them growing up when being with them was an option.

See, I can understand some circumstances. You've got a couple who want children, but then trying to work out who will quit work to raise the kid gets difficult (why should it always be mum?), or you have a career pair who don't plan on kids, but lets face it not every child is one that is intentionally created. Condoms split, tubal ligations reseal, even some forms of vascectomy can reverse.

And I totally understand where you have low income families where they cannot afford to give up work and where a nanny is a less expensive workaround - should the poor not be allowed to reproduce?

But I am mystified by the prevalence of parents who have kids but clearly have no interest in them. The other half's little sister goes to a school as a non-boarder where the majority of kids are in board - school study hours are 8-6 mon-fri then 8-3 sat and occassional sunday school, with homework on top. Most of the kids who board there literally wake up and eat, start school, finish school and just go to bed because there is also a curfew. So mostly the parents don't even see their children once a week.

I just cannot imagine being a child and having that little contact with your parents - where is the chance for family intimacy? You can't cuddle your teacher these days, and you can bet they have intimacy rules for between the kids themselves.

I don't understand how you can be poor and still be able to afford a nanny. Maybe we have different definitions of poor? One of the reasons I stay home is because if I worked, I would pay more in childcare that I would make. To me, that is poor. Nannies, in this areas at least, are more expensive than daycares.

And honestly, I don't have a problem with nannies, if a mother needs some help. If they have a lot of kids (though again, why have a lot of kids) or want to work. I have a problem with parents that hire a nanny to pretty much raise the child(ren) and have nothing to do with them.

I've always believed that a woman/man should choose to do what's right for her and her children. There are pro's and con's to each side of the story.

I see woman who juggle career and home and it's not for me. Yes, there is someone else in the home caring for the kids but the mom is the mom and the kids know that. I don't believe a mom should give up her career life for her children if she so chooses not to. At least she can afford someone to be in the home. I know of three children who are still in grade school who are raising themselves. No one cooks for them, no one tucks them in. She can't afford a nanny. It would be wonderful for the kids if she could.

My sil told me over winter break that she couldn't wait to go back to work. I laughed, being a mom is the hardest job in the world. We work for kisses.

As for me, my kids are my life. I can't work because of my lack of health. Lucky me.

And for the woman/man who chooses not to have children...chicken.

Ultimately I think we need to consider both sides and respect it for what it's worth.

And for the mom who gets a nanny so she can live the party life, UP YOURS!