Full-time Nanny with SAHP - Why?

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-28-2004
Full-time Nanny with SAHP - Why?
1258
Tue, 02-10-2004 - 6:41pm
Something I've often wondered about, but never had the opportunity to ask. Why do SAHM or SAHD need a full time nanny, especially when they aren't working from home. I can easily see the need if the SAHP is a WAHP, but what is the logic for a full time nanny otherwise?

Any comments?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:07pm

But who says there is a detriment?

SUS

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:07pm
Hey....depending on WHEN she wore those polyester pants, she might have been totally in fashion.

Hugs,

Bridget & Ethan (5)

Avatar for myshkamouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:07pm
PS. Here's a salary survey for nanny's in the US. Pretty interesting. Looks like many work longer than 40 hour weeks, and, while some certainly do make more than the $8 per hour we pay ours (plus bonus and 2 weeks paid vacation)...some make less.


MM

Avatar for myshkamouse
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:09pm
Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:09pm
Dh does get to do things for himself. Just not during the workday. My day starts earlier and ends later than dh.

The fact that I spend some of the in-between time doing something other than caring for the kids or cleaning the house should be of little consequence to anyone. I don't think that the SAHM with a ft nanny is usually absent from her kids for long stretches of time. But likewise, I don't think it's a tragedy if she spends some time away from the kids doing other things.

Jenna

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:11pm
Oh, I'm not changing anything.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:12pm
I wasn't aware that this was a contest. nt

SUS

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:14pm

Please do try to keep up.


The debate is not whether anyone should be able to spend any time volunteering when they could be raising their family's SOL. The debate is whether a person should be away from their children 40 hours a week, week in and week out, instead of either (1) working for pay or (2) being AH.


<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:15pm
You did.

You wrote "Look, if you think it's fine to get a nanny to watch your small children so you can volunteer, go to the spa, play tennis, lunch, or follow your bliss in whatever way you see fit for the majority of the day, you go right ahead, but don't expect me to think you're not selfish if you do."

Apparently cleaning the house and taking care of the kids are the only acceptable activities for SAHMs.

Jenna

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:17pm

I see your point.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> 

Pages