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 - 4:18pm
Why? If they have all of the basis covered, what does it matter?

SUS

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:19pm
I can't imagine a nanny working as little as 40 hours a week if both parents worked OH.

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:19pm
Sorry, but the US govt. (and standard usage) doesn't agree. If she's not a naturalized US citizen, she's not Mexican-American. She's a resident-alien Mexican national, and so is her oldest child. Resident aliens pay taxes, but that doesn't make them American; only an accident of birth or the US Dept. of Homeland Security can do that.

(I should know. For quite a number of years, as the youngest child and the only one born in the US, I was the only American in my immediate family.)

Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:19pm
Your family doesn't need the income from you working either. You WANT the income, and I have no problem with that. But you don't NEED it. And working takes you away from your children for 40 hours a week for something that is not necessary.

I volunteer and that takes me away from my kids for far less than 40 hours a week. It is not necessary for me to volunteer but it something that I WANT to do.

That is why they are equivalent. They are both uneccessary. They are both things that we want to do. And they both take us away from our kids.

And for the record, I haven't had a nanny since I stopped working ft, 4 years ago. I just don't think it would be WRONG for me to have one.

Jenna

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:21pm
Obviously you don't see my point at all. nt

SUS

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:21pm
It's not a contest.

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:21pm
Actually, I would think that for a "typical" family with 2 children, you would be paying a nanny more in the range of $13-$15 an hour in Minneapolis.

Hugs,

Bridget & Ethan (5)

Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:21pm
what is the detriment? I am away from my kids far less than you are. I don't see being separated from kids as a detriment unless the separation is to much" (don't ask me to define to much, I can't).

Jenna

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:25pm
She can do whatever she wants.

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

Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 02-18-2004 - 4:27pm
My reading comprehension is just fine. Do I need to dig up the posts where you said volunteering is SELFISH or will you just admit to it? I would rather not do that.

But if volunteering 40 hours a week is selfish why isn't working 40 hours a week selfish? If my family's need for me is so great that I shouldn't be away for 40 hours why is is so great to work those 40 hours for pay? Especially if the money is not to be used for basic survival? I don't think it's bad to work for pay, but I just can't understand why it is so terrible to volunteer alot of hours but it's ok to work them for pay.

Jenna

Pages