how do i convince my husband

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2004
how do i convince my husband
1841
Mon, 07-18-2005 - 4:09pm
how do i convince my husband to let me at least job-share so i can take care of our 3 month old dd? he grew up with his mom working & all his friend's moms working. we can afford it if we cut back on some things, but he doesn't want to cut back & just doesn't understand someone wanting to be a stay at home mom...it doesn't help mycause that the grandmothers will babysit. i'm so unhappy about having to go back to work...he wants me to work full time 1 more year & just doesn't get it! i feel like my heart is being ripped from my chest every time i hink about it.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 8:24am
It's true that accentless languiage is a function of being exposed to the second language during a particular window in brain development. Where peer influence comes in is that in situations where the parents only speak the first language (or speak the second language with an accent) it is only the peers and not the parents who can teach accent-less usage.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 8:33am
Perhaps it was wishful thinking on my part. While it is certainly annoying to hear ordinary childhood activities relableled as homeschooling, it doesn't seem like it would be that hard on the child. In my (wishful thinking) version, the dd goes about her business with momofhk trailing after her, notebook in hand, scribbling down the title of every book she reads. In your more micromanaging version, the dd has her childhood snatched away and then handed back to her piecemeal in tightly wrapped packages of education.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2004
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 8:39am

a bit of him being easy, a bit of us having regular habits.

Karen

"A pocketknife is like a melody;
sharp in some places,
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 8:41am
ITA!!!
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2004
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 8:42am

Except that's untrue.

Karen

"A pocketknife is like a melody;
sharp in some places,
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 9:10am

***But you are setting up an "either or" here (either 100% of the time or not at all).***

That's (again) not what I'm saying at all.

***Are you saying that either the skin to skin contact has to be 100% of the time or the benefits are lost?***

No- what I am saying is that if a child is at daycare for 8+hrs a day (the duration of a full time 40+hr/wk job) and the parent is a normal American parent who tries to get that child to sleep through the night as soon as they are reasonably able to do so, that is more an issue of a few feedings at the breast versus most feedings taking place at dc. Certainly the benefit is not lost- any (skin to skin with mom) is better than none, and that a woman is pumping and providing breastmilk is fabulous, but IMO it's *more* beneficial to nurse exclusively at the breast. (Difference in manner of suck at the breast has been shown to provide dental benefits as well as the issue that breastmilk may lose nutritional/immunologic value if stored in the fridge/reheated etc. Can't recall the exact studies but I'd heard about it recently- If I come across the info again I'll post it. Granted, the benefit is still absolutely there and I'm not at all suggesting that is a reason not to pump! ;)

Is it *necessary* (only feeding at the breast)? I think it's obvious that it's not given the wide variety of feeding options out there. :) I'm only stating what I feel is *most* beneficial. Not that there are no benefits to other options or that benefits are negated.

***I have a WOHM friend who nursed each of her children for well over 3 years. Do you honestly think that the few feedings they had a dc during the day in the first 10-12 months or so negated all of the benefits of the skin to skin contact and fresh antibodies they got in over 3 years of mostly nursing directly?***

*curious* Did she WOH fulltime? If so how did she manage to 'mostly nurse directly'? (NOT suggesting that it's not possible, just that I haven't seen anything that suggests that this is the norm -from what I've heard- from others.) And no- that's not what I'm saying (that benefits are negated)- merely that IMO there is *more* benefit to exclusive skin-to-skin contact with the mother during feeding. Also, the mothers who I have spoken with who have pumped while working and fed at the breast at home have almost without exception told me that they only get a couple feedings in at the breast as opposed to the majority of feeding taking place at dc.

Good for your friend btw. Nursing even to the age of 1yr is unusual in our culture. I wish I'd have been able to. *slightly jealous sigh* :)

Wytchy

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 9:12am

You nailed my issue here. It's not about the child at all. It's all about glorifying the mother. Mother and child cannot be separated. Baby may not have even breast milk from a bottle because then someone else can feed her. Mother must wear the child. Mother must stay home to teach nonspecific spirtual values. Mother must stay home to do pedestrian arts and crafts and call it homeschool. Mother is indispensible at every stage. Father's role is to look on adoringly.

I must be doing it wrong. I thought it was supposed to be about the child.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 9:13am
Most women can pump without a problem.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-04-2004
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 9:18am

***I think what is recent to history is the idea that a mother would turn down a convenient feeding option on principal of 'breast is best'.***

Yes- I'd agree. It is only in recent history that our lives have been thus that we've had the luxury to consider what is nutritionally best as opposed to what is most easily accessible. Historically, life has been brutal, hard and very short... We are very fortunate to live in the times that we do.

***Quite frankly, until fairly recent times the breast was the most convenient method for feeding a baby.***

I'd say it's *still* the most convenient- it is our modern lifestyle and the commonality of mothers working away from their infants that makes other methods more convenient- not the nature of the method itself... :)

***Its a fairly well established and accepted fact that nursing baby was in many societies a task shared by available lactating women.***

...I'd say it was common for wetnurses to be used in some periods of history, but not that it was common to share by avab. lactating women (which to me denotes more of a tribal culture where any woman would just randomly pick up anyone's hungry baby to nurse...)

Wytchy

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 08-09-2005 - 9:18am

"So while there are technically "other options", those options aren't the ideal, nor are they biologically intended."


I agree on both counts.

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

Pages