How young is too young?daycare?

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-07-2003
How young is too young?daycare?
954
Tue, 12-02-2003 - 1:00am
If you have a career and you had a baby what age would you think is apropriate to send your child to daycare/dayhome after they were born?

I have a friend that is a dayhome provider, she has 10mnth old twins and she was provinding care for a 2yr old. Mom of the 2yr old just had a baby and she was back to work when baby was 4days old, in my friends care. It is only half days now, but she is soon going to be full time, the baby is almost 5wks. Thoughts?

Be who you are and say what you feel because those  who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind.

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 1:21pm
Sure, it's my opinion. However, surely even you can acknowlegde that SAH would make it easier to exclusively bf (no formula, no bottles) than would WOH?
Avatar for laurenmom2boys
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 1:21pm
I don't know about you Virgo, but I'm throwing in the towel with this one. It's not worth my time to try to convince someone who sees things in black and white to try to see something in varying shades of gray or colors.
iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 1:24pm

Actually the only one I know who bf only, no table food and no formula was wohm.

PumpkinAngel

Avatar for laurenmom2boys
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 1:41pm
I can see your point, but don't agree. I believe that expressed breastmilk is fine if one doesn't want to use formula. I don't see that bonding can only take place with exclusive breastfeeding.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 1:44pm
The problem with your little theory is that my dd goes to school to socialize with the SAME neighborhood friends that she plays with outside of school. In other words, she enjoys socializing with a PARTICULAR group of friends, her neighborhood friends.

Although we do homeschool as well, it is strictly for individualized educational purposes only. In our situation, homeschooling is not a "social experience", it is a one-on-one learning experience. In other words, she goes to school to socialize with her friends, and she is homeschooled so that she may learn and explore topics of interest that are personally meaningful and challenging to HER as an individual.

What's the problem here? Sounds like we have the best of both worlds to me LOL.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 1:56pm
Well, there's the difference, my dd's teacher is not responsible for helping the students to "get lunch, making sure they eat well enough, making sure that they take a proper shower after gym class, kissing owies and hugging a sad/upset child...in general making sure that a child is happy, healthy, well-fed and feeling good at school."

I do not think this is a teacher's responsibility at all. In fact, my dd's teacher doesn't even eat with the class at all. She has lunch in the teacher's lounge LOL. Sure, teachers probably do give an occasional hug, but that's about the extent of it. I guess the biggest difference between "caregiving" and "school" is that by the time a child reaches school age they are fairly independent and don't require much in terms of "caregiving" especially in a school setting when their friends are around.

I do not think teachers can be accurately compared to substitute caregivers. They are not caregivers. They are not babysitters. They are teachers. There IS a difference.

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-02-2003
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 1:57pm
I'll vote for heredity. I was bottle fed and have a horrible mouth. They couldn't straighten my teeth with braces (I refuse to have my face fractured so I live with an imperfect smile). My dd, who was bf for over 2 years has the exact same problems I do. Fortunately, they now have the ability to widen the pallet while she grows so she won't face bone fracturing to completly strighten her teeth. Dd#2, who was also bf'd has her dad, who was bottle fed's, perfect smile. Of the six bottle fed kids in my family, three needed braces and three did not and, surprise, surprise, each of the kids who needed braces has a child who needs braces regradless of whether or not they were bf'd. Same goes for being cavity prone. I'm going with genetics here and I suspect I'll win.


Edited 12/12/2003 1:59:52 PM ET by cyndluagain
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-29-2002
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 2:00pm
The problem is that you are repeatedly berating parents (actually, I should say mothers, since your diatribe doesn't seem to extend to fathers) for not caring for their children exclusively 24/7, when you are failing to do that yourself. If what you say is true, there is absolutely no need whatsoever for your child to be attending school. You are already homeschooling her for educational purposes, so your child gains nothing educationally by going to school (according to you), and her social needs (PARTICULARLY since her social circle seems to be mainly neighborhood kids) would be easily satisfied if you would only take the time and energy in the afternoons to make sure she gets a chance to socialise with her friends, she certainly doesn't need to be with friends all day in order to have a good relationship with them and have plenty of socialization. I just flat-out don't see a need for your daughter to be in school. It seems to be a *want* for your family and a convenience (after all, you don't have to go to the bother of putting in the effort to guarantee time with her friends, school does that for you).

And yet...you have the utter gall to put down and berate parents who send their children to dc/preschool as failing to care for their children 24/7, in spite of the fact that those children gain exactly the benefits that your child does (socialization, etc.), merely because you label it a "want" on the part of those parents. Frankly, my daughter have FAR more to gain and far more reason for being in preschool than your daughter does for being in school, and those reasons actually have nothing to do with me not wanting to have the responsibility (did ft SAHM thing for over 6 years after all) or my work being more important than my child or my being incompetent as a parent and, therefore, needing better care for her. *She* gains by it in a concrete fashion that would be impossible to provide at home (ignoring your odd and unrealistic theories about language acquisition). People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones....an old cliche, but an absolutely valid one.


Laura

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-08-2003
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 2:03pm
"there might have been some good daycare in the area--i didn't look very closely . . . come to think of it there was one place i'm pretty sure i would have been comfortable using nearby" is a world apart from your repated firm insistence that you had *no* options but your dd or drunks and other violators who cared more about other people's dogs than the children they took in. a few posts back i said i could, and i do, believe the kind of qualified assertions you now make in your revised recollections.
iVillage Member
Registered: 11-14-2003
Fri, 12-12-2003 - 2:06pm
I'll be the first to admit it... I wouldn't be able to handle your friend's situation completely by myself. God bless her for doing so. I know I wouldn't be able to do the same. Luckily my fiance and I have a very strong support network of family and friends, so neither of us would be forced to handle something like that completely on our own.

Does that mean I shouldn't be a parent? Gosh, I sure hope not. I think part of being an adult is knowing what is best your loved ones, as well as what is best for *you* as an individual, and adjusting your life accordingly. For me, if I were in that situation, the very worst thing for my kids would be *not* asking for help, since I can't imagine that an overly-stressed and severely depressed parent would be the ideal for any child (and that is what I would be in your friend's shoes.)

Pages