If you hadn't had kids...

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-23-2004
If you hadn't had kids...
1649
Thu, 05-20-2004 - 10:34pm
And your dh made enough $$ to support both of you comfortably, do you think you would be working?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 11:30am
Yes, it may be sad.

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-08-2003
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 11:36am
Our sleep-away camp is broken into different weeks/ partial weeks. My daughter is going for 4 days/3 nights and it is $279.00. A full week is around $425.00. We figure when they are all old enough to go for a week it will be around $2000.00. A whole week with out them--might be worth it:)
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 11:57am
"How incredibly sad that some of your relatives and friends do not have long term vested interest in your kids."

There are MANY times when a family member is NOT the best caregiver for a child. My father doesn't work, but he had a stroke and would in NO WAY be able to care for my son. Sure, he has a great relationship with him, but would NOT be a caregiver.

My MIL doesn't work either. She has serious physical and mental health problems. Again, not an option as a caregiver. Just because someone is "family" does not mean they are automatically the best person to care for your child.

Avatar for 1969jets
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 11:57am
Camps in GA and the Carolinas are far less. I just did a quickie search and found one where a 2 month session is $3600 and another that was $5425 for a nine week session. I just don't want to send my kids away. I enjoy having them home. I like to send them to day camp for some weeks so they can have fun and I can get a break but I would really miss them if they were gone.

Ds is going to a sleep away football camp for 4 nights but that is 10 minutes away from here and only for 4 days. If the younger boys want to go at some future date we could consider sending them. But for now it will be strictly day camp.

Jenna

iVillage Member
Registered: 12-12-2002
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 11:59am

>>>How sad. You mean that your kids don't go and spend time with their grandfather? Why?You would think that relatives and close friends would be more likely to have a long term vested interest in your kids than a paid substitute. <<<


Just butting in here to say that not everyone has decent relatives.

Okmrsmommy-36, CPmom to DD-16 and DS-14

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-27-1998
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 12:01pm
Sometimes sad, but we can't choose our relatives or be responsible for their behavior now can we?

PumpkinAngel

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-29-2003
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 12:09pm
But WHY can't that VESTED INTEREST be in taking GREAT care of kids???? The WHOLE point is that kids be WELL taken care of, isn't it?

eileen

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-31-2003
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 12:09pm
"Ok so she is receiving education from someone other that you."

Absolutely!!! She is most certainly receiving group educational and social experiences from her PEERS. That's specifically why she goes to school in the first place, to interact with and learn form her peers. However, we also feel that it's important for her to have individualized educational experiences that are based on her personal interests and skill level, hence we homeschool/unschool part-time during the school year and full-day (not quite full-time) over summer break and other school holidays.

"Hey, if you want to be part of the "burn em out young" crowd that is fine by me. When my kids get off the bus, they do their homework, and then the go outside and play like normal 6 and 7 year olds."

Umm, how could I "burn her out" when it's *her* idea? My dd spends about 3 hours on homeschooling/unschooling activities/projects and about 3 hours inside/outside playing with her friends during the school year. So basically, she spends half her time on educational activities of *her* choice, and half her time playing inside/outside with her friends. BTW, the 4 friends that she generally plays with, all go to dc after school as well as throughout the summer, so they aren't available to play until after dinnertime, year round. Also, she generally spends more like 6 hours on homeschooling/unschooling activities over summer break and other holidays, due to the fact that she isn't in school and has more time on her hands.

So what's the problem here? We've found a wonderful balance between *group* educational experiences and *individualized* educational experiences as well as between *homeschooling/unschooling* and *free play* with friends. Again, what exactly do you have a problem with here? What exactly do you think we should be doing instead? Sending our dd to dc year round perhaps?

"they can't speak or write any forms of Chines. Sigh"

You seem to be missing the point here. *SHE* chooses her own projects/activities. In other words, *I* did not teach her to write in Chinese, as *I* don't know how to write in Chinese. *SHE* found a website on the internet, and *SHE* taught herself how to write in Chinese. You act as if I should prevent or restrain her from following her own personal interests. Why? Again, what exactly do you think we should be doing instead? Hmm, do you think I should force her to go outside and play all day OR just send her to dc year round? After all, that's what normal 6 and 7 year olds do, right? BTW, what exactly do *your* children do?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 12:21pm
My older dd wanted to go but even before I found out the cost I wasn't ready to send her away for 7 or 8 weeks. I briefly considered a half season until I realized that it was way more than half of the cost.

Both kids are going to day camp, which will be just fine.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 06-10-2004 - 12:33pm
Oops, I think you missed the point. In those "natural" days, it would not have necessarily been the child's grandmother taking care of them, but the a tribal elder. Not a relation. Same with breastfeeding. Whoever was lactating would do it, not necessarily a relative. Besides, compared with the tribal living of "natural" days, the definitions we place on family are "unnatural".

Even in more recent history the people who wore their children into the fields and into work are the people who couldn't afford a better environment for them. Do you really believe that it would be better for an infant to be strapped to someone *WORKING* (in a manner that most of us are lucky enough not to know) in a hot field with minimum protection from the elements than to be with people who can pay attention to their needs and be in a safe environment.

Are you now saying that since it was natural for older children to take care of the younger ones and since natural is always best, it would be right for me to leave my 7 year old in charge of the 2 year old? After all, that is the way man did millions of years ago so it is the right way to do it.

Or, perhaps, as the enviornment we create changes we have to evaluate what is the most natural to us given our resources and needs?

SUS

Pages