Is SAH really because the children what

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-23-2003
Is SAH really because the children what
1206
Fri, 10-06-2006 - 3:33pm

it....


Okay first I want to say hello everyone I haven't had the time to keep up with this very fast moving board :)


Now

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-13-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 6:32am
right - if tey are not potty trained they are not allowed to go. the cost of the preschool and the daycaer is the same per hour - the only difference being that the preschool you pay by the month and if your child doesnt attend for a day you still pay, the daycare you pay for the actual hours used, but the rate is the same.
Jennie
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-13-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 6:46am
what is extraordinary about it, of your there were things they didnt experience by not being in daycare. they didnt experience the wider group of friends with whom to play, they didnt experience certain activities that occur at a daycare, they didnt experience the lessons learned by being exposed to another persons experiences. nothing life altering but things that are missed by not being there. my oldest loves opera, she was exposed to it at her daycare many years ago, had it not been for daycare she would not have had that exposure and might not realize now much she loves it - of course i could have exposed her but i would not have because i hate opera and would have never even considered taking her. things like that.
Jennie
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 6:47am

ITA. If that were true, I would totally want my tax dollars refunded and then we'd move to a State with decent schools.

My older DD *NEEDED* someone who didn't treat her like a little daycare kid, to wipe her nose and bum, when she was in First Grade. She needed a terrific teacher, an educator. Her academic needs were thankfully recognized, understood and met - like your oldest (I think you metioned) - she is very intellectually advanced.

I'm so glad the teachers don't coddle our elementary school kids here and talk to them as a group who can't think for themselves. The group thing at daycare serves no one's needs in a school environment - now, "we" will put on our listening ears, and we will all go to the bathroom as a group (though the Kindergartener may not need to go), and we will then all have a forced "rest-time" on our mats so the daycare provider can get a break even though the Kindergartener may not need a rest. Gag.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 6:57am

I just wonder, with elem. school students, why would only some days be mostly babysittin? If she has a group that's too large, everyday is gonna be babysitting. If her kids never have recess, gym or never leave the main classroom, it's always gonna be bad.

So, I have to say, it's confusing that a teacher is going to have some days of mostly teaching and other days where she feels like all she's doing is babysitting. Your words aren't being twisted - they need further explanation from you.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 7:02am

I think what she is doing is great and the BEST for the children. She is making their transition to living with her as easy as possible. She is making sure that they are well cared for and are being raised withthe values their mother intended. I'm sure there are many things that are different- how can it not be- but she is doing the right thing- placing the children's needs first. Not putting her rules ahead of them. SHe is showing flexiblity for them in a time where I am sure they need it.

I commend her for taking on this task.

J

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 7:10am
I agree. Why work at a job or why sah if the person is not going to take the responsibility seriously? It's like an earlier question I had, I know several women IRL who work part-time just to keep up their resume - they've said they make a pittance. I don't get that way of thinking. And I don't think they will fool their future full-time employers either.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 7:16am
I can't understand where people can't understand your point! It's simple. Teachers should not be babysitters or dcps.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 7:26am
Apparently, in some regions, an excellent elem. school teacher is a cold-hearted, unfeeling automaton who doesn't like children. In those areas, I'm glad then that education and academics are compromised, and teachers perform the work of babysitters. The children must be getting at school what parents are unable to give.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-17-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 7:31am
Me neither. I am clearly not understanding how a parent at work can potty-train a child during the week.
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-14-2006
Sat, 10-14-2006 - 7:33am

"I think that's extraordinary."

No it is not extraordinary, it is very common.

There are probably more familes for who the second income does provide opportunitie than there are families for who the second income has no effect on the lifestyle of the family.

The opportunities that my kids have received by me WOH have ranged from the frivilous DD1 being able to be a cheerleader her freshman year of high school to the not so frivilous of them getting a college education that they did not have to totally finance on their own. Not every family is able to fincance every thing they want on one income and to those families the second income can be very important.




Edited 10/14/2006 7:39 am ET by texigan-again

Pages