which is best for the kids?

iVillage Member
Registered: 04-17-2003
which is best for the kids?
250
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 11:31am
Just a thought, but it seems like a lot of the debate is about what is best for the parents. Obviously it is important to have the parents happy, or else home life is going to be miserable for everyone, so this point isn't to be overlooked. I am just wondering if any of you looked into research about the effects of full time daycare, the research done about "latch key kids', etc, before making your choice. Personally, I feel that whatever choice is made it does need to be in the best interest of the whole family, not just the mothers and fathers. Once we bring these souls into the world, we need to take care of them, emotionally as well as physically.

It seems that from what I have read in physcological reports, it is better to have a parent be in the home. I know that there are families where this is not possible, due to single parenthood, or the need for two incomes. However, they have shown that children in daycare do become more aggressive, one reason why my friend who works in daycare can't wait to get her own child out of the system. She has seen it first hand.

What kinds of things did you look into when making your decision?

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 11:36am
I don't use "daycare." Not all dual WOHPs do.

For us, it was a given DH and I would both WOH, so our thought process was that we wanted to find the best possible care for our children while we did so.

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

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 11:47am
Oh, we just looked in the yellow pages, chose the place with the cutest sounding name, and signed our kids up. Isn't that how most people do it?

Well, come on....what did you expect to hear? If people "have no choice" because they are single mothers or have some true financial crisis to deal with, then they do the best they can. If they have a choice, they are likely to be pretty well informed about the issues surrounding substitute care and to find creative ways to minimize any negatives. If they tryly don't care, then they'd make terrible SAHMS and their kids are probably better off in some kind of part-time substitute care, anyway.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 11:49am
I knew we would both be working. The decision was an easy one for various reasons that have been discussed before. We decided, with my first child, to use home daycare. I liked that there were different ages and one caregiver. We interviewed and found someone we liked and met our criteria. He went to home daycare then went to a full-time preschool before kindergarten.

My youngest has been different, though. He has been sickly since birth-rotovirus, asthma, hand, foot, mouth, flu and ear infections. The asthma doctor strongly suggested we do not put him in group daycare. He stays with a lady during the day at her house. Joy is a wonderful person and he gets tons of attention-sometimes too much. We might move him into a preschool setting next fall if he is not sickly over the winter. For right now, the situation is perfect.

I did not look at studies before deciding. It is really easy for studies to be twisted and show bias. I knew neither of us would be staying home-why read studies that promote guilt about working. I don't need the extra guilt or stress.

K

"I do not want to be a princess! I want to be myself"

Mallory (age 3)

      &nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 11:53am
I didn't look directly at studies, but I did read a lot of literature discussing studies, and it influenced the kind of substitute care we chose for our kids -- I was more comfortable with a nanny-type situation that gave the kids one other person to bond to as infants and toddlers than with a daycare group situation. And we went for home daycare rather than a center when they were a little older because I liked the mixed-age family feeling in the home daycare.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 12:05pm
Well, I was a little cranky when I responded. I did do some research-I am just that kinda of person. I asked other parents and interviewed several people. I went to daycare centers and looked at them. I read some books but, like you, did not directly look at studies.

K

"I do not want to be a princess! I want to be myself"

Mallory (age 3)

      &nbs

Avatar for laurenmom2boys
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 12:18pm
We used a dart board ourselves. Took all the cheapest DCs we could find locally and put them up there and let the darts decide. LOL! (JK!!!!!)

Your post made a lot of sense. And what I'd like to know is why is DC okay for those kids whose parents both need to work but not okay for those kids where one CHOOSES to work.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2003
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 12:20pm
the same study that found that children who were cared for by nonmothers (including fathers) were (almost insignificantly) more "aggressive" (not violent, not antisocial), also found them more intelligent. go figure, eh?

i'm not sure what "physcological reports" you're reading (or how well you are reading, from your more than somewhat incomplete passing mention of the one), but i've not seen anything that suggests that it is it is unequivocally or even generally "better to have a parent be in the home." i'm sure that many others here share my interest in seeing such materials, if you could link or cite them; many of us have been involved in this debate for years, and some of us are even perfectly intelligent and pretty on top of things, and yet the type of findings you depict would be news to us.

more than that, though, there are few people who share a cartoonish one-dimentional view of the matter. i, for one, share your suggested dislike of latchkey, but not your deficient view that sah is the only way to avoid it. many others, though they share your apparent distaste for dc, (by design or because they've burned bridges that would broaden their options) plan to use latchkey after they sah during at least some of the preschool years.

while your presumption that other parents don't share your "novel" concern for what is best for their children is charming, it's also insulting and more than a bit stoopid. no doubt the condescending hoo-ha is easy for you to knock out, but i for one would love to see you try to display even a shred of evidence or originality along with it.

edited to fix a nonsequitor


Edited 7/8/2003 12:22:25 PM ET by mogm

Avatar for biancamami
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 12:30pm
I think its awfully presumptuous of you to insinuate that we have not considered our children's happiness when making a decision about WOH. I have yet to see ONE study that clearly shows that a working parent is a detriment to a child's happiness and development. I have yet to see one conclusive study that shows that the SAH model is superior to a dual working model when it comes to raising children. What about latchkey kids? What statisticts do you have on those? What about that study about "aggressiveness" in daycare children...did you just hear a soundbyte on Good Morning America or have you actually read the study? Because if you read the study you will note that the researchers also found traits in daycare children that can be viewed in a positive light.

"It seems that from what I have read in physcological reports, it is better to have a parent be in the home. I know that there are families where this is not possible, due to single parenthood, or the need for two incomes."

I would really love to see those "psychological" reports. What exactly do they state? I had a working mother throughout my early childhood and I guarantee you that it did not affect my social or intellectual development in a negative way. I had a loving network of caregivers...same as my daughter.

I think the problem with posts like yours is that there is an assumption on your part that this relatively modern, Western model of ONE mother staying at home with her 2.5 children is the ideal that everyone *should be* striving for! For centuries, mothers and fathers have worked in different capacities to provide clothing and shelter for their children and have still managed to raise healthy and emotionally stable offspring. Just because you *think* that a SAHP-model is the best it does not mean that that is the ideal or even the "natural" way of doing things...it is merely the way you have chosen.

For example, my MIL is watching my DD and my nieces today. Fo how many hundreds of years have young mothers relied on the extended family to help them raise their young? For how many centuries have the younger generation used the resources of the older members of an extended family in caring for their children? Is this model somehow inferior to a SAHP model even though it has been used succesfuly for hundreds of years and thousands of children have thrived in this care situation?

I simply don't buy that children are so delicate, so fragile in their psyches, so prone to developmental dysfunction that they can't thrive in ANY other environment except the one you propose as ideal...a parent taking care of them 24-7. Surely there is more flexibility in the design of human children that they can thrive and succeed in many different environments as long as their basic physical and emotional needs are taken care of. I know that being in the care of grandparents and nannies during that supposedly magical stage of ages 1-5 did me absolutely no harm. And I am very confident that the results can be equally duplicated with my DD.

Ana
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 12:35pm
It is the line of thinking that daycare is O.K. if you have to use it but not O.K. if you choose to use it that makes me so mad. I am one of those parents that gets a "free pass" because I have to work (DH's health situation). I also choose to work-I enjoy working. I enjoy being out of my house. I am a horrible human being, I know. I could stay home and live a substandard life on my DH's salary but I choose not to. I choose to have health insurance (in the event of DH's death). I choose to have a reasonable income for living. Horrible me. Now, I am a selfish parent that does not care about my children being overly aggressive or their neglect. Whatever, as my 6 year old would put it.

None of these posters ever talk about the SAHM that stays home at the cost of their family. The ones that stay home when their DH's are underemployed or underinsured. The ones that stay home because their children are too precious to be left in that mean, ole dirty daycare and neglected all day. It is allright that they may not have a reasonable income or reasonable insurance because their children have their mother. I have seen this scenario played out time and time again in my own life. I could give you three examples off the top of my head. Staying home with your child is not the end all and be all of parenting. It is a choice. It is not necessary.

We have always used the dart board when choosing daycare-it has always worked wonderfully for us.

K-who is unreasonably cranky for 2 days before her birthday.


"I do not want to be a princess! I want to be myself"

Mallory (age 3)

      &nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 07-08-2003 - 12:40pm
Now here's a point to ponder...

You got me thinking about the names of the DC and preschools we've used, and I realized that they are all named after a location--the street name, the neighborhood name, etc. Even my DD's elementary school is named after the neighborhood. The only one that really made me pause was named Hunger Mountain, after a nearby mountain. It made me think of sad, hungry children!

Based on my vast experience, I conclude that geographical names indicate quality care. How's that for rock-solid criteria?

Pages