WOH and sleeping issues
Find a Conversation
WOH and sleeping issues
| Sun, 05-22-2005 - 10:34am |
We were at a dinner party last night at the home of one of dh's coworkers. They have 2 boys, 6 and 4. They have a bunch of sleeping issues (kids 'scared' at night, won't fall asleep in their own bed, won't go to bed without mom or dad cuddling them, etc.) The mom blames herself because since she works all day and misses them so much she tends to cuddle with them late at night and they fall asleep in a pile on the bed all together. She said that if she SAH, they wouldn't have the same issues.
I sah. For us, bed time is a rigid, welcome respite at the end of the day. Dh has no desire to keep them up either, lol.

Pages
Wow. What a bunch of wimpy umps your teams have! I've never heard of umps putting a call up for a vote.
If asked, I'd want my kid to tell the truth. If not asked, the play stands. Either way.
On its face ~ since you don't know the women I'm speaking about ~ it says that if a mom's only job is taking care of preschoolers, she would likely hire help if she has the means.
<> I also speak with them. lol. And the reason for using babysitters during the week is that it is so much work and it is stressful.
Don't you know any sahms with weekly babysitters? I think a sahm would like to do it all on her own, but if help is available, she'll lean toward taking it. Many sahms won't.
But, my post concerns the fact that ALL of the sahms I know of who have the means (and kids not in school just yet) will use help if it's available. That is telling.
"On its face. . .it says that if a mom's only job is taking care of preschoolers, she would likely hire help if she has the means." No. It means that in the crowd in which you circulate, moms hire help if they have the means. Nothing more.
"Don't you know any sahms with weekly babysitters?" The ones I know who had a sitter did it so they could take their second or third child to things like "Mommy and Me" programs, because they couldn't be two places at once, not because they were "stressed." Two of DH's cousins take turns watching each other's kids while they grocery shop because it's a lot more efficient doing your grocery shopping without your four or six kids in tow and it makes for a good opportunity for the kids to spend time with their cousins than in the produce aisle.
"ALL of the sahms I know of who have the means (and kids not in school just yet) will use help if it's available. That is telling." Yes. It tells that you only associate yourself with people pretty much just like you. Which we already knew.
"She wore a sweatshirt but my hill to die on was that she was NOT!!! going outside to play in the sweatshirt. Sweat was beading on her lip and her face was red from being overdressed. I didn't let her outside to play until she was wearing shorts and a t-shirt."
See, that wouldn't have been a molehill for me. I would have seen that as a very good opportunity for him to figure out for himself that he'd be more comfortable going in and changing.
Having the two girls close together causes a lot of the stress. That's my conclusion.
This weekend was fantastic. Joel was home and played with the girls on the beach. I got a lot of work done around the house. I took Aspen out shopping (just the two of us!!) and was really able to enjoy hanging out with her. It was really, really great. We shopped and got ice cream and talked.
I think this is a lot of what dogma has with her only ds. If it was just Aspen, my perceived stress level would be way, way down. But with Vivi, not only are there her own baby issues, but there are the issues that are created between the two of them.
Maybe we have different definitions of stress. I didn't think that could be possible.
A parent can certainly take another child to Mommy & Me classes, even when that child is not enrolled in that class. It happens all the time. The same with grocery shopping.
But it is so much less stressful to leave one child with a babysitter and take the other child to the class. Relying on a sitter is about decreasing stress and increasing enjoyment. For you, apparently it's something else. I think you're making a distinction without a difference. (Hate to invoke that legalism, but I know you're familiar with that one.)
Why do you think a sahm of preschoolers would use regular babysitting during weekdays? Because it's fashionable, she needs someone else to yell at during the day, she wants to throw money away?
Raising young children is a lot of work. Babysitters reduce the stress and lighten the load.
"A parent can certainly take another child to Mommy & Me classes, even when that child is not enrolled in that class. It happens all the time." Nonenrolled children were not allowed to hang out at the programs in which I participated. Yes, often people with multiple children take them grocery shopping, I didn't say otherwise.
"Why do you think a sahm of preschoolers would use regular babysitting during weekdays? Because it's fashionable, she needs someone else to yell at during the day, she wants to throw money away?" Distinct possibilities. Also some do use them because they're stressed. It's not the only possibility.
Not every SAHM of means finds it necessary or desirable or stressful not to have a weekday sitter. I don't think our definition of stress is different. I think what we find stressful is different, as well as what is a perfectly acceptable level thereof.
Sounds like a great weekend! It is so much more work with 2 and especially when they are close in age. And each of mine had evening colic, which I thought I would never live through.
Another thing I thought of with the naps. Do the girls nap at the same time? At some point, one of my kids would realize she was being put in for a nap while the other child wasn't. She'd fight her nap because she thought she was missing out on the fun and that I was having a party with the other kids who were still awake. So, I tried hard to get two to nap at the same time. It's not easy. But it's worth it.
But now I have nobody under the age of 2. I love it, as will you, and you will experience great days everyday, just like you did this weekend. My stress has been cut way down as they got older and I get wonderful butterfly-in-the-stomach moments everyday just watching them. You will get there - it just takes a while for this stuff to pass so then you can appreciate the easier days.
Actually you said "I refuse to believe that a 2 year old doesn't need a nap. I believe that a 2 year old will try not to have a nap, but that doesn't mean that she doesn't need it."
<>
They mean routines that suit the child and the routine exists in the environment. Not that every routine a mommy can make up is destined to be suitable. And not that the child will provide mommy with routine.
<>
Tragically for you growing up is all about change. Which means, transition phases will happen, which aren't consistent, whether you like it or not. You have it all backwards. You seem to think the child is supposed to provide you with a consistent predictable behaviour pattern and is what they mean by routine. No no no. You are supposed to provide a reasonably consistent environment in which the child can comfortably go about changing and progressing. Not one which won't tolerate change. 2yr olds are progressing out of naps, whether you like it or not. And they'll do it on their terms and trynig to stall them won't work. You, as the adult, are supposed to be flexible. So, if you used to have 2 babies who napped for 2 hrs in the afternoon giving you time to watch your soap opera...and now one is 2 and doesn't want to nap...you have some adjusting to do. Whether you like it or not. Your soap opera in peace is no longer an option. Forcing the child to nap when the child doesn't want to nap is not the kind of routine they mean.
Pages