Bay 3 months chucked into FULL time nursery

balletshoes

j.e.j. wrote: »

I presume the thread touches a raw nerve with a lot of the people on here.

I simply said children don't get the choice, mothers do. That is the case.

If everyone is entitled to their own opinion, as you rightly say, why do you object so strongly to someone whose opinion might differ to yours?

no, I honestly think its just that people think (me included) that the judging over whether a woman is a SAHM, a working mum, a bit of both, or something completely different, needs to stop, because its bog-all to do with anyone else.

j.e.j.

Gigglepig wrote: »

J.e.j. Already in your very first post, where you agreed with the OP you said

I agree with you. If you don't want to look after it, why have a baby?

To me, This comes across as judgmental.

FBaby doesn't come across as judgmental the way you do.

You are quoting selectively*. In the same post I went on to say:

j.e.j. wrote: »

But then I am not a parent. Perhaps if I was I'd be putting the child into nursery and trying to regain my sanity :rotfl:

*and going back in and editing your post after I have responded to it

pollypenny

I am in the USA at the moment to see the family including a new born and 19 month old.

Not all states have 12 weeks maternity leave. When the family lived in Florida it was 6 weeks. The family looked after baby for three months, before he went to a lovely child minder. Now he is in a crèche at the place where both DS and DIL work.

We will come to look after new baby for a month, her mum will do the same.

There's nothing my DIL would like more than a year off with the children. It's not possible though. She has a senior position, which would be compromised.

heartbreak_star

If I had a baby it'd be offloaded onto a nursery within a week.

This is why I don't have children

HBS x

pimento

trevorsminted wrote: »

I appreciate and totally see that some don't care about strangers caring for their kids for longer hours than they do, changing their nappies, reading to them ,hearing them speak, smile for the first time, fair enough as I said you got to work and cant afford it then its a choice you make, I just wondered what the point was instead of waiting a few years saving up to appreciate fully your newborn baby for the first year and savour every moment, call me old fashioned we went without but the new fashion is "we cant afford not to work" as I have said each to their own!

That's the longest sentence I've read in a long time.

j.e.j.

heartbreak_star wrote: »

If I had a baby it'd be offloaded onto a nursery within a week.

This is why I don't have children

HBS x

Fairy nuff

Person_one

j.e.j. wrote: »

The OP has obviously hit a raw nerve amongst the mums (and the non-mums) on here.

You know, when people disagree with you, it doesn't have to mean you've 'hit a raw nerve', it usually just means they think you're wrong.

Thorsoak is spot on by the way, there was never any 'golden age' where every mum happily stayed at home baking with the children and every dad came home for tea on the table at 6pm. Not outside of American TV anyway.

j.e.j.

Person_one wrote: »

You know, when people disagree with you, it doesn't have to mean you've 'hit a raw nerve', it usually just means they think you're wrong.

Thorsoak is spot on by the way, there was never any 'golden age' where every mum happily stayed at home baking with the children and every dad came home for tea on the table at 6pm. Not outside of American TV anyway.

I've never once advocated being a Stepford wife (though I can't see what's wrong with being at home baking, or looking after your family?)

The original post was controversial, and predictably within seconds a lot of irate mums were on here defending the woman's right to have her career while the baby gets looked after by other people. I'd say it did indeed 'hit a raw nerve', judging by the tone of the replies, and the accusations of sexism, etc

Surely everyone is entitled to their own opinion, including people who don't necessarily go along with the majority

FBaby

If you re-read the first page, all that responded as to why they supported the decision of putting a baby in childcare mentioned doing so because of not being able to afford not to. Nothing about the right of women to go to work. However, you have post #5 and then #11 which were pointless but to insure they 'hit a nerve'.

Person_one

j.e.j. wrote: »

I've never once advocated being a Stepford wife (though I can't see what's wrong with being at home baking, or looking after your family?)

Nothing wrong with baking, but then nobody said there was, did they?