To become a sahm?

MissMoneypenny

zagfles wrote: »

Being judgemental about someone claiming benefits they are legally entitled to is saying they are bad.

Yet you're quite happy to be judgmental to working mothers and then tell them that putting their pre school children in childcare causes Attachment Disorder; when it doesn't AND it is a rare condition anyway.

Now you tell us you are no expert on Attachment Disorder; so why even make that claim about children of working mothers? To make them feel bad? Or yourself feel better? Both?

http://www.child-development-guide.com/reactive-attachment-disorder.html

Reactive attachment disorder (RAD) is a rare psychological disorder in which your child is unable to form healthy bonds with others, including you.

Children from orphanages or who have been in various foster homes are more likely to have been unable to bond with a loved one and are at a higher risk of developing RAD.


Your baby demonstrates a secure attachment to you when she feels comforted, is moderately distressed when you leave, and quickly re-establishes contact with you when you return

zagfles

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Obviously. I can't find anything that backs your claim that putting a pre school age child in childcare causes Attachment Disorder.

I didn't claim that. I suggested it's a possible issue and that people should be aware of it, so they can take steps to avoid it. The wiki article looks quite good and well referenced.

zagfles

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

Yet you're quite happy to be judgmental to working mothers and then tell them that putting their pre school children in childcare causes Attachment Disorder; when it doesn't AND it is a rare condition anyway.

Now you tell us you are no expert on Attachment Disorder; so why even make that claim about children of working mothers? To make them feel bad? Or yourself feel better? Both?

To make people aware of it, as above. I'm no expert on cancer but I know of various things that can cause it, should these things never be mentioned?

People can google it, if it's not an issue, then they won't feel bad, will they? Unlike your pathetic attempt to make people feel bad about claiming benefits.

MissMoneypenny

zagfles wrote: »

I didn't claim that. I suggested it's a possible issue and that people should be aware of it,

Please link the article that confirms your assumption.

MissMoneypenny

zagfles wrote: »

People can google it, if it's not an issue, then they won't feel bad, will they?

I still can't find the article to back your claim that working mothers can give their children RAD if they put their pre-school children into childcare. Please would you post the links to those papers.

zagfles

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

I still can't find the article to back your claim that working mothers can give their children RAD if they put their pre-school children into childcare. Please would you post the links to those papers.

Who said anything about RAD? I never even mentioned RAD!! Hint - attachment disorder doesn't start with an R :rotfl:

Google is your friend if you want more info.

Caroline_a

Obviously a topic that creates a lot of opinions one way or another. As my youngest is 7 years younger than the middle one, I almost had 2 families to bring up. Situations change, and I spent 7 years at home with the first 2, and went back to work after the youngest just turned 18 months.

Which was better? Well, the older 2 cannot remember a time when I was at home, and the youngest remembers her time with the childminder and the other children with fondness. All have grown up into successful, confident young women.

Finances were very pinched when the first 2 were growing up, but I managed. Less so with number 3, but I still had to be careful. Did I appreciate being at home with number 1 & 2? no, not really. When I had the youngest I knew that I'd need to go back to work early as another round of finger painting and playdo woud drive me bonkers.

Within limits you have to do what fits best for you. It would have cost me more than I could earn to work with the first two - no help from anyone then! If you work you will always feel guilty - it's the default position! If you stay at home you will (usually) be skint and spend your time penny pinching.

princessdon

I have lots of research on attachment disorders. Just to clear the issue up.

A) it's rare but exists
it rarely if ever has a single trigger
C) it's not related to putting children into childcare but CAN be part of the process that involves AD IF other triggers are present too.

To sum it up, there is zero evidence that placing a child over 3 months into nursery creates this at all. If fact often when there are more prevelant triggers (PND, illness of the main carer), social services will provide free nursery places. This is to ensure the child has a stable, safe environment where they do have attachments (the key worker).

It's a complex issue, often affecting children who end up in care and yes being placed in childcare at a young age is a trigger, but there is no evidence that this single trigger causes the disorder. It's often many situations. If any one has evidence otherwise is genuinely like to read their clinical based study.

FBaby

Same would apply to anyone whinging about people getting childcare vouchers or the childcare element of WTC.

How can this be compared? In one case, one contributes towards the system whilst also taking from it, in the other, they only take and contributes nothing. Add to this that the parent who continues to work is much more likely to up their skills and move up the ladder quicker (therefore paying back more taxes) than the parent who has chosen to have a career break.

I didn't claim that. I suggested it's a possible issue and that people should be aware of it, so they can take steps to avoid it

Why mentioning it in the first place then? It would like a poster believing that working parents is better for pre-school children and suggest to SAHP to read up on children suffering from separation anxiety and to avoid it.

princessdon

FBaby wrote: »

How can this be compared? In one case, one contributes towards the system whilst also taking from it, in the other, they only take and contributes nothing. Add to this that the parent who continues to work is much more likely to up their skills and move up the ladder quicker (therefore paying back more taxes) than the parent who has chosen to have a career break.


Why mentioning it in the first place then? It would like a poster believing that working parents is better for pre-school children and suggest to SAHP to read up on children suffering from separation anxiety and to avoid it.

To be fair it's also a bug bear of mine how much childcare we pay for. 16 hour claimants often claim FT childcare and then use the time to do housework, get their hair done etc. I think it should be limited to hours around work only.