Work and a family

[Dahlia]

When I was a child I went to daycare everyday after school and day camps all summer. My parents are divorced, but my dad, mom, and stepmom all worked full time. I can definitely say that during the summer I wished I could have just been at home playing instead of going to sports camp or science camp, when I didn't even like either sports or science. However, I think that there are benefits to a good daycare organization. I am an only child and it taught me how to interact with other children in a way that is outside of normal schooling and academic. This is often valued more highly by collectivist societies, but I do believe that it benefits the child to be participating in activities with other children, just the same way that sports, etc. would. I also feel that good childcare programs offer opportunities that the child may not have otherwise (for example, despite my indifference toward science, I did get to shoot rockets off, go to theme parks, etc.).

With that said, I would prefer to be able to stay at home when I have children. Ideally, I would prefer that both my husband and myself could stay at home with our children (which again, is more of a reality in other countries than in the US). But, as Matt said, with the cost of living right now I don't know if that is even a possibility.

 

[K.D. Lightner]

I was raised in a two-parent family, have one brother 5 years younger. Family life was not ideal, but I was so naive about what happened in other families (and rarely at that time) that when I was 10, a neighbor girl told me that one of our classmate's parents were divorced.

"What is that?" I said. She told me and I was so stunned, I blurted out, "You mean, they can do that!?

By the time my nieces were in grade school, at least half the class had parents who were no longer together. This included my nieces. At least it wasn't as hard on them as it was kids in my day, when people whispered behind your back.

karol

 

[jamespowers]

I was raised in a two-parent family, have one brother 5 years younger. Family life was not ideal, but I was so naive about what happened in other families (and rarely at that time) that when I was 10, a neighbor girl told me that one of our classmate's parents were divorced.

"What is that?" I said. She told me and I was so stunned, I blurted out, "You mean, they can do that!?

Gee, that is sort of the same experience I had here. I had no idea what divorce was at ten either. All of my family were married and not divorced so you just didn't encounter it. This was not that long ago either---just so you know.
I think what we are all touching on with this thread is the subject of choices we make in our lives. It is quite possible to not only screw up our own lives but those of our children if we make bad choices along the way. No one makes us choose the wrong path. We just tend to wander there on our own when we are not planning for what the future brings. This is a part of the reason that I am the age I am and childless.
It is a great, and possibly the greatest, responsiblity a person can take on to become a parent. For me it involves much thought and planning. The creating is the easiest part of this venture. The thought and intention is another. Some have children without a thought in their heads about who will take care of it, where the money will come from and who will stay home and who will work---or even if that is possible. At this point in my life it is possible to give the attention, time and money necessary to raise a child. I can go from here now.
I think if this generation and future generations really concentrated on personal responsiblity then the children we raise will be better for it and the successive generations can only become better. Passing on values, morals and manners are key to shaping the world we live in one child at a time. For some it means sacrificing some income to raise a child as well as humanly possible. For others it could be different. As long as the result is a better society then I have no problems. Let's be clear that the schools, daycare, friends and strangers are not likely to pass on the values and morals that we want to instill. The government prevents it in many cases and may even undermine our efforts so the burden falls upon us. It is our job as parents to shape the future.
Kids don't come with manuals but I can guarantee that if you as a parent:
Stay in school and graduate from at least high school
Don't have children out of wedlock
Plan your life around the money you have
Do not spend more than you have
Then your life will be much easier and it is likely that you will not live in poverty yourself nor will your children. Studies have shown that the above factors contribute to stronger families and more well adjusted kids in 80% of the cases. The future is in our hands for sure.

Regards to all,

J

 

[K.D. Lightner]

I tell my welfare clients that all the time: your children are watching you, watching what you do, and forming values. They will not do as you say, they will do as you do -- and if they see that you value education and work, they will do so also.

I have yet to encounter a client who wanted their children to end up like they did, and yet so many have done so -- by watching their parents and then repeating the very life styles and choices that brought their parents to welfare in the first place.

It can be a sad cycle.

karol

 

[elsewhere]

Maybe I should add to my earlier comments.

I was raised primarily by my single mother. Our parents divorced when I was about 7. At that time I also had a 2 year old younger brother and my mom was pregnant with my younger sister.
This was in 1977.

I was lucky in that I spent a lot of time with my grandparents-- my siblings, being younger & not as easily cared for by aging grandparents who ALSO still worked, spent a lot of time with non-family caregivers.

My mother worked full time AND went to school full-time to better herself and to be able to offer us better futures. She did what she HAD to do. To this day she is my idol. She took what life gave her and did her best with it.

That said, I think it would have been better for everyone if she had been ABLE to be with us more. That just wasn't possible, however. It's not possible for lots of poeple.

That said... Sure.. we all want our children to be better socialized and to have those experiences with other kids & strangers-- but I don't see daycare as able to RAISE a child. They do not instill values in children -- how can they? They are not the parent. They aren't related and they have no vested interest. (of course.. there are exceptions to every rule) Heck, I'd personally probably resent anyone trying to instill THEIR values into my children.

As for people having children outside of wedlock... well.. we can dream but I doubt it will happen. Not until proper sex education is taught in schools. You can't prevent what you don't understand.. and rarely has "no" held any meaning for a teenager- raised well or not.

Ok.. time for cocktail hour!

 

[jamespowers]

Sure.. we all want our children to be better socialized and to have those experiences with other kids & strangers-- but I don't see daycare as able to RAISE a child. They do not instill values in children -- how can they? They are not the parent. They aren't related and they have no vested interest. (of course.. there are exceptions to every rule) Heck, I'd personally probably resent anyone trying to instill THEIR values into my children.

I can see that completely. I would not want anyone trying to brainwash my child either. Makes sense to me.

As for people having children outside of wedlock... well.. we can dream but I doubt it will happen. Not until proper sex education is taught in schools. You can't prevent what you don't understand.. and rarely has "no" held any meaning for a teenager- raised well or not.

This actually seems to contradict your previous point. Someone is teaching your child about sex outside of a moral context---by law. That is not exactly what I want.
Interestingly the out of wedlock birth rate for the last thrity years is over twice as high as it was thirty years previous to that even with all of that "sex education." It seems they taught them how to, not not to. hmmmm....
As far as "no" goes. It worked just fine for me and my friends.

Regards to all,

J

 

[elsewhere]

This actually seems to contradict your previous point. Someone is teaching your child about sex outside of a moral context---by law. That is not exactly what I want.
Interestingly the out of wedlock birth rate for the last thrity years is over twice as high as it was thirty years previous to that even with all of that "sex education." It seems they taught them how to, not not to. hmmmm....
As far as "no" goes. It worked just fine for me and my friends.

I don't think it conflicts at all-- I'm not talking the education of a small child.. I'm talking about teenagers. Totally different breed. Values really are instilled early on. The teenage years are when they put those values to the test. Plus... to me, sex & morality are different issues. I do not think sex is immoral.. but I DO think it comes with responsibilities. There are valid reasons OUTSIDE of religious or moral issues to NOT have sex so I would like to think that parents on both sides could find a middle ground.
I really don't think it's possible to avoid SOME sort of sex education for teenagers...They'll find out about it one way or another. If they don't learn the the actual facts through responsible outlets when they start becoming curious about it, they'll learn what they can from their friends and experience. I don't know a single person who learned about sex from their parents OR school. They learned it from TV & by DOING. That's what scares me.

I was in high school in California (a pretty liberal state) from 84-88 and they sure weren't teaching sex ed then so I am not quite sure what you mean about sex education effecting out of wedlock birth rates.
I was born out of wedlock, myself. (my mother married when I was 2) She wasn't given any sex education, either. She got pregnant with me on her FIRST TIME. The word among her fellow students was that you couldn't get pregnant on your first time. Happy as I am to be here... you have to admit that things might have gone differently if she'd had ANY idea about what sex was and what could happen.
It's my understanding that although there are some classes offered now, they aren't really indepth. I've NEVER heard that they teach they "how to" but not "not to". What I've understand about current sex ed classes (and I'm sure they vary in different states) is that they simply discuss the basic mechanics of sex, and toss in a few pictures of disease ridden private parts.

What I mean by sex education is a FULL AND COMPLETE education. That would include talking about what happens if you DO have sex. It should include the emotional side, as well. I believe it should also include the possible diseases out there as well as the possibilities for pregnancy. But not ONLY in a "scare tactic" way-- in a factual way. I don't think that saying nothing except "just don't do it" really works in this day and age-- our society is too fragmented about the messages that we send about sex and kids just end up confused.

What's really sad is women (and men, I'm sure) don't even have a basic understanding of how their bodies work. Sex isn't dirty ("unless you do it right!")-- but it does come with responsibilities. I think kids should be taught that. The parents who'd rather stick their heads in the sand and not have their child taught anything about sex... well.. that just seems irresponsible to me. Just remember the old adage about the "preacher's daughter".

Ack.. sorry if I'm not totally coherent right now.. I've been fighting a huge headache all day and it's not improving. I shoulda had cocktail hour when I said so last post!

I appreciate the debate, though

 

[Angelicious]

Of course, you will need quantity--meaning time--as well, but how much depends on the needs of the individual kids -- and how they can vary!--and at what life stage they are, besides, the balance of their needs constantly change.

Exactly. I kept my daughter with me almost 24-7 as a baby (although that was maybe not a good thing for either of us). When she turned 2 I put her in a home-based daycare with 4 other kids. Now she is 3 and 1/2, and I'm looking to put her in a daycare centre because she's just getting too big for her boots in a small group. She's an only child, so she's the main focus at home, and now it looks like she needs some time in a larger group, to get used to team playing and not being the centre of attention.

What each woman chooses is up to her, most certainly, because, since you need a partner who is full-well willing to cooperate, the choice of such a guy is up to the gal.

Well, the choice isn't always up to the gal. At least, choosing the partner might be, but you can't force him to stick around, or prevent him from changing after the baby is born, or bend reality to keep him alive, or re-write the law to let you stay together, or any one of a hundred ways parents can't or don't stay together. (And that's making the assumption that people *choose* to have a child. Contraception isn't 100% effective, some people are devious, and crime happens.)

That is to say, I think that creating a normative, value-based judgement that "All families should/must be THIS WAY" can sometimes be a bit shortsighted or naive.

There may have been some things they missed out by going to day care, but I figure they gained other experiences that they wouldn't have had, had they stayed home.

Exactly. I think even if I weren't swamped by study, there would be plenty of things my girl needs/would want that I just couldn't give her. There are child development things that I don't notice until someone else tells me - a quality childcare will understand a child's mental, emotional, physical, and social development, and will help the parent understand if they don't already.

(That's from a local perspective. Childcare centres here must legally have on-staff and available at least 1 registered early childhood teacher (Bachelor's degree), 1 person with a Diploma to every 5? kids, and a certain number of teacher aides. They're certainly better qualified that I am to understand children's development!)

That said, I agree that childcare is no substitute for parenting. You can't raise a kid in a daycare. But as far as I'm concerned, that's not what daycare is for. Parenting is my job, educating is theirs. (Not that I don't help my daughter learn, but as I said, I'm heading for a Political Science degree, not a Bachelor of Education.) As long as a child is nurtured and raised with confidence and a strong dose of their family's ethics, daycare shouldn't injure them in any way.

P.S. Angelicious, I have a dryer and a dishwasher, but though I let the washing machine do the laundry, I prefer the washline, and I prefer to wash my dishes by hand, somehow, it all seems quicker and more efficient done that way.

Well, I'd love to have a dryer - I never have anything dry to wear; it's raining and stuff takes forever to dry on the rack! My place looks like a Chinese laundry...

I can live without a dishwasher, but one would be handy - dishes are one job that just never seem to finish. It would be nice for the job to take 10 minutes instead of half an hour. But dishwashers & dryers are way down the list; my fridge and TV are dying and I don't have a freezer. Why must they make appliances to go obsolete so quickly?!?

Also, good luck in everything you do, and I'm sure your precious girl will grow up a lovely lady with such a wonderful mom :clap

Thank you. She is a lovely wee thing, although she's gifted, and so quite demanding mentally. I hope this search for a new daycare solves some of her boredom problems and silly antics...

 

[Feraud]

That said... Sure.. we all want our children to be better socialized and to have those experiences with other kids & strangers-- but I don't see daycare as able to RAISE a child. They do not instill values in children -- how can they? They are not the parent. They aren't related and they have no vested interest. (of course.. there are exceptions to every rule) Heck, I'd personally probably resent anyone trying to instill THEIR values into my children.

I have to disagree here...
No one institution raises a child. Everyone has an opportunity to be a good example and show proper values towards our youth. We are all role models. Does a teacher have a vested interest in their students? Do doctors, policemen or nurses have an interest in the recipients of their profession? I certainly think they do! Why would you not feel that a person who chooses to become a child care professional would not care about children?

We do encounter a lack of pride in one's work, but that does make it right nor widespread. Many people enter the childcare profession for the same reason others become doctors, teachers or military men. It is a calling.

You can never be around your children 100% of the time. They will probably get into trouble when you are not around. When that happens you should hope there is a responsible adult around to show them the errors of their ways. When we take that attitude that "no one tells my child what to do" we go down that road of raising very disrespectful children. What your child learns is to not respect authority because mom and dad will "back me up" no matter what. Even if the child has done wrong..
What the child also learns is, as long as their parents do not see it they can get away with Lord knows what.

We really can not complain about "today's youth" if the parents think no one but themselves know right from wrong.

As reality shows us, 'blood relations' have never stopped adults from behaving in selfish ways that are detrimental to their childs welfare.

 

[Angelicious]

Well said, Feraud!

 

[LaMedicine]

Well said, Feraud!

I second that! :clap

 

[elsewhere]

I have to disagree here...
No one institution raises a child. Everyone has an opportunity to be a good example and show proper values towards our youth. We are all role models. Does a teacher have a vested interest in their students? Do doctors, policemen or nurses have an interest in the recipients of their profession? I certainly think they do! Why would you not feel that a person who chooses to become a child care professional would not care about children?

We do encounter a lack of pride in one's work, but that does make it right nor widespread. Many people enter the childcare profession for the same reason others become doctors, teachers or military men. It is a calling.

You can never be around your children 100% of the time. They will probably get into trouble when you are not around. When that happens you should hope there is a responsible adult around to show them the errors of their ways. When we take that attitude that "no one tells my child what to do" we go down that road of raising very disrespectful children. What your child learns is to not respect authority because mom and dad will "back me up" no matter what. Even if the child has done wrong..
What the child also learns is, as long as their parents do not see it they can get away with Lord knows what.

We really can not complain about "today's youth" if the parents think no one but themselves know right from wrong.

As reality shows us, 'blood relations' have never stopped adults from behaving in selfish ways that are detrimental to their childs welfare.

And I agree with you, too. What I meant is more in line with "daycare cannot substitute for raising your child". And although I agree that it's good for children to spend time in environments where they are not the total focus.. there many children who spend way more time with strangers than with ANY family. Sometimes it can't be helped.
But.. let me give you another example... thought not quite on this trend:
My family is not religious. We are, however, very respectful of other people's religious beliefs. We have friends that are Catholic, Buddhist, Christian, Wiccan, etc. We encourage our daughter (my step-daughter) to talk to these people about their beliefs so that she can make her own decision.
As she does spend some of her week with her birth mother... I cannot control what happens to her when she's not here. Her mother recently began sending her to a daycare where the care provider MADE her pray before every meal. She refused to respect my daughters right to simply sit silently while THEY prayed. I don't appreciate the lack of tolerance they exhibit, since tolerance of others is a central part of how we raise her.

Of course... these days a lot of my experience is colored by my current situation. My husband had 99% custody of our gal and the birth mother didn't show up at the hearing. She had virtually nothing to do with the little gal until she learned I was a part of her life, at which point I guess jealousy took over. Then she fought for more custody and because our lawyer is apparently a total drunk and didn't file ANY of the paperwork, she got more custody. Slightly less than half.
So what does she do with all this extra time with her daughter? She puts her in daycare during the day and takes her to a babysitter at night.
*sigh* it's very frustrating.
Plus.. she's not a very good mother (and I doubt she'd be any better if she DID stay at home to raise them). She has another child, 3 1/2, who hits my husband and I when we come to pick our little gal up. The birth-mother laughs and says "he's mad because you're taking his sister".. but doens't chastise the child for lashing out at us in violence. Every week our gal comes home with new bruises from her brother because she took something dangerous away and he didn't like it so he hits her.
Were she a day care provider, I'd take my child out of her care because she does NOT teach any solid values.

I fear I'm rambling... sorry... this headache refuses to leave me today. I hope I've at least made SOME point!

 

[Trickeration]

I was in high school in California (a pretty liberal state) from 84-88 and they sure weren't teaching sex ed then so I am not quite sure what you mean about sex education effecting out of wedlock birth rates.

I'm not up for a big debate, (I get that enough with my husband ), I'm just curious. But, where did you go to school? I was in high school '83 to '85 (then finished with homeschool) in San Diego County and we had a fantastic co-ed health class. The teacher encouraged open discussion and when she got to the sex ed. she promised no question would go unanswered. I think our class finished her course pretty well informed. We also had 'family life' classes in jr. high but the girls and boys were in seperate rooms then.

Back to the home and family thing, though. I'm a stay at home mom, and have been since my daughter was born 14 years ago. I also have a son who is 11. I homeschool my kids. Not for any major reasons, it's just always worked for us, and I enjoy having a say in what my kids are learning. They haven't missed out socially, they're probably out and about then I am!

Anyway, my husband and I always knew I would stay home once there were kids in the picture. It's been very hard financially at times, but we wouldn't trade it for anything. And we've always made sure that our kids didn't feel the effect of tighter times. So far, my kids seem to have it pretty together. I know they aren't full 'teens' yet, but I'm not worried about the future.

I'm not sure where to go with this, I could write all night. It seems like this thread could become a heated debate, or a great learning tool for the parents in this forum. I'd hope to see the latter. If you want any input on homeschooling (I've seen many versions) or just how to seriously bargain hunt, I'd be happy to share. Best of luck to all of you in whatever parenting styles you choose. Just love your kids and let them know you're there for them always.

 

[elsewhere]

I'm not up for a big debate, (I get that enough with my husband ), I'm just curious. But, where did you go to school? I was in high school '83 to '85 (then finished with homeschool) in San Diego County and we had a fantastic co-ed health class. The teacher encouraged open discussion and when she got to the sex ed. she promised no question would go unanswered. I think our class finished her course pretty well informed. We also had 'family life' classes in jr. high but the girls and boys were in seperate rooms then.

I went to high school in Laguna Beach, CA. A VERY liberal town.. at least at that time. I went to Jr High in Norwalk, CA.. which is a suburb of LA. In the Norwalk Jr High they STARTED to have a sex ed class. We made it about 1 week before pressure from too many parents closed the class down. They changed the class to drug education.
However, according to my friends who were in the Laguna Beach school district prior to my arrival (in Jr High), there was no sex ed there, either.

I'm sure it's hit & miss all over. I wonder what the standard is, now?

I actually love the debate and see it in a good vein. I hope others do, too.

 

[Zach R.]

You get a basic sex ed class in 5th grade now(or at least you did in 1998) and a drug education class in 7th or 8th(Health/PE).

Though for the Sex Ed you can opt out of it if your parent/guardian deems it fit.

 

[Trickeration]

I had all of my schooling in Oceanside. I guess things do vary somewhat from district to district. Now I'm curious, though, so I think I'll ask around about what the standards are nowadays. It's up to the parent with homeschoolers, and it makes some parents more than a little uncomfortable . My daughter handles it with some curiosity and a lot of maturity (she's the more serious one). At this point my son isn't really curious, and what has been discussed is 'gross'.

 

[jamespowers]

You get a basic sex ed class in 5th grade now(or at least you did in 1998) and a drug education class in 7th or 8th(Health/PE).

Though for the Sex Ed you can opt out of it if your parent/guardian deems it fit.

Same thing here from the 70s through the 80s. The problem seems to be the result of having this course taught. Parents think that they do not have to do a damn thing after the school sends them the note. They give their kids over to a valueless system that just goes through the motions. The onus of teaching your children to be potty trained is on the parent and so should the onus of teaching them about sex. The coursework or classes do not exempt the parents from doing their job. I think many parents hide behind the school instead of taking it up and straightening their children out about what is appropriate for their families. There is no excuse.
The fact still remains that out of wedlock births have been going up ever since the late 1960s. Lets just face it. If sex education mattered then it would steadily be going downward. Incidences of STDs and even more scary viruses that can kill you have increased as well. Education should have made a small dent in that if it worked. Hmmm......
Let's face it, those classes and "education" are a joke to most people in school. I remember we had a lot of fun learning new words to call our classmates and it provided some class clowns with a lot of material but it was basically pointless. Been there done that. I can say that it provided comedy relief for the day though. They even give you useless classes in College for credit as well. Marriage and Sex along with Anthropology 3745(Human Sexuality) was another hoot. They were easy As that helped you pad the GPA and general Education requirements but again basically pointless.

Regards to all,

J

P.S. This thread tears it. My child is going to a private parochial school.

 

[Zach R.]

I remember we had a lot of fun learning new words to call our classmates and it provided some class clowns with a lot of material but it was basically pointless. Been there done that. I can say that it provided comedy relief for the day though.

I think you hit the nail on the head here, exactly the same situation twenty years later.

 

[Angelicious]

Parents think that they do not have to do a damn thing after the school sends them the note. They give their kids over to a valueless system that just goes through the motions.

I agree that's a problem with the parents, not just the school. I know a lot of people who are teachers who have real issues with parents expecting schools to raise kids. In fact, I know people who have quit teaching because of comments like:

"Why is my son failing???" "He won't do the work." "Why don't you MAKE him do the work?!?" "That's not my job. I'm there to teach 40 kids, not to discipline 3. How much work does he do at home?" "I dunno, but you should do some thing about this!"

And so on. Parents who refuse to take responsibility for their kids' actions is another - teens who cause trouble at school, and then the parents shrug off the problem as "out of sight, out of mind", or claim "I let him make his own decisions. if you have a problem with his behaviour, that's your fault.".

The fact still remains that out of wedlock births have been going up ever since the late 1960s. Lets just face it. If sex education mattered then it would steadily be going downward.

I'm not sure what your point is with this one... Yes, out of wedlock births have gone up, but so has the acceptability and incidence of de facto relationships. Many of my parents' friends have kids and aren't married to each other, but have been together 20 or 30 years. What does that prove?

(I do acknowledge that teen pregnancy is rising among the middle and upper classes [studies differ as to whether lower classes have always had high teen birth rates], but I think that is a separate-but-related issue.)

Incidences of STDs and even more scary viruses that can kill you have increased as well. Education should have made a small dent in that if it worked. Hmmm......

STI education is often a bit of a joke. I don't just mean in schools, I mean for all ages. If govts & MedAssocs were serious about educating people against STIs, why, proportionally, is so much poured into AIDS education, with things like chlamydia/gonhorrea a trailing second, when Hep B has a greater long-term constant effect, and is more common, and more expensive to treat? When HSV (Herpes Simplex Virus) is found in about 1 in 5 people, and probably 30-50% of those people are unaware they have it? (Sorry, mini-rant! I get it from my mum, who is a medical laboratory technician and sick of human idiocy. )

In fact, sex education aimed at teens is a bit of a waste sometimes. Those who would be willing to listen probably already know, and act accordingly. Those who refuse to listen & think themselves 12 foot tall and bullet-proof wouldn't take any of the information in anyway...

 

[Angelicious]

I hope that didn't sound too growly or abrupt... I didn't mean it to be so - I think those headaches are catching.