I believe this may be contraversal, but I am willing to hear your say on this. This article says there is no way to go back to one parent staying home. I stay home and yes I am broke most of the time, but I think it's worth it to be with my kids. There are so many things that I leave behind to do so. All of this talk about how great it is for a mother or father to let their child be with another person for huge amounts of money is just crazy to me. I do in home daycare, charge $500.00 a month, for many that is a lot, to some that is a fracton of what they pay a month. A few of the kids I watch are here from 8:30 to 6:30, that is ten hours a day, and that's not including the half hour that it takes to get here and to get home. So, that is 11 hours a day that that child is away from home. Wow, I say, I guess that just really makes me sad. Sorry if I offend anyone. Hugs to all the kids and their parents!


The child-care crisis - MSN Money

I agree with you. My husband and I firmly believe that one parent will stay at home with the children. At least, until they start going to school that is. With so many divorces and one-parent homes in this country today children really need their parent(s) there for not only love, but discipline as well. I am not bashing those parents that do decide to work (or sometimes have no choice) but I do believe that IF possible, one parent should stay home. When I was little my father worked 2 jobs and my mother worked 16 hours a day and even today, 22 years later, I still feel like I do not know my father. And my mother and I never even got to bond until she was dying. It really was sad. I would rather struggle and be broke all the time than to leave my child feeling deprived of love. To those who do work and rely on day-care, just make sure your child gets the love and attention he/she deserves.

Thanks Holly, I guess I am not bashing anyone, I am just trying to understand the worth of paying not to be with your kid. I think once your kids getinto school there is nothing wrong with getting a good job or career to get on with the next phase. But the kids I watch are so tiny, they are so little yet, and I know if they had a choice they would want to be with their parents at home.
My dad worked on the slope, meaning two eeks on and two weeks off, when he got home, we gave him down time so he could get into the swing of things. So there was a two day grace period at the beginning and end of his stay at home. I know almost half of my dad. Seems odd but that was how it was. My step mom worked as well. I am truly sorry you weren't close with your parents, until the end. That is very sad... Hugs Holly. :)
I hope I stay in the position to wait a bit longer to get back to work full time, as for me, I am one who really enjoys kids and enjoy being with them. I love the spilled milk and the smiles! Time just goes by so fast, I can't imagine missing any of it! Hugs and love to the families out there.

I am home with two little ones and, while yes, it does make money really tight, I wouldn't do it any other way. This mom-thing is way more intense than I thought it would be, but I would be miserable if I was at work all day and someone else was with my kids. I always knew I would stay home with my kids. My mother stayed home with us until we were well into school and I appreciated that even as a kid.

Thanks for the reminder of how lucky I am that I can stay home--I really need to be reminded sometimes! Me and the boys are learning together as we go.

I wish everyone who wanted to stay with their kids could. The posted article mentions tax credits for day care; too bad the government doesn't recognize the value of future citizens being raised by a parent at home and give us a tax credit.

Parenting is a very important job. Information has come out recently about later behavioral issues being connected to crowded day care where children do not receive the structure they need. I have a relative in childcare and some of those kids are just crying out for the personal care that the limited daycare providers just can't give them because there are too many kids.

I was a stay-at-home mom for 12 years until the kids were in school, and then I worked only part-time while they were in school or while their father cared for them some evenings. My part-time job was at the library across the street from their school. Then I got a second part-time job working in the school they attended. Our house was six blocks away, so travel wasn't a problem.

If I could do it over again, I would do the same thing. I was able to be there at home for first rollovers and for first teeth and for potty training. I played with them, taught them songs and poems, read to them, played outdoors with them, took them grocery shopping, and made cookies with their help. They helped me sort the dirty laundry, wash it, dry it, fold it, and put it away. They emptied wastebaskets and vacuumed. They helped me print the grocery list and choose the groceries at the store. They both learned to read by the age of two from looking at street/road signs that we passed. They learned to count as we walked around the neighborhood and counted flowers, robins, squirrels, and different kinds of trees. They learned colors and shapes the same way. They also learned to be polite, to take turns, to listen carefully, to follow directions. We went to restaurants and got compliments from other diners and from the staff. Taking them on a jet to visit my parents 700 miles away was no problem; they knew how to behave and to be patient and to entertain themselves with counting games and reading and watching people. They were fun to be with then, and are still fun to be with now that they are in their 30s.

With only my husband's income, we were poor in money but we were rich in the things that matter. I wouldn't have missed those early years for anything!

I too agree with a parent staying at home. Especially if when you consider the cost of daycare vs. earnings. Lets just for instance say working part time your bring home pay for 5 part time days is $150.00. Then lets say the daycare costs $100.00 per 5 day week. Now that would mean that the individual working was going to actually only bring home $50.00 per week. Then most daycares are on an enrollment basis, meaning that your child has a reserved spot to attend said daycare. You pay even if your child is sick and has to stay at home, you pay for any holidays that the daycare center observes and on the days your child is sick and you pay and miss working that day yourself, you go in the hole for that week. So yes if the mom is only going to be working bringing home a little more than what it costs for daycare, then stay at home. A couple of other points here, we didn't figure in any fuel costs for the vehicle, and didn't figure in any costs for such things as lunch, or drinks. Not to mention that the children in a daycare usually has more sickness than the stay at home child. So economically it is sometimes best to stay at home if you can't see any other way to justify it. My wife stays home with our last child, and it has made a huge difference in his mentality. He already does things on the computer by himself, and is only a young 3. also, his older brother has him playing Xbox with him playing Halo 2 on the level of Heroic. This makes the process of thought very excelerated due to the fast graphics and situations. The Xbox is also teaching excellent hand - eye coordination.

In Canada we have 12 months of paid parental leave available to us. We obviously did that for both our kids. We are fortunate to have found a great daycare in a house near us. None of us work long hours so it's win/win all 'round in our case. Don't gte me wrong, if my salary (or my wife's) were double one of us would stay home - the kids are sweet and a blast to be around.

Wow, you guys, great to be with the kids! CMM, we all need reminders sometimes, it is a job in itself to be a mother, and to be one 24 hours a day... well, I know what you are saying! Wondergirl, experiencing is learning, you did very well! Mowerman, 3 and Xbox? LOL! Computer I could see but HALO?? Can't you get a cool little kid game? Good to be with them all together.
NK, there is something to be said for balance, and for as long as I have seen you around on here, there is no doubt that you aren't making sure your kids are well taken care of. Remember, I am not bashing anyone at all for not staying home, I just wonder how you do it, financially and emotionally. There is nothing wrong with pre school, or daycare in my eyes, (I am a daycare provider) but I just have a problem with the kids being away from their families for that long and too many days out of the small week!
Sheesh, thanks for all of the replies, I was hoping there would be some conclusion on whether I was the crazy lady that still stays home with her kids! LOL

I have been hearing more and more about families realizing it would be better in the long run for one parent to stay home. Most of them said that the one income paid for the regular bills and the other income paid for the second car payment, second car insurance, gas to work, day care and work clothes. They realized cut out the second car, the day care live simpler and you are better off.
I had to raise my 4 kids alone on welfare, around $1,000. A month and I never did figure out how or why so many two parent families worked and missed out on raising their kids.
They really didn't have that much more to show for it other than a vacation and a bunch of toys. And most of their kids were the trouble makers. They always say it is the welfare moms kids that are terrible, but these kids were left to run the streets and when you would tell them to not bully the other kids they would say "You can't do anything about it my parents both work and they don't care." I always felt bad for them in a way because they had no guidance and no real parent.

If all moms or dads stayed home during the first 6-18 years of the children's lives, the real estate barons would have to change their tune. There would be few double incomes to support the over-inflated housing market. Demand for 'toys' would go down too, and so would the prices.

I used to work, run the kids to daycare/school, run home to fix dinner, do laundry and cleaning... That is way more than one job. Children are much more important than the way I had to treat them then. When I worked, they were usually in the way. Now that I stay home, they are part of my life.

I think its great your able to stay home with the kids and provide daycare for others. I did the same thing and on a beer budget. I've seen all the firsts, played all the games and taught them like pre-school. Mine, both early twenties are stilll home and we wouldn't have it any other way.

I'm going to throw a curve ball from and education point of view.

As some of you may or may not know, my MIL is a 4th grade teacher, and has been a teacher for 40+ years. And we had this discussion 14 years ago after my daughter was born.

She says can tell which children stayed at home with one parent or the other and which children went to preschool or daycare. Yes, at 4th grade she can still tell.

Children who stay at home are not quite as "socially rounded" as the children who went to daycare or preschool. Children who have not been to daycare or preschool do not understand the concept of lining up... sitting still during certain times of the day (circle time for example, in younger grades).

In the grade that she teaches, 4th, the children who did not go to preschool or daycare have a much harder time studying, paying attention in class, not acting up.

While I would love to stay home with my kids (but I'm not a homebody and it would drive me nuts, I've tried it with all 4 kids), I do see a difference between my 5 year old and some of his friends who stayed home, even my 14 year old and some of her friends.

With the way the schools push our children through these days, preschool can be very beneficial to our children.

Don't believe the No Child Left Behind, it's a rip!! I watch children "left behind" every week when inputting my MIL's grades (she's not computer literate). While some of those children are learning disabled (Down's Syndrome), others don't take the time to study and learn and just get pushed through the system. Many of those children are children who were at home with a parent versus daycare or preschool.

I guess this is where I will differ with J9 I often see how the kids are riased, no matter if a parent is home or not. You can see it in kids where you eat out, in church and at the play yards, Some kids are better mannered and listen and follow instructions others don't.

And social skills are not a problem is the parent staying at home works on it, with pray groups, Day out with other stay at home moms ( yes there are even clubs for this) There is Sunday school and other times kids interact such as local parks and play grounds.

Yeah I can see J_9's point but the problem is TOO MANY stay at home moms do neglect their children rather than teaching them and socializing them. They 'leave it to when they get to school they will learn so I don't need to bother'.
I see stay at home moms leave their 2 and 3 year olds run the streets all day while they sit at home and watch soap operas. Their kids don't bully so much as the work parents kids do they are too busy learning 'the wrong type things'.

J_9 I have a relative who works in elementary school and behavioral problems are rampant--due to bad parenting or being without proper direction in daycare from a young age you really can't make kids who can't follow directions a problem related solely to stay at home moms. But Nohelp4U is right that society in general (American society anyway) has this idea that it is the schools' responsibility to teach children character as well as reading and writing, etc. This will never work and will only take power away from the parents who still want to do the raising.

As for socialization, I agree with Fr_Chuck, it is the parents' responsibility to get their kids out with other kids, to teach them how to get along with others. There are a lot of groups for stay at home moms and moms who homeschool. In addition, these are just as beneficial for the moms as for the kids and for the family as a whole if it helps mom's mental welfare.

J_9 I know what you mean about the difficulties of "staying" at home. I have an undergrad degree and if I don't use my brain I get really unhappy but I have found ways to work creativity and intellect back into my life--including educating myself on raising these little vippers. I have so much to learn! When I think of parenting as one big document that I have to write, edit, and re-edit--and re-edit it becomes an amazingly fulfilling challenge. I don't "go nuts" as often as I used to.

Wondergirl--it sounds like you did an amazing job--what an inspiration!

I agree with nohelp4u. My best friend of 15 years has a 20 month old at home. He is already potty-trained, he can brush his teeth on his own (although not well lol) he can dress himself, he says please and thank you, he cleans up his toys, etc. If the child is properly taught the way the parent is supposed to do while staying at home the child is a joy. Too many parents just stay at home and use their children as an EXCUSE for them to chill out on the computer and talk on the phone all day. Just because you stay at home doesn't mean you are doing that job that needs to be done.

Children's behavior varies too. Some kids do great in school and daycare. My youngest was being 'pushed through.' She came home crying every day. The schoolwork was hard for her. She was bullied and made fun of constantly in spite of 3 talks I had with the teacher. So, I pulled her out of the public system. She is homeschooled now and knows how to behave and treat others.

I had similar troubles in school, mom did not pull me out though. She taught school (different school) and graded papers till she went to bed. Kids who follow directions, sit still, line up and get good grades are not necessarily the 'good ones.' I did all those things in school. After school, I acted-out because of the bullying. Mom had no idea, she was grading papers.

I think staying home with your kids is detrimental if it means your family suffers as a result of it. If it means you can't afford to buy healthy food, can't afford to properly clothe them, can't afford to keep the lights on, etc. It's one thing for money to be tight and live within a budget, to buy clothes at Wal Mart instead of Gap; it's quite another to not be able to afford the necessities in life.

A lot of people are in the predicament that the parent who stays home can't make enough outside the home to cover the cost of daycare. Years ago, when I worked in retail, I had several co-workers who were in that sort of situation so they worked evenings and weekends when their husband was home to help make ends meet, or to contribute to savings, or afford vacations or whatever. The moms all loved to be able to get out of the house and have "adult time" for even a few hours a week.

Socialization is a huge issue for stay-at-home-parents; my cousin has a daughter who is almost two who is very poorly socialized and has a lot of stranger anxiety, even with family members she sees on a fairly regular basis. But, my cousin doesn't participate in mommy and me classes, or spend time at the park, or anything else. I really worry about the child when school time comes around. To expand on what J_9 was saying about kids in school being so different, I have a friend who is a SAHM who never focused on teaching her daughter her colors, numbers or alphabet because "she'll learn it in school". She's very well socialized and in pre-school now, but she started pre-school at a big disadvantage to many of the other kids.

Being a parent is tough, and making the decision to stay at home or work is something only the parents can make. Either situation can go wrong if not treated with priority. So I don't think one or the other is really right or wrong, it's all situational.

I see everyone's point about socialization, and learning, but like many of us know, we can teach that and we can get the kids into sports, into little groups that help with all of that. Being around other kids is very wonderful. I agree with that! Learning though, all four of my kids are different, see, it may be a good thing that I stayed home with my oldest, but my second, well, she would have liked more interaction with the world. None of my kids are sissies, they all can take care of themselves, they can work well with others. My 6 year old had a hard time sitting still in circle time though. I agree, there has to be balance.
I also agree with Jillian, and that is all part of the reason why I posted this post. I am in a sticky situation, and wonder if it is just time to get back into the work force full time. My youngest is now 4 so my heart will be fine letting him join a pre-school, and letting him get on with it socially. He will be very good and welcome anywhere, he is an angel. Struggling financially can take a toll, on the kids, husband and wife relationships, kids and parents relationships, I have encountered and few of these. This is not the first time, just I suppose, I wanted to hear more on the subject. Personally, I love being with my kids, and watching them grow, I would if it meant we weren't going to go under financially, but I am seriously considering sprucing myself up a bit and getting into gear. I hope you all know I am not judging any of you, I really wanted to hear what you had to say! Hugs and lotsa love!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by simoneaugie

If all moms or dads stayed home during the first 6-18 years of the children's lives, the real estate barons would have to change their tune. There would be few double incomes to support the over-inflated housing market. Demand for 'toys' would go down too, and so would the prices.

---

I see your line of thinking here, but I disagree. I don't think single-income families would have much of an effect on the housing market, as there are people out there who can afford all kinds of things on a single income, and they would simply invest and the rental market would go up. There are also lots of people who buy and spend way beyond their means to buy "toys" and houses and vacations; they see no problem going into debt over it. If anything, prices of things might go up to make up for the loss of demand (depending on the demand, anyway).

As a little example... I'm a landlord. My properties are in good shape, in decent neighborhoods, but they are not, by far, country-club material! I have a tenant who is a single mom of two boys, who has been a renter for her entire life. She barely qualified for my place, yet she has a big screen, new living room furniture, and a car more expensive than mine. She always pays her rent on time and the check always clears, so I don't care, but I do know her credit score and how much debt she's in (from the tenant screening when she moved in) and she would be much better off if she spent her money in better places or was a bit more thrifty. Now, could she have a sugar-daddy who buys her all these things? Sure, but I use her as an example of the millions of people out there who buy and spend beyond their means and as a result have massive credit card debt.

Remember, the floundering housing market right now is a result of people buying beyond their means; people bought at the top of their range (which was inflated by the banks anyway) instead of the lower end or mid-range. Then they bought all new stuff and lived the high life, even though they couldn't afford it; now the economy has tanked and everyone is screwed!

Sorry, I know that was all off-topic!!