BRANCH: Careers and childraising

[Suki]

Originally Posted by MMM

For both a mother and a father to have a career, something has to be sacrificed. That would be child raising.

That's not true and I'm living proof of that.

You'd have to be very economically well off in order to be able to quit your job. I mean, most women don't stop working after their first child because they can't afford to, not because they wouldn't like to.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Suki

That's not true and I'm living proof of that.

You'd have to be very economically well off in order to be able to quit your job. I mean, most women don't stop working after their first child because they can't afford to, not because they wouldn't like to.

Every minute you are not at home raising your children you are not at home raising your children.

[Suki]

Originally Posted by MMM

Every minute you are not at home raising your children you are not at home raising your children.

Every minute you're not working and being paid for it, you're not working and being paid for it, therefore you're not earning the money you need to raise your child in good conditions.

The father's salary alone might not be enough.

Parents have to deal with the most part in the childraising stage, but there has to be other people too. The child needs to interact with other human beings. Get familiar with other faces. Get used to not always being around his parents. That's why taking your child to day care is not such a bad idea.

Raising your kid right doesn't mean being with him 24/7, it means making sure he's never unattended and gets everything he needs (like, survival wise).

[MissMisa]

I agree completely with Suki on this one.

To be at home with your child all the time is a detriment to your child's health rather than a help. They become dependant on that one parent and can't function without them.

It's true that the child needs different role models in their lives, but the gender of these are irrelevent. In my opinion, these roles are interchangable.

If both parents are working, it is a positive step for your childs development. It means they don't become dependant on one or both parents, and they learn social skills and how to mix with other people. As they get older, they learn you have to make sacrifices and they develop a stronger work ethic.

The best way to learn is by going out there, making mistakes and doing things for yourself. Just because both parents may be working doesn't mean they are never there for their child, the typical 9-5 job means they actually spend the majority of the day with their child anyway.

Maybe it's useful in the very early days for parents to be at home to provide basic needs for a new born child, but that's about as far as it goes for me.

I don't think one parent needs to go out and work, and one parent needs to stay at home. The parents will be at home some of the time and at work some of the time. Surely it's better to have a balance rather than a one sided state of affairs?

[StonerPenguin]

Originally Posted by MMM

Every minute you are not at home raising your children you are not at home raising your children.

Whaaaaaaaaat? Did you intend for that comment to be as redundant as it is?
Anyway, after your child enters public school there's really no need for a stay-a-home mom/dad. I was home-schooled and my dad ran a machine-shop from home and really he didn't to check on me and my siblings very often. (Although, raising small children right next to a machine shop isn't very safe... and I have lots of now-hilarious stories of trips to the ER lol)

Kids don't need 24/7 attention. I know a lady who raised her daughter that way and now the kid is batshit crazy and self-centered. A think a little alone time is good for kids Eh, just my two cents. BTW Suki and Robin, I wish you guys the best lol

Edit; Haha, MissMisa and Suki said similar stuff to what I wrote! You guys are so cool

[MMM]

Originally Posted by Suki

Every minute you're not working and being paid for it, you're not working and being paid for it, therefore you're not earning the money you need to raise your child in good conditions.

The father's salary alone might not be enough.

Parents have to deal with the most part in the childraising stage, but there has to be other people too. The child needs to interact with other human beings. Get familiar with other faces. Get used to not always being around his parents. That's why taking your child to day care is not such a bad idea.

Raising your kid right doesn't mean being with him 24/7, it means making sure he's never unattended and gets everything he needs (like, survival wise).

I think you are talking about two different things. You talk about your career for you on one side, and then working out of necessity on the other.

Naturally if it is for survival, work needs to take priority over careers, but I think there is something funny about both a mother and father who are successful working when it isn't necessary.

Sure a child needs to be exposed to people other than parents, but when the parents are gone for the majority of the day, that means they are being raised by people OTHER than the parents.

Child raising is a relationship, and a relationship is a two way street. Id you want a stranger taking care of your child during the majority of waking hours during the day, what is the point of having children in the first place?

I think it is fine for people to put great importance in their careers, but if it is a great priority for both husband and wife (and I know couples like that) then they should wait on having kids.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by StonerPenguin

Whaaaaaaaaat? Did you intend for that comment to be as redundant as it is?
Anyway, after your child enters public school there's really no need for a stay-a-home mom/dad. I was home-schooled and my dad ran a machine-shop from home and really he didn't to check on me and my siblings very often. (Although, raising small children right next to a machine shop isn't very safe... and I have lots of now-hilarious stories of trips to the ER lol)

Kids don't need 24/7 attention. I know a lady who raised her daughter that way and now the kid is batshit crazy and self-centered. A think a little alone time is good for kids Eh, just my two cents. BTW Suki and Robin, I wish you guys the best lol

Edit; Haha, MissMisa and Suki said similar stuff to what I wrote! You guys are so cool

I am talking about ages zero to about five. After a child has his "job" of going to school, there is no reason for both parents not to work if they want/need to. I am talking about the baby/toddler years.

I think your story of "hilarious" ER trips kind of makes my point.

[MMM]

Originally Posted by MissMisa

I agree completely with Suki on this one.

To be at home with your child all the time is a detriment to your child's health rather than a help. They become dependant on that one parent and can't function without them.

It's true that the child needs different role models in their lives, but the gender of these are irrelevent. In my opinion, these roles are interchangable.

If both parents are working, it is a positive step for your childs development. It means they don't become dependant on one or both parents, and they learn social skills and how to mix with other people. As they get older, they learn you have to make sacrifices and they develop a stronger work ethic.

The best way to learn is by going out there, making mistakes and doing things for yourself. Just because both parents may be working doesn't mean they are never there for their child, the typical 9-5 job means they actually spend the majority of the day with their child anyway.

Maybe it's useful in the very early days for parents to be at home to provide basic needs for a new born child, but that's about as far as it goes for me.

I don't think one parent needs to go out and work, and one parent needs to stay at home. The parents will be at home some of the time and at work some of the time. Surely it's better to have a balance rather than a one sided state of affairs?

I missed this from Miss Misa, but wanted to respond.

Why would you think raising a child would be a determent to a child's ability to grow up? Raising a child is the normal way of doing things, and how it has been done since we started walking on dry land.

Children ARE dependent on their parents until they are old enough to function on their own. A parent TEACHES independence and all the other skills that are needed to function in society.

I agree that the roles of a mother and father can be interchanged, but I do not agree that the roles of a mother and father should be exactly the same. That's a little like saying little boys should be exactly the same as little girls.

The reality is that boys and girls see the roles of mother and father differently. The way a boy listens to his father can be very different than the way he listens to his mother, and vice versa. This modern day meme that moms and dads should play the exact same roles is a fallacy, and makes it easier to accept single parenthood as just as good as a two-parent home. If both mom and dad are doing the EXACT same things, then what do we need to people for?

How often I have heard single moms say "I am my son's mom AND dad"? Maybe to you, but not to your son.

I am not saying a single mom cannot do a good job, but I am saying she could do a BETTER job with the father in the picture. Of course there are many examples where this might be true (abusive father, for example) but pound for pound a child does better with a man and a woman raising him.

I cannot imagine a reality where it is BETTER for a child if BOTH parents are out of the picture most of the waking day. I am curious where you get this impression. How is that "positive for a child's development"? The child is going to develop regardless, should that development be fostered by a loving parent, or a stranger? Who do you want your child to learn values from?

[MissMisa]

I never said that the parent's roles should be the same so that point is irrelevent. 'It's true that the child needs different role models in their lives'

You can raise the child without being there 24/7. Clearly if you are working 8-7 every day bar Sunday then that's no good either.

Your child will never grow to be dependent if one person is constantly there 24/7. It's easy for a nanny or a childcare worker to provide these basic needs (and more) for a child while you are away.

Surely it's better to learn by example than to be 'taught' to be independant?

There has to be a balance.

Personally I think if career is your priority, kids just get in the way, so that's why I don't want them. But either parent shouldn't have to give up their career if that happens as a result of circumstances beyond your control.

There are positives to either example but I personally think working parents set a better example for their kids than those that don't work.

As a side note, from my experience (which to you will be limited because I'm 20 so not much to go on), all the kids with stay-at-home Mum's or Dad's are the ones that have never had jobs, and all the kids who's parents worked are the ones that have, or have had, a part-time job, including me. Those are just my observations and not stats, but that's what I'd rather go on than nothing.

[RobinMask]

Originally Posted by MMM

I agree that the roles of a mother and father can be interchanged, but I do not agree that the roles of a mother and father should be exactly the same. That's a little like saying little boys should be exactly the same as little girls.

The reality is that boys and girls see the roles of mother and father differently. The way a boy listens to his father can be very different than the way he listens to his mother, and vice versa. This modern day meme that moms and dads should play the exact same roles is a fallacy, and makes it easier to accept single parenthood as just as good as a two-parent home. If both mom and dad are doing the EXACT same things, then what do we need to people for?

How often I have heard single moms say "I am my son's mom AND dad"? Maybe to you, but not to your son.

I am not saying a single mom cannot do a good job, but I am saying she could do a BETTER job with the father in the picture. Of course there are many examples where this might be true (abusive father, for example) but pound for pound a child does better with a man and a woman raising him.

I cannot imagine a reality where it is BETTER for a child if BOTH parents are out of the picture most of the waking day. I am curious where you get this impression. How is that "positive for a child's development"? The child is going to develop regardless, should that development be fostered by a loving parent, or a stranger? Who do you want your child to learn values from?

I don't understand why you're against parents leaving their child with another perosn whilst they work. If we assume that the parents are leaving their child with a loving nurturing adult, one who will attend the childs needs and not neglect or abuse them, then the parents return later on in the day/night to spend considerable/quality time with the child, then what would be the problem? The child knows who it's parents are, it loves them, and those few hours apart don't serve as a problem. If anything it teaches the child to socialise and interact with people other than its parents, and it gives it a wider world view and teaches it respect of other adults. Why would it be deteremental to a child?

Also - just because it's been annoying me, lol - I have to ask you. . . you keep saying men and women are different. I get that, biologically and psychologically we are, and children can relate differently to each parent depending on gender/age etc. When it comes to parenting though what do you think the difference should be (or is) between the father and the mother? And if there is a difference - aside from cultural and sociological expectations - why should there be a difference?

I would also ask where is your evidence it's better to have a two-person family. I could give anecdotal evidence why single-parent families or same-sex parents can be better in the long-run for a child, but I would like to see objective/scientific evidence that different-sexed two-parent families are better, if that is what the claim is.