So what's the issue?
Jun. 13th, 2006 03:37 pmI paraphrase: "If you'd rather not leave your 10-month-old baby for more than a day, you have deeper issues." I didn't paraphrase the "deeper issues" phrase, since I'm not clear what it means, but the context implies "problems".
But I've heard this before - that it's unhealthy to want to spend almost all of every waking day with your baby, that wanting regular time away in multi-hour chunks is more normal than not, that not wanting such time is evidence that the parent is weirdly dependent on the baby and fostering a dependent attitude in the child, suffocating and other things I can't remember the names for now. If it's a boy-baby Oedipus comes into things once the discussion gets sufficiently heated.
The bit I don't understand is why it's bad for parents, particularly mothers, to want to spend most of the time with their children, caring for them, not leaving them with a sitter or a carer or similar. How does it hurt the mother? How does it hurt the child? How much time away from the child, leaving someone else to care for it, is necessary for optimal psikerlogical development?
This makes about as much sense to me as the assumption that it's bad for children to be left with an alternative carer while the parents, to pick a random example, go out and earn food money, or study, or take papier mache lessons. Why?
But I've heard this before - that it's unhealthy to want to spend almost all of every waking day with your baby, that wanting regular time away in multi-hour chunks is more normal than not, that not wanting such time is evidence that the parent is weirdly dependent on the baby and fostering a dependent attitude in the child, suffocating and other things I can't remember the names for now. If it's a boy-baby Oedipus comes into things once the discussion gets sufficiently heated.
The bit I don't understand is why it's bad for parents, particularly mothers, to want to spend most of the time with their children, caring for them, not leaving them with a sitter or a carer or similar. How does it hurt the mother? How does it hurt the child? How much time away from the child, leaving someone else to care for it, is necessary for optimal psikerlogical development?
This makes about as much sense to me as the assumption that it's bad for children to be left with an alternative carer while the parents, to pick a random example, go out and earn food money, or study, or take papier mache lessons. Why?
(no subject)
Date: 2006-06-13 08:42 pm (UTC)I was not allowed to leave my kids much. My dh didn't think I needed any guaranteed off duty time, because I loved the kids, didn't I? When my son was 6 months old a neighbour started looking after him for a few hours once a week, but then we moved 200 miles away, to somewhere we knew no-one. The first time I spent a night away from him was when he was 2.5 years old, and I'd just found out I was pg again. It was similar for my daughter; the time I spent 12 hours away from her was when ds was in hospital; she was 20 months old. Dh did take the kids out sometimes, but it wasn't regular, and was often a 'favour' for me.
As various others have pointed out, the type of togetherness is important; whether it is forced, enjoyed, smothering, or simply together in the same house, each doing their own thing.
Mothers and children all need their own friends and own support systems; it is only if these systems work that everyone can be their own person - so important for all concerned. The amount of time parents and children spend together, HEALTHILY, can vary tremendously from relationship to relationship, and still be 'right'.
In a year's time, I will be a lonely empty nester; my kids have been my whole life for the past 20+ years, not totally by my own choice, and it is VERY difficult to let go, but I know that they are more likely to keep in touch if I let them go with a hug and a wave, rather than trying to tie them to me. Oh, and I am trying to make plans for my maternal redundancy! (grin)
I have seen Ailbhe's parenting in real life; and she is superb! So, of course, is Linnea!