Child guru says nurseries harm small children

The Sunday Times ^ | February 12, 2006 | Sian Griffiths

[tbird5]

The Sunday Times - Britain

The Sunday Times February 12, 2006

Child guru says nurseries harm small children Sian Griffiths ONE of the world’s most popular parenting gurus is to warn that placing children younger than three in nurseries risks damaging their development.

Steve Biddulph, whose books have sold more than 4m copies worldwide, says that instead of subsidising nurseries, which do a “second-rate” job, the government should put in place policies to enable mothers to stay at home with their babies.

The advice signals a reversal of views for Biddulph, an Australian with more than 20 years’ experience as a therapist, whose previous bestsellers include Raising Boys and Raising Girls.

In his new book Biddulph will admit he has changed his mind because of growing evidence of increased aggression, antisocial behaviour and other problems among children who have spent a large part of their infancy being cared for away from home.

He argues that such children may have problems developing close relationships later.

[tbird5]

Read the research on who gets divorced and why and why marriage is always better for the child then divorce.

[protest1]

I would say your wife was absolutely correct

[Thoeting]

Totally agree with you.

But for single mothers supporting a family, options are limited. Remember the Welfare-To-Work program? For women to get off of welfare and work a job, someone has to watch the kids. These women are caught in a Catch-22.

[RMDupree]

My mom watched my youngest for the first two years, but she burned out and I had no other option but to turn to day care.

I chose the place with much care and thought, making sure it had a Christian curriculum and a clean, happy environment.

It just irks me to read these "anyone who puts their child in day care is a bad parent" threads. I'd love to be in a position to stay home for my kids, but if I didn't work we'd have nothing.

[LK44-40]

let the kids fight it out themselves, govern themselves

Yea....like in Lord of the Flies.

You must be either:

1. Employed by the Japanese Ministry of Propaganda, or

2. Deranged by Rousseau, or

3. Just enjoying baiting your friends here, or

4. You are five-years-old and impatient with Napolenoic ambition, or

5. You are on crack!

[SauronOfMordor]

the government should put in place policies to enable mothers to stay at home with their babies

That's easy. Eliminate welfare and all other government social programs. Force women to either (A) not have babies they can't afford to raise by themselves, or (B) marry a stable man who will support them, and do what's necessary to keep him interested in sticking around and continuing to support them

[RMDupree]

I'm not arguing the causes of divorce, tbird. I understand that some reasons for divorce are silly, especially with stakes raised because of children involved.

What I am challenging is the assumption that ~everyone~ has a choice in sending their child to day care.

It is for those folks, like me, that I have to stand up and say that it doesn't make us bad parents. We do what we must to survive.

[nmh]

That's right!

They don't DARE to discipline these little monsters - you know, their SELF ESTEEM might be injured.

I've seen it time and time again, "baby prison" kids when they are older are VERY ILL BEHAVED. In the "baby prison" they form little gangs because they don't have the love and nurturing that parents give. I define parents as ONE male and ONE female, MARRIED.

I won't allow my daughter to play with daycare kids. They undo what we try to instill in our child. Right now she's still in training. She needs good examples.

[RMDupree]

Force women to either (A) not have babies they can't afford to raise by themselves,

Force us not to have babies we can't afford by ourselves, Sauron? And if we're married when we decide to have them and then suddenly we're not married anymore?

or (B) marry a stable man who will support them, and do what's necessary to keep him interested in sticking around and continuing to support them

Just out of curiousity, what do you consider "doing what is necessary"? Just how much is a woman supposed to tolerate?

[mudblood]

Heh, I get you on the lord of the flies thing. Just remember: the teacher is in the room, an omni-present authority. You should watch the video. Any campus will have it. Its a study on how 3 cultures handle preschool, not propoganda - they don't give any indication on which one they like best.

I no longer work for the Japanese Ministry of Propoganda...

[TAdams8591]

"There may be tons of wonderful, caring babysitters out there but NO ONE WILL LOVE YOUR CHILD LIKE YOU DO!"

Exactly!

[nmh]

"Then I learned that he was the son of an incredibly wealthy oil exec."

Envy isn't flattering. Perhaps he did not benefit from that "wealth". Besides many who are NOT wealthy manage to put their kids first, do with less and raise great kids. I'd rather see that than kids whose parents work to "give them what they didn't have" and turn out to be spoiled, ill behaved hoodlums.

[tbird5]

Agree. Yet, I would like to know what mother's did with their children when their husbands died after wars? And what did father's do when their wives died in childbirth which was so common up to the 1950's? Government wasn't there for them is my point.

[D-Chivas]

The kids don't need a nursery it is bad for them. But we don't need a government program to keep them at home. Just two things are needed.

Stay married and Be happy with less material things.

Amen.

[protest1]

Most singe mum's these day are single because that is their choice. Many are not divorced they just did not bother getting married in the first place. They are their own worst enemies. Also among divorced women, with children, that I have know it has been hard to tell just why they were divorced in the first place. A general discontent seemed to be the reason. Not in one case I know did the parents care two hoots what their selfish divorce did for the children. Divorce and promiscuity should be greatly discouraged to prevent the children suffering.

[veronica]

It just irks me to read these "anyone who puts their child in day care is a bad parent" threads. I'd love to be in a position to stay home for my kids, but if I didn't work we'd have nothing.

Lots of notions we have can change when the real world intrudes. But I think you hit the nail on the head. If a day care center has a solid religion-based core (Christian or Jewish) that makes a huge difference. And Lord knows one can burn out babysitting. It's exhausting taking care of little ones. My friend's baby is just about to turn two, and now she takes her once a week to a very small, local, play school. I handle the one other day the mom works, or the grampa does. It's a sacrifice cause I'm a very busy person, but it's worth it. The kid seems to like the play school. It's in a very small town and all her little buddies are there.

[SauronOfMordor]

But for single mothers supporting a family, options are limited. Remember the Welfare-To-Work program? For women to get off of welfare and work a job, someone has to watch the kids. These women are caught in a Catch-22.

Correction: these women have, for the most part, chosen to put themselves in a Catch-22

[Politicalmom]

Wow. You must have a low opinion of "men".

Sounds like only women have any sense of responsibility and "men" are animal-like beasts with short attention spans.

[clarissaexplainsitall]

"Parents who put their babies in day care are awful people..."

It's so nice to meet you too!

[protest1]

Yet, I would like to know what mother's did with their children when their husbands died after wars?

or even what did the mothers do with their children when their fathers were away for years fighting in WWII. The children were not packed of the be raised by the state.