Do you believe periods of separation of child-parent/caregiver permanently damages the child? (method, party)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The specifics of my question are about leaving a child with grandparents who live far away -another country specifically, but that doesn't matter. The caregivers are assumed to love the baby, but the baby wouldn't really know them.
I would love to see some research in this area that would be considered acceptable to the readers here.
I wouldn't go by research myself -- I would go by individual child and situation. Some kids might be able to handle it just fine, others could be damaged. I don't think there could be a set standard that works for all.
Not all kids are as resiliant as other kids - and what is meant by "permanent damage"? There could be some emotional damage but the child will adjust and still lead a normal life.
I know a young woman who was taken away from her biological parents -- drunks and spent time in foster homes and was finally adopted. She has some memory of police showing up, being caught and taken away to foster homes, then being returned home, and then taken away again, occasionally stayed with a caring grandmother who for whatever reason didn't/couldn't keep her. She says she has "issues" but she functions, is in a long-term relationship, planning marriage and a family. She's been through therapists -- so there is damage but also healing to some degree.
That example is more extreme but what is meant by damage? Some kids might actually enjoy the stay with the grandparents, others may not. Even with the same set of siblings, different ones will react differently -- one might think it was fun, another might have worried the entire time or felt a loss.
I'll respond again even though I know Wmsn4Life would like me to shut the heck up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute
I wouldn't go by research myself -- I would go by individual child and situation. Some kids might be able to handle it just fine, others could be damaged. I don't think there could be a set standard that works for all.
Not all kids are as resiliant as other kids - and what is meant by "permanent damage"? There could be some emotional damage but the child will adjust and still lead a normal life.
I know a young woman who was taken away from her biological parents -- drunks and spent time in foster homes and was finally adopted. She has some memory of police showing up, being caught and taken away to foster homes, then being returned home, and then taken away again, occasionally stayed with a caring grandmother who for whatever reason didn't/couldn't keep her. She says she has "issues" but she functions, is in a long-term relationship, planning marriage and a family. She's been through therapists -- so there is damage but also healing to some degree.
That example is more extreme but what is meant by damage? Some kids might actually enjoy the stay with the grandparents, others may not. Even with the same set of siblings, different ones will react differently -- one might think it was fun, another might have worried the entire time or felt a loss.
I don't know what's meant by damage, but distress via separation anxiety that results in consequences (child is stressed out, scared, or sad due to caretaker's absence) is worth looking at IMO. How that plays out far into the future seems impossible to say.
Anyhow, one of the things I'm curious about is how parents know that first year and even second year. I have an almost 14 month old and everyday with her it's something new. She's trying out different ways of expressing herself. Most recently is this fake crying thing. She'll pretend to cry and then look at me. I suspect she's experimenting with her communication.
Also, some days she seems super independent, other days she's a bit more needy. I could not gauge at this point to predict how she would react to an extended absence from my husband and I other than to do a test run.
With that said, to reiterate, this isn't about extend family or nannies who are close to the baby.
OK, let go of the word "damage" since it gets everyone all angered up. W
Will it have a consequence? Yes, its unavoidable in human psychology - this will have a consequence.
You can rationalize all you want that it will be a positive consequence - but deep down, absent PC and other concerns, 9 outta 10 of us know the consequence is highly unlikely to be positive.
Most children are not raised under ideal circumstances. And most parents work. So regardless of what studies say, the great majority of humanity is being raised by 2 parent working families. And most of them are turning out just fine.
Human beings are resilient. We can thrive under all sorts of circumstances. Very few people are raised in ideal situations. People have problems, the children themselves can have problems. Life happens.
Certainly the death of a parent at a young age can be harmful. But regular separations for day care/travel? Meh. IMHO as long as children have A consistent caregiver (mom, dad, grandma, auntie, nanny, etc) then they have what they need to thrive.
I disagree.
I think fewer and fewer people are turning out fine as less and less parenting is happening.
I read that link. It goes without saying that a child will do better if left with a familiar caretaker. It also goes without saying that a child in need of hospitalization will do better if a parent remains present. What it doesn't say, is leaving a healthy child with a well known caretaker is detrimental.
I can only go by my own experience. When my kids were hospitalized, I was there, around the clock. When I went away with my husband, they stayed with my parents, who they were comfortable with, and who loved them. There were no repercussions, no tears, no nightmares.
I read that link. It goes without saying that a child will do better if left with a familiar caretaker. It also goes without saying that a child in need of hospitalization will do better if a parent remains present. What it doesn't say, is leaving a healthy child with a well known caretaker is detrimental.
I can only go by my own experience. When my kids were hospitalized, I was there, around the clock. When I went away with my husband, they stayed with my parents, who they were comfortable with, and who loved them. There were no repercussions, no tears, no nightmares.
That's what it's about (this thread)- unfamiliar caretakers in unfamiliar environments. I linked that site because there's a question in my mind how this would play out given that separation anxiety is supposed to be a normal part of development (based on what that page says).
That's what it's about (this thread)- unfamiliar caretakers in unfamiliar environments. I linked that site because there's a question in my mind how this would play out given that separation anxiety is supposed to be a normal part of development (based on what that page says).
I don't see where you made the distinction. You specified parents putting their needs/desires ahead of the parent-child bond. If you didn't mean to infer that any separation is harmful I apologize, but I didn't get it.
I really doubt parents leaving young children with strangers is much of an issue, except for those who don't excel at any area of parenting to begin with.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
