Do you believe periods of separation of child-parent/caregiver permanently damages the child? (childcare, baby)
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.
Hopes, to reiterate, if the baby doesn't know the grandparents they are strangers to the baby. It's not about grandparents in and of themselves. Or at least I wouldn't assume so. Primary caregivers can be anyone.
Hopes, to reiterate, if the baby doesn't know the grandparents they are strangers to the baby.
To reiterate, you have to start sometime or the grandparents will remain strangers for a very long time if they live far away. That's why I shared my experience. My grandparents didn't live in our city, but we had a very close bond with them because my parents sent us to spend time with them----long before 5 years old. If I recall correctly, you felt that it was detrimental to be away from the primary caregiver for extended periods of time for the first 5 years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn
It's not about grandparents in and of themselves. Or at least I wouldn't assume so.
This is ignoring that the quality of the temporary caregiver greatly influences the outcome. You posted studies of children left in foster care and all sorts of things. Those situations can't be compared to a parent wisely choosing a temporary caregiver who will be loving, nurturing and attentive to their child in their absence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Braunwyn
Primary caregivers can be anyone.
I'm not talking about grandparents as primary caregivers. I'm talking about primary caregivers leaving babies and children with grandparents living in other cities. They are strangers to the babies and will remain strangers to the babies for as long as the parents postpone fostering a relationship like you have been suggesting.
I have noticed a lot of people comparing situations that are totally different (like comparing apples to oranges).
Several people mentioned that their parents traveled often and they were left with their nannies or their grandparents, who were like parents to them and they turned out fine. Or spending summers with their aunts and uncles, who were like second parents to them.
Well, that is a lot different than parents going on a lengthy trip and the young child is "suddenly dumped", completely out of their comfort zone and familiar surroundings, at a total stranger's house with total strangers who will care for them while their parents are gone.
And, as another poster pointed out, the same situation may turn out fine for one child while their sibling, of a different age & with a different personality, may be seriously affected.
Some of the studies that I have read in the past, when I was an early childhood special education teacher, (no, I don't have links) were about children placed in emergency foster homes for weeks or months, again with total strangers, when their parent was put in jail or hospitalized for an extensive amount of time. As I recall, some of those young children did have serious adjustment problems. But, were those adjustment problems caused by the abrupt separation or perhaps by other environmental or child rearing factors?
This is an interesting topic but I doubt if anyone is going to change their opinion on the topic. Parents who strongly believe that children should only be cared for by the parents are not going to start to agree that a few vacations where the kids stay with grandparents or close family friends are OK. And, parents who routinely travel and leave their kids with nannies or sitters or relatives for extended periods of time are unlikely to decide to stay home more often.
I think this may be one of the subjects where people may need to "agree to disagree".
What I suspect could be harmful is if parents actively lie to themselves, or put their heads in the sand, because they don't want to face the fact that they prioritize their personal good time over the needs of their children. And that is what this aspect of the conversation is about. The needs of the child vs the parent's good time. It's a fail before we even leave the gate.
Anyhow, the cited article I linked above runs the gamut of A-Z separation in the Introduction and the study addresses 4 hypotheses rather than just innocuous short term parental separation as well as affects on parental behavior following separations. Since we are only discussing short term separation with a few specific variables provided by the OP - (A. mom and dad gone for 10 days twice a year; B. Infant's age to start at 6 months for first trip; C. Temporary residence during vacation is at grandparents who live in another country) I'll just pull out relevant content as I see it.
Although please read the article and study, or follow the citations in the article.
Their review of the literature in the Intro
Findings in this study
Discussion
You don't say.
Another study to add to the Journal of Plain Common Sense Lost on Half the Population.
I have noticed a lot of people comparing situations that are totally different (like comparing apples to oranges).
Several people mentioned that their parents traveled often and they were left with their nannies or their grandparents, who were like parents to them and they turned out fine. Or spending summers with their aunts and uncles, who were like second parents to them.
Well, that is a lot different than parents going on a lengthy trip and the young child is "suddenly dumped" completely out of their comfort zone at a total stranger's house with total strangers who will care for them.
No, it's not necessarily different at all if the grandparents, aunts and uncles live in different cities. In my situation, we started out in a strangers home with total strangers the first time. There has to always be a first time to foster that close relationship with distant grandparents, aunts and uncles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by germaine2626
Some of the studies that I have read in the past, when I was an early childhood special education teacher, (no, I don't have links) were about children placed in emergency foster homes for weeks or months, again with total strangers, when their parent was put in jail or hospitalized for an extensive amount of time. As I recall, some of those young children did have serious adjustment problems. But, were those adjustment problems caused by the abrupt separation or perhaps by other environmental or child rearing factors?
Those are totally different circumstances. The OP's quotes clearly indicate that the way the parents handle the separation and the attentiveness of the temporary caregiver have a great impact on creating a positive outcome.
To reiterate, you have to start sometime or the grandparents will remain strangers for a very long time if they live far away. That's why I shared my experience. My grandparents didn't live in our city, but we had a very close bond with them because my parents sent us to spend time with them----long before 5 years old. If I recall correctly, you felt that it was detrimental to be away from the primary caregiver for extended periods of time for the first 5 years.
This is ignoring that the quality of the temporary caregiver greatly influences the outcome. You posted studies of children left in foster care and all sorts of things. Those situations can't be compared to a parent wisely choosing a temporary caregiver who will be loving, nurturing and attentive to their child in their absence.
I'm not talking about grandparents as primary caregivers. I'm talking about primary caregivers leaving babies and children with grandparents living in other cities. They are strangers to the babies and will remain strangers to the babies for as long as the parents postpone fostering a relationship like you have been suggesting.
The initial link I posted in the other thread was more about vacationing parents. I don't recall the time span, but I've seen it span from 2-8 years. What I personally said about my kid is at least until she can talk.
What I personally said about my kid is at least until she can talk.
Why? Children can understand language and what's happening long before they can speak.
When we lived in Holland, my parents left me with a native who didn't speak English while they traveled Europe for a couple of weeks. They weren't concerned about my not speaking the language because they knew understanding language happens before speaking language. They were right too. My needing to communicate actually advanced my language skills. I was speaking Dutch when they returned from their trip.
Since we moved to Holland a year after I was born, I would have been 2 years old (at the most) because we only lived in Holland for a year. I remember everything about our life in Holland, btw. When children move around, it's much easier to be certain of what age you were for the memories. Most people don't remember their early childhoods because they lived in the same place.
What's important is how the parents separate from the child via explaining to the child what is happening and they will be back, along with having an attentive caregiver in their absence. Children aren't idiots incapable of understanding concepts at young ages. A child who has been separated from parents in the past will understand the parents will return because they returned previously. Your child would be at greater risk if you went into the hospital because you're not allowing her to learn that you will return after separations. It's like the extended version of peekaboo.
Because I would want her to be able to communicate with me or the person she is staying with. It's not about her not being able to understand, but the adult.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopes
Why? Children can understand language and what's happening long before they can speak.
When we lived in Holland, my parents left me with a native who didn't speak English while they traveled Europe for a couple of weeks. They weren't concerned about my not speaking the language because they knew understanding language happens before speaking language. They were right too. My needing to communicate actually advanced my language skills. I was speaking Dutch when they returned from their trip.
Since we moved to Holland a year after I was born, I would have been 2 years old (at the most) because we only lived in Holland for a year. I remember everything about our life in Holland, btw. When children move around, it's much easier to be certain of what age you were for the memories. Most people don't remember their early childhoods because they lived in the same place.
What's important is how the parents separate from the child via explaining to the child what is happening and they will be back, along with having an attentive caregiver in their absence. Children aren't idiots incapable of understanding concepts at young ages. A child who has been separated from parents in the past will understand the parents will return because they returned previously. Your child would be at greater risk if you went into the hospital because you're not allowing her to learn that you will return after separations. It's like the extended version of peekaboo.
Because I would want her to be able to communicate with me or the person she is staying with. It's not about her not being able to understand, but the adult.
I'm aware that's the reason. Your articles are saying the problem is the children not understanding the separation, and I say that's bull if the parents take the time to tell them. In a traumatic situation, such an emergency hospitalization or being ripped away from parents for foster car, a parent doesn't have the time to explain the separation.
Parents do have the time to explain for a trip. And children communicate with caregivers (temporary or permanent) long before they start talking. Your child communicates with you all day. Good caregivers understand the needs of children and can meet those needs. One of your articles states that parents explaining the separation prior to leaving and an attentive caregiver meeting the child's needs virtually eliminates all of the negative outcomes. When I have time to find it, I'll post it. After all, it's from your own articles.
I think it depends on the kid and time, but no, I don't think a 6 month old or a 1 year old is going to understand a parent explaining a trip. I don't think I could explain to my 1 year old why I'm leaving for work in the morning. I also wouldn't believe that anyone in my life would be able to understand my daughter with any significant degree of sensitivity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopes
I'm aware that's the reason. Your articles are saying the problem is the children not understanding the separation, and I say that's bull if the parents take the time to tell them. In a traumatic situation, such an emergency hospitalization or being ripped away from parents for foster car, a parent doesn't have the time to explain the separation.
Parents do have the time to explain for a trip. And children communicate with caregivers (temporary or permanent) long before they start talking. Your child communicates with you all day. Good caregivers understand the needs of children and can meet those needs. One of your articles states that parents explaining the separation prior to leaving and an attentive caregiver meeting the child's needs virtually eliminates all of the negative outcomes. When I have time to find it, I'll post it. After all, it's from your own articles.
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.
