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.
If we are married, or living together, there will be two incomes, doesn't matter if one of us has Don Trump money, or one of us is selling dime bags, eff all that nonsense.
If we are married, or living together, there will be two incomes, doesn't matter if one of us has Don Trump money, or one of us is selling dime bags, eff all that nonsense.
Because little kids don't deserve a parent in the home to lovingly raise them??
It's tough to juggle all that shuttling kids around while selling dime bags. Have some compassion.
That's true.
It's really annoying how people act like one parent staying at home is about someone not working instead of it being about the huge benefits to young children.
I work full-time now but I stayed with my daughter the first three years. I took on that economical risk and career setback because it was what was best for her.
Again, I would kill for a spouse in the home. Someone to take care of business and organizing the household so I can focus on work and not have to worry about who's gonna pick up the kids or watch and feed the kids or take them to appointments/school/activities. Someone to clean my house and have food ready when I get home. Someone to LOVE my kids in their most vulnerable ages rather than a cold daycare environment, to teach them and engage with them.
Yep. I worked in early childhood long enough to strongly feel that if it's at all possible for a parent to be the primary caregiver during waking hours in the pre-K years, it's vastly preferable. Not everyone can swing it, and I get that. But if I can, hell, yes, it's the choice I'm making.
I worked in a really great center, as well, and wouldn't describe the environment as cold. But the fact remains that in a room with 8 infants, 12 1-year olds, 14 2-year olds, or 24 3- and 4- year olds (the legislated capacities, and we always had a waitlist and full classrooms), the opportunities for forming adequate caregiver bonds are not sufficient. Even with the best caregivers in the world, their attention is split many ways. If you can work out a lower ratio childcare setting, awesome, but I'd still much prefer to spend that time with my own kid, if at all possible. And if it IS possible, why would I not take advantage of that?
Yep. I worked in early childhood long enough to strongly feel that if it's at all possible for a parent to be the primary caregiver during waking hours in the pre-K years, it's vastly preferable. Not everyone can swing it, and I get that. But if I can, hell, yes, it's the choice I'm making.
I worked in a really great center, as well, and wouldn't describe the environment as cold. But the fact remains that in a room with 8 infants, 12 1-year olds, 14 2-year olds, or 24 3- and 4- year olds (the legislated capacities, and we always had a waitlist and full classrooms), the opportunities for forming adequate caregiver bonds are not sufficient. Even with the best caregivers in the world, their attention is split many ways. If you can work out a lower ratio childcare setting, awesome, but I'd still much prefer to spend that time with my own kid, if at all possible. And if it IS possible, why would I not take advantage of that?
Are centers actually stuffing to capacity? I would imagine the $15K-$24K/kid could be better spent if they are.
Just for infants the center is raking in $120K-$192K, but they are only paying the teacher $30K.
NVM, it looks like it varies by state.
In IL the state limits are a fraction of what yours are.
Those capacities are really high! I had my little guy in center-based daycare a couple of days per week last year, and his 3-year-old class had a 7:1 ratio.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TabulaRasa
Yep. I worked in early childhood long enough to strongly feel that if it's at all possible for a parent to be the primary caregiver during waking hours in the pre-K years, it's vastly preferable. Not everyone can swing it, and I get that. But if I can, hell, yes, it's the choice I'm making.
I worked in a really great center, as well, and wouldn't describe the environment as cold. But the fact remains that in a room with 8 infants, 12 1-year olds, 14 2-year olds, or 24 3- and 4- year olds (the legislated capacities, and we always had a waitlist and full classrooms), the opportunities for forming adequate caregiver bonds are not sufficient. Even with the best caregivers in the world, their attention is split many ways. If you can work out a lower ratio childcare setting, awesome, but I'd still much prefer to spend that time with my own kid, if at all possible. And if it IS possible, why would I not take advantage of that?
It's the insurance premiums that make child care centers so expensive. They're, understandably, through the roof.
Maybe, but I think the ratios are more of a factor. I would imagine that all daycare places have to insure against the same risks, but who knows what the pricing model actually looks like.
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.
