5 ms·

I'm pretty sure that having both parents work and raising your child via nanny is the current obsession and having a stay at home parent was normal human operat

I'm pretty sure that having both parents work and raising your child via nanny is the current obsession and having a stay at home parent was normal human operating behavior for ~200,000 years.

idm 10y ago
The word "parenting" was coined in the 1950s. Prior to modern times, groups of people (maybe related, maybe just neighbours) shared childrearing responsibilities. It's unlikely anybody was a dedicated caregiver in the same sense as modern parenting.
- exstudent2 10y ago
  More often than not the mother was highly involved. Almost never was a nanny the primary caregiver.
nommm-nommm 10y ago
No, it's not the current obsession. The current cultural obsession is over-parenting and massive anxiety and guilt about not "spending enough time" with children no matter how much time is actually spent with children. The comment I replied to is reflective of the current cultural attitude that its "so sad" that kids get a break from their parents for 40 hours a week. Time spent on childcare has actually increased since the 1960s[1] which reflects the increased amount of emphasis on childrearing. There also seems to be little to no questioning of what is healthy for children and parents, it's just seen as "natural" and "obvious" and certainly ideal if possible. The people with this "so sad... you can't get those memories back" attitude never explain why its ok for the working parent to miss out on "memories" while they are at work whereas its absolutely essential that the nonworking parent gets in the maximum amount of "memories" possible. Or why its ok to ever send a child to a public school because "memories" certainly happen during the school day and you're going to miss out! Or why its so terrible for children to bond to several caregivers rather than one or two? [1] http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2007/DoParentsSpendEnoughTimeWithTheirChildren.aspx http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2007/DoParentsSpend... >Time diaries indicate that married fathers spent an average 6.5 hours a week caring for their children in 2000, a 153 percent increase since 1965. Married mothers spent 12.9 hours, a 21 percent increase. Single mothers spent 11.8 hours, a 57 percent increase. >These increases are powerful because the figures are for "primary care" where the child is the main focus of attention, not for time spent with the child while doing other things. Time-diary numbers, however, do not say whether mothers are as accessible to their children at home during as many hours as they were in the past.
- exstudent2 10y ago
  > The current cultural obsession is over-parenting and massive anxiety and guilt about not "spending enough time" with children no matter how much time is actually spent with children. More time spent with children != over-parenting. That's your own personal opinion. The OP also was explicitly stating that they don't have time with their child and that they pay for a full time nanny (a situation not mentioned in your linked report). Dual income households have indeed increased massively since the 1960s: http://www.pewresearch.org/ft_dual-income-households-1960-2012-2/ http://www.pewresearch.org/ft_dual-income-households-1960-20...
amyjess 10y ago
Maybe for the lower classes, but the upper class has always had nannies raise their children.
- exstudent2 10y ago
  Correct, but the OP was about middle class people where both parents work. That's new.

I'm pretty sure that having both parents work and raising your child via nanny is the current obsession and having a stay at home parent was normal human operating behavior for ~200,000 years.

idm 10y ago

The word "parenting" was coined in the 1950s. Prior to modern times, groups of people (maybe related, maybe just neighbours) shared childrearing responsibilities. It's unlikely anybody was a dedicated caregiver in the same sense as modern parenting.

exstudent2 10y ago
More often than not the mother was highly involved. Almost never was a nanny the primary caregiver.

nommm-nommm 10y ago

No, it's not the current obsession. The current cultural obsession is over-parenting and massive anxiety and guilt about not "spending enough time" with children no matter how much time is actually spent with children. The comment I replied to is reflective of the current cultural attitude that its "so sad" that kids get a break from their parents for 40 hours a week. Time spent on childcare has actually increased since the 1960s[1] which reflects the increased amount of emphasis on childrearing. There also seems to be little to no questioning of what is healthy for children and parents, it's just seen as "natural" and "obvious" and certainly ideal if possible. The people with this "so sad... you can't get those memories back" attitude never explain why its ok for the working parent to miss out on "memories" while they are at work whereas its absolutely essential that the nonworking parent gets in the maximum amount of "memories" possible. Or why its ok to ever send a child to a public school because "memories" certainly happen during the school day and you're going to miss out! Or why its so terrible for children to bond to several caregivers rather than one or two? [1] http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2007/DoParentsSpendEnoughTimeWithTheirChildren.aspx http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2007/DoParentsSpend... >Time diaries indicate that married fathers spent an average 6.5 hours a week caring for their children in 2000, a 153 percent increase since 1965. Married mothers spent 12.9 hours, a 21 percent increase. Single mothers spent 11.8 hours, a 57 percent increase. >These increases are powerful because the figures are for "primary care" where the child is the main focus of attention, not for time spent with the child while doing other things. Time-diary numbers, however, do not say whether mothers are as accessible to their children at home during as many hours as they were in the past.

exstudent2 10y ago
> The current cultural obsession is over-parenting and massive anxiety and guilt about not "spending enough time" with children no matter how much time is actually spent with children. More time spent with children != over-parenting. That's your own personal opinion. The OP also was explicitly stating that they don't have time with their child and that they pay for a full time nanny (a situation not mentioned in your linked report). Dual income households have indeed increased massively since the 1960s: http://www.pewresearch.org/ft_dual-income-households-1960-2012-2/ http://www.pewresearch.org/ft_dual-income-households-1960-20...

amyjess 10y ago

Maybe for the lower classes, but the upper class has always had nannies raise their children.

exstudent2 10y ago
Correct, but the OP was about middle class people where both parents work. That's new.