Babies 6 Weeks of Age?

[mac60]

In my own personal experience with my children in both centers and home daycares, I found that the centers were much more rule oriented than home daycares. I found home daycares to be much more willing to work with a parent than at a center.

[jen]

I am a parent and what I want for my child will reign supreme and I HAVE chosen centers based on what suits my child and my wants for him. There is no basis for argument there because afterall, I am the parent and have the ultimate say in raising my minor. I believe the instances where a provider chooses a family as you suggested solely occurs in home care settings; not center care facilities. I personally do not prefer a home care setting for the very reasons you specified--the provider mandates what *they* believe to be developmentally appropriate or in general what *they* deem appropriate for the child(ren). I prefer center group settings and in that type of care, the parent chooses where to enroll their child and would have more levels of individuals to bring problems forth to. In a center setting, if something is not working out in a classroom there is atleast an assistant Director, Director, owner, or further level of management to discuss the matter with where parents aren't in a deadlock disagreement with one individual as you would find in a home care setting. The first time a provider attempts to tell me how to raise my child, a notice would be forthcoming. I have no issue with rules. I have no issue with set schedules or programs. I am not unreasonable in what I expect from my child's dc center. But I will take issue with someone mandating their opinion onto my child. I have not had my child in a home care setting so cannot speak for the need for such rules to exist. I would imagine that the operator of a home care setting may need to place rules of their own for items such as bottles, toys, pacifiers, etc for the simple fact that they may have scattered age groups and be the only person caring for the group and the rules would be necessary for the benefit of the provider. Yet another reason why homecare is not an option for my child. But, that was not the topic of this thread was it? I was simply pointing out in my earlier post that disagreements occur because of differing opinions which is just the fact and you proved that with your reply.

Look, all I'm saying is this...unless you keep your child home, no daycare, no preschool, no school at all, your opinion only reigns supreme as long as it falls in to the parameters of the program that that you choose. That is just a fact of life.

[Vesta]

I was really under the impression that the OP was a parent, or at least not a provider.

[missnikki]

I am a Director of a center, and I have those same rules. I absolutely interview parents and children for the purpose of finding out if we are a 'fit' for their family. That being said, it is the same as finding an auto shop or hairdresser. You get recommendations, visit the site and get a feel, even speak to the service person. You have the chance to ask questions, and take it or leave it. So do they.
Ultimately, we aren't out to take over the world, one infant at a time. We are in it because we love kids and are more experienced with unique family dynamics than, say, opinionated parents.

[Chickenhauler]

seems like a lot of families listen to their daycare provider. So maybe you could encourage Moms to stay home longer. I love the help that is given in the "great white north". Where is that? I wish the lower 48 did that!!!

We are already free to do that here in the US.

We can save our money, and be responsible, and with the help of modern science and being responsible adults, put off having children until we are financially able to take off as much or as little time as we please, without forcing someone else to pay for it.

I'm glad we don't have that here....I pay for mine already, why should I pay for everyone else's?

[missnikki]

We are already free to do that here in the US.

We can save our money, and be responsible, and with the help of modern science and being responsible adults, put off having children until we are financially able to take off as much or as little time as we please, without forcing someone else to pay for it.

I'm glad we don't have that here....I pay for mine already, why should I pay for everyone else's?

As always, well said. I think you should run for office- Department of Telling It Like It Is, When No One Else Will.

[Unregistered]

I dont think it has much to do with paying for other people who aren't being responsible and planning for their children. Even people who prepare get paid maternity leave AND paternity leave in many countries. It's NOT welfare. It's a benefit through employers.

1) Out of 173 countries studied, 168 countries offer guaranteed leave with income to women in connection with childbirth; 98 of these countries offer 14 or more weeks paid leave. ... The U.S. guarantees no paid leave for mothers in any segment of the work force.

2) Sixty-six countries ensure that fathers either receive paid paternity leave or have a right to paid parental leave; 31 of these countries offer 14 or more weeks of paid leave. The U.S. guarantees fathers neither paid paternity nor paid parental leave.

3) At least 107 countries protect working women’s right to breastfeed; in at least 73 of these the breaks are paid. The U.S. does not guarantee the right to breastfeed, even though breastfeeding is proven to reduce infant mortality.

Another recent study from the Census Bureau provides even more sobering statistics about the lack of family values in American public policy. This study highlights the fact that 51per cent of women who give birth in this country have no paid maternity leave whatsoever. These women are forced to use unpaid leave or quit their jobs. The 49 per cent of women who do have some sort of paid leave generally have to cobble together vacation and sick days as well as "disability" leave. It is truly disgusting that we could ever consider pregnancy as a "disability."

[Chickenhauler]

I dont think it has much to do with paying for other people who aren't being responsible and planning for their children. Even people who prepare get paid maternity leave AND paternity leave in many countries. It's NOT welfare. It's a benefit through employers.

1) Out of 173 countries studied, 168 countries offer guaranteed leave with income to women in connection with childbirth; 98 of these countries offer 14 or more weeks paid leave. ... The U.S. guarantees no paid leave for mothers in any segment of the work force.

2) Sixty-six countries ensure that fathers either receive paid paternity leave or have a right to paid parental leave; 31 of these countries offer 14 or more weeks of paid leave. The U.S. guarantees fathers neither paid paternity nor paid parental leave.

3) At least 107 countries protect working women’s right to breastfeed; in at least 73 of these the breaks are paid. The U.S. does not guarantee the right to breastfeed, even though breastfeeding is proven to reduce infant mortality.

Another recent study from the Census Bureau provides even more sobering statistics about the lack of family values in American public policy. This study highlights the fact that 51per cent of women who give birth in this country have no paid maternity leave whatsoever. These women are forced to use unpaid leave or quit their jobs. The 49 per cent of women who do have some sort of paid leave generally have to cobble together vacation and sick days as well as "disability" leave. It is truly disgusting that we could ever consider pregnancy as a "disability."

Call it what you want, semantics, whatever, but when the gov't makes a law mandating an employer do something like paid maternity/paternity leave, paid vacation, etc, it's a socialist program of gov't interfering with private business.


You state "It's a benefit through employers"....but it's guaranteed and required by the gov't?

That means that everyone's wages in that workplace are reduced to make up for Fertile Myrtle's annual paid maternity leave. That money has to come from somewhere.

Someone large like Intel, HP, Toyota, etc can weather something like this, but I run a small business. Now, if I was mandated to pay 14 weeks of maternity leave with no production (revenue) for that expense, I would be all done and over with-bankrupt. My only other option would be to hire a temp to fill that position, but that still doesn't make up for 14 weeks of pay going out of the checkbook with no return. Thus, I would not hire females of child bearing age to protect myself and my business from this risk.

Why should women get special treatment when it comes to paid breaks for breastfeeding? What happened to "equal work for equal pay"?

The US is not a socialist nation (not yet anyways), we are a capitalist (for now), kinda-free-market nation where if you don't like the way things are where you work, you are free to seek an employer who better suits your wants.

And if no employer wants to give you what you want, you are free to get some education and job skills and make yourself and what you bring to the workplace so valuable that employers will be bidding against one another, offering you the sun, moon and stars just to come work for them.

[QualiTcare]

chickenhauler - what DID happen to equal work for equal pay?

women STILL don't get paid as much as men for the same job.

and you say why should women get special treatment? in many countries, they have paternity leave as well. i see nothing sexist about that.

just because america doesn't do it, doesn't mean it's not right.

america is the most family unfriendly country in the world. if other countries can do it, so can we. there are countries where everyone has access to healthcare, education, maternity AND paternity leave (paid) and they are nowhere near the welfare state we are in.

[Chickenhauler]

chickenhauler - what DID happen to equal work for equal pay?

women STILL don't get paid as much as men for the same job.

and you say why should women get special treatment? in many countries, they have paternity leave as well. i see nothing sexist about that.

just because america doesn't do it, doesn't mean it's not right.

america is the most family unfriendly country in the world. if other countries can do it, so can we. there are countries where everyone has access to healthcare, education, maternity AND paternity leave (paid) and they are nowhere near the welfare state we are in.

We have all those things you list here in America, you are free to choose which healthcare provider you want to pay for, you are free to attend whatever level of education you want to pay for, and you are free to take as much or as little time off when you or your spouse has a child.

Who is paying for this leave? Where is the money coming from? This is the question I ask everytime someone brings up one social program or another, yet nobody can give me a straight, honest answer. All I ever hear is "Don't worry about it, we'll figure it out later"....dammit, that's why this nation is in the condition it's in, we spend, spend, spend, and worry about paying the tab later.


So, if I moved to one of these nations that are so 'equal', when my co-worker goes to breast feed, I also get a paid break also?

I highly doubt it, I'm willing to bet that while she's getting paid to pump or breastfeed, I'm getting paid to do twice the work for the same amount of money.

When my wife was working a regular job, she did her pumping on her regularly scheduled breaks, not during special paid breaks that she was given just because she was breast feeding.

[jen]

It would be nice if we just treated people like, oh, I don't know HUMAN BEINGS! Good grief, if a new mother needs a few minutes to pump, why in the world do you care if you need to do a little extra for a few minutes! I am certain that at some point someone will do a little extra for you as well.

When I worked outside the home I was on salary; I just locked my office door and did what I needed to do. When the receptionist had a baby, I watched the phones for her why she used my office! And no, I did not ask her to clock out.

Now aside from simply doing the right thing, there are economic realities as well...

Breast fed babies are in general less likely to become ill than forumula fed babies. When babies are ill, somebody is gonna be staying home to care for that child! Do you have any idea how much lost productivity there is when parents are home for days with a sick infant? It is much cheaper to allow women the opportunity to breast feed than it is to have them miss many more hours home with a sick baby.

Then there would be the health care costs...breast fed babies, as they are sick less often, spend less time utilizing health care services. Less health care costs can save the company THOUSANDS of dollars in premiums.

It would be great if the world were as simplistic as you've made it out to be, but it just isn't so.

[QualiTcare]

chickenhauler,

you asked about how to pay for it and how nobody can answer the question, etc.

really?

it's not that complicated, really. the U.S. is actually the worst when it comes to maternity/paternity leave and benefits.

other countries treat it much like unemployment benefits are handled. anyone who works and pays taxes is eligible for unemployment if they get laid off or fired in a lot of cases. it's no different. not everyone gets laid off and uses unemployment, but it's there should they need it. not everyone gets pregnant or has a wife that gets pregnant, but the benefits work the same way.

you act as if it's welfare and it isn't. people who don't work wouldn't get a check on maternity/paternity leave just like people who don't work don't get unemployment.


why would anyone be AGAINST working mothers and fathers being able to have paid time off (up to a year in many countries).

are you against unemployment benefits too?

[Chickenhauler]

chickenhauler,

you asked about how to pay for it and how nobody can answer the question, etc.

really?

it's not that complicated, really. the U.S. is actually the worst when it comes to maternity/paternity leave and benefits.

other countries treat it much like unemployment benefits are handled. anyone who works and pays taxes is eligible for unemployment if they get laid off or fired in a lot of cases. it's no different. not everyone gets laid off and uses unemployment, but it's there should they need it. not everyone gets pregnant or has a wife that gets pregnant, but the benefits work the same way.

you act as if it's welfare and it isn't. people who don't work wouldn't get a check on maternity/paternity leave just like people who don't work don't get unemployment.


why would anyone be AGAINST working mothers and fathers being able to have paid time off (up to a year in many countries).

are you against unemployment benefits too?

Ok, now answer the question-where will the money come from?


Are you going to mandate that every person, regardless of whether they have children, plan to have children or even cannot have children, have a percentage deducted from their paycheck to be paid out to those who have kids?

That, my dear lady, is socialism.


Why would I be against it? Because I live in the real world where I understand that money doesn't just appear magically. Before the gov't can give ANYONE ANYTHING, they must first take it from someone else.

And that's WRONG.

[Chickenhauler]

It would be nice if we just treated people like, oh, I don't know HUMAN BEINGS! Good grief, if a new mother needs a few minutes to pump, why in the world do you care if you need to do a little extra for a few minutes! I am certain that at some point someone will do a little extra for you as well.

When I worked outside the home I was on salary; I just locked my office door and did what I needed to do. When the receptionist had a baby, I watched the phones for her why she used my office! And no, I did not ask her to clock out.

Now aside from simply doing the right thing, there are economic realities as well...

Breast fed babies are in general less likely to become ill than forumula fed babies. When babies are ill, somebody is gonna be staying home to care for that child! Do you have any idea how much lost productivity there is when parents are home for days with a sick infant? It is much cheaper to allow women the opportunity to breast feed than it is to have them miss many more hours home with a sick baby.

Then there would be the health care costs...breast fed babies, as they are sick less often, spend less time utilizing health care services. Less health care costs can save the company THOUSANDS of dollars in premiums.

It would be great if the world were as simplistic as you've made it out to be, but it just isn't so.

My question is, why can't this be performed on their regularly scheduled break times?

Why should there have to be special accommodations made for them?

[jen]

I am sure that there are companies who do require women to pump during their regular break times...during my last 3 jobs prior to daycare we didn't get "breaks." We got an hour for lunch, but other than that we used the restroom, got coffee, or pumped when we needed to.

It isn't just nursing women who get special accomodations. Hell, smokers had been getting special treatment for YEARS!

In the end, it still comes down to this...EVERYBODY benefits from breast feeding. The company with healthy, happy mothers who are at work and productive as opposed to at home with a sick child--not to mention the reduction in health care services and savings on insurance premiums. In a perfect world, when the company is productive and saving money, the employees are making more money, getting better benefits, and enjoy a certain level of job security.

Lots of people get special treatment for different things. We in Minnesota are fortunate enough to be able to purchase subsidized health insurance if we are self employed or if our employer doesn't offer health care. Many people balk about that, but in reality it comes down to the same thing. It is CHEAPER to ensure that people have access to health care than it is to deal with health issues once they have become emergent. Same deal, it is cheaper to provide women with the opportunity to pump than it is to have them home with sick kids or in the doctors office.