kids should stay at home with their mothers

[formant]

Jesus, we could have done it, very easily. We chose not to, as we thought it would be better for the kids. We believe it was the right thing to do, and from how our kids are, think it's worked well.

Why would it not be beneficial to have both parents equally involved in the children's upbringing?

I don't understand fathers who don't want to be in it 100%. Nor do I understand mothers content to do it all whilst allowing their life/career to be parked. I do however understand that most couples don't have the luxury of choice in this, which is sad.

My other half took the baby to work today - work today being just a supervision meeting with one of his PhD students. Means I get to work from home without distraction (my work, when busy, doesn't mix well with babies).

[Mich the Tester]

Why would it not be beneficial to have both parents equally involved in the children's upbringing?

One of them might be a CUK'er.

[cailin maith]

My other half took the baby to work today - work today being just a supervision meeting with one of his PhD students. Means I get to work from home without distraction (my work, when busy, doesn't mix well with babies).

You are very lucky...

I couldn't just rock up at work with Jnr in tow - for a kick off the little sod would switch everything off and unplug it all... all about the switches and plugs at the moment.... sigh.

Neither could himself, for one thing Jnr isn't SC

[d000hg]

No matter how equal we pretend to be, it's still the woman who gives birth and breastfeeds the baby, and therefore it's usually the mother who puts career on hold and ends up taking on most of the baby duties.

Once breastfeeding is done, the man could just as easily be the stay-at-home one. It's less common but we're talking the scientific angle here... though their may of course already be attachment issues after all the breastfeeding so you'd probably need some cross-over while the man is presented as a stable carer first, not a sudden switch-over.

[Old Hack]

Why would it not be beneficial to have both parents equally involved in the children's upbringing?

I don't understand fathers who don't want to be in it 100%. Nor do I understand mothers content to do it all whilst allowing their life/career to be parked. I do however understand that most couples don't have the luxury of choice in this, which is sad.

My other half took the baby to work today - work today being just a supervision meeting with one of his PhD students. Means I get to work from home without distraction (my work, when busy, doesn't mix well with babies).

I am about as 100% as I could be. I just understand that there's an important bit the mother does, which I cannot, and this is all I am saying. Not matter how you dress it up, that's about the long and the short of it. I think the kids need to be with the mother more than the father in the early days. I have spent days looking after the kids as babies on my own, and if I leave the room, they deal with it. However, if my wife is looking after them, when she leaves the room, they, up to a certain age, go mental. This isn't learned behaviour, it's because they fear their mother is leaving and is a known natural reaction to the mother not being there. Me, I could leave and come back 30 mins later and they wouldn't know. The wife leaves, and it's bedlam.

Not being with your kid in the early days, as the mother, damages them. I can see how that works.

[Old Hack]

Once breastfeeding is done, the man could just as easily be the stay-at-home one. It's less common but we're talking the scientific angle here... though their may of course already be attachment issues after all the breastfeeding so you'd probably need some cross-over while the man is presented as a stable carer first, not a sudden switch-over.

There's more attachment issues than just breastfeeding d000hg, and once you have children, you'd realise this. As I said, I have looked after my kids as young babies, and they're mainly happy once they've melted down about the mum leaving them. If I leave the room, they deal with it. However, when the wife is home, if she leaves the room, the kids go mental, fearing she's off and will not return. They grow out of it, but it happens. It's a known reaction, the name of which escapes me.

[cailin maith]

It's a known reaction, the name of which escapes me.

It's called "can't possibly let Mammy have a wee in peace" syndrome.

[DodgyAgent]

Why would it not be beneficial to have both parents equally involved in the children's upbringing?

I don't understand fathers who don't want to be in it 100%. Nor do I understand mothers content to do it all whilst allowing their life/career to be parked. I do however understand that most couples don't have the luxury of choice in this, which is sad.

My other half took the baby to work today - work today being just a supervision meeting with one of his PhD students. Means I get to work from home without distraction (my work, when busy, doesn't mix well with babies).

I turned down a career as a deep sea diver just so that I could share the task of bringing up my kids.

[Gibbon]

I turned down a career as a deep sea diver just so that I could share the task of bringing up my kids.

You could really regret that.

[Old Hack]

It's called "can't possibly let Mammy have a wee in peace" syndrome.

There's more Latin in it I think, but I wouldn't argue that not being a direct translation of it