The cost of childcare vs doing it yourself?

Sweet Rose

I don't think you can use the argument that staying at home is more expensive in terms of heating, food etc. You still need to heat your home when you come home from work. I can prepare meals on a budget at home for next to nothing and if I was working I'd have to pay for diesel to get to and from work everyday and then I'd have to pay for work clothes too. Other things I've found expensive while working was paying in for retirement presents, birthday cakes etc. I definitely find it's cheaper to stay at home but then I've become very savvy and I have the time to look for he best deals.

I know it's controversial but at times I do wonder why some people bother to have children. I have a friend who leaves her child in the crèche at 7.30 every morning and doesn't collect her until 6.30p.m. She says herself she is just bringing her child home, bathing her, reading her a story and kissing her goodnight. At weekends, she likes to socialise and leaves her child with a childminder most of Saturday evening and Sunday morning. She would rarely bring her child on a day trip or anything like that. Where is the parenting in that.

Children, especially at a young age, need a comfort figure and a constant presence in their lives. To me this should be their parent. Children grow up too quick and it's nice to spend the time with them when they are so little.

lazygal

jester77 wrote: »

Have you watched an infant?

My little lad is just gone 11 months and being around other infants definitely helps his progress. When there are younger babies around he will go over and gently touch them. When there are infants around his own age he will interact with them, play with the same toy or grab food from each other. When there are infants who are older and are too fast on their feet for him, he will stand there and observe them and watch what they do, and you will then see him trying to do some of the stuff that they do, climbing onto things is one I wish he hadn't picked up

I have noticed a huge difference with my younger child compared to the older one. There's 15 months between them but he picks up thing so quickly because he's had the older sibling to play with. He's also saying a few words earlier, knows how things 'work' (lego etc) from watching big sister and I can see him doing things like potty training quicker too. I was skeptical about children needing socialization before age 3 myself, but having seen the effect on my younger child I know it has some benefits.

pwurple

Era, unless you never leave the house with children, they are going to get socialisation from interacting with neighbours, people on the bus, in shops... wherever.

We all know people at both extremes of miserable situations.. the mum who hates being at home, and plonks the kids in front of peppa pig for the day while she drinks vodka in the other room. Or the working mum who has a massive commute and never sees the kids and hates every minute of that. And on the other side there are very happy SAHM's who balance and enjoy it all, and the same for working parents.

The happiest are where there are 2 content parents, happy with their workload and how much they see the kids. Whether it's at home, or working is immaterial. Miserable resentful parents make for unhappy children.

SameDiff

lazygal wrote: »

I have noticed a huge difference with my younger child compared to the older one. There's 15 months between them but he picks up thing so quickly because he's had the older sibling to play with. He's also saying a few words earlier, knows how things 'work' (lego etc) from watching big sister and I can see him doing things like potty training quicker too. I was skeptical about children needing socialization before age 3 myself, but having seen the effect on my younger child I know it has some benefits.

But it's not a race. Every child learns to walk and talk in the end. What matters is the presence of one or both parents in their lives from a very early age.

That is the foundation the rest of their lives is based on. Socialising and learning is not as important up until they reach school age. That is why the world over, school age is around 4 to 6. It is not a coincidence.

SameDiff

pwurple wrote: »

Era, unless you never leave the house with children, they are going to get socialisation from interacting with neighbours, people on the bus, in shops... wherever.

We all know people at both extremes of miserable situations.. the mum who hates being at home, and plonks the kids in front of peppa pig for the day while she drinks vodka in the other room. Or the working mum who has a massive commute and never sees the kids and hates every minute of that. And on the other side there are very happy SAHM's who balance and enjoy it all, and the same for working parents.

The happiest are where there are 2 content parents, happy with their workload and how much they see the kids. Whether it's at home, or working is immaterial. Miserable resentful parents make for unhappy children.

Great analogy......2% of Irish mothers drinking while kids watch telly, 50% commuting and barely seeing their children.

We won't see the damage done by this creche culture of absent parenting for another decade.

Of course I've seen infants, I'm a mother! And a working one at that.
Look, my son was speaking in sentences at 18 months. He's bright as a button, extremely outgoing and social .... without, gasp, ever going to a crèche.

Kids develop whether they're in crèche or not. It's normal to assume a child is progressing the way they are because they're surrounded by other kids. But oftentimes that happens anyway!

I started him in playschool two mornings a week when he was almost 3, by them I thought yes, he'll benefit from having children of similar ages around him. But I ain't kidding myself either, those mornings means I have a few free hours to do stuff myself.

I'm not crèche bashing, just a little longer on the planet than the average first time parent so I've seen family grow up to adulthood without ever being "socialised" in a childcare facility and become perfectly confident, functioning adults who never missed out.

pwurple

SameDiff wrote: »

Great analogy......2% of Irish mothers drinking while kids watch telly, 50% commuting and barely seeing their children.

We won't see the damage done by this creche culture of absent parenting for another decade.

Where did you pull those numbers from? The sky?

What possible 'damage' are you even alluding to? Working parents have been around a lot longer than a decade. I've got grown up cousins whos parents used creches followed by summer camps and aupairs. The children are perfectly normal members of society, with university degrees, jobs and families of their own. I don't know what mystery malicious thing you are alluding to.... unless you think the example good work ethic is something terrifying!

My own parents both worked when we were small. we had a series of childminders, playschool and aupairs. Myself and my siblings are all educated, employed, contributing members of society with our own husbands/wives and families.

There's nothing wrong with either way of doing things, despite the chips on shoulders.

Hannibal Smith

I gave up my job after my second because we couldn't afford 2 creche fees.We were flat broke when I wasn't working. ..but would have been worse with the creche fees.

My eldest started school last year and after 2 years out of work I was job hunting. A lot of changes took place while I was out so I started at the bottom to allow myself catch up a year later I got another better job with more pay and im right back to where I was before the 2 year break.

The eldest was in a creche from 10 months up to school age (which included the ecce year while I was off). He flourished. ..he learned so much, made fantastic friends which are like extra siblings to him now. They know each other so well that they play fantastically together. They're all in the same school now and he knows if he falls out with any of his classmates he has his creche buddies to link in with. So for him creche worked perfectly.

I worry the second guy will never have that but I'm hoping the ecce year will some how help him catch up.

So after all that waffle lol...you'll have your girlfriend's maternity leave to see how it is being home and a reduced income. ..so don't make any decisions until you see how that goes.

lazygal

SameDiff wrote: »

Great analogy......2% of Irish mothers drinking while kids watch telly, 50% commuting and barely seeing their children.

We won't see the damage done by this creche culture of absent parenting for another decade.

I was in a crèche 30 years ago, when regulations were non existent, and I've turned out fine.

Working parents and crèches are not some mad new phenomenon. When I was in school lots of friends went to minders or some form of day care after school.

volchitsa

My kids are almost grown up now, and I would say that good child care matters more than the kind of childcare - and that can be crèche, childminder or parent. We've done all three, and all can work, or not.

One thing I'd say about giving up your job is not just to look at it in the short or even medium term, it's a decision that will have huge consequences for the rest of your lives, including retirement. That probably seems irrelevant now, but I have friends who worked part time, or stopped completely, for years (even when it was only meant to be short term, several children arriving in a row meant it never really seemed logical to go back) and who are now coming to a point where they are looking at retirement rights - and you really pay a huge price for those years out.

All in all, if you can afford financially to work part time for a few years, that is probably ideal for everyone - but be aware that there is a price to pay for that even years down the line. It's horrible at the time to think that you are working to pay the crèche fees - but you aren't really, it's an investment in your future earning power.

lazygal

Women especially need to be aware of this, as it seems to be mainly women who reorganize their lives after children. Taking career breaks and doing shorter weeks is one thing, but they will count against you longer term. I'm ok with taking the hit but I'm going in with both eyes open. I know of many women who quit work after they had a second child, with the intention of returning to work when they were in school, and it has proved very difficult for them to reenter the workforce. My mother always worked, but now she's nearing retirement age leaving her secure job to do a job more in line with raising us is starting to affect things like her pension. It's not all about working for crèche fees.

SameDiff

lazygal wrote: »

and I've turned out fine.

Yes, indeed.

ThisRegard

Deleted User wrote: »

What do infants get from socialising? I'm not having a go at you, but countless peer reviewed studies will tell you that an infant does not need to be placed in a childcare facility to be socialised.
From the age of about 2.5 they start showing an interest in playing with others. Before that, no.

I understand it's not me you're having a go with. I didn't actually say they have to be socialised in a creche, I said they benefit from it. As others have already said, despite their age, they do interact with each other rather than sit in a corner playing with themselves. They learn off each other by copying and observing. If one kids figures something out, the others will quickly copy.

And most importantly, they have great fun doing so. Watch the joy on their faces as each member of their group turn up in the morning, the latest member to appear is almost mugged.

Sweet Rose wrote: »

I have a friend who leaves her child in the crèche at 7.30 every morning and doesn't collect her until 6.30p.m. She says herself she is just bringing her child home, bathing her, reading her a story and kissing her goodnight. At weekends, she likes to socialise and leaves her child with a childminder most of Saturday evening and Sunday morning. She would rarely bring her child on a day trip or anything like that. Where is the parenting in that.

I have issues with that myself, but not all parents who use crèches put their kids in that long.

lazygal wrote: »

I have noticed a huge difference with my younger child compared to the older one. There's 15 months between them but he picks up thing so quickly because he's had the older sibling to play with. He's also saying a few words earlier, knows how things 'work' (lego etc) from watching big sister and I can see him doing things like potty training quicker too. I was skeptical about children needing socialization before age 3 myself, but having seen the effect on my younger child I know it has some benefits.

My daughter is almost 5, youngest not yet 1 and we see the similar. Like the analogy I used earlier, he watches her like a hawk, everything she does. And it's not necessarily always a good thing !

SameDiff wrote: »

We won't see the damage done by this creche culture of absent parenting for another decade.

That's just nonsense. As others said, this "crèche culture" is not a new thing, it's been around decades.

Sleepy

Unless you're pretty well paid, it's not nearly worth it after a second child is born.

If you're married, the working parent can claim the SAHM/SAHD's tax credits and a "home carer credit" (well worth looking into at €810, I only found out about it this year, d'oh!) which total to earnings of €4,350 (after tax), add the cost of any travel/commute, childminding etc. and many will find they're paying to be in employment.

It's not really just the first few years either as while they're in primary school, realistically they're only there for half a day so childminding will still be needed and one of the parents will still need the flexibility to take time off for sick days, mid-terms, summer holidays etc.

Our solution for it was for Mrs. Sleepy to become a child-minder herself so she minds another little girl whilst also minding our two monsters. As the first 10k of earnings are tax-free for a child-minder who minds in their own home (and doesn't affect the ability to transfer the credits), this is an extremely tax-efficient means of earning a second income whilst also being able to be at home with your own kids.

Sleepy

volchitsa wrote: »

One thing I'd say about giving up your job is not just to look at it in the short or even medium term, it's a decision that will have huge consequences for the rest of your lives, including retirement. That probably seems irrelevant now, but I have friends who worked part time, or stopped completely, for years (even when it was only meant to be short term, several children arriving in a row meant it never really seemed logical to go back) and who are now coming to a point where they are looking at retirement rights - and you really pay a huge price for those years out.

All in all, if you can afford financially to work part time for a few years, that is probably ideal for everyone - but be aware that there is a price to pay for that even years down the line. It's horrible at the time to think that you are working to pay the crèche fees - but you aren't really, it's an investment in your future earning power.

This is very much advice based on your own generation I'm afraid, most parents of young children these days can't afford a pension unless they're in the Public / Semi-state Sector.

The One Doctor

Sleepy wrote: »

This is very much advice based on your own generation I'm afraid, most parents of young children these days can't afford a pension unless they're in the Public / Semi-state Sector.

We certainly can't. Unless I get one of the civil service jobs that are going. Fingers crossed. Actually, everything is crossed.

SameDiff

ThisRegard wrote: »

That's just nonsense. As others said, this "crèche culture" is not a new thing, it's been around decades.

It hasn't been so widespread as it is today and the hours have never been so long.

We won't see the damage done for another while yet, but we will see it, that is a certainty.

Infants do not belong huddled in these chaotic groups being looked after for money. This kind of treatment does not pass without consequence.

beauf

Apart from the money, if you have kids in different locations, with different start/end times, its not actually possible to do all that and fit a job in at the same time. Unless you pay even more for a collection/drop off service, or have family who can do it for you. if you don't its not a practical to go back to work until all the kids are in for a similar and longish school day. Then you have to factor summer holidays, illness etc. There's a point where you need a minimum of hours/days working to make it worthwhile.

The other point is if you take a few years out of work. It can be difficult maybe impossible to get back to the same position, and salary. So some will decide to take a short term loss for the long term gain.

ThisRegard

SameDiff wrote: »

It hasn't been so widespread as it is today and the hours have never been so long.

We won't see the damage done for another while yet, but we will see it, that is a certainty.

Infants do not belong huddled in these chaotic groups being looked after for money. This kind of treatment does not pass without consequence.

What damage ? What consequence ? Huddle in chaotic groups ? Are we in a post apocalyptic world or something? Don't just throw out phrases like this without expanding on what you mean.

I would argue it was as widespread in the 90s as it is now, so many of those kids are well into secondary school or college.

pwurple

Sleepy wrote: »

This is very much advice based on your own generation I'm afraid, most parents of young children these days can't afford a pension unless they're in the Public / Semi-state Sector.

Most don't have a pension? I don't think that's right. Some don't... and it depends on their age rather than the number of children they have.

I think the statistic is ~77% of employed people in ireland have occupational or private pensions... that was 2009 CSO data though. Amoung the 20-24 age group pension coverage is 19%, rising with each demographic group. In the 25-34 group (age likely to have small children?) the rate is 51% of employed have pension, so just over half. It's a factor to be considered alright.

Link here:
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/labourmarket/2009/qnhs_pensionprovisionQ409.pdf

lazygal

SameDiff wrote: »

It hasn't been so widespread as it is today and the hours have never been so long.

We won't see the damage done for another while yet, but we will see it, that is a certainty.

Infants do not belong huddled in these chaotic groups being looked after for money. This kind of treatment does not pass without consequence.

Do you know anything about early childhood care and education or are you just throwing out ill informed opinions on something you know nothing about?

lazygal

ThisRegard wrote: »

What damage ? What consequence ? Huddle in chaotic groups ? Are we in a post apocalyptic world or something? Don't just throw out phrases like this without expanding on what you mean.

I would argue it was as widespread in the 90s as it is now, so many of those kids are well into secondary school or college.

In recent years many crèches have seen a decline in business, as more parents were laid off/hours were cut. So there could well be more parents looking after their children than previous years, especially dads who worked in areas where there were huge job losses.
Also, other countries have had crèche scenarios for donkey's years and its not like every child there has grown into a delinquent.

beauf

I think ye are on a different topic. The effect of childcare in general.

Sleepy

pwurple wrote: »

Most don't have a pension? I don't think that's right. Some don't... and it depends on their age rather than the number of children they have.

I think the statistic is ~77% of employed people in ireland have occupational or private pensions... that was 2009 CSO data though. Amoung the 20-24 age group pension coverage is 19%, rising with each demographic group. In the 25-34 group (age likely to have small children?) the rate is 51% of employed have pension, so just over half. It's a factor to be considered alright.

Link here:
http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/labourmarket/2009/qnhs_pensionprovisionQ409.pdf

It was a stat I heard on Newstalk so a pinch of salt may be required but if we can agree on the 25-34 age group from the CSO figures as the "most likely to have young kids", I think my point stands...

While the majority of this group are going to be private sector workers (hiring practices over the past decade leaving most PS organisations with very few staff under the age of 30), the effect of the minority subset having a (near) 100% level of pension ownership will undoubtedly skew the overall figure to be unrepresentative of their private sector counterparts.

I'd be very surprised if the effect of that distortion wouldn't equate to the level where an overall 51% translates to a minority in the case of the private sector subset.

SameDiff

pwurple wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with either way of doing things, despite the chips on shoulders.

What?

volchitsa

Sleepy wrote: »

It was a stat I heard on Newstalk so a pinch of salt may be required but if we can agree on the 25-34 age group from the CSO figures as the "most likely to have young kids", I think my point stands...

While the majority of this group are going to be private sector workers (hiring practices over the past decade leaving most PS organisations with very few staff under the age of 30), the effect of the minority subset having a (near) 100% level of pension ownership will undoubtedly skew the overall figure to be unrepresentative of their private sector counterparts.

I'd be very surprised if the effect of that distortion wouldn't equate to the level where an overall 51% translates to a minority in the case of the private sector subset.

I'm not yet at retirement age, these are actually colleagues/friends about 10-15 years older than me, but since I don't work in the republic, I'm not able to get into the details of the pension law - but I would say that I suspect that your point, if it is correct, is all the more reason not to give up a job for short term financial gain. Surely it would be a better bet to increase your earning potential in order to be able at some point to invest in a pension than to hope the government will stump up for those who chose to stay home?

Rose35

SameDiff wrote: »

It hasn't been so widespread as it is today and the hours have never been so long.

We won't see the damage done for another while yet, but we will see it, that is a certainty.

Infants do not belong huddled in these chaotic groups being looked after for money. This kind of treatment does not pass without consequence.

You definitely don't know what you are talking about and I would say have never even set foot in a creche with sweeping statements like that.
Go and educate yourself on early childhood learning and what it involves, I am a working mum and have been using a creche since my son was 6 months old I resent your comments that my son will grow up to be some sort of a delinquent because I choose to stay in the workforce, he receives excellent care and has a string of little buddies he looks forward to seeing every day, he is forming life long friendships at a young age and nothing at all wrong with that. I am totally happy with the care he gets and we are financially well off as a result of both of us working, he will never want for anything put it that way.

pwurple

SameDiff wrote: »

What?

Just wondering actually... do you work yourself?

SameDiff

pwurple wrote: »

Just wondering actually... do you work yourself?

Are you going to clarify this "chips on shoulder" remark? If not, are you going to apologise for it? It has no place on an open discussion forum.

eviltwin

I'm not a fan of creches but they are a necessary service for parents who aren't lucky enough to be able to stay at home or have a family member who can child mind. There are good and bad out there, my son did his ECCE year in a creche that's part of a well known chain, we could see into the baby room every morning and the kids were just left there sitting in cots crying. On the other hand I have a friend who works in a small family run creche who wouldn't hesitate to put her own child in it. Of course no care will ever be as good as one on one parent or family member but there are lots of ideals we as parents don't achieve. We just do the best we can. But parents should do their homework and make sure the service they choose is a good one and not assume all creches are the same.