i found out on the weekend that my cousin has gone back to work full-time only 8 months after her little'un was born. i also heard from the GF's sister that her best mate has stopped breast-feeding at 5 months so that she can return to work in the 6th month.
my cousin cited cash flow problems. her fella earns a decent wedge up city (>£65k), but she ended up sticking stuff on the credit card. the kiddie(baby?) was already attending kindergarten for 3-4 hours a day, but no she'll be stuck there for 8-9 hours a day. her life will consist of being woken up, fed, taken to kindergarten, left there till mummy picks her up, takes her home, feeds her and then put to bed.
the GF's mate says she wants to work (bit of a career girl). if she loves her job that much why did she bother having a child?
why pay someone - and consequently have to work more in order to do so - to bring up YOUR child?
as you may know i've not got kids nor am i inclined to possess any in the near or imediate future. but, if i were to have kids i'd want to make sure that i am one of the biggest influences on them during their formative years.
surely a kindergarten/day-care can't provide the same environment that you as a parent can at home. i understand it's good for the kiddie to have experience of interacting with other kids (as my mates 13 month old does 4-5 imes a week for 4 hours or so at a time), but to leave your kid in someone elses care so that you can earn more money money money money money money makes me sick.
maybe it's a sign of how rotten our societies are; that a mother (or father for that matter) is more interested in the size of their house/car/bank balance than the upbringing of their child. why have kids if you're not going to look after them?
i have a friend who teaches english to 4-6 year olds at a kindergarten (this is in germany). some of the parents complained that the kids would talk english more than german despite the fact they are paying extra for the english classes. shouldn't they be talking to the kids at home?
discuss.
