Scarlett Johansson doesn't want a nanny for children

Actress Scarlett Johansson, 22, is currently portraying nanny Annie Braddock in the movie The Nanny Diaries. However, when asked during an interview if she would ever hire a nanny when she has children, the Golden Globe nominee was very candid.

I can never imagine someone else raising my children. I’ll probably bethe person who pays the babysitter 15 or 20 bucks an hour. I’llprobably have the 14-year-old coming over and playing Candyland with mychildren.

I don’t know that I could ever hire someone fulltime to lookafter my children. That’s not how I was raised. I couldn’t imagineraising my kids like that. It’s just not my style.

Source: AZCentral

Comments

I stay home alone with my kids 24-7, but some of my friends with nannies are also home 24-7 and just need an extra set of hands. While some nannies absolutely rear children by themselves, not all nannies do.

- sarawara on August 22nd, 2007

I couldn’t imagine staying home with my children AND STILL needing a nanny?? Unless you have triplets or something! I don’t think I could ever entrust my children to a stranger. If I ever needed a babysitter I had family close by, thankfully. I know some people don’t. In Hollywood, I think nannies are just the norm. I know lots of parents like Jen and Ben are always with their child. As is Denise Richards, it seems, along with Reese and Ryan. But, some seem to have a nanny even if they don’t need it…or take them on vacations with them. I don’t know, I guess I just don’t “get it”. Scarlett’s views are refreshing!

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

Good for her. I also don’t like the idea of leaving my children with strangers, the only people I’d ever trust with my children are my own family. I’m not judging anyone who does have a nanny, but I know it’s not always essential to have one. My parents raised 5 children without ever needing a nanny, so I’m pretty sure I can do the same (fingers crossed)!

- ix on August 22nd, 2007

I feel the same about the nanny. No offense to the writer here who is one, or to anyone who may have one, but it’s just not my style either.

When I have kids and if work full time (which I’m sure I will) I hope that my mom can watch them when I’m out and they’re not in school. Even if I start working before they’re officially in school yet, I’d like them to be in a group setting like a daycare or a Headstart program.

Sarah’s note: No offense taken! I don’t live in with my families and I only work 20 hours a week for one and 8 hours for the other. The twins’ grandmother watches them the other 20 hours a week, and for the second family, the mother is home the rest of the week with her girls. They chose to get a nanny because they wanted the kids to have a strong relationship with one other person (I’ve watched them since 3 and 5 months old, and they’re now 3 1/2) and lots of personalized attention, and I totally respect that. Personally I’m not sure what I’ll do when I have my own children.

- Xan on August 22nd, 2007

My friend Gunda had 4 babies in 5 years, all singletons (no multiples). She needed an extra set of hands for sure. Heidi Klum’s kids are close in age, too, and I think how close your kids are in age is a big factor, especially if you breastfeed. My older kids always seem to need something when I sit down to nurse. A good nanny can be a real blessing.

- sarawara on August 22nd, 2007

Sorry, but her saying those things is VERY easy without her actually having kids. Or is she going to quit making movies as soon as she has kids?

I am 100% certain if she ever has kids, she will have a nanny. Quite frankly, I would have too if I had the money. It’s not about having someone else raise your kids, they dont have to live-in 24/7 but it sure would be handy to have someone on standby and who is a pro.

- Anne on August 22nd, 2007

Why is it that the people without children are always the perfect parents? It’s bad enough when parents make judgments of each other’s parenting, but it’s ridiculous when the childless do.

- Rose on August 22nd, 2007

I am a nanny and I love it. I only nanny for parents who are there for their children and raise them the right way. I used to watch two boys from 7 AM till 7Pm and I was raising them and it was so hard on me. I vowed after that to NEVER take on that role again. Now I really enjoy the children AND the parents. Its important for parents to be the ones raising the children and the nanny to be the one who enforces the rules but also is there to take kids out and play with them so the parents get go out or get things done, nannies shouldnt be the parent. If they are it will be a hard break in the end. I do think she is looking at it from the point of view in the movie and I think people get the wrong ideas about nannies and it devalues us in a way.

- Bren on August 22nd, 2007

Why are there so many celebrities who claim not to have a nanny, or who say they’re not going to have one when they have children, when they obviously are going to need one in order to continue working. I’ve read so many interviews with celebrity mothers who say, “We don’t have a nanny, we just have a babysitter.” Or, “We don’t have a nanny, we just have a woman who helps out.” That’s the same thing as having a nanny. A person doesn’t have to live in 24/7 to be a nanny. And it’s just impossible for these people to be working parents without a nanny (and since daycare isn’t a safe option for celebs, having a nanny is pretty much the only way to go for working Hollywood parents). I don’t understand why they’re so relucatant to say, “Yes, I work and therefore I have to have a nanny to take care of the children during those times when I’m on the set.”

- Kate on August 22nd, 2007

sorry, i still don’t get it!! my two were 18 months apart and I managed just fine. as do most women who cannot afford a nanny. now, in the case of 4 or 5 kids in as many years….yes, she needs an extra set of hands. Or someone who has triplets. Of course help is a great thing to have. I just know so many celebs with only one child who have nannies and I think it is ridiculous unless they are working and that is not always why they have a nanny.

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

I always thought I wouldn’t have a nanny before children and now that I have one (and another on the way), I still don’t.

I don’t speak nanny.

Sarah’s note: Congrats! I always like reading your posts about your son and your experiences.

- Principesa on August 22nd, 2007

I will listen to her talk about someone else “raising her children” when she is actually not a child herself.

That phrase irritates me to no end and seems to be the one thing SAHM’s ALWAYS say when it comes to discussing childrearing.

I don’t consider childcare to be the raising of others children. A big part of raising children in my opinion is supporting them financially as well, something you may need to leave the house to do and ENTRUST your child to others for. If my Daycare provider were raising my children, then they would be there in the middle of the night when my kid is puking, paying for medical bills, nursing my babies. Big difference between entrusting and raising.

Just wanted to get that out there.

- suz on August 22nd, 2007

To Anne (and everyone else to clarify the ‘nanny’ situation here in SoCal),

I agree, to have a ‘pro’ on hand to help take care of your kids would be great if you could afford it. But, the situation here in SoCal is not that. I am friends with a bonafide British nanny, and she HATES when people who aren’t actually nannies are called nannies. Most of the people working as ‘nannies’ here aren’t trained professionals. They are immigrants, perhaps not legal, who may or may not speak English, and have varying levels of education from their home countries (often not much, barely any high school at most). These ‘nannies’ have become a baby/child accessory of sorts here for people of a certain socio-economic class, like the ever present Petunia Pickle Bottom diaper bag has. I stay home with my daughter, and often when we go to a class (ballet, gymnastics, etc) or to the park, it is these ‘nannies’ who bring the children. What disturbs me most about this is I know many of the moms do not work. Also, as you might imagine, these ‘nannies’ do not charge a premium for their services. My point of contention with this is that many of these families who employ these women could afford an actual professionally trained nanny. It just seems to me that the care of your children is not the place to save a dollar, especially when you have many. So, keep this in mind when you read about nannies here in SoCal, because they aren’t like Scarlett Johansson’s character in her movie, or like the British nannies on Supernanny and Nanny 911. They have no training in child care and from what I have observed are not qualified to take care of young children (there are exceptions of course, some are very good).

- Cordelia's Mommy on August 22nd, 2007

Everybody’s circumstances are different. So often on these discussions I hear about how parents have their mothers help out instead of hiring a nanny. That’s great – as long as the mother is alive, willing and/or living close by. Many people don’t have the option of having family members help out so I just can’t see judging those that need/want some outside help.

- madison on August 22nd, 2007

Ok, I can absolutely see having a nanny for when you are working on a movie/TV set, and want to have your child there with you. You bring the nanny and your child, and you know where your child is, and you can see them when you want. Basically, I think that is the equivalent to having my child in day care while I’m at work.

But I think it should end there. I don’t take my daycare provider home with me, I see no reason why celebs need the nannies there all the time. It bothers me to see celebs out with their child/children, walking by themselves while the nanny/nannies carry the kids. In cases like that, and where the nannies take the kids everywhere, instead of the parents, I think it’s weird. That to me seems like the nannies are raising the kids. In needing a nanny when you’re working, then yes, that’s what alot of us do with daycare, etc. Or when you have a lot of kids, and need an extra hand. But having 1 or 2, and not working…. why? Are they unable to take care of their kids themselves? That’s just plain lazy. Have someone to clean your house, take care of your lawn, whatever. But raise your kids?! I agree with Scarlett, and I think MAYBE when she decides to have children, she’ll use one when she’s filming, but I really don’t see her having one 24/7.

- momtoone on August 22nd, 2007

Isn’t Scarlett from a wealthy/celeb family? So, I think she understands what she’s talking about. Her parents didn’t use a nanny for her and she doesn’t want one for her future kids. Heath Ledger and Michelle Williams don’t have a nanny and I’m sure there are many celebs who don’t have full-time nannies.

However, if there are parents who really want a nanny for their kids, I really don’t see a problem. Not everybody has a mother/family nearby who is willing to care for grandkids. Those that do are lucky, for sure.

Sarah’s note: Heath and Michelle actually do have a nanny. There are many that don’t though — Heidi Klum only used her mom until she had her second child, Kate Hudson only uses nannies when she’s on film-sets…etc.

- essie on August 22nd, 2007

essie, Scarlett’s father is/was an architect and her mother was her manager and they separated when she was 13. So, as far as I know she wasn’t a celeb baby from a wealthy family.

Cordeliasmommy, I enjoyed your post…this is the kind of thing I was talking about for the most part.

IMHO, hiring a trained professional nanny works if you have to have one and you can afford one. BUT, if you have one child, don’t work, and your nanny is seen taking your kid to the park or dance class so you can have a facial….that is just wrong. And, yes, I was very lucky to have family nearby when my children were young. BUT, if I hadn’t had that luxury I would have found a babysitter when I needed one through recommendations from friends. I am very lucky I do not have to work now, but when I did work, my daughter was in pre school. I took her to school, went to work and picked her up. If I had to work a little late…my fiancee/husband picked her up. My son rode a school bus to his special school(he is autistic and has medical problems) and my grandma would be there for him in the afternoon when they brought him home..with my husband or I following close behind within an hour. Where there is a will there is a way to work with schedules. When I quit work I took my kids to school and picked them up every day, did homework with them, their activities, etc… I WANTED to be there. You would think celeb parents would want to be there too. UNLESS they are filming and cannot bring their kids it makes no sense to me to have a nanny. Take Reese and Ryan…they have always said when one is working the other is not so at least one can be with the kids. Like I said before…in MOST cases…where there is a will there is a way!

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

I agree Anne Scarlett doesn’t have kids yet, so it’s easy to say things until your actually in that situation. If she continues to be an actress, I would be willing to bet money she will have a nanny. You know how many celebrities have said they won’t, and than they end up with a nanny lol. Truthfully if you got the money, I see nothing wrong with a nanny, as long as your involved with your child and don’t just let the nanny do everything. I don’t blame celebrities for having nannies, they do have busy careers so someone has to help with the kids and some of them bring their kids to work, so a nanny comes in handy.

- gabriella on August 22nd, 2007

I used to nanny for a family during the summer. Both parents were very involved with the kids, but because they both worked year-round they needed someone to watch the kids during the day when they were out of school.

Ultimately, I think “nanny” is a neutral word and just because someone has one doesn’t mean that they gave up raising their children. Of course, that said I have heard horror stories from fellow nannies. But it is always a case-by-case situation.

- Katey on August 22nd, 2007

Not being rude and not assuming anyone that does this is a bad parent but I could never understand why you would keep having kids if you can’t take care of them all by yourself? Why have kids to have someone else take care of them.

This is my outlook on it but then again I have NO ONE but me and my husband take care of my son alone. I wanted him, I had him and he is mine. I’m a stingy mom who doesn’t like to share… LOL! When we decide to have another, we will make sure that I can take care of both children by myself since I’m lucky enough to be a stay at home mom. If I don’t think I’m up for the challenge of two kids then I just won’t have anymore.

- Melea on August 22nd, 2007

Nannies are practically babysitters…to me no difference. Some call me a nanny because I spend 40-45 hours a week with the child I watch but then others say I am just her sitter (because I watch her in my home). Whatever neither title bothers me. But I’ve also been called her second mommy by her own mother. I take care of this child as if she’s my own. She has a very good relationship with her mother and father as well as me. Sure her mother misses out on a lot but her mom and dad have to work and don’t have much of a choice. I was the perfect situation for them. They didn’t want daycare so they got me, a one on one sitter to care for their daughter while they’re at work.

I helped to raise this child since she was 3 months old and she’s now 2 1/2. They even talked about having another and are pleading with me to take the second bc they “love how well I’ve done with the first and can’t imagine someone else taking care of their baby.” I am sure they feel guilty about not getting to spend their days with her but they also know that she’s in good hands and have no worries about her well being.

I personally feel as though I too could not just leave my babies in the hands of strangers. However I would be open to having someone take care of my child during the day if I chose to work.

To me there is a difference between someone raising your child and someone watching your child. If a person needs a sitter for a few hours in the day (even to get stuff around the house done) is completely acceptible. But to have a nanny live with you to do all the work (while you the parents are in the house) is just odd to me. Infact I know someone who has a family member who uses a nanny to watch her child while she basically spends her days at the spa and getting her hair and nails done. This nanny is there so the mom can enjoy her freedom and relieve herself of responsibilities of her son all day. To me that’s when the whole nanny thing crosses the line imho. But all in all I don’t feel as though nannies are necessarily horrible.

Scarlett is young. She has time to figure it all out!

- J.M. on August 22nd, 2007

Melea, I agree with you. If you can’t manage to raise one child without paying someone else to help, then why continue having loads more? I know that sounds rude, but it really annoys me. My little brother had a friend who is one of three and he has been left with a nanny since he was around 9 months old. His mother said she couldn’t stand spending the whole day with him and needed to get back to work… But she went and had another two babies anyway, both who have grown up with a nanny since they were just a few months old. I think it’s crazy!

- ix on August 22nd, 2007

Melea, I liked your post! It definitely makes sense. At least to me, it does. I am a stingy mom too! I HATED putting my daughter in pre school. I looked at so many daycare centers and decided if I HAD to do it…it would be an actual pre school where she could learn. Not just a place to dump my kid while I worked. The pre school she attended had computer classes and swimming lessons(an onsite pool) and LOTS of educational field trips. She loved it!!! I missed her terribly! I was so happy when I quit work!

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

*headscratch* I’m not sure why it’s acceptable to have help for 4 under 5 and not for less children. What’s that magic number, then? Magic ages?

And no, I’m not speaking of something I have no experience with. Right now I care for 5 children weekdays 7:30 – 4 PM – when one leaves. The other two of them are here 7 am – 6 PM and the other two are mine, so full time. Yes it’s not the same as day and night with 4, but really, it’s pretty easily do-able without help (and yes we do go out!).

- Jean on August 22nd, 2007

Wow. I’m a working mom of 2, both in day care. I find many of the SAHM comments here pretty offensive. I was stunned at Scarlett’s assertion she’d never use a nanny – how could she have any idea until she actually has kids? But it sounds like some commenters pretty much don’t think anyone should have kids if they choose to work outside the home. (That would make this site pretty dull, wouldn’t it?)

- Kari on August 22nd, 2007

I agree with Suz’s third paragraph. Inviting other caregivers into your children’s lives–whether family or just-like-family–doesn’t equate to asking other people to raise your children. Raising one’s kids totally by yourself is actually somewhat of a western and modern notion. Many other cultures and generations raise/d kids in a more village style. Both have advantages and disadvantages, I’m sure.

Moms who work seem less likely to attack the decisions of moms who stay at home. Why do SAHMs so readily question working moms’ motivations and priorities?

- Fynn on August 22nd, 2007

jean, are you a childcare provider?? If so then you are trained and licensed to care for many children at once. Anyone who decides to have 4 or 5 children SHOULD be cut out for it before deciding to have that many!! Just my opinion. I KNOW I wasn’t cut out to have 4 or 5 kids in a row year after year! I had 2 within 2 yrs and it was really hard! But I did manage. If I somehow had 4 or 5 within as many years I would go crazy….that is why I did not!!! BUT, aside from that…if you can afford it and have that many having some help is nice…so you can at least take a shower in peace for half an hour, or go get a haircut without dragging all 4 or 5 little ones along. I would understand that more than having a nanny for just one child….unless career warrants it and no other solution could be achieved! Just my two cents!

PS. jean…thank goodness for people like you who CAN deal with 4 or 5 kids so that others may work and earn a living!!

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

J.M….you said the parents you sit for “need to work”??? I am just curious and not passing judgment…I always wonder why people say they need to work. Do we all feel the same way about need vs. want?? Basically, I quit working because half my paycheck was going to pre school and quite a bit of the rest was going to gas to get to work and lunch out once a week at work (I took my lunch the rest of the time). So, maybe $100 a week was going towards actual living expenses. When I quit we rearranged things and found we had money by my staying home with the kids. It just surprises me how many families keep working(both mom and dad) not because they really need the money, but because they want to keep their career. There is nothing wrong with it. It wouldn’t be a priority with me at all.

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

Good for Scarlett, ITA with her. DH and I are the ones raising our kids, not a nanny or daycare or anyone else. Yes I’m a SAHM so judge away on MY judgement. I didn’t have kids so that someone else could raise them, thank you.

- daphneesmith on August 22nd, 2007

to those who think us SAHM area attacking working moms…that was NEVER my intention. I am mainly speaking about celeb moms and some regular moms I know that have one child or even two and stay home and still have nannies. Working moms obviously have to have a caregiver for their children and if they choose a nanny or daycare or whatever it is most likely a necessity.What I personally believe is that I should be home taking care of my kids IF I can and still live comfortably within my means. But someone who makes 2 or 3 million a movie having a nanny because they want to make 3 or 4 films a year is odd to me. Yes, they may love their career, but then why have a baby without being able to take significant time off?? Liv Tyler did it, so did Gwyneth Paltrow. Its not like they really need the money when they already have millions in the bank and most of them have spouses or significant others that make just as much as they do if not more! It just doesn’t make sense to me. It is what are each individuals priorities when it comes to children and family.

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

What bugs me most about her remarks is the idea that a 14-year-old babysitter is ok.
I do not care if it’s considered normal or not, I will never consider having a 14-year-old mind toddlers, babies or young kids for a few hours. Sure they may have fun, and they may really like the bubbly baby-sitter. But how much life experience does that babysitter have in case of an emergency? I’m thinking fire, first-aid, unforseen circumstances …. not a bright idea. Even if the kid is pretty responsible, what happens when a friend calls by, or they get sidetracked by their cell phones or whatever?
I don’t have a nanny for my kids. But I resent her way of thinking that qualified help is just not the done thing, but paying a child to mind children is? How screwed is that way of thinking. That’s putting your children at risk. No matter how many people say “our 14-year-old neighbour minded us all the time and nothing ever happened” – it’s taking risks that can be avoided.

- IrishLass on August 22nd, 2007

irishlass, i tend to agree with you about 14 being a little young, BUT…my daughter took babysitting courses including CPR at school when she was 13 and was very qualified to babysit. It depends on the teenager. I would trust my 14 yr old niece before I would trust some of my daughters old friends(she no longer hangs around with them) at 16 and 17. Like I said, I think it all depends on the teenager. honestly…I think it was an off the cuff remark about the 14 yr old babysitter. I doubt she really even thought about it at the time.

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

Tink, Celeb mothers are working mothers too.

- Devon on August 22nd, 2007

devon, of course they are, but with what they make they can afford to take time off to be with their babies. why single me out??? there are others here who had the same opinion as me too and there are some who don’t. As I have said before…these are MY priorities and MY beliefs. I have never spoken harshly or judgmentally, just curiously.

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

Irishlass, I understand your concern but then again I was babysitting other peoples kids at 11. I too took a babysitting course and was certified in CPR and first aid at 12. I was a very responsible young girl and people trusted me to look after their kids for a few hours. However, there are 12-14 yr. olds that are not mature enough to handle it. You just have to be careful. But not all 14 yr olds are irresponsible.

Tink – daycare would have been too much for them. Going rates are different for different places you live. The baby they had was born premature. The last thing she wanted to do was work but she couldn’t afford to just quit her job. I never got a reason, for I don’t think it’s even my business to ask why she doesn’t stay at home. All I know is that she said if she could she would. But since they were in that situation they called upon me. I was not a stranger. We’ve known each other all our lives. I was supposed to watch the baby for just a few months for the summer but I grew too attached to her and I couldn’t give her up. I wouldn’t be opposed to having someone care for my child as well (like I’m doing with her baby, one on one) but daycare for me is not my first choice. I do not however jump on anyone who has to do that because for some it’s their only option.

Caring for this baby has taught me great responsibility. It’s nice to know that I have helped to mold her into the person she is today. And I am grateful they too gave me this opportunity. But I also can say that taking care of a child is a bigger responsibility then anything I’ve ever done in my life! So yes sometimes it makes me wonder if I really want to stay home with them all day every day. I’d be up for working a few days a week to really get a “break”. This doesn’t mean I don’t love my kids or want to be bothered with them. I just think sometimes you can go insane spending you entire day with them.

On another note, I agree that it makes no sense to have multiple children if you can’t afford them. However by putting them in a daycare doesn’t mean you are not a good parent. Some people want career AND family. Why can’t you have both? So it’s either one or the other. Work and have no kids. Or have kids and give up your career? I think to me that just makes no sense.

Like I said if your having children to just have them and not want to be with them at all that’s when I get concerned but if you want to have a family but still be able to maintain a career there should be no reason why one can’t have the best of both worlds. That’s just my opinion.

- J.M. on August 22nd, 2007

The assertation that only those that can afford to stay home with their children should be allowed to have children is ridiculous and short sided.
I love the self righteousness of those who stay home.
Let me take that back. It infuriates me.
I am really glad it works for you. But please, stop judging us who make different choices. I work because I have to. Financially. I don;t need to quantify it for you, but suffice it to say, life would be really rough for everyone around here if my paycheck weren’t in the equation.
My feeling has always been if you make the most of the time that you have with your children, even if it is only 4 hours a day, than you are doing your job. There are plenty of people who stay home that are really crappy mothers, just as there are plenty of mothers who work who are as well. It’s not the quantity, but the quality.

- suz on August 22nd, 2007

I plan on being a SAHM. My husband and I agree that we don’t want anybody else raising our kids. I feel that somebody who watches your kids for 40+ hours a week IS raising them. Why have kids if somebody else is going to raise them? If you both work full time during the day, the kids get to see their parents a little bit in the morning (while everybody is rushing around getting ready for work), and in the evenings during the week! That is ridiculous to me!

- gentlemc on August 22nd, 2007

Tink, I wasn’t singling you out. You said celebs and working mums. Celebrities who are mothers are just the same as any working mother. They make more money then most, but they obviously love what they do so why shouldn’t they have a nanny or sitter for when they are working just like other working mums do, after they take their mat leave?

- Devon on August 22nd, 2007

JM, thanks for clarifying and explaining. I was just curious and certain situations are different than others!! I feel for those who have to work and want to be home with their children all the time. I also agree that the quality of time is much better than the quantity….as long as the reasons are valid. But, my idea of valid may conflict with others and thats ok. That is why we are all different and we all have different opinions. I am very lucky I don’t have to work and I chose to spend my time being a mom and loving every minute. If I had to work I know I would have been miserable. If you have a career you love and you work it out schedule wise to spend as much quality time with your kids in addition to working then more power to ya! My main beef was with rich and famous who have nannies for one child because they want to go shopping or go to the spa, or because they just have to make their 4th or 5th movie in one year cuz they don’t have enough money already. Women can have it all and if it works for them, great. It wouldn’t work for me. That was all I was saying…FOR ME…its not a priority and I wanted to hear civil answers as to why it works for others and why they choose to do it. I totally get it with those who HAVE TO work. Never said I didn’t.

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

devon, it felt like singling me cuz you put “tink” in the post. LOL. I get where you are coming from and I know they probably love their work and want to continue. I just think an arrangement like Ryan and Reese have would work for alot of celebs. When one is working the other isn’t. With the amount of money they all make in Hollywood…it isn’t a necessity for both parents to constantly be working in order to always have a nanny or two around. Just my opinion!

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

To Cordelia’s Mom – British nannies are immigrants too. The most important thing is to have someone watch your children who will love and care for them. There are many mothers who have no “formal training” or even first aid knowledge. Your friend that’s a “pro” may be griping about a tight market.

- J-Lin on August 22nd, 2007

gentlemc, that has always been my feeling too, but lots of others don’t agree and that is their right. I don’t want it to seem like we are attacking moms who work. Most that work are doing it because they have to. I hate the time I spend away from my kids and always have. Even when they are in school!! I miss them. But school…well, they are learning and they have to be in a school of some kind. But, I liked the fact that I was there to pick them up or there when they got off the bus and I was there to help with homework and fix dinner and tuck them in at night without feeling like I rushed it all and didn’t have any time to really talk to them. I know its a trade off for alot of families. Money to pay the bills or time with the kids…there is only one choice there. In my case, when I quit work we were scared we wouldn’t make it, but like I said before…we rearranged some things, did a little creative spending and saving and it all worked out and now…we are comfortably living without my working. It works for us and I am very thankful I have been able to do it.

- tink1217 on August 22nd, 2007

Hi Tink. I totally agree with you about wanting to be there when the kids get home from school, etc. I don’t want our time to be rushed. And, I feel like I will be able to get some things done during the day so that in the evenings and on the weekends, we will be able to relax as a family and not have to worry about grocery shopping, for example. Sometimes I worry about us being able to do it, but I know it will all work out in the end because we want it so bad and that is why we are waiting until we feel we can do it. I don’t want to attack anybody, but I feel SO strongly about this and I guess I just don’t understand and won’t understand the other viewpoint.

- gentlemc on August 22nd, 2007

Here is a little hint…
If you have to preface a statement with
“I don’t want people to think we are attacking moms that work”, than you already are doing it.
You people are unbelievably judgemental and supercilious.
For the one hundredth time. NO ONE IS RAISING MY CHILDREN OTHER THAN MYSELF AND MY HUSBAND, with no support from any family members or friends other than our daycare providers.
I hate that phrase. Please, STOP USING IT. It is entirely inflammatory.

- suz on August 22nd, 2007

It’s a personal choice and I see where Scarlett is coming from. I feel the same way that she does and I will not be changing my mind when I have children. That doesn’t mean I have anything against nannies — it means that it’s the way I want my life. I’m 29; I will be at least 30 before I have children and that’s only in an accidental scenario Chances are that by the time I have kids, I will have put a lot of other important life experiences behind me and I will be eager to devote myself to them nearly full-time. I’m also surrounded by supporting, loving family and friends whom I know will help if I need them (and every mother deserves some help). And when I’m not around, I believe in social interaction such as daycare as opposed to nannies. I think that will be important for my kids since, given my age, it’s not likely that I’ll have a whole lot of them.

However, I WAS a nanny, and in that case I was very important for the kids, if I may say so. Their parents weren’t any less devoted or loving toward the children than parents without nannies. They needed full-time careers to give the best to their children — not materially, but in the sense of being their best selves to set an example for their kids. Having me around exposed them to a different culture and ensured that they were loved to pieces and also disciplined and taught 24 hours a day. Being a caretaker is a draining job; there is no release from it, so I understand why parents need help. How the physical caretaking is divied out is up to the parents. I’m sure some parents hand over responsibility for their kids in lieu of taking responsibility themselves, but that’s not every parent that has a nanny. It totally depends on personal choice and lifestyle, and healthy, happy kids can result from either scenario.

- Chiara on August 22nd, 2007

Why do people always dismiss childless people’s comments? What she is saying could be 100% true! Before I had kids I said the same things, I didn’t want someone else raising my children. Now that I’m a parent I take care of them myself. Every once in awhile I’ll have a babysitter so we can have date night but other than that I am the one who does everything around my house and I wouldn’t change it for the world.

- Lorus on August 22nd, 2007

OK, this is my take on this…

I work from home, for the most part…During the week I makre jewelry. On the weekends I travel to 11 different states in the midwest setting up at craft fairs/festivals and art fairs. I grossed the low 6 figure range last year. I HAVE to work, I HAVE to travel. It pays for ALOT…like private school, great vacations and my kids see ALOT of the country. They have seen more of this country than anyone else we know.

Oh, and I have a nanny. She comes with me on the weekends beacause my husband works. She HELPS me make sure my children are safe and is an extra set of hands for me. She does not RAISE my children. I have 4 children. They are 6,5,4 and 2 months old.

It’s nice to have someone there when the other ones are fighting and the baby needs a bottle and I have customers in my booth. She works on Friday, Sat and Sun. She gets her own hotel room and I pay her and for her expenses. She makes about 300 per weekend. She enjoys the travel and my kids love her too.

It works for us. Scarlett may have ideas about how she wants to raise her kids or who she wants/doesn’t want to take care of them, but you just never know.

Sorry this is so long…LOL

- Krewcat on August 22nd, 2007

Wow! much debate on the “Nanny” issue!
The only problem I have with people getting Nanny’s is exp: When Geri Halliwell went for a walk with a Nanny, and the Nanny pushes baby. Or people who parade around while the Nanny’s are following behind holding the child, or baby!
I just feel some people are nothing but lazy on the issue. But hey if they wanna spend their money…well!

- Callen on August 22nd, 2007

Well, really, I only saw her say she could “She could never imagine” someone else raising her children and “didn’t know” if she’d ever have a hire a nanny for her children when that time rolls around. It wasn’t a concrete answer, but what her mind is set on right now.

Still, I’d applaud anyone who raises their children without help, be it one child, two, three, so on and so forth, be it they don’t want one or just can’t afford that luxury.

Most I’d ever get is a good daycare facility. I’m not going to differentiate between daycare/sitter and nanny, but anyway, it’d be daycare or family who’d care for my child when I was at work, and that’d be it.

- FC on August 22nd, 2007

“NO ONE IS RAISING MY CHILDREN OTHER THAN MYSELF AND MY HUSBAND”

Suz — as a nanny and sitter myself and also in my practicum as a preschool teacher I’ve taken care of LOTS of children. I do understand why you might find it offensive for someone to say they are “Raising your children” especially to imply single handedly… but you know what, nannies, sitters, teachers and other family members to whom you “entrust” the protection, love, safety, and emotional/physical/mental well being of your child ARE helping you to raise your children. Period. You shouldn’t be offended by that, rather thankful that you have other people who care enough about your children to do those things.
This past summer when I could only work two days a week and the woman I’ve nannied for had to find a new sitter she wasn’t happy. She told me that they don’t hug her, give her kisses, tell her they love her. She said something was missing from what they have with me. Then she said she realized what it was… she realized that her children had been with me their ENTIRE lives (the oldest is 9). That I am like a mother to them when she is gone and that they need that.
I’ve fed, I’ve bathed, I’ve diapered. I’ve stayed up into the wee hours of morning with a crying baby when mommy and daddy were out late. I’ve wiped up more snot than I care to imagine, and I’ve sat by the bed of a feverish child. I’ve comforted, cuddled and I’ve disciplined. I’ve taught ABC’s, 123′s and valuable things like morals, and life lessons. I’ve laughed, I’ve smiled, I’ve cried. I’ve dealt with deaths of loved ones, I’ve dealt with sibling rivalry. I have disciplined and most of all I have LOVED. If you don’t think that is “helping to raise” a child… then what a perfect waste my job must be.

- Rachel K on August 22nd, 2007

Bravo Rachel K!

There is nothing shameful about enlisting help in caring for your kids if you feel it’s necessary. It’s only belittling its importance that’s deplorable.

- Chiara on August 22nd, 2007

Isn’t that what they all say?

- mama bear on August 22nd, 2007

I have read all these comments, some making me a little agitated here in my chair, but none making me want to applaud like Rachel K’s did. What an amazing post, Rachel. Thank you for it.

- Danna on August 22nd, 2007

Having a babysitter or sending your child to daycare is no different than having a nanny in my opinion. In fact, I think more people would have a nanny that sending their kids to daycare if they could afford to do so.

People like to call it different things to make themselves feel like superior parents, but any parent who works outside of the home will eventually have to rely on someone else to take care of their children.

- terri on August 22nd, 2007

Btw, to add to my last post. My mom was a SAHM. I loved that she was a SAHM, but I don’t pass judgment on women that choose or have to work and enlist help in taking care of their children. So maybe it is helping to raise their children, but I just don’t think it minimizes that parent’s role either.

- terri on August 22nd, 2007

You’re right Terri, it shouldn’t minimize and doesn’t minimize that parents role (unless that parent chooses it to be that way… I’ve dealt with some of those as well). I think that in a situation like many of us are living in today where more often than not both parents HAVE to work a parent should feel BLESSED to find a wonderful person or daycare of family member to help them raise their child(ren).

I totally agree that you should NEVER minimize a parents role, but after spending 60 hours a week by myself with the children I nanny for… I also think that parents should think really hard before minimizing the role their caregivers play in their children’s lives.

- Rachel K on August 22nd, 2007

Hmm. I like Scarlet, but who really cares what she thinks at 22 with no babies in sight? I had lots of opinions too before I had 3 children in 4 years. No, I don’t have a nanny, and I barely ever have a babysitter, but I don’t judge those who do. That is because I’m a full time mom and my husband is a teacher, so we live off one small salary, and can’t afford child care. But I can dream… IF I had the money I would employ a babysitter. There is a HUGE difference. I was a nanny, and a babysitter. A nanny is a mommy substitute. She lives in the home, she changes the diapers, feeds the baby and does, in many ways, raise the child. A babysitter comes to the home several times a week and has a close relationship to the child, but is more of an aunt or nurturing companion than a mother.

- ZBella on August 22nd, 2007

I’m a SAHM and I am just really shocked at how judgmental a lot of people are being. Not everybody has a support network around them or experience with babies. I think people should get whatever support they need in order to do a good job raising their children. If that means hiring a babysitter/nanny to come over for 2 hrs a day so you can go grocery shopping in peace or take a shower, I think that’s great! Moms don’t cease being women once they have kids. We need breaks too – being a SAHM is a hard job and you never get a lunch/coffee break like you do at other jobs.

Not everybody has a sister or auntie who lives near them to give them a break every once in a while. I would kill to have a babysitter come over and watch my son so I could take a really long shower. While I’m glad I’m the one raising my child, I can completely understand the need for help once in a while. I think working moms (for whatever reason they continue working) are in such a tough spot, because they must feel guilty all the time – I feel guilty about things I’m doing/not doing and I’m at home. There’s no reason to try to make them feel worse about an already difficult decision.

Also, I think all the childless women on this board have NO idea what they will end up doing until they have kids. You have all of these plans that just go right out the window once you have a baby. It’s impossible to predict.

- PSB on August 22nd, 2007

I just love these judgemental comments from these SAHM’s. Just because you stay at home doesn’t make you a good mother. I had a SAHM, and she was the worst mother possible, frustrated because she couldn’t fulfil her ambitions. I would rather have had a working mother who was satisfied and happy with herself. I have a sister-in-law who is a SAHM, and can’t even be bothered to play with her daughter, or bake cookies with her. Stop judging working mothers. There are good parents and bad parents, and whether they work or not has nothing to do with it.

- Dancer on August 23rd, 2007

Suz- I, like Scarlett, am in my early 20s, and it upset me to hear you refer to Scarlett as a child. The fact of the matter is, she is NOT a child, she is a young adult!

- Annoynomus on August 23rd, 2007

ITA with you about Mommy’s need to have a break, PSB! When I was 19-20 years old, I worked as an au pair for 3 different families. After constantly getting dumped with a good majority of the parents’ responsability in raising their children, I vowed to NEVER have anyone else “rasie my children for me”. Meaning no nanny, no day care. Well, guess what? 18 months ago my son arrived and I was in for a shock at how challenging, overwhelming and exhausting mothering can be! I don’t have a support network of family or girlfriends who can babysit and believe me, when your baby has napped for only 45 minutes for the entire day or you’ve been breastfeeding around the clock, you need a break!! I stayed home with my son until he was 12 months and then went back to work part-time. Hubby and I decided to put him in day care because he’s a very active, sociable child who thrives on interaction. Part-time day care was an answer to our prayers because it not only allowed me to go back to work but it was another stimulus outlet for our son, and that really took a load off my shoulders. At day care, he sings songs, paints pictures, plays with other kids. It’s great.

- Mia on August 23rd, 2007

suz, and all the others who think we are being judgmental….I have not said anything judgmental about YOUR choices. They are yours and not mine and would not be mine. I have never said they were right or wrong. You don’t know me or my family. What works for me would not work for others and vice versa. Suz, it sounds to me like you are very defensive without needing to be. Nobody is attacking working moms. We are having a discussion about celebs having nannies…which was the original preface to this coversation. My views are MY views. Some may agree, others don’t. That is fine. I never said mine were right and others were wrong. I enjoy reading about different situations and with the one post by JM, I think…I learned something. Debates like this get heated, which is why I have tried to stay civil about it and I believe I have…otherwise my posts would not be here.

One last time….if you HAVE TO work and have a nanny…I UNDERSTAND! IMHO, if you are a stay home mom of one child, or even two…and you still need a nanny cooking and taking care of your kids while you go shopping…its ridiculous. Hollywood is filled with moms like that and I think its sad. There are so many facets to this debate we can’t possibly touch on all of them and I won’t try. I will once again say this is MY opinion. This is what I think and feel. These are MY priorities and I do not look down upon or think badly of any working mom where this is concerned.

- tink1217 on August 23rd, 2007

Why don’t you worry about raising your own children instead of placing so much concern on how you perceive celebs are raising theirs?? A nanny is okay in this situation but not in that instance…it’s ridiculous. Focus on your own responsibilities and how you decide to handle them. It’s about what works for each family, and it’s none of our business – period.

Do I think that Scarlett is going to eat her words later? Probably, but why do I care?

- Nicole on August 23rd, 2007

I don’t think she shouldn’t be able to have an opinion just because she DOESN’T have kids either. That’s absurd. What I do think is that most of us, if we were celebrities or extremely wealthy, would probably like a few hours of break every week with 1 steady caregiver we felt we could trust.

I don’t think Scarlett is ruling that out completely, just overstating that she doesn’t want someone raising her children in the typical sense of a nanny, which is quite often live-in. Well, I totally agree.

- Sarah F. on August 23rd, 2007

PSB, I’m a mom who works outside the home. (The phrase “working mom” doesn’t work for me because I think all moms are working moms, right?) And I don’t feel guilty most of the time. A good friend, who also works outside the home, told me before my son was born, “If you’re OK, your kids will be OK.” And I’m OK. So are my kids. So I don’t feel guilty.

- Fynn on August 23rd, 2007

Nicole, if everyone felt the way you do about “focus on your own ” we wouldn’t be here reading and commenting and having discussions. If you don’t seem to care…why comment? Because everybody has an opinion and some like to express theirs and have discussions like this.

Sarah, you are right, just because she has no children doesn’t mean she can’t have an opinion. I had opinions before I had kids and sometimes once you have them your opinion changes. When people read and discuss things with each other sometimes that changes an opinion too. Its all about growing and changing as individuals through interacting with others and having life experiences.

- tink1217 on August 23rd, 2007

Entrusting other people to help us and to help our children-definitely. Being told that someone else is “raising” my kids. That’s a whole nother ballgame.
Tink, yes, I am defensive. It is really hard not to be when you read these comments.
Go back and try reading them from the perspective of someone who does not stay home…I bet you would feel entirely differently if you did. The comments are quite judgemental.
I have been a mom for 5.5 years. In my years as a mom, I have watched and participated in this debate numerous times. I cannot believe in this day and age this is still a debate. There is no answer for every family. When are people going to realize that?
I feel lucky in the respect that I have had a tremendously caring staff at my kids daycare center that have partaken in helping my kids to become the people they have become. But the core values that they have, I will take full credit for, thank you very much.

- suz on August 23rd, 2007

suz, I have read most of the comments and I do see some judgmental things being said, but I have always maintained that what works for me may not work for everyone and I don’t think any less of a woman that works and puts their child in daycare or pre school or has a nanny. MY whole focus was the celebrity nanny. And women who are SAHM who STILL think they need a nanny. That…well, I just don’t get! Never have I said or implied that working mothers are bad because they work. I do get the feeling some here think if you are gonna have a kid, be prepared to stay home and take care of them yourself. That is totally NOT what I am about. Me personally….yes, for me…it was what I wanted. I know so many women who wish they could stay home. Some that stay home on maternity leave and it kills them to have to go back to work. And, some that want to go back to work to get some time around adults. Whatever works, but yes, there are certain aspects of the whole nanny debate amongst Hollywood and the affluent that bugs me. That was all I was trying to say. Really, don’t beat yourself up or be defensive. I, for one, DO NOT judge you at all. I am sure there are many more that would feel that way too.

- tink1217 on August 23rd, 2007

Doesn’t that old saying go, it takes a village to raise a child. So if you have nannies, sitters, daycare providers etc. it’s just other “loving” individuals helping you to bring up your child into the wonderful people they will someday be.

Children thrive on love and attention, to me it doesn’t matter who it comes from as long as the intentions are good.

- J.M. on August 23rd, 2007

personally, I have never bought into the “village to raise a child” theory. But, it is true…children thrive on love and quality time spent.

- tink1217 on August 23rd, 2007

I also am offended at calling Scarlett a “child.” I am 20 with 2 kids of my own and when I was pregnant with my daughter all I heard from anyone is how “babies are having babies.” Yes, I’m young but far from a “child.” It is extremely hurtful to be referred to as such.

As far as the nanny debate goes, I think everyone needs help sometimes. If I could afford it, I think I still would not have a live-in nanny, but I don’t see much of a difference of putting your child in day-care/any type of childcare versus having family watch them. In essence, then, aren’t your family members “raising” your children for you as well? Are you going to keep your kids out of school, less the teachers “raise” them also?

I agree, it takes a village to raise a child and as long as your child doesn’t turn into the next Hitler or something, I really don’t think it matters who helped.

- Has on August 23rd, 2007

Not a child in the sense of age. A child in her level of maturity

- suz on August 23rd, 2007

I really don’t think we have to worry about these celebrity babies. They will get fed, they will get clothed, and they will have educational and career opportunities and connections that us “regular people” can only dream about. So what if the celeb mom walks around with a nanny? Big deal in the big picture, really!

Let’s worry about the orphans of the world or the kids from really bad homes where they don’t get meals every day and they don’t get love. How about a post wiht 65 comments on that?

Tink, you say that you don’t ‘judge’ other moms but if you re-read your posts with a more impartial eye, you will see that you do feel superior to the celebrity mom with a nanny or a SAHM with a nanny. Really, until you walk in there shoes, you don’t know. They may have millions to spend on childcare and good for them that they do! No need to even comment on it. Where I live, most of the SAHM have outside help as well simply because they can afford it. I would go gray ‘worring’ about these people all day if I cared.

For me personally, I honestly don’t care one way or another as long as the child has plenty of love, security, disciline, food and a roof over their heads. Celeb babies are the last people we should be loosing time worring over!

Peace,
Pauline

- Pauline on August 23rd, 2007

Tink,

You seem to voice your “theories” on parenting a lot here and you may not see how they come across as inflamatory, but they do. If someone posted a comment such as , “Don’t get me wrong and I don’t mean to offend, but I view SAHMs as lazy and not caring for their children’s future college funds” (obviously, this is a satirical comment)…. wouldn’t you get offended?

You say that your comments are not personal but they sure as heck come across that way!

- Jessica S. on August 23rd, 2007

Pauline, how do I come across as sounding “superior”??? really? I have always said what I believe doesn’t work for everyone and I am supportive of women who want to have it all. It just isn’t for me and I don’t need my life to be that way. If someone else does that is fine for them. It doesn’t make them a bad person. I ALWAYS try to be civil and have intelligent discussions and I try to learn something, which I did with JM above. In no way do I feel superior to celeb moms in any way. I just feel sad for those children of celebs that have more time spent with their nanny than their own parents because their parents are too career oriented. It CAN be a problem. These are my opinions and now I feel like I am being attacked for them. We all have opinions and are allowed to voice them. Just as you did or anyone else here.

Jessica S, If someone said SAHM are lazy and not caring about future, uh, no I would not take it personally because I am secure in knowing I am not one of those moms.

- tink1217 on August 23rd, 2007

I’ve read most of these comments and don’t think I’ve actually seen anyone address the fact that many working mothers actually want to work. I’m not a mother yet but I imagine that I will want to work at least part-time when I do have children (I know my feelings may well change, but that’s how I feel at the moment). The way I see it is that I’ve studied hard my whole life, have two degrees and am just about (at the age of 26) establishing my career. To give this up when I have children seems like a waste to me, when it is perfectly possible to work part-time and spend plenty of time with your children. For me, I can imagine that the decision to return to work will be less related to money and more about maintaining my career. In other words, I will want to work, rather than have to work. I feel that this point of view has been overlooked in the comments I’ve read here. I find it hard to understand how we can get any further with gender equality when it seems to be OK for young women to study hard and get careers, but in order to be “good mothers” they are then expected to give all that up once they give birth. Then what happens when the children grow up and leave home? It is more difficult for the woman to restart a career and as a result she generally ends up more dependant on men (who strangely appear to have been ommitted from this whole debate).

Sorry for the rant

- lizzie on August 23rd, 2007

lizzie, I think your ideas about being a parent and working are great! There is a balance for everyone and one way may not work for one person but yet it does for another! You are right, you worked hard for the degree and working part time for you may end up being perfect!

On the men part…you are right. Men have been omitted completely from this whole debate!! Lots of men now are SAHD or dads who work from home. I wonder if a SAHD would want to hire a nanny??? Seriously??

As for being dependent on men….I never have been and never will be even though I am a SAHM. My daughter starts college Monday and my son is in high school. He will always be with us due to his mental and physical challenges but I still don’t feel like I am dependent. I have my own money (and no, I won’t get into where or how I have it). I would be perfectly fine if I were a single mom, financially. But, I do see how women could become dependent on men if they give up their careers to raise a family. I have seen it happen. And, yes, it is very hard to start a career again after being out of the workforce for upwards of 18 yrs in some cases. It all depends on circumstances and personal priorities. There are so many factors involved.

You raised some very good points!

- tink1217 on August 23rd, 2007

tink, it’s interesting what you’ve said about SAHDs, as it’s something that I don’t see very much here (Britain) and there definitely seems to be some stigma attached to it. I often think that the best solution when I do have children would be for both me and my future partner to work part time and share the childcare equally, but do think that I might have a hard time getting a man to do this!

Bringing this back to the nanny debate, which I didn’t discuss in my previous post, I just can’t see a problem with having one if you can afford it. If I did end up having my future children cared for by someone outside the family, I’d much rather hire a nanny than have a baby in a nursery/daycare (I say baby because I think nurseries may be good for older children but aren’t ideal for babies). I’d certainly much rather hire a nanny than a 14-year-old babysitter, as Scarlett appears to think is preferable and doesn’t amount to “someone else raising your kids”. I can partially understand the argument against non-working mothers having nannies, but at the end of the day I’d much rather see a happy mother who uses a nanny so that she can spend some time on herself, than a stressed, overworked mother who’s spending every second of the day with her children to try to prove a point that she can do it alone.

- lizzie on August 23rd, 2007

lizzie, a happy mother and child is what the ultimate goal is. I know, for me, I was not happy working and being away from my kids so when I could quit I certainly did. I am MUCH happier and have been ever since. That may not be the case for some and that is ok. I do want to say that I was not one of those women who spent everyday alone with her children to prove I could do it alone. Far from the truth. I WANTED to be with them as much as possible. I grew up without having my mom around much for various reasons. My grandmother practically raised me. She worked nights with the phone company while my grandfather was with me at night. My grandfather had a very succesful lawn business and worked the days with my uncle. She would come home around 7AM, get my breakfast ready and take me to school. She would go home and sleep til 2 and then pick me up from school. She chauffeured me to dance class and skating and gymnastics, made me dinner and got me ready for bed and then went to work while I slept. I saw how hard this was on her. I am so glad I had someone there for me all the time. But, I saw how tired she was and how happy she was when she finally retired!! By then I was 17 and graduating. I could tell she did not enjoy her job and only worked for monetary reasons. So, I get that you can do it all, but for some…it comes with a price. I just knew if I could ever stop working to be a full time SAHM I would. I knew working full time and being a full time parent would not make me happy…although I would work IF I had to.

- tink1217 on August 23rd, 2007

I babysat when I was thirteen until I was about seventeen. I had the Red Cross certification and everything. 14 year olds can be very good babysitters and very mature and smart — it just depends on the person. Plus, if you expect them to act stupid and immature they will. Teenagers can handle way more than most people give them credit for, which is why most of them are immature, spoiled and irresponsible, because nobody decides to give them a chance because of their age. They don’t have to grow up.

Tangent aside, I think it’s perfectly reasonable for her to say that she never wants a nanny. She might change her mind, but when did it become a crime to change your mind? At least she’s thinking ahead of time about what she wants to do, not just having kids now and figuring it all out later.

- Ginny on August 23rd, 2007

Tink, I think LOTS of SAHDs would hire nannies in a second! I personally know three in my building (two of them are gay) and two out of the three of them have part-time help. Like I said before, sometimes people just need a little help.

I can see your point about SAHMs who have live-in nannies and go shopping and get facials all day (or the worst–having the nanny trail after them with the kid in the stroller while they run errands), but a lot of people have nannies come part-time to help out and I think this is great. Sure, a lot of moms raised 5 kids on their own, but how much individual time did they spend with each of those children? If they had some help, they could focus on each child for a bit while the nanny played with the others. Getting children fed and bathed isn’t all there is to having children, and when you have a large family and lots of chores, you sometimes have trouble finding time for the important stuff.

I only have one toddler (for now) but there are days when I am just so tired and would love for somebody to watch my child so I can take a nap or a long bath. When I have two children, I would love to spend some special time with the older one while somebody helps with the newborn. My husband works late and my son barely naps, so my days are really long. I don’t live near any family or close friends, so I get no relief. Maybe you just have more energy than I do? I would kill for a part-time nanny!

PS – I think the reason celebrities lie about having a nanny is because of arguments like this. Who wants to be judged for not being the “perfect mother” and needing an extra set of hands? Nobody knows what each person’s situation is and why they may need help.

- PSB on August 24th, 2007

I have spent YEARS around nannies and have seen it all. As someone pointed out earlier anybody can call themselves a ‘nanny’ – whether qualified and experienced or not. It’s the posers that give real nannies a bad rap. I’ve seen people work in childcare only because they cannot be bothered to do anything else. It’s a disasterous situation. At the same time I have known families who have not given a rats for their kids. We all seem to think kids are their parents priority. Believe me this is not he case.

Just to add I have also spent years with excellent nannies who love their jobs and the families they work for are just wonderful.

My advice to families: once who find a great nanny don’t let her/him go!

- WOW on August 24th, 2007

PSB, nobody can ever be the “perfect mother”. Nobody is perfect!! That is why I try not to judge people like Britney on their parenting as much as alot of others do. And I totally understand people needing an extra set of hands sometimes. At least you realized what I was really trying to discuss here…that whole SAHM who has a nanny so she can have all kinds of free time to herself for selfish reasons. Which lots of celebs and lots of affluent moms seem to do. NOT the everyday working moms needing a nanny or sitter because they have to or want to work. I remember the toddler days. But I DID have a newborn also. My kids are 18 months apart. I understand how hard it is. The newborn is crying to be fed, the toddler crawling all over me for attention or wanting the baby’s bottle. It wasn’t easy and I did have family, but I did 95% of everything myself because I didn’t want my family to think I expected them to help me. I even tried going to work when my son was 3 months old and my daughter was 21 months and had family as a sitter. I missed them both so much and was miserable. I didn’t need to work at the time so I quit. It just didn’t work for me.

I think in some situations…being a SAHM and having some part time help so you can have some time just to go to the grocery store by yourself or go get a cup of coffee with a friend is really nice. Luckily I had family. A mothers helper once a week seems like an excellent idea. Maybe even just for a couple of hours!

At this point, after trying so hard for so long to have another child, if I did have another, I would be so happy and so attached that I would take him or her everywhere!! But, I am sure I would like a couple hours a week to myself and my husband would be alot of help on weekends. So, yes, I have been VERY lucky!

- tink1217 on August 24th, 2007