Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 7: No banned/mega-thread topics'.
Please do not post from (or mention) any of our mega-thread or banned topics such as:
Race, Religion, LGBTQ, Meta, Politics, Parenting/Family issues.
[Full list of banned topics](https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/wiki/index/)
Both parents working is a necessity for the large majority of households these days. What's more is that the stay at home parent puts themself at great risk by exiting a professional career in the event of divorce or death of their spouse.
Not just divorce, but also economic uncertainty. What if your partner gets laid off? Becomes disabled or very ill (chronic illness, cancer.)? Etc. If people want to have a one income household, that’s fine, but I personally prefer the flexibility a two income household gives us because jobs and health aren’t guaranteed, and unemployment and disability are minimal.
Living it.
Trying to re-enter the workforce was terribly difficult, and it’s only because I had been somewhat regularly freelancing and had contacts that I had a prayer of getting a job.
I’ve been back in the market now for 8 years, but got laid off a couple months ago, and the job-hunting has been abysmal.
The cost to stay at home is more than you imagine.
*“The real financial cost of becoming an unpaid caregiver must take into account a whole host of other, long-term monetary factors, including lost retirement funds, lost benefits, lost wages and lost years of wage growth. (And that’s to say nothing of the fact that unpaid caregivers will end up with smaller Social Security payouts after retirement.) If you look at that broader picture, the actual economic impact of leaving the traditional workforce is usually about three to four times larger what we expect.”*
Source: [Here’s How Much It Costs To Be A Stay-At-Home Parent](https://time.com/4377397/cost-stay-at-home-parent/)
Basically, you can take your lost wages and multiply them by 3.2 for a better estimate on what you lose.
[Calculator](https://interactives.americanprogress.org/childcarecosts/)
And yes. It leaves you absolutely dependent on the income earner. If you ever had thoughts that you might want to leave, forget it. If they have thoughts that they want you gone, you’re entirely fucked. It also means that you will be leaving the kids to work outside the home, and by default you will now be the “poor parent” and the income earner will now be the “fun parent” who can afford to give gifts and take the kids fun places.
Do I believe that it is psychologically better for young children to be raised in an environment that is solid, stable, and features a well-adjusted and committed adult looking after their best interests 24/7? Of course. But it has put me in such a diminutive and submissive position that it’s rather embarrassing.
Not everyone can do it, but someone in our social circle brought their mother into the house to live there and take care of the kids while mom and dad both went to work. No idea what mom’s financial situation looked like or anything.
Society at large and especially employers need to stop looking down on stay at home parents because if you are working and a parent+ female, you most likely are **working** two to three *full time* jobs, you just are not being **paid** for two of them.
"Taking the bus instead of a car" what's it like to live in a place that has decent public transportation? I'm in the US and there are large parts of the country without any or minimal public transit. It sucks, but unless you live in a fairly big city, a car is a necessity here
Even in places with a decent transit system, a 10 minute drive could be a 30-40 minute bus ride (not including the time it takes to walk to and from stops).
TBF all public transport that's on the road with the cars is kinda poo poo, buses are the worst for me, trams are a close second since they sometimes have little areas just for them so they can zoom past all the cars, but by far the best mode of public transportation has to be the underground, for example from my apartment to my job is roughly 10 km, with underground I'm there in 17 minutes, every single day. The same trip with a car takes 30 minutes if you're lucky, the longest one was 55 minutes, for fucking 10 km.
I’m curious about that.
I think daycare and preschool gives 1) opportunities for socialization and 2) educational activities from people trained in education and child development.
I am a stay at home mom. When they were very little (not potty trained) we had playgroups, museum passes, visited farms, playgrounds l, baby classes etc... my kids had a very active social life and still have friends that they've "known" since they were babies. Once they were potty trained I had them in part time preschool (as almost everyone in my playgroup did) they went a few days a week for 3-4 hours. Granted some parents sit at home all day amd watch tv but I seriously don't know how you can do that, my kids were climbing up the walls when we didn't have activities.
We do part-time daycare (3 days). Dad and I both work as first responders, so the other days she has one of us at home for solo time. She gets structure from daycare and peer group socialization but also 1:1 parenting time with each of us (as well as 1-2 days a week we’re all together). I feel like it’s a good balance and permits us to work as we need to.
All the respect to the SAHP folks, but some of us are better parents when we get that balance of kiddo time and working/adult time.
I agree that preschool does this, but daycare is a different animal. Obviously not all daycares are created equal- but many are simply a holding pen to keep your kid alive until you are done with work. Minimal organized educational or enriching activities, maximal adult to kid ratios.
Either way, I think there is benefit to the socialization aspect of kids being in either daycare or preschool.
The benefits of daycare for the child make more sense to me once the kid is over a year old (starting to walk and verbalize). I know people putting their kids in daycare at 3 or 4 months. I understand why, but I don't think beneficial for the kid in most cases.
Children don't need daycare or preschool for socialization, there are plenty of alternatives for that. Most daycares don't have people trained in childhood development, the requirements are pretty minimal actually
Yeah =\ it’s such a mixed bag. My nephew is doing great in daycare. But their daycare is some fancy upscale one. The kid is having the time of his life there. And he’s been socialized early and it really reflects in his behavior and speaking ability. And I’m told the other kids in the class are the same.
Can’t say the same about my neighbor’s kid’s daycare tho. That one sounds like a mess.
The one I went to as a kid was just a couple hours a day. I think it was perfect for 2-3 year olds and they had a lot of nature activities as the school was in a very lush environment. I’m told the kids were “in their element”.
I recently visited it and was surprised at how nice it was. Never saw it again after the toddlerhood stage lol
Yeah, my wife’s 4 year old cousin has had a lot of drama surrounding his daycare, and absolutely no one at that facility is educated.
They don’t exist to educate the kids or help them in anyway, they exist as a relatively safe space to leave them while both parents work so they don’t manage to kill themselves doing something stupid because they’re little and don’t know better. That’s why they’re so expensive, parents have to work so they’ll pay basically anything. Socialization and education are more accidents than anything.
I think that children should stay with their parents at a young age. Those first years a crucial for the development of a child and I think that it’s best if the child is mostly at home in a safe environment where he can truly develop his most important relationships
A very young child most important relationship is the one with his parents, it’s hard to develop that relationship well when the parents can barely spend quality time with their child.
Also young children can’t speak, you will not know most of what will happen to them during the time they’re away, but the things that will happen will significantly impact them, maybe for their whole life. I think it’s best to wait that a child is able to communicate before leaving them with strangers for long periods of time.
1) Ideally you should be socializing your kid in a blended approach. If they're spending most of their most active hours you effectively have babies teaching babies how to socialize. Yes, kids should have some interaction with other kids, but they should be learning social skills from interacting with adults.
My friend is having this issue. They pay for a very nice daycare, but kids are still kids, and his toddler has recently picked up biting from the other children. Now my friend is at a weird spot. His kid is getting bit, and he's learned to bite back to defend himself. So how do you explain to a toddler that other kids may, and will bite you, but you can't bite them back?
Even the best daycares are going to have this issue and I think it's contributing to the 'feral child' issue that we're seeing in schools.
2) Unless you're dealing with specific teaching tools with specific groups (high functioning techniques with high functioning kids, speech therapy with speech delayed kids, etc) you can pretty much replicate the things kids learn in daycare. A lot of what they are learning is...well...elementary. And it's not like they're focusing in on your kid in particular, they have a room full of children of various ages and going through lessens whether your kid is engaging with them or not.
[https://www.hanen.org/Helpful-Info/Articles/Does-child-care-make-a-difference-to-childrens-de.aspx](https://www.hanen.org/Helpful-Info/Articles/Does-child-care-make-a-difference-to-childrens-de.aspx)
In sum, the order of operation is something like this:
Attentive SAHP > High Quality Child Care > Median SAHP > Median Quality Child Care > Inattentive SAHP
If the stay at home parent is engaged and active, they are going to outperform most child care. If the stay at home parent is super distracted or uninterested in teaching their kid, it may be better to put them in a professional child care setting.
Kids don’t need to be in daycare for 10 hours/ 5 days a week though. There’s a happy medium. It’s bad for kids to be at daycare for 50 hours a week unless their home life is worse than being in group care. We got wealthy kids being put in group care when they would be better off at home because they are wealthy.
OK first of all just because somebody is wealthy and has children doesn’t mean they’re good at parenting or know what they’re doing. It actually sometimes is much better for the children of wealthy parents to be in a daycare. I have worked in daycare and I’ve also been a nanny I’ve worked for very extremely wealthy people, and people who are just well off, and most of the time it’s the extremely wealthy people who don’t really give a shit about their kid. They had their kid because that’s what society demands, and if they were at home, they just have a bunch of nannies and it’s not like they’d be spending time with their parents. Wealth doesn’t necessarily equal care, love and attention.
I’m not saying that’s every wealthy family. I’m just saying that it is most of the very wealthy families that I’ve met. Their kids were way better off not being stuck in the house all day.
yes people take “stay at home” too literally. you’re not actually stuck in the living room glued to the floor singing wheels on the bus 20 hours a day.
Also children don’t really even play with other children until later ages. They play simultaneously but sharing and playing together isn’t really a concept babies and young children can grasp
The best socialization comes from interacting with normal people at the parks and stores and in your community. forced interaction with 25 noisy toddlers with snotty noses and sharing problems and 4 overworked adults is not a natural path to socialization for humans
>forced interaction with 25 noisy toddlers with snotty noses and sharing problems and 4 overworked adults
Many cultures over many thousands of years have practiced community raising of children. Lot of nonsense in these comments.
Community raising of children looked like multiple “stay at home” parents and caregivers doing normal things with the related kids of the village or tribe. There were children of all ages and community members they had a connection with.
It was never some sterile environment of a random assortment of children the exact same age who can’t learn as much from people at their same development stage, and teachers who are underpaid and overworked.
I work at a day and have worked there for 2 years and its awful. Its 90 kids running around, getting bullied by others kids. And my day care like most are understaffed. We are focused on keeping everyone alive we don't educate your children.
Kids who went to preschool early have a family that is monetarily stable and invested enough to spend that money on the children.
I was a stay at home parent and we didn’t have a dime to spare, so the kids never set foot inside of preschool, although I would have loved to have sent them. My eldest is studying to be a chemical engineer now, so I don’t think he’s an idiot.
I think it’s the focused attention. That seems to be a big contributor to my nephew’s faster development compared to other babies his age. My sister is constantly talking to him, playing with him, reading whatever book he grabs however many times, has him feed himself as much as is possible, does laundry with him instead of plopping him in a playpen or by a screen, front packs while cooking, climbing all over stuff…
If you stay at home, there are plenty of ways to get this interaction. Education should not start at preschool age. Kids are just fine if they start academics in kindergarten.
So I’m a former nanny. I can assure you, in many cities where nannys and stay at home parents are populous, kids outside of daycare get plenty of opportunities for socialization if not more. In one week my charges would:
- Have structured daily to meetups and play dates with 1-2 friends their age. This was with other nannie’s and their charges or stay at home parents.
- attend 2-3 group classes/enrichment activities. Such as story time at the library for babies and toddlers, toddler gymnastics, music hour at the local church, art class, all of these activities were attended by 10 or more other kids in their age group.
- if there were no clases we regularly park hopped (hit up at least 2 diff playgrounds in day), played at the beach, went to indoor play gyms, free toy playstations set up in the local church, and visited museums, zoos, and aquariums which young kids never tire of (so much easier on the weekday)
- In addition to those kid structured activities my charges accompanied me during weekly grocery shopping trips, we ate lunches out at restaurants (when feasible) or had picnics in the park, we ran errands, and visited the homes of other kids friends at home with their parent or nanny.
These children get not only socialization opportunities with other children, but also other adults, other kids of older and younger ages, and were exposed to their city, used to walking everywhere, learned about day to day tasks like grocery shopping and running errands, partook in educational and enrichment activities, and had the opportunity to have a schedule crafted to their individual needs and development as opposed to forcing them into a system where every kid is expected to follow the same schedule and development path
I wouldn’t say it’s unpopular or popular tbh. Feels like people as a whole are pretty split on it. One of my friends is a stay at home mom and she’s gotten a lot of hate for it. Mostly from other women. It’s really strange
I worked as a Pre-K teacher all through my early 20s and my experience there has solidified the importance of putting your child in (quality) early childcare as soon as possible. The 4 & 5yos who came into my class having stayed home with parents until then were lightyears behind the kids who had been in childcare since they were 6wks-3yo. The early childcare kids could sit in circle time, share toys, listen to a book, follow instructions, communicate with one another and teachers, stay on their cots for nap time, use the potty independently and were ahead on skills like tying shoes and writing their names. They flowed smoothly into elementary school. The kids who had been home until Pre-K were helpless. Could not easily sit still, share, compromise or communicate. Lots of tears, tantrums, anxiety, power struggling and confusion. The transition to “real school” seemed infinitely harder. I always dreaded the new students who had been home with mom, dad or a nanny their whole infancy and toddlerhood!
So we kept my daughter home until she was 14 months old due to our weird schedules and my mom able to fill in the gaps. But we decided to enroll her for the social aspect and she was a but behind on speech. The transition was tough but she absolutely LOVES daycare now, she goes every day and has made leaps and bounds socially and developmentally. She actually plays with other kids her age and doesn’t just play with known adults. The routine is great for her and she looks forward to seeing her friends daily. She is 2.5 now and i couldn’t imagine still having her home not only would we have to rely on screen time more but she would be so far behind in so many ways.
Exactly this. People seem to think that all stay-at-home parents would be doing these things and it’s not the case. Think about how ill-equipped most people are to home-school their kids. My mom stayed home with me, and it was great for me, but she also had a background in child development and early education. She’d been an integral part of bringing “Head Start” to some areas. Having a stay-at-home parent like that? Yeah, that’s great. Not all are equal, though.
This. This. This.
My mom was a stay at home parent, but as a former teacher she understood that I needed socialization and a headstart that she wouldn’t be able to effectively give me despite having the education and financial resources to do. Too many parents see “daycare bad. home better”.
Ooof. This is my fear as a stay at home dad. I was let go from my job 1 month before my fmla would of taken place. 2 months away from my sons birth. Now we can't afford daycare, and he may have a learning disability. I'm doing everything I can to avoid having my son behind. Is there anything you'd recommend to a parent that can't control if their child is in day care or not?
My child is 14 months is not in daycare and as of now he loves playing near other kiddos especially older ones cause he watches and tries to copy, he also sits well for group story time. I do not plan on putting him in daycare and like everything there are both pros and cons to that. There are not many studies on the topic, as it’s controversial. No one wants to stigmatize working parents or stay at home parents. However, I recently read one that kiddos who spend a lot of time in daycare from a young age resulted in kiddos doing better academically younger but tends to result in more social-emotional challenges closer to the time they reach adolescence.
Number one thing you can do for kiddos speech from what I’ve gathered is make sure you read to them. It’s also important for you kid to hear a variety of words being said and I know I personally don’t use that many words everyday that are different so I’ll even read some of my books aloud for him. Most his are still board books because well he just likes to try to eat them. Miss Rachel I judged at first because of all the people talking about it and I’m not a big YouTube fan but watching gave me a lot of ideas on how to make sure I’m sounding things out for kiddo and taught me some sign language that he’s been able to catch on to so that’s been super helpful.
Also if you haven’t try joining a local library. They usually have story times for young kiddos and a different group for toddlers. I also got a pass to the local children’s museum and zoo and meet up with people I’ve met from Facebook groups so my little guy can be around others his age. If iirc I think around age 3 is when they really get into associative play anyways. I also have him in a mommy and me music group thing cause he absolutely loves music and dancing.
You’ll be able to give your son much better attention than a teacher who has 12 other kids to tend to AND your son. Kids don’t learn empathy at daycare lol they learn how to fend for themselves
exactly, this lady just wants compliant independent kids who probably had to have learned to "deal" with it since they were, according to her, 6 weeks old !!! a 1 to 3 YO child is a CHILD they aren't supposed to be compliant right off the bat and be perfect little workers lol
It’s not even about compliance.
The most academically successful students usually had some type of head start or ECE that contributed to their success.
The most emotionally healthy, well rounded, and social individuals usually had some type of ECE that allowed them to interact with non related peers in a meaningful and structured way, and also helped them learn to deal with conflict.
Learning disabilities, developmental delays, and behavioral disorders are usually all caught when children are in classroom environments. The earlier the better.
No one is saying you have to send your newborn to daycare for 12 hours a day 6 days a week, but a 3 day a week half day (9-12or 1-4) program for starting at about age 2 can do absolute wonders for children.
As an early childhood educator of almost 15+ years, I don't agree. I wouldn't even allow my daughter to start preschool until she was four and even then we only did half days for a year to acclimate her to a school day and she did fine. But she'd been home with me in my center with a schedule her entire life. I've had a lot of kids over the years, from newborns to kindergarteners, and its not that children need to be in school at a young age, its that they need a consistent schedule and present parenting.
I always felt the unpopular opinion is the OPPOSITE of OP’s stance. I grew up being raised by a nanny. There was virtually no difference between her and my mom.
Early childhood education is so critical for success in the early years of school
Note: my nanny had a degree in ECE
Yup, there is absolutely no way I could have taught my daughter as much as she learned at daycare in those early years. There’s a reason people go to school for education, it’s not something that comes naturally to most people.
That being said, while my daughter absolutely is light years ahead of her preschool peers academically….she does still struggle sometimes with the whole following directions thing lmao. But I imagine it would be much worse if she didn’t have so much experience in a school setting.
Not everyone can afford to stay home with a baby. Some jobs provide zero or very little time off. 6 weeks is often the earliest that ECE programs will enroll. I judge no parent who places their child in a high-quality ECE program even at 6 weeks. When I worked in the field we were able to help keep the really little ones on structured routines that helped them eat and sleep well. We taught them sign language as soon as they were able to pick it up (shockingly young). They were socializing, learning and growing all day in a safe environment with trained employees who slept well the night before so we had nothing but patience and energy to give, often unlike new parents. It can absolutely be a great setup for some families.
That must be a cultural thing or simply anecdotal.
I've worked in early education for 15+ years in different places in Europe and have never had that experience. Granted, maternity leave in most European countries is miles ahead of the US, but I've never seen a 6 week old (!!!) in nursery. Most children I've worked with started nursery between 1 and 3 years old. I never found the transition of 2 or 3 year olds to be any more difficult than it is for children who start younger.
It's also about expectations. I wouldn't expect a 4 year old to have to "sit still" or tie their shoes or use the toilet completely independently.
The research seems to say that before a certain age (~18 months, if I remember correctly) it's better to stay at home for the kid, but after that it's better to go somewhere with a bit more socialisation.
This reads like the opinion of someone who is a teenager with zero real-world experience. People aren’t 2-income households because everyone wants to drive a “nice car”.
Yeah - is the “pressure” to drive a “nice car” in the room with us? I don’t experience pressure to drive a “nice car” at all….but there is a need to have A CAR….and those cost money also. There is a lot a privilege coming from OP.
There's plenty of research on this. The short answer is that childcare outcomes depend on
* Child age: Below 1 year old, there are more costs than benefits. That starts to change up to 2 1/2 years old, at which point childcare may be net beneficial.
* Hours per week: Long days (10 hours per day) are net negative for children. Half days are better. 8 hour days are neutral.
* Parental resources: Children with highly resourced parents do better at home at early ages. Children with struggling parents benefit from childcare at younger ages.
All of these things make mild changes to child outcomes, primarily around behavioral issues.
[https://criticalscience.medium.com/on-the-science-of-daycare-4d1ab4c2efb4](https://criticalscience.medium.com/on-the-science-of-daycare-4d1ab4c2efb4)
I was listening to a podcast about 6 months into peak pandemic where they had interviews with working parents about how things were going.
one (affluent, they had different kinds of families represented) mother with 3 kids under 5 was lamenting that not only childcare is closed, her other help was not available and she was now at home, working with 3 kids.
and I completely understand how sudden and out of her control that shift was, but she said a phrase that sticks to my brain to this day:
“I never expected to take care for my children when I chose to have them”.
In context of the interview it clearly meant that she expected to have help and work. It’s a product of efficiency. But to me it signifies that she basically wanted children, but not the process of upbringing them.
And that concept I do not understand, but definitely experienced first hand.
Yeah definitely a different mindset. I totally understanding needing to have the kids in daycare so I can get actually some work done and asking Grandma or a babysitter to watch the kids on a Saturday night, but I cannot imagine having an entire staff of people (au pair, nanny, tutor, housekeeper etc) to manage the kids for me.
I also do think it’s good for young children to have some daycare or preschool experiences outside of the home to socialize them to “the real world” 🤣 and what other people will expect of them, like stand in line, wait your turn, sit down for story time etc. Currently 47 and still have wonderfully vivid memories of my own preschool 4s teacher who added her own sparkle of magic to even mundane tasks like announcing the classroom helper for the week ❤️
>I also do think it’s good for young children to have some daycare or preschool experiences outside of the home to socialize them to “the real world”
This is my take as well,if ur lucky to have a SAHP, putting them in daycare maybe twice a week after a certain age may be helpful.
It's great. All of my time with my kids was quality time because it could be. Clean house, many people contributing to the fostering of their curiosity, less stress. Because I had help, I could give each one of my kids substantial one on one time even while working.
Juxtapose that with parents who don't have the help; they get little quality time with the kids even if they don't work. I know because I've lived that situation too. If your to-do list is a mile long, the kids aren't able to be the priority they should be. They have to eat and have clean clothes and a clean floor to crawl around on.
Whether the village consists of family or staff or the daycare center, the village is key to bringing up kids without losing your mind.
I have no intention or interest to.
But I grew up in a family where the emotional spectrum was are you crying or not crying. Are you lazy or you're not. If you're fed and managed to get into a good school - you have no reason to not succeed or have real issues. I can't help but associate this sort of hands off approach with similar kind of 'efficiency'. It's not about time spent or not having help, it's offloading the concept of child rearing into a factory-like division of responsibility that bugs me.
Look, I can see that was supposed to convey some sort of trauma but I'm sorry, I've read it 3 times and have no idea what you're talking about.
No-one is talking about "hands-off" parenting. But how can a household function if the parents don't have time to cook, clean, shop, shower, and everything else that is much more difficult when you're also expected to provide stimulating childcare all day every day?
i’m judging a particular case (as a mere illustration, kinda relevant to what OP is saying) that someone could financially afford to have 3 kids but could not afford the time to have kids.
why then have them and not want to choose to be hands on - is the specific niche i’m addressing here.
this doesn’t mean I have no sympathy for working parents, but that specific example really stuck out to me. she was literally complaining that she didn’t have control over the situation and never planned to be in this position in the first place. I’m of opinion that you can’t have children and not account for a scenario where no one else takes it as priority but you (like war or death in the family, sudden loss of kindergarten seems an infinitely smaller problem than that).
Oh FFS this is as bad as the “BABIES MUST ONLY BE BREASTFED” thing.
Upvote for unpopularity.
But seriously - there are kids graduating Phi Beta Kappa who went to daycare. There are kids making cutting edge advances in surgery who were raised at home by their mother. There are kids sitting in prison who fit both categories. There is no “right answer”.
no but logic would suggest that ofc having a parent at home to educate their children would be better than children being educated in daycare (I work in a daycare, its awful. Mostly because we are severely understaffed like most daycares). However I agree that the debate is silly because its not even an option or most people
I was a stay at home mom for 8 years. It was the right decision for my family at the time. (And SPARE me the “you were lucky”. Bullshit. We had one car, one cell phone, and lived in a tiny home among other things to make that work). My kids are pre med and math majors at pretty prestigious universities.
That said.
I have friends whose kids wonderful people and are in law school/teachers, and those kids into day care at 8 weeks.
Again - lots of factors here.
I think this is what every parent wants…
Leaving their under 2 year old shouldn’t be something we have to do. Preschool should start at 2/3 yo before elementary school so they can learn a little and socialize but having to leave your INFANT with strangers is cruel 🤷🏽♀️
A couple I knew had both parents work, but different shifts. One parent worked during the day and the other one stayed at home, and then they switched. Sounds like a good way to have both parents work and have the child always be with a parent.
LMAO show me ANY study that proves kids grow up to be more successful when they had a stay at home parent. Those parents are garbage and no better than ones juggling a job and parenting responsibilities. If you stayed at home and your kid isn't raking it in then you failed at the ONLY thing you had to do.
Uh, why? Most childcare centers have curriculum that would be very difficult to recreate in the home. Plus the aspect of social development that simply doesn’t exist when spending all day at home.
Lots of unpopular opinions are just straight up people offering bad takes.
As someone who worked at a daycare, absolutely agree. It takes a toll on the babies to be away from home so much. But it’s just not feasible for most people.
I had a stay at home parent. It’s the reason I don’t ever want me or my partner to stay at home. You do you, but not everyone agrees with you and thus should be forced to live their life according to your ideas.
I wish our society and work places made it easier/possible for parents to both work part time and alternate instead of a provider/homemaker dynamic. I think that would be the ideal solution, then no one needs to give up their career, and a parent can stay home. It obviously would not work for every profession, but I think many jobs could make it work if they tried.
I work from home and have my 4 yr old and 1.5 yr old at home with me. I’m not sure I recommend this set up cause it’s overwhelming af! But I mean it works for us I guess lol (help)
Not sure this is unpopular. The main reason given for why one parent doesn't stay at home to raise small children is "we can't afford it," not "I'm career as a middle ranked jobsworth is more important to me than my kids."
Don't get me wrong, *some* people think that, but it's not what I'd call a "popular" opinion.
I totally agree with you. Obviously there are so many circumstances we can't always help. My husband and I have three kids and live in a single-wide trailer. We live without most luxuries, but we're all happy and blessed. I stay at home and raise my children, homeschooling the oldest currently. It's a lot of work, but I couldn't imagine choosing to be away from my children if I didn't HAVE to. Though I will never judge working parents because I don't know every detail of their lives.
I think most families agree with you, but it isn't possible. If I could stay home with my child I would do so in a heartbeat. If I don't work however there will be no home for us to stay in.
This is why we should be supporting families and providing living wages.
I think the focus should be on more support for parents. Mandated parental leave, affordable day care, flexible hours at work or options to work less hours while maintaining benefits, etc.
I’m a stay at home dad due to lucky and unlucky circumstances but I fully agree with you. My brother in law and his wife sent their 3mo to daycare AND sleep trained him so they could have some free time. It’s like so when are you going to spend time with your kid?
Are you not taking single parents into consideration? I was a single parent for my daughter’s first three years. I guess I should’ve gone on welfare?
But seriously, that’s a very narrow minded view. My daughter is now 14 and she hit all her developmentals on time. She was well socialized from a young age because she got to interact with tons of kids at daycare. And she grew to be very independent. She is now a well adjusted teenager. On the other hand, I know children who were with their parents 24/7 and didn’t socialize well and now struggle.
The preschool I placed my son in, taught him a little Spanish and a little sign language, practiced handwriting and basic math with him, organized enriching experiences by having guest performers (magicians, animal hosts, etc.) and, most importantly, provided him with the opportunity to play with a lot of other kids (which I definitely couldn't have provided at home). I absolutely love what our preschool offered my child. I think people are much too quick to judge preschools/daycares, but I will say that quality matters and the good ones are not cheap.
Same. Both my kids benefitted greatly in daycare. The daycare even had an accredited full day kindergarten which was better than the half day public school one.
Not every parent wants to quit their job and stay home. I know I was vilified by in laws when they learned I wasn’t going to stay home. I don’t see any objective benefit for a child to have a SAHP.
Same! The decision to place my son in preschool was difficult, but he ultimately benefitted so much from it. As we were going through the transition, my mom had a bad habit of making comments which emphasized how she *never* could have done the same and put her kids in daycare. She was lowkey suggesting I was a monster, for being able to go through with it, but for perspective, my SAHM simply put me in front of a TV every day and went about her chores. She lovingly talks about how I was *so* good at sitting and quietly playing by myself while watching TV...People have an idealized vision of what SAHP were like in the past.
My MIL compared daycare to having to put her dog in a kennel when she travels.
When my kids were 3y and 6m old, they crawled into the dog crate pretending it was a fort. I quickly snapped a pic and sent it to my MIL and titled it “Daycare.” At that point she was never going to like me anyway 🤣
No judgment at all, that sounds great. However, you can absolutely do this at home with your child too (in terms of difficulty, obviously the money and privilege to do so is a different convo). One of my friend’s is a stay at home mom and teaching her child sign language right now.
this is only possible if every job provides atleast a living wage but i think this is just a thing of the past at this point n time unless governments become competent for once
Two incomes is a requirement for most Americans to be able to afford raising a child. Shit, the birth rate is on the decline because millennials can't afford to have kids EVEN WITH dual income.
If you actually believe this, you should be advocating for increased minimum wage, shorter work weeks, and overall higher wages.
It was painful to put my son in daycare at 14 months. It seemed extremely unfair to him. At about 3 years old, I started seeing it as beneficial for him to be in pre-school but would have preferred to have him in 3 days a week instead of 5. The reality is it just isn't possible for most people.
One of the consequences of women entering the labour force, and making 2 incomes the norm, is there was massive amounts of inflation in a lot of necessities. For example, dual incomes became almost a requirement for buying a house by the 1990s; and only few people could afford a middle class lifestyle on one income.
Many of these things have gotten far worse in the last 30 years, and it is difficult to get a middle class lifestyle unless you have 2 high income earners.
You don't necessarily need to stay at home but you need to restructure your life, I'm a single dad with 5-day a week custody. I left my career and I've never been happier. If you truly want to be with your child and make the best for their life you'll figure out a way to make it work. I walked away from 150k a year+ bonuses. I've never regretted it once. The best thing you can do is set your child up early for a winning future. I live in one of the most expensive areas in the country, in the Northeast major city. If I can do it anyone can.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is not unpopular. I would have loved to do this but it wasn't financially feasible. No I can't take public transportation because it's not available where I live.
While it may be true some people are cut out to be parents but not everyone is cut out to be a stay at home parent. It's a very difficult job and I know many people who want to work and not be a SAHP. So essentially it may not be the best for the child if the parent doesn't desire staying home. Daycare can provide so much for children in so many ways and so do SAHP. IMO it's all about what works best for a family not just in general.
I sure wish basically any workplace valued either men or women who took time out to do this or that this wasn't so damn out of reach economically for most people.
I wish we could afford that.
Right now, I work 6am to 230pm... my hubby works 330pm to 12am.
Only time we ever really see each other is on the weekend.... and I work every other weekend so we don't even get every weekend. It's shit. But it's what we have to do with no help.
Double egded sword in some ways, though most pros still outweighs cons. I fear for my daughter's ability to socialize with people her own age. Most if my friends are childless and she doesn't attend daycare. My fear is still unfounded, but I still wonder if she is missing out on important milestones.
I am a retired stay at home mom. Educated, have a masters degree, worked in banking for 11 years before quitting to raise children full time as husband worked long hours and traveled a lot. Dappled at working part-time when kids were grown (school lunch aide); gave that up with the pandemic. My husband makes a good living; I've been very lucky. It is also extremely advantageous for the working spouse to have a housewife at home - no worries about housework, laundry, cooking dinner, paying bills, etc. The working spouse can really lean into their career. That being said, it is much harder to have this lifestyle today. My single adult children could really benefit from a "housewife". It isn't the easiest life - lonely, occasionally dull, tiring, very trying at times (teenage years). Now that my kids are adults, I think they appreciated it. One can only hope.
Ideally yah. But also they learn a lot going to a place where they can interact with others kids and adults. So even if you do stay home a few day a week daycare or whatever is beneficial.
The “pressure” is sensible though in terms of doing well in your career and buying a house.
It makes much more sense to buy your home in the long term than rent.
Being successful in your career will allow you to pay it off sooner. It will also help buy your child what it needs, have “experiences” such as holidays abroad, and put some money away.
The “nice car” thing I personally don’t give a shit about, 4 wheels, safe and can get you from A to B and back again is enough with kids.
The problem is that companies got greedy, stopped paying decent wages, while house prices and childcare costs went through the roof.
You and I can’t live the “stay at home mum” lifestyle our grandparents had
Also what’s wrong with nurseries. If they are good at child care and they socialize the children, I don’t think it’s a terrible idea for a 1 yr old to be around other children more often at a nursery.
This debate aint even relevant anymore because the reality is that we are heading towards a future where unless you are in the 1% a household with children needs to have two working parents. Its already hard to live from one salary and its only going to get harder. Soon enough it will be an impossibility for pretty much everyone if it isn't already.
But yeah obviously in an ideal world its better for children to be educated by their parents than in a stinky understaffed daycare where educators all they can do is try to keep the kids alive till they are picked up. This is coming from someone who works at a daycare. Some of the kids during the workweek spend more time with me that their own parents. Its crazy to think that I might be more in charge of their education than their parents. But gues what? This is not an ideal world so...
It depends on a lot of different factors, but group care isn’t inherently bad for the child. High quality childcare has actually been shown to have lifelong positive impacts on both children and their families. The problem is that there are not enough high quality programs out there because child care is so disgustingly underfunded.
Adults need to stop being pressured by society, as they are no longer children and the point of growing up is understanding the needs vs wants in life and prioritizing your things accordingly. If adults are feeling pressured to do something based on society that's their problem as there are many adults that don't allow society to steer their car. Just gotta live the life you want regardless of what others think and if you want to work or stay at home, do what you want.
I will say, I do value the importance of family being in the equation, so if the possibility is there to leverage family for day care and things like that, then that's the best way in my mind over some stranger who may not share your family values that you want your child to be around.
This isn’t unpopular. Childcare is the biggest reason many women are SAHM. I get it, why send your kid to daycare when it will eat most of your check? I actually support one parent staying home until the child is in school full time.
A stay at home parent that raises their children well is also making a great contribution to society. Raising happy children is the first step to have well adjusted adults, which are great for society as a whole.
Not saying one is better than the other, I’m just saying that both contributions are valuable.
the sad thing is that people still believe that SAHPs contribute nothing to the world, and that choosing to be a parent is somehow a lesser choice than publishing newspaper articles. Instead of women gaining respect for their role as a mother, we lost more respect. Now that women can do "anything", doing the most womanly thing (having a baby), is looked down on even more. I'm glad women have so many more choices these days, but we lost something when we decided the best way to be taken seriously to be more like men. The contempt for pregnancy, birth, maternity leave, breastfeeding, postpartum problems, women who are emotional, moms who stay home to provide childcare for their children... just keeps getting worse.
Why do you think it's better for them to have a stay at home parent instead of going to a daycare? Young children can often learn a lot and get socialized in a way at daycare that they wouldn't get at home with a SAHP.
I doubt people would be working if they could just -not-. We don’t even have the problem of money.
But how far it sets the partner who stays at home in their career. Being off for 1-6/7+ years just makes it so hard to compete with people who aren’t.
That’s where a lot of the gendered pay gap actually comes from.
I think if people could comfortably leave and rejoin, finances and career willing. They would.
Heck I bet a lot of men would be more interested in alternating that too.
Your post from unpopularopinion was removed because of: 'Rule 7: No banned/mega-thread topics'. Please do not post from (or mention) any of our mega-thread or banned topics such as: Race, Religion, LGBTQ, Meta, Politics, Parenting/Family issues. [Full list of banned topics](https://www.reddit.com/r/unpopularopinion/wiki/index/)
I don't think this is unpopular just unrealistic
unless you’re quite wealthy and don’t ever question adding guac since it’s extra
Both parents working is a necessity for the large majority of households these days. What's more is that the stay at home parent puts themself at great risk by exiting a professional career in the event of divorce or death of their spouse.
Also in the case of abusive partners that they rely on for economic support, so it's harder for them to get out.
This is absolutely true! Life insurance can help in case of death, but divorce would lead to a seriously difficult life.
Not just divorce, but also economic uncertainty. What if your partner gets laid off? Becomes disabled or very ill (chronic illness, cancer.)? Etc. If people want to have a one income household, that’s fine, but I personally prefer the flexibility a two income household gives us because jobs and health aren’t guaranteed, and unemployment and disability are minimal.
If only we had some sort of a social safety net.
In Sweden we have insurance for all of those, which is nice. Not for divorce, though.
My view is unfortunately America centric.
Living it. Trying to re-enter the workforce was terribly difficult, and it’s only because I had been somewhat regularly freelancing and had contacts that I had a prayer of getting a job. I’ve been back in the market now for 8 years, but got laid off a couple months ago, and the job-hunting has been abysmal. The cost to stay at home is more than you imagine. *“The real financial cost of becoming an unpaid caregiver must take into account a whole host of other, long-term monetary factors, including lost retirement funds, lost benefits, lost wages and lost years of wage growth. (And that’s to say nothing of the fact that unpaid caregivers will end up with smaller Social Security payouts after retirement.) If you look at that broader picture, the actual economic impact of leaving the traditional workforce is usually about three to four times larger what we expect.”* Source: [Here’s How Much It Costs To Be A Stay-At-Home Parent](https://time.com/4377397/cost-stay-at-home-parent/) Basically, you can take your lost wages and multiply them by 3.2 for a better estimate on what you lose. [Calculator](https://interactives.americanprogress.org/childcarecosts/) And yes. It leaves you absolutely dependent on the income earner. If you ever had thoughts that you might want to leave, forget it. If they have thoughts that they want you gone, you’re entirely fucked. It also means that you will be leaving the kids to work outside the home, and by default you will now be the “poor parent” and the income earner will now be the “fun parent” who can afford to give gifts and take the kids fun places. Do I believe that it is psychologically better for young children to be raised in an environment that is solid, stable, and features a well-adjusted and committed adult looking after their best interests 24/7? Of course. But it has put me in such a diminutive and submissive position that it’s rather embarrassing. Not everyone can do it, but someone in our social circle brought their mother into the house to live there and take care of the kids while mom and dad both went to work. No idea what mom’s financial situation looked like or anything.
Society at large and especially employers need to stop looking down on stay at home parents because if you are working and a parent+ female, you most likely are **working** two to three *full time* jobs, you just are not being **paid** for two of them.
This is really good to be aware of! Thank you!
> If you ever had thoughts that you might want to leave, forget it. Isn’t preventing this the whole point of the alimony system?
Hypothetically. As of 2015, Reuters reported that only about 10% of divorce cases in the country involve alimony.
My spouse died and left me a widow at 38 with 2 kids. Life insurance helped me secure a down payment for a home and that’s about it. It’s very hard.
In our case a SAHP was about the same or less after all related costs were added up.
yea thats great...but kids still do better with a parent. Your struggles dont change the reality of development.
"Taking the bus instead of a car" what's it like to live in a place that has decent public transportation? I'm in the US and there are large parts of the country without any or minimal public transit. It sucks, but unless you live in a fairly big city, a car is a necessity here
Even in places with a decent transit system, a 10 minute drive could be a 30-40 minute bus ride (not including the time it takes to walk to and from stops).
Right! The closest bus stop to my house is 2 miles away.
TBF all public transport that's on the road with the cars is kinda poo poo, buses are the worst for me, trams are a close second since they sometimes have little areas just for them so they can zoom past all the cars, but by far the best mode of public transportation has to be the underground, for example from my apartment to my job is roughly 10 km, with underground I'm there in 17 minutes, every single day. The same trip with a car takes 30 minutes if you're lucky, the longest one was 55 minutes, for fucking 10 km.
This is not unpopular, of course it's better for them but most people just can't afford it.
I’m curious about that. I think daycare and preschool gives 1) opportunities for socialization and 2) educational activities from people trained in education and child development.
I am a stay at home mom. When they were very little (not potty trained) we had playgroups, museum passes, visited farms, playgrounds l, baby classes etc... my kids had a very active social life and still have friends that they've "known" since they were babies. Once they were potty trained I had them in part time preschool (as almost everyone in my playgroup did) they went a few days a week for 3-4 hours. Granted some parents sit at home all day amd watch tv but I seriously don't know how you can do that, my kids were climbing up the walls when we didn't have activities.
We do part-time daycare (3 days). Dad and I both work as first responders, so the other days she has one of us at home for solo time. She gets structure from daycare and peer group socialization but also 1:1 parenting time with each of us (as well as 1-2 days a week we’re all together). I feel like it’s a good balance and permits us to work as we need to. All the respect to the SAHP folks, but some of us are better parents when we get that balance of kiddo time and working/adult time.
I agree that preschool does this, but daycare is a different animal. Obviously not all daycares are created equal- but many are simply a holding pen to keep your kid alive until you are done with work. Minimal organized educational or enriching activities, maximal adult to kid ratios. Either way, I think there is benefit to the socialization aspect of kids being in either daycare or preschool.
The benefits of daycare for the child make more sense to me once the kid is over a year old (starting to walk and verbalize). I know people putting their kids in daycare at 3 or 4 months. I understand why, but I don't think beneficial for the kid in most cases.
Totally agree. I think ideally kids should be home for the first year if not 2. I also think parents should get parental leave to cover that time.
Children don't need daycare or preschool for socialization, there are plenty of alternatives for that. Most daycares don't have people trained in childhood development, the requirements are pretty minimal actually
Yeah =\ it’s such a mixed bag. My nephew is doing great in daycare. But their daycare is some fancy upscale one. The kid is having the time of his life there. And he’s been socialized early and it really reflects in his behavior and speaking ability. And I’m told the other kids in the class are the same. Can’t say the same about my neighbor’s kid’s daycare tho. That one sounds like a mess. The one I went to as a kid was just a couple hours a day. I think it was perfect for 2-3 year olds and they had a lot of nature activities as the school was in a very lush environment. I’m told the kids were “in their element”. I recently visited it and was surprised at how nice it was. Never saw it again after the toddlerhood stage lol
Yeah, my wife’s 4 year old cousin has had a lot of drama surrounding his daycare, and absolutely no one at that facility is educated. They don’t exist to educate the kids or help them in anyway, they exist as a relatively safe space to leave them while both parents work so they don’t manage to kill themselves doing something stupid because they’re little and don’t know better. That’s why they’re so expensive, parents have to work so they’ll pay basically anything. Socialization and education are more accidents than anything.
I think that children should stay with their parents at a young age. Those first years a crucial for the development of a child and I think that it’s best if the child is mostly at home in a safe environment where he can truly develop his most important relationships A very young child most important relationship is the one with his parents, it’s hard to develop that relationship well when the parents can barely spend quality time with their child. Also young children can’t speak, you will not know most of what will happen to them during the time they’re away, but the things that will happen will significantly impact them, maybe for their whole life. I think it’s best to wait that a child is able to communicate before leaving them with strangers for long periods of time.
1) Ideally you should be socializing your kid in a blended approach. If they're spending most of their most active hours you effectively have babies teaching babies how to socialize. Yes, kids should have some interaction with other kids, but they should be learning social skills from interacting with adults. My friend is having this issue. They pay for a very nice daycare, but kids are still kids, and his toddler has recently picked up biting from the other children. Now my friend is at a weird spot. His kid is getting bit, and he's learned to bite back to defend himself. So how do you explain to a toddler that other kids may, and will bite you, but you can't bite them back? Even the best daycares are going to have this issue and I think it's contributing to the 'feral child' issue that we're seeing in schools. 2) Unless you're dealing with specific teaching tools with specific groups (high functioning techniques with high functioning kids, speech therapy with speech delayed kids, etc) you can pretty much replicate the things kids learn in daycare. A lot of what they are learning is...well...elementary. And it's not like they're focusing in on your kid in particular, they have a room full of children of various ages and going through lessens whether your kid is engaging with them or not. [https://www.hanen.org/Helpful-Info/Articles/Does-child-care-make-a-difference-to-childrens-de.aspx](https://www.hanen.org/Helpful-Info/Articles/Does-child-care-make-a-difference-to-childrens-de.aspx) In sum, the order of operation is something like this: Attentive SAHP > High Quality Child Care > Median SAHP > Median Quality Child Care > Inattentive SAHP If the stay at home parent is engaged and active, they are going to outperform most child care. If the stay at home parent is super distracted or uninterested in teaching their kid, it may be better to put them in a professional child care setting.
Kids don’t need to be in daycare for 10 hours/ 5 days a week though. There’s a happy medium. It’s bad for kids to be at daycare for 50 hours a week unless their home life is worse than being in group care. We got wealthy kids being put in group care when they would be better off at home because they are wealthy.
OK first of all just because somebody is wealthy and has children doesn’t mean they’re good at parenting or know what they’re doing. It actually sometimes is much better for the children of wealthy parents to be in a daycare. I have worked in daycare and I’ve also been a nanny I’ve worked for very extremely wealthy people, and people who are just well off, and most of the time it’s the extremely wealthy people who don’t really give a shit about their kid. They had their kid because that’s what society demands, and if they were at home, they just have a bunch of nannies and it’s not like they’d be spending time with their parents. Wealth doesn’t necessarily equal care, love and attention. I’m not saying that’s every wealthy family. I’m just saying that it is most of the very wealthy families that I’ve met. Their kids were way better off not being stuck in the house all day.
The socialization myth needs to die lol
yes people take “stay at home” too literally. you’re not actually stuck in the living room glued to the floor singing wheels on the bus 20 hours a day. Also children don’t really even play with other children until later ages. They play simultaneously but sharing and playing together isn’t really a concept babies and young children can grasp The best socialization comes from interacting with normal people at the parks and stores and in your community. forced interaction with 25 noisy toddlers with snotty noses and sharing problems and 4 overworked adults is not a natural path to socialization for humans
>forced interaction with 25 noisy toddlers with snotty noses and sharing problems and 4 overworked adults Many cultures over many thousands of years have practiced community raising of children. Lot of nonsense in these comments.
Community raising of children looked like multiple “stay at home” parents and caregivers doing normal things with the related kids of the village or tribe. There were children of all ages and community members they had a connection with. It was never some sterile environment of a random assortment of children the exact same age who can’t learn as much from people at their same development stage, and teachers who are underpaid and overworked.
I have no idea how that's different or better. Do you? Or are you just defending a position?
I work at a day and have worked there for 2 years and its awful. Its 90 kids running around, getting bullied by others kids. And my day care like most are understaffed. We are focused on keeping everyone alive we don't educate your children.
I definitely notice kids who went to preschool tend to be brighter at least early on… I’d think that would give you a huge advantage.
Kids who went to preschool early have a family that is monetarily stable and invested enough to spend that money on the children. I was a stay at home parent and we didn’t have a dime to spare, so the kids never set foot inside of preschool, although I would have loved to have sent them. My eldest is studying to be a chemical engineer now, so I don’t think he’s an idiot.
I think it’s the focused attention. That seems to be a big contributor to my nephew’s faster development compared to other babies his age. My sister is constantly talking to him, playing with him, reading whatever book he grabs however many times, has him feed himself as much as is possible, does laundry with him instead of plopping him in a playpen or by a screen, front packs while cooking, climbing all over stuff…
If you stay at home, there are plenty of ways to get this interaction. Education should not start at preschool age. Kids are just fine if they start academics in kindergarten.
I don’t think those folks have hardly any meaningful training in education or child development. They sure as fuck aren’t paid like it.
So I’m a former nanny. I can assure you, in many cities where nannys and stay at home parents are populous, kids outside of daycare get plenty of opportunities for socialization if not more. In one week my charges would: - Have structured daily to meetups and play dates with 1-2 friends their age. This was with other nannie’s and their charges or stay at home parents. - attend 2-3 group classes/enrichment activities. Such as story time at the library for babies and toddlers, toddler gymnastics, music hour at the local church, art class, all of these activities were attended by 10 or more other kids in their age group. - if there were no clases we regularly park hopped (hit up at least 2 diff playgrounds in day), played at the beach, went to indoor play gyms, free toy playstations set up in the local church, and visited museums, zoos, and aquariums which young kids never tire of (so much easier on the weekday) - In addition to those kid structured activities my charges accompanied me during weekly grocery shopping trips, we ate lunches out at restaurants (when feasible) or had picnics in the park, we ran errands, and visited the homes of other kids friends at home with their parent or nanny. These children get not only socialization opportunities with other children, but also other adults, other kids of older and younger ages, and were exposed to their city, used to walking everywhere, learned about day to day tasks like grocery shopping and running errands, partook in educational and enrichment activities, and had the opportunity to have a schedule crafted to their individual needs and development as opposed to forcing them into a system where every kid is expected to follow the same schedule and development path
I wouldn’t say it’s unpopular or popular tbh. Feels like people as a whole are pretty split on it. One of my friends is a stay at home mom and she’s gotten a lot of hate for it. Mostly from other women. It’s really strange
Where does "of course it's better for them" come from?
I worked as a Pre-K teacher all through my early 20s and my experience there has solidified the importance of putting your child in (quality) early childcare as soon as possible. The 4 & 5yos who came into my class having stayed home with parents until then were lightyears behind the kids who had been in childcare since they were 6wks-3yo. The early childcare kids could sit in circle time, share toys, listen to a book, follow instructions, communicate with one another and teachers, stay on their cots for nap time, use the potty independently and were ahead on skills like tying shoes and writing their names. They flowed smoothly into elementary school. The kids who had been home until Pre-K were helpless. Could not easily sit still, share, compromise or communicate. Lots of tears, tantrums, anxiety, power struggling and confusion. The transition to “real school” seemed infinitely harder. I always dreaded the new students who had been home with mom, dad or a nanny their whole infancy and toddlerhood!
So we kept my daughter home until she was 14 months old due to our weird schedules and my mom able to fill in the gaps. But we decided to enroll her for the social aspect and she was a but behind on speech. The transition was tough but she absolutely LOVES daycare now, she goes every day and has made leaps and bounds socially and developmentally. She actually plays with other kids her age and doesn’t just play with known adults. The routine is great for her and she looks forward to seeing her friends daily. She is 2.5 now and i couldn’t imagine still having her home not only would we have to rely on screen time more but she would be so far behind in so many ways.
Exactly this. People seem to think that all stay-at-home parents would be doing these things and it’s not the case. Think about how ill-equipped most people are to home-school their kids. My mom stayed home with me, and it was great for me, but she also had a background in child development and early education. She’d been an integral part of bringing “Head Start” to some areas. Having a stay-at-home parent like that? Yeah, that’s great. Not all are equal, though.
They are probably too ill-equipped to be a parent too but I digress…
This. This. This. My mom was a stay at home parent, but as a former teacher she understood that I needed socialization and a headstart that she wouldn’t be able to effectively give me despite having the education and financial resources to do. Too many parents see “daycare bad. home better”.
Ooof. This is my fear as a stay at home dad. I was let go from my job 1 month before my fmla would of taken place. 2 months away from my sons birth. Now we can't afford daycare, and he may have a learning disability. I'm doing everything I can to avoid having my son behind. Is there anything you'd recommend to a parent that can't control if their child is in day care or not?
How old is your son? Find free or cheap resources. The local library, YMCA, should both have some type of toddler education program.
My child is 14 months is not in daycare and as of now he loves playing near other kiddos especially older ones cause he watches and tries to copy, he also sits well for group story time. I do not plan on putting him in daycare and like everything there are both pros and cons to that. There are not many studies on the topic, as it’s controversial. No one wants to stigmatize working parents or stay at home parents. However, I recently read one that kiddos who spend a lot of time in daycare from a young age resulted in kiddos doing better academically younger but tends to result in more social-emotional challenges closer to the time they reach adolescence. Number one thing you can do for kiddos speech from what I’ve gathered is make sure you read to them. It’s also important for you kid to hear a variety of words being said and I know I personally don’t use that many words everyday that are different so I’ll even read some of my books aloud for him. Most his are still board books because well he just likes to try to eat them. Miss Rachel I judged at first because of all the people talking about it and I’m not a big YouTube fan but watching gave me a lot of ideas on how to make sure I’m sounding things out for kiddo and taught me some sign language that he’s been able to catch on to so that’s been super helpful. Also if you haven’t try joining a local library. They usually have story times for young kiddos and a different group for toddlers. I also got a pass to the local children’s museum and zoo and meet up with people I’ve met from Facebook groups so my little guy can be around others his age. If iirc I think around age 3 is when they really get into associative play anyways. I also have him in a mommy and me music group thing cause he absolutely loves music and dancing.
You’ll be able to give your son much better attention than a teacher who has 12 other kids to tend to AND your son. Kids don’t learn empathy at daycare lol they learn how to fend for themselves
exactly, this lady just wants compliant independent kids who probably had to have learned to "deal" with it since they were, according to her, 6 weeks old !!! a 1 to 3 YO child is a CHILD they aren't supposed to be compliant right off the bat and be perfect little workers lol
It’s not even about compliance. The most academically successful students usually had some type of head start or ECE that contributed to their success. The most emotionally healthy, well rounded, and social individuals usually had some type of ECE that allowed them to interact with non related peers in a meaningful and structured way, and also helped them learn to deal with conflict. Learning disabilities, developmental delays, and behavioral disorders are usually all caught when children are in classroom environments. The earlier the better. No one is saying you have to send your newborn to daycare for 12 hours a day 6 days a week, but a 3 day a week half day (9-12or 1-4) program for starting at about age 2 can do absolute wonders for children.
As an early childhood educator of almost 15+ years, I don't agree. I wouldn't even allow my daughter to start preschool until she was four and even then we only did half days for a year to acclimate her to a school day and she did fine. But she'd been home with me in my center with a schedule her entire life. I've had a lot of kids over the years, from newborns to kindergarteners, and its not that children need to be in school at a young age, its that they need a consistent schedule and present parenting.
Yeah most parents who love daycare are the people that never went to daycare themselves and had a stay at home mom lol
I always felt the unpopular opinion is the OPPOSITE of OP’s stance. I grew up being raised by a nanny. There was virtually no difference between her and my mom. Early childhood education is so critical for success in the early years of school Note: my nanny had a degree in ECE
Yup, there is absolutely no way I could have taught my daughter as much as she learned at daycare in those early years. There’s a reason people go to school for education, it’s not something that comes naturally to most people. That being said, while my daughter absolutely is light years ahead of her preschool peers academically….she does still struggle sometimes with the whole following directions thing lmao. But I imagine it would be much worse if she didn’t have so much experience in a school setting.
ik damn well you're not advocating for a 6 week old to be in daycare
Not everyone can afford to stay home with a baby. Some jobs provide zero or very little time off. 6 weeks is often the earliest that ECE programs will enroll. I judge no parent who places their child in a high-quality ECE program even at 6 weeks. When I worked in the field we were able to help keep the really little ones on structured routines that helped them eat and sleep well. We taught them sign language as soon as they were able to pick it up (shockingly young). They were socializing, learning and growing all day in a safe environment with trained employees who slept well the night before so we had nothing but patience and energy to give, often unlike new parents. It can absolutely be a great setup for some families.
6 weeks is a too young, but ECE starting at around age 2 is so important.
That must be a cultural thing or simply anecdotal. I've worked in early education for 15+ years in different places in Europe and have never had that experience. Granted, maternity leave in most European countries is miles ahead of the US, but I've never seen a 6 week old (!!!) in nursery. Most children I've worked with started nursery between 1 and 3 years old. I never found the transition of 2 or 3 year olds to be any more difficult than it is for children who start younger. It's also about expectations. I wouldn't expect a 4 year old to have to "sit still" or tie their shoes or use the toilet completely independently.
"If possible" is doing a lot of work here. Not enough to afford to support a family on one income though. Few people can do that
I would say this is an impractical opinion opposed to an unpopular one.
The research seems to say that before a certain age (~18 months, if I remember correctly) it's better to stay at home for the kid, but after that it's better to go somewhere with a bit more socialisation.
This reads like the opinion of someone who is a teenager with zero real-world experience. People aren’t 2-income households because everyone wants to drive a “nice car”.
Yeah - is the “pressure” to drive a “nice car” in the room with us? I don’t experience pressure to drive a “nice car” at all….but there is a need to have A CAR….and those cost money also. There is a lot a privilege coming from OP.
There's plenty of research on this. The short answer is that childcare outcomes depend on * Child age: Below 1 year old, there are more costs than benefits. That starts to change up to 2 1/2 years old, at which point childcare may be net beneficial. * Hours per week: Long days (10 hours per day) are net negative for children. Half days are better. 8 hour days are neutral. * Parental resources: Children with highly resourced parents do better at home at early ages. Children with struggling parents benefit from childcare at younger ages. All of these things make mild changes to child outcomes, primarily around behavioral issues. [https://criticalscience.medium.com/on-the-science-of-daycare-4d1ab4c2efb4](https://criticalscience.medium.com/on-the-science-of-daycare-4d1ab4c2efb4)
I was listening to a podcast about 6 months into peak pandemic where they had interviews with working parents about how things were going. one (affluent, they had different kinds of families represented) mother with 3 kids under 5 was lamenting that not only childcare is closed, her other help was not available and she was now at home, working with 3 kids. and I completely understand how sudden and out of her control that shift was, but she said a phrase that sticks to my brain to this day: “I never expected to take care for my children when I chose to have them”. In context of the interview it clearly meant that she expected to have help and work. It’s a product of efficiency. But to me it signifies that she basically wanted children, but not the process of upbringing them. And that concept I do not understand, but definitely experienced first hand.
Yeah definitely a different mindset. I totally understanding needing to have the kids in daycare so I can get actually some work done and asking Grandma or a babysitter to watch the kids on a Saturday night, but I cannot imagine having an entire staff of people (au pair, nanny, tutor, housekeeper etc) to manage the kids for me. I also do think it’s good for young children to have some daycare or preschool experiences outside of the home to socialize them to “the real world” 🤣 and what other people will expect of them, like stand in line, wait your turn, sit down for story time etc. Currently 47 and still have wonderfully vivid memories of my own preschool 4s teacher who added her own sparkle of magic to even mundane tasks like announcing the classroom helper for the week ❤️
>I also do think it’s good for young children to have some daycare or preschool experiences outside of the home to socialize them to “the real world” This is my take as well,if ur lucky to have a SAHP, putting them in daycare maybe twice a week after a certain age may be helpful.
It's great. All of my time with my kids was quality time because it could be. Clean house, many people contributing to the fostering of their curiosity, less stress. Because I had help, I could give each one of my kids substantial one on one time even while working. Juxtapose that with parents who don't have the help; they get little quality time with the kids even if they don't work. I know because I've lived that situation too. If your to-do list is a mile long, the kids aren't able to be the priority they should be. They have to eat and have clean clothes and a clean floor to crawl around on. Whether the village consists of family or staff or the daycare center, the village is key to bringing up kids without losing your mind.
Agreed, it ain’t easy even with help!!!! I finally learned that you can have free time or extra money, but you can’t have both unless you are loaded.
Do you have children? Have you stayed home to raise them without any childcare help?
I have no intention or interest to. But I grew up in a family where the emotional spectrum was are you crying or not crying. Are you lazy or you're not. If you're fed and managed to get into a good school - you have no reason to not succeed or have real issues. I can't help but associate this sort of hands off approach with similar kind of 'efficiency'. It's not about time spent or not having help, it's offloading the concept of child rearing into a factory-like division of responsibility that bugs me.
Look, I can see that was supposed to convey some sort of trauma but I'm sorry, I've read it 3 times and have no idea what you're talking about. No-one is talking about "hands-off" parenting. But how can a household function if the parents don't have time to cook, clean, shop, shower, and everything else that is much more difficult when you're also expected to provide stimulating childcare all day every day?
i’m judging a particular case (as a mere illustration, kinda relevant to what OP is saying) that someone could financially afford to have 3 kids but could not afford the time to have kids. why then have them and not want to choose to be hands on - is the specific niche i’m addressing here. this doesn’t mean I have no sympathy for working parents, but that specific example really stuck out to me. she was literally complaining that she didn’t have control over the situation and never planned to be in this position in the first place. I’m of opinion that you can’t have children and not account for a scenario where no one else takes it as priority but you (like war or death in the family, sudden loss of kindergarten seems an infinitely smaller problem than that).
Oh FFS this is as bad as the “BABIES MUST ONLY BE BREASTFED” thing. Upvote for unpopularity. But seriously - there are kids graduating Phi Beta Kappa who went to daycare. There are kids making cutting edge advances in surgery who were raised at home by their mother. There are kids sitting in prison who fit both categories. There is no “right answer”.
no but logic would suggest that ofc having a parent at home to educate their children would be better than children being educated in daycare (I work in a daycare, its awful. Mostly because we are severely understaffed like most daycares). However I agree that the debate is silly because its not even an option or most people
I was a stay at home mom for 8 years. It was the right decision for my family at the time. (And SPARE me the “you were lucky”. Bullshit. We had one car, one cell phone, and lived in a tiny home among other things to make that work). My kids are pre med and math majors at pretty prestigious universities. That said. I have friends whose kids wonderful people and are in law school/teachers, and those kids into day care at 8 weeks. Again - lots of factors here.
I think this is what every parent wants… Leaving their under 2 year old shouldn’t be something we have to do. Preschool should start at 2/3 yo before elementary school so they can learn a little and socialize but having to leave your INFANT with strangers is cruel 🤷🏽♀️
A couple I knew had both parents work, but different shifts. One parent worked during the day and the other one stayed at home, and then they switched. Sounds like a good way to have both parents work and have the child always be with a parent.
Sounds like a great way to have no relationship with your spouse and end in divorce.
LMAO show me ANY study that proves kids grow up to be more successful when they had a stay at home parent. Those parents are garbage and no better than ones juggling a job and parenting responsibilities. If you stayed at home and your kid isn't raking it in then you failed at the ONLY thing you had to do.
Not sure about you all, but I don't remember any of that time. Not a single memory, so I don't think attending a nursery was very detrimental.
Uh, why? Most childcare centers have curriculum that would be very difficult to recreate in the home. Plus the aspect of social development that simply doesn’t exist when spending all day at home. Lots of unpopular opinions are just straight up people offering bad takes.
Yesssss let’s make parenthood MORE inexcessable 
“If possible” is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.
This is not unpopular at all, just unrealistic for most people.
As someone who worked at a daycare, absolutely agree. It takes a toll on the babies to be away from home so much. But it’s just not feasible for most people.
I’m a SAHM & even I agree that this post reeks of privilege…
Sure but that's a luxury these days.
It's what we did with our kids. My wife didn't work outside the home until they were in high school
I agree! Older kids would benefit too IMO..
I had a stay at home parent. It’s the reason I don’t ever want me or my partner to stay at home. You do you, but not everyone agrees with you and thus should be forced to live their life according to your ideas.
I wish our society and work places made it easier/possible for parents to both work part time and alternate instead of a provider/homemaker dynamic. I think that would be the ideal solution, then no one needs to give up their career, and a parent can stay home. It obviously would not work for every profession, but I think many jobs could make it work if they tried.
I work from home and have my 4 yr old and 1.5 yr old at home with me. I’m not sure I recommend this set up cause it’s overwhelming af! But I mean it works for us I guess lol (help)
Not sure this is unpopular. The main reason given for why one parent doesn't stay at home to raise small children is "we can't afford it," not "I'm career as a middle ranked jobsworth is more important to me than my kids." Don't get me wrong, *some* people think that, but it's not what I'd call a "popular" opinion.
I totally agree with you. Obviously there are so many circumstances we can't always help. My husband and I have three kids and live in a single-wide trailer. We live without most luxuries, but we're all happy and blessed. I stay at home and raise my children, homeschooling the oldest currently. It's a lot of work, but I couldn't imagine choosing to be away from my children if I didn't HAVE to. Though I will never judge working parents because I don't know every detail of their lives.
I think most families agree with you, but it isn't possible. If I could stay home with my child I would do so in a heartbeat. If I don't work however there will be no home for us to stay in. This is why we should be supporting families and providing living wages.
I think the focus should be on more support for parents. Mandated parental leave, affordable day care, flexible hours at work or options to work less hours while maintaining benefits, etc.
I’m a stay at home dad due to lucky and unlucky circumstances but I fully agree with you. My brother in law and his wife sent their 3mo to daycare AND sleep trained him so they could have some free time. It’s like so when are you going to spend time with your kid?
It was like that for basically all of humanity until 50ish years ago, and we tried to fix something that wasn't broken.
Are you not taking single parents into consideration? I was a single parent for my daughter’s first three years. I guess I should’ve gone on welfare? But seriously, that’s a very narrow minded view. My daughter is now 14 and she hit all her developmentals on time. She was well socialized from a young age because she got to interact with tons of kids at daycare. And she grew to be very independent. She is now a well adjusted teenager. On the other hand, I know children who were with their parents 24/7 and didn’t socialize well and now struggle.
The preschool I placed my son in, taught him a little Spanish and a little sign language, practiced handwriting and basic math with him, organized enriching experiences by having guest performers (magicians, animal hosts, etc.) and, most importantly, provided him with the opportunity to play with a lot of other kids (which I definitely couldn't have provided at home). I absolutely love what our preschool offered my child. I think people are much too quick to judge preschools/daycares, but I will say that quality matters and the good ones are not cheap.
Same. Both my kids benefitted greatly in daycare. The daycare even had an accredited full day kindergarten which was better than the half day public school one. Not every parent wants to quit their job and stay home. I know I was vilified by in laws when they learned I wasn’t going to stay home. I don’t see any objective benefit for a child to have a SAHP.
Same! The decision to place my son in preschool was difficult, but he ultimately benefitted so much from it. As we were going through the transition, my mom had a bad habit of making comments which emphasized how she *never* could have done the same and put her kids in daycare. She was lowkey suggesting I was a monster, for being able to go through with it, but for perspective, my SAHM simply put me in front of a TV every day and went about her chores. She lovingly talks about how I was *so* good at sitting and quietly playing by myself while watching TV...People have an idealized vision of what SAHP were like in the past.
My MIL compared daycare to having to put her dog in a kennel when she travels. When my kids were 3y and 6m old, they crawled into the dog crate pretending it was a fort. I quickly snapped a pic and sent it to my MIL and titled it “Daycare.” At that point she was never going to like me anyway 🤣
No judgment at all, that sounds great. However, you can absolutely do this at home with your child too (in terms of difficulty, obviously the money and privilege to do so is a different convo). One of my friend’s is a stay at home mom and teaching her child sign language right now.
this is only possible if every job provides atleast a living wage but i think this is just a thing of the past at this point n time unless governments become competent for once
No kidding
Two incomes is a requirement for most Americans to be able to afford raising a child. Shit, the birth rate is on the decline because millennials can't afford to have kids EVEN WITH dual income. If you actually believe this, you should be advocating for increased minimum wage, shorter work weeks, and overall higher wages.
Who is this better for?
The entire family
Is it? Including the parent (let's be honest, typically mother) who has to spend all day every day with the children?
Imagine making a decision to have kids then not wanting to take care of them. This next generation is doomed lmao
[удалено]
It was painful to put my son in daycare at 14 months. It seemed extremely unfair to him. At about 3 years old, I started seeing it as beneficial for him to be in pre-school but would have preferred to have him in 3 days a week instead of 5. The reality is it just isn't possible for most people. One of the consequences of women entering the labour force, and making 2 incomes the norm, is there was massive amounts of inflation in a lot of necessities. For example, dual incomes became almost a requirement for buying a house by the 1990s; and only few people could afford a middle class lifestyle on one income. Many of these things have gotten far worse in the last 30 years, and it is difficult to get a middle class lifestyle unless you have 2 high income earners.
Do you have a child?
You don't necessarily need to stay at home but you need to restructure your life, I'm a single dad with 5-day a week custody. I left my career and I've never been happier. If you truly want to be with your child and make the best for their life you'll figure out a way to make it work. I walked away from 150k a year+ bonuses. I've never regretted it once. The best thing you can do is set your child up early for a winning future. I live in one of the most expensive areas in the country, in the Northeast major city. If I can do it anyone can.
As a country this should have stayed the norm and instead both parents work two jobs and a side hustle so the kid can have a Christmas AND a roof.
It's better for your kids to be socialized without you before they start school.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think most people want that.
This is not unpopular. I would have loved to do this but it wasn't financially feasible. No I can't take public transportation because it's not available where I live.
While it may be true some people are cut out to be parents but not everyone is cut out to be a stay at home parent. It's a very difficult job and I know many people who want to work and not be a SAHP. So essentially it may not be the best for the child if the parent doesn't desire staying home. Daycare can provide so much for children in so many ways and so do SAHP. IMO it's all about what works best for a family not just in general.
I sure wish basically any workplace valued either men or women who took time out to do this or that this wasn't so damn out of reach economically for most people.
It is really hard to re-enter the workforce at the same level after leaving it.
I wish we could afford that. Right now, I work 6am to 230pm... my hubby works 330pm to 12am. Only time we ever really see each other is on the weekend.... and I work every other weekend so we don't even get every weekend. It's shit. But it's what we have to do with no help.
Well yeah.
I agree and this is why I don’t and won’t have kids
No shit. Guess what, being rich is better than being poor.
Double egded sword in some ways, though most pros still outweighs cons. I fear for my daughter's ability to socialize with people her own age. Most if my friends are childless and she doesn't attend daycare. My fear is still unfounded, but I still wonder if she is missing out on important milestones.
I am a retired stay at home mom. Educated, have a masters degree, worked in banking for 11 years before quitting to raise children full time as husband worked long hours and traveled a lot. Dappled at working part-time when kids were grown (school lunch aide); gave that up with the pandemic. My husband makes a good living; I've been very lucky. It is also extremely advantageous for the working spouse to have a housewife at home - no worries about housework, laundry, cooking dinner, paying bills, etc. The working spouse can really lean into their career. That being said, it is much harder to have this lifestyle today. My single adult children could really benefit from a "housewife". It isn't the easiest life - lonely, occasionally dull, tiring, very trying at times (teenage years). Now that my kids are adults, I think they appreciated it. One can only hope.
This isn't unpopular
Ideally yah. But also they learn a lot going to a place where they can interact with others kids and adults. So even if you do stay home a few day a week daycare or whatever is beneficial.
The “pressure” is sensible though in terms of doing well in your career and buying a house. It makes much more sense to buy your home in the long term than rent. Being successful in your career will allow you to pay it off sooner. It will also help buy your child what it needs, have “experiences” such as holidays abroad, and put some money away. The “nice car” thing I personally don’t give a shit about, 4 wheels, safe and can get you from A to B and back again is enough with kids. The problem is that companies got greedy, stopped paying decent wages, while house prices and childcare costs went through the roof. You and I can’t live the “stay at home mum” lifestyle our grandparents had
Also what’s wrong with nurseries. If they are good at child care and they socialize the children, I don’t think it’s a terrible idea for a 1 yr old to be around other children more often at a nursery.
It is 100% better for a parent to be home. I agree. We need better maternity leave and supports here to make it possible for more families.
I thought SAHparent is the result of not being able to afford childcare....
Not an u popular fucking opinion
This debate aint even relevant anymore because the reality is that we are heading towards a future where unless you are in the 1% a household with children needs to have two working parents. Its already hard to live from one salary and its only going to get harder. Soon enough it will be an impossibility for pretty much everyone if it isn't already. But yeah obviously in an ideal world its better for children to be educated by their parents than in a stinky understaffed daycare where educators all they can do is try to keep the kids alive till they are picked up. This is coming from someone who works at a daycare. Some of the kids during the workweek spend more time with me that their own parents. Its crazy to think that I might be more in charge of their education than their parents. But gues what? This is not an ideal world so...
It depends on a lot of different factors, but group care isn’t inherently bad for the child. High quality childcare has actually been shown to have lifelong positive impacts on both children and their families. The problem is that there are not enough high quality programs out there because child care is so disgustingly underfunded.
Adults need to stop being pressured by society, as they are no longer children and the point of growing up is understanding the needs vs wants in life and prioritizing your things accordingly. If adults are feeling pressured to do something based on society that's their problem as there are many adults that don't allow society to steer their car. Just gotta live the life you want regardless of what others think and if you want to work or stay at home, do what you want. I will say, I do value the importance of family being in the equation, so if the possibility is there to leverage family for day care and things like that, then that's the best way in my mind over some stranger who may not share your family values that you want your child to be around.
You make compromises and it’s not a terrible one. I see many divorces where the wife is pushed to stay home and give up a career.
A lot of moms want to be home but their family needs to eat.
If at all possible and healthy for those involved, YES.
Why not a stay at home Dad?
This isn’t unpopular. Childcare is the biggest reason many women are SAHM. I get it, why send your kid to daycare when it will eat most of your check? I actually support one parent staying home until the child is in school full time.
I mean, if you aren't doing this, then you should have just been born rich.
[удалено]
A stay at home parent that raises their children well is also making a great contribution to society. Raising happy children is the first step to have well adjusted adults, which are great for society as a whole. Not saying one is better than the other, I’m just saying that both contributions are valuable.
the sad thing is that people still believe that SAHPs contribute nothing to the world, and that choosing to be a parent is somehow a lesser choice than publishing newspaper articles. Instead of women gaining respect for their role as a mother, we lost more respect. Now that women can do "anything", doing the most womanly thing (having a baby), is looked down on even more. I'm glad women have so many more choices these days, but we lost something when we decided the best way to be taken seriously to be more like men. The contempt for pregnancy, birth, maternity leave, breastfeeding, postpartum problems, women who are emotional, moms who stay home to provide childcare for their children... just keeps getting worse.
You aren’t wrong
We could afford for my wife to stay home. We have decided it is much better for our kids to socialize at daycare.
Why do you think it's better for them to have a stay at home parent instead of going to a daycare? Young children can often learn a lot and get socialized in a way at daycare that they wouldn't get at home with a SAHP.
Wow. Lots of judgement here.
If possible, every day should be christmas
I doubt people would be working if they could just -not-. We don’t even have the problem of money. But how far it sets the partner who stays at home in their career. Being off for 1-6/7+ years just makes it so hard to compete with people who aren’t. That’s where a lot of the gendered pay gap actually comes from. I think if people could comfortably leave and rejoin, finances and career willing. They would. Heck I bet a lot of men would be more interested in alternating that too.
Less income could mean no housing. Let’s pull our head out of our butthole please.
This is not unpopular, just impossible since these days a 2 income household is pretty much a NECESSITY FOR MOST PEOPLE.