I dunno. I find the shock and tutting about their arrangement both fascinating and puzzling. I don't get it at all. But then I'm a reformed drug taking fiend who drinks with my husband when both our kids are at home with us, who thinks a TV is a perfectly acceptable babysitter and that beans on toast is a dinner of champions. People probably judge the hell outta me, and that's fine and expected. It's the way in which that judgement is voiced that I have issues with.
No doubt someone is judging me in this thread as well. Just don't tell me to my face
To the original question... We all make judgements. There's a big difference though between 'not for me' and 'those people are selfish/making bad choices/damaging their child". For the latter - and voicing it publicly - I think that ought to be when there's a real risk of serious harm. I just don't see that here.
I work with children who have been removed from their families. I work with 3 year olds who are abused by their older siblings on a daily basis; children who are so used to having no food in the house that we have to keep food on locked cupboards lest they binge every chance they get; 6 year olds who know more than I do about taking drugs and are used to getting themselves across town to school every morning; kids who know no other way to talk to someone than to belittle them or speak with their fists. THOSE are situations in which children are seriously harmed. That's where it's quite clearly bad parenting - usually for a whole host of complex reasons - rather than just 'not for me'.
Last edited by VicPark; 15-05-2016 at 16:51.
And I take your last sentence as totally condescending. I was never "on" drugs. I took drugs occasionally, through choice, for fun and didn't overcome adversity, I simply grew out of that phase of my life. Same as when I have the odd ciggarette; I do it because I like it, I enjoy it but I know it's not good for me so I partake very rarely. I'm no battler who overcame an addiction, save your applause for someone who needs it.
I was genuinely trying to be nice and supportive - I am sorry if you are not open to receive such support yet.
It's obvious you came into this thread with a personal chip on your shoulder so I will leave it at that. Best of luck.
No chip at all. Just defending a parent who's being slammed for a perfectly reasonable parenting decision. Though I have to say the part where it was said she shouldn't have children got my back up because I think that's a vile thing to say. But no, no chips.
Wow, still going!!
I just read Rachael's response to some of the backlash [text deleted by moderator]
An interesting point at the end by Durham Uni that states they have done a study on these kind of arrangements, and that it does not harm the child in any way in the long term and only adds to the childs sense of community, family etc.
And for the haters to back off lol 😂
So it goes without saying there is nothing wrong being done here and as many of us stated earlier on in this topic, the parents spend a lot more time with their daughter than any of the usual 9-5 arrangements.
[moderator removed link]
Last edited by Mod-Nomsie; 15-05-2016 at 19:21.
"So it goes without saying there is nothing wrong being done here" is a rather ballsy authoritarian statement to make on such an unclear and subjective issue.
Last edited by Mod-Nomsie; 15-05-2016 at 19:22.
Pregnant for the first-time?
Not sure where to start? We can help!
Our Insider Programs for pregnancy first-timers will lead you step-by-step through the 14 Pregnancy Must Dos!