Rickeroo--Get your head out of the 1950's and join us all here in the real world.

That is a good answer. Financially, my wife and I have set things up so that we survive on my salary. She stays home with the kids.

We don't want our kids raised by strangers, so we sacrifice. No new cars and almost never go out to eat. But it is worth it.

I agree with you Rickeroo. Leaving a child with any stranger is horrible. Too many pedophiles etc. these days. If you can't afford childcare don't have children. Wait until you are married and have two people in the family and work different shifts so someone is home with the child. If you get pregnant before you are married and are single well good luck I don't know what to tell you.

I agree that one parent should be home with the kids. As a single parent, that wasn't an option for me. Living with my dad made it possible for me to work a graveyard shift and leave my son sleepping in his own bed at home. I would sleep while he was at school and be up when he was home.

The best sollution is to not have children in the first place! While as a parent you may love them, but many of us that don't have kids don't want to see or hear them, ever. Problem is solved as to what to do with them, and my wife and I can enjoy an evening out without some brat ruining it. Besides, the tax law is unfair giving parents lots of credits whereas couple without kids get slammed. Time to change that too! YOU want to have kids? Then pay for them!

I'm with Rickeroo, but with a caveat. We chose to forgo a lot of potential income by having my wife stay home with the kids instead of packing 'em off to daycare so she could work. I still believe that was the right decision (do the kids come first, or don't they?). BUT, despite this being her idea - her dream - which I gave up my own dreams to give her - she found it stultifying, got really frustrated, started having affairs over the Internet, and is now leaving me. So beware. It's best for the kids, but only if everyone is emotionally mature enough to handle it.

Then again, if everyone's not emotionally mature in the first place, they're not ready for children under any circumstances.

No Party Affiliation

I found your comment to be very hostile and disturbing. If everyone stopped having children, the human race would die out. I will be praying for you. You appear to have a lot of stress in your life.

Unfortunately in today's society- both parents are sometimes force to work just to met the rising cost of the basics (food, utilities, and mortgage). Another solution is to have a trusted family member watch over the kid if both parents have to work. Esp one that truly loves the kids.

My husband and I both decided to live on a modest income so that I can stay at home with my kids. Esp after one bad childcare experience. We both feel we made the right decision. I don't have any family near me. The kids know that there was a lot of sacrifice involved in this and they were/ are just fine with not having the latest in video games or the brand name clothing... they actually appreciate the fact that they come home to a secure, loving, and happy environment. So even if both parents have to work... a family member is the next best thing.

Agree Rickeroo!!! If one parent can not stay home then why are you having kids? It is so sad to hear that both parents have to work. Ya right...typically they just don't want to sacrifice their lifestyles. I wish they would ask the kids this question....hmmmmm what do you think they would say? Guaranteed it would not be in a institution or with a stranger!

I always thought I was "lucky" to have been able to stay at home with my kids, but now I know that luck had nothing to do with it. It was a plan from the beginning of our marriage that I would stay home with the kids when we had them - and I did! You have to plan for it and both be on the same page.

That was what was best for our family. However, I do know women who were miserable being at home. What was best for their families was to get childcare and get the mother out of the house and into a job. I don't know how to decide what kind of outside childcare is best for your children since I never had to do it myself, but I would imagine it would be a very difficult thing to do and you would have to be willing to pluck your child out of one place and put them in another if things didn't work out.

To Dave in NM: Your story is heart-wrenching! How did such good intentions turn out so bad? So sorry!

Thanks, SunnyD. Things will be better for everyone once the dust settles. Whatever else I say about my to-be-ex, she loves the kids as much as I do, and knows that they're the last ones who should suffer for her transgressions. I guess there's a lesson here: if you're unhappy in your marriage, say something while it's still early enough to fix the problem!

Still, though, I maintain that her not working was the right choice, knowing what I knew at the time, and the kids are fantastic! Not sure they'd be so wonderful if they'd been in some daycare all this time, just so their mom and dad could drive new cars and have dinners out.

Well Rickeroo since college, by the time my 4 month old gets to that point, will be more than what I probably paid for my house, I choose to work along with my husband to ensure we can provide her with the encouragement to attend college without having to worry about a stack of student loans to worry about. One parent home is not an option for everyone, luckily we have family to help during the day but there are a lot of people out there without the advantages I have and they do not deserve to be put down for working to provide their child or children with a roof over their head and food on their plate. Wake up, it's not 1955.

(Not so)Unique73, please keep your prayers, especially if they are to the "God of Abraham", as that deity is a made up one. Secondly, yes I am hostile - I pay more in taxes because you get tax breaks for each child. Hardly fair. Finally, you don't know me or my wife. Due to medical reasons, she was told at an early age she'd never have children. We knew this getting married, and after 21 years of no kids, we wouldn't change a thing. However, why should my meal or a visit to a movie or play be ruined because parents no longer can control their kids? Fine, if you want them, give up tax breaks for them, and go to only child-friendly places. This will allow adults to go to child-free places and not have to hear or see the brats.

I do think it is very interesting that having a parent stay-at-home is not an option on their survey.

That's because it's about child care for children whose parents both work.

Unfortunately, a lot of parents are not the best choice for their children. They don't deliberately harm them, but many parents are uneducated and ignorant. They are not good role models, let alone teachers--neither are their relatives. Their children need to see a different world each day to have any chance of success.

I sounds like you are saying parents that are "uneducated and ignorant" shouldn't be left alone with their own children. Who gets to decide which parents are too dumb to raise their kids? How exactly would that be measured?

U73: The question whether someone is too uneducated and ignorant to be a good role model is a valid one, and should be considered and discussed, even though it doesn't address the obviously thorny question of who gets to decide that. Many parents just don't have the kids' best interests at heart, or even if they do in theory, they don't know how to go about it (hint: be involved, set and enforce limits [especially on TV time and content], learn to say no, and read, read, READ TO THOSE KIDS!!!). Just because Brenda doesn't have all the answers doesn't mean she doesn't raise a valid point.

I totally agree that some people have no business being in a position of authority over children. I have been a school volunteer for the last 8 years and have seen and heard thing that caused me sleepless nights. I've also had to make calls to protective services on numerous occasions. My question still stands. Who sets the standard on the level of intelligence required to raise children? Should my standards (no TV other than DVD/VHS movies, reading daily, knowing his friends, supervised Internet/music privileges, etc) be used as a guideline? I believe our societies have eroded terribly where family is concerned. I think we need to get back some of the old ways, such as, it takes a village to raise a child. Unfortunately we have more questions than we have answers at this point. Hopefully that won't always be the case.

No. What I am saying is that children, especially poor ones, need to experience a different world than the one their parents provide for them. I grew up on Chicago's south side in the worst neighborhood for a few years before ending up in foster care and the wealthy suburbs. I hold a three master's--two in education--and a PhD in education. When children do not hear correct English, for example, they struggle hard to learn to speak it. There are sounds that I still do not hear because I did not get acclimated to them as a child. Welfare to work is also a case in point. Mother's sat home all day, but it's difficult to argue that good parenting was usually taking place. Further the reason why preschool at earlier and earlier ages is advised for poor children is because they do not often have the proper stimulation a home. I tell my relatives constantly to take their children out of the neighborhood and out of Chicago as often as possible. They need to see more of the world to know what is available to them.

If it takes a village to raise a child U73, then the village decides who's too ignorant and uneducated. Frankly, fools can have children. If you can't read or write and have no income, the perhaps those things should be clues as to your readiness to be a good parent. I think this society owes you nothing. We help you because it behooves society to do so. This is a democracy. Democracies require educated citizens. Further, there are already agencies who are empowered to decide whether or not you are a fit parent. I'll use my own situation as an example. Like I said, I ended up in foster care, because my mother was an illiterate schizophrenic who had 14 children whom she could even begin to take care of. We slept on the floor. The state decided she was unfit, but couldn't make her stop procreating.

I agree with you.

We should look down on people that breed the same way we look down on puppy-mills:

Why breed new ones when there are already ones that need homes?

Wow?!? I think you have that backwards; we should look down on people that breed and pawn their children off on others. Those are the people that need to stop breeding!

They all need to stop breeding.

Watch the movie "Idiocracy"... it's prophetic.

No, I don't think danger-D has it backwards. We're told about the superiority of heterosexuality, but apparently that superiority is limited by conditions that do not follow natural laws. The natural law is that heterosexuality leads to breeding, which is what is supposedly superior about it.

I love the movie Idiocracy, but I think everyone who chooses has the right to a child or two, or maybe even three, depending on their circumstances. It would be nice if people would be smart about it and limit their families, but obviously that would be impossible and distasteful to enforce here.

The point of the opening montage in Idiocracy is not that breeding is bad, it's that indiscriminate breeding by stupid people is bad.

Me, I'd advocate for a program of mandatory sterilization before puberty, for boys and girls, reversible upon request at the age of majority. And now that I've said that out loud, in public, I'll never have to worry about running for any kind of elected office.

LOL, Dave, at least you have a sense of humor. Your idea would solve a lot of problems, wouldn't it? There, now I also no longer have to worry about ever running for office!

Dave in NM

I will be in your corner if/when that medical advancement comes along! We should also look into ways of making sex more of a non-option (parental involvement anyone?). Maybe all the STD's could be gotten under control. Great comment. I think you should run for some elected office. You seem to have some good ideas.

U73: Thank you - unfortunately, my stance on stupidity alienates me from a plurality of potential voters. I am also hugely non-telegenic, and the entirety of my platform revolves around yet-nonexistent medical technology (though this parental-involvement thing would make for another useful plank).

Besides, I really like the job I have!

It IS an individual decision; you're right, Bencas. What's up with anti-daycare posters making vicious, black-and-white, remarks. It's not one size fits all, folks. You want to stay home, or (I suspect in most cases) want your wife to stay home, and raise the kids full time? Go ahead! Good for you, making a decision that YOU are comfortable with. But don't tell me that I have raised my kids wrong because they went to daycare. It was a wonderful experience.

Like Bencas, I had to switch centers once because my child was not getting the care I wanted her to have. We have CHOICES, remember? Noone is making you send your kids to daycare, nor do you have to stick with whatever center you initially choose.

These knee-jerk daycare-hating responses are not doing anyone any good.

Why did this post only have one "thumbs up" before me? Who could read this and not want to give their approval? CJ just laid out the formula, along with proof that it works. Way to go, CJ. Thank you for your inspiring story, and for bringing such a fine young man into the world.

I agree. I'm sure there are couples that HAVE to work, both of them, in order to maintain bare subsistence - food on the table, roof, clothing - but think how many hundreds of thousands - millions - both work merely because they want to keep up with some social class or standard of living, or because they think it's more important to provide a child with things than with guidance and learning. Those people need to realize: THE KIDS COME FIRST, and that means - if AT ALL possible for basic survival - you raise your children YOURSELF, and really be involved: teach, read, go to museums, go to the zoo, read, talk, make things together and READ!! Day in, day out, every day. If you can't commit 100% to a child, DON'T HAVE ONE.