After watching this film last night I came to the realization that if you don't have time to raise your children yourself then you shouldn't have children. Simple as that! There's nothing wrong w/ having a regular babysitter but to me the profession of live-in nanny shouldn't even exist!
shareI couldn't agree more. If you cant take care of the child you don't need to have "it". Even if you are in a tight situation you should still find time to spend with "it".
shareUmm, I have a 24 hour nanny.
Maybe if you halfwits wouldn't speak about subjects that you know nothing about maybe you'd learn a little about the world around you instead of pontificating your little narrow minded beliefs.
I happen to be a single father to a 10 month old son. My son does not have a mother in his life and I also run my own company. The nanny actually helps me spend more time with my son as they both travel with me where ever I need to go. My nanny is completely live in, 24 hours a day, well trained in CPR and first aid and is exceedingly well compensated. I spend every moment that I can with him but in order to make certain that my sons future is solid, I need to hire some help so that I can take care of... "it".
So while I'm not in a tight situation, I do require some assistance to make sure that my "it" lives a complete life.
If you're going to speak on topic, please be aware of what you're saying before you do.
Now I understand where you are coming from but it shouldn't be required to have a 24 hour nanny. Didn't mean to piss you off but... whatever sorry.
Learn from yesterday, live for today, and look forward to tomorrow.
I kind of have a middle of the road opinion on this. In most situations, it is a little silly to have 24 help if there are two parents in the home, especially if one doesn't work at all. I don't want to speak for others, but I think that's what these ladies were talking about.
But, kudos to you for raising your son solo.
mommalittle.com
It's really based on circumstance. In the movie, Laura Linney did not need a 24/7 nanny, as she did not work and went to spas and everything. She realised this at the end of the movie and started spending time with her son. However, there are people who do need the nanny to make sure they can see their children as much as possible, and when they can't be with their children, the nanny makes sure that they are well looked after. I don't think having a 24/7 nanny is the problem, as long as the parent makes time to see their children and be available to them in the most important ways. It's when the nanny starts to replace the parent, and the parent makes no effort (which was Laura Linney at the beginning of the movie), that there should be concern.
Anyways, that's my two cents worth.
Exactly if they both work hetic jobs they need one. Ok what if your both lawyers cops or trade stocks all kind of things what if your called in late at night and the other parent in on a also at work or your a single parent you need sme one you can trust to take care of your kid. But if you have one parent that does not work and does not spend any time with it. You should not have a child. Casue you are not rasing it it should be with some one the cares for it and wants a child. Most of thease up tight ones dont want kids but keep them any way. Instead of doing right by the child. I know a few older friends that want a baby and there very much in love wiht stable jobs but she cant get pregnet. So it ticks me off when someone that really wants a kid cant get one but some one that does not deserve nor want a kid have them. but sadly thats how the cookie crumbles. And kudos to the single father. Take Care
EVERY MAN DIES NOT EVERY MAN REALLY LIVES
I HAVE TO RETURN SOME VIDEOTAPES
In my parents case, they forwent making a maximal salary by working special schedules so that I was always with someone and never alone. My dad worked full time as a machine operator but had 3 days off a week. My mom worked part-time as a cashier in order to look after me, and worked the days my dad was off.
I grew up in a $30,000 a year household (in the 1990s), and because my parents took the time to raise me, I turned out to a normal kid by getting direct contact with my parent during all phases of my upbringing.
I used to envy people who had more money than me (which was most of my friend's families), but when I grew up, I started to learn that wealthier families aren't always the happiest, and they may have their own set of issues.
I didn't have that much (except for a Nintendo, 3 squares a day, and 2 cars outside) but I was pretty happy as a child.
As far as securing a child's future, while my parents sacrificed salary for being able to raise me (and could not afford to save money for college for me), I still ended up getting excellent grades at a public high school (and aced my AP classes), never went without medical insurance through age 21, got a full ride into a private college through p.h.D. (I worked hard on my high GPA and SATs knowing that there was no money saved for me for college), and my parents didn't need to make a CEO salary (in fact my mom never worked more than 35 hours a week).
No one NEEDS to make an executive wage to raise a happy child (or even to maintain an acceptable standard of living) they simply choose to because they really like their work, money, or some combination thereof. However, that doesn't mean one shouldn't be one, and I admire anyone with that much ambition and passion for success.
While I respect the role of the nanny very much (and everyone's right to get one if they want one), and I believe nannies and baby sitters are sometimes necessary, I am a firm believer in trade-offs in life.
If you focus your life on making lots of money and your career too much (while there's nothing wrong with either in moderation), you are trading off familial harmony. It's all about work/life balance IMHO. If there's anything this movie teaches us is that material wealth doesn't necessarily make a child happy (though it helps).
I wouldn't trade the Friday nights I spent playing soccer with my dad throughout my childhood for anything in the world.
I don't agree that anyone needs a 24/7 nanny if one can afford one (and if they can, they should pay them handsomely). The parent just has to be willing to sacrifice a little of salary/position at the corporation if family is truly important; if the parent is not willing to, that's their prerogative.
As long as you can pay your rent/mortgage in a decent area, have a enough for food, gas, clothing, medical insurance, some entertainment, and still have a little left over at the end of the month, you can't ask for much else; everything else is really just gravy.
In this movie, it's amazing how the Chris Evans character is actually a normal person even though he went through the whole boarding school thing, barely seeing his dad. I can't comment whether that is a typical outcome or not for kids in the character's situation, but in my book, nothing beats seeing your mom and dad home after work, them picking you up from school, etc.
Both of my parents worked and are career-oriented.
I grew up with several nannies and I can tell you that its not always a 'sad' situation. I had a wonderful childhood, never doubted my parents love for me and had the added bonus of never worrying about money (although my parents never spoilt me, i had to 'earn' my pocket money etc).
The thing i've never understood is, how is having a nanny judged more harshly than putting a child in 'day care'?.
My parents hired nannies so that we had close personal supervision and could go outdoors on outtings and to friends places. Then when we got home we got to spend time with our parents before bed, and on weekends plenty of time. Whenever we saw our parents they were SO happy to see us as they missed us greatly and vice versa... i have no recollection of my parents seeming bored or frustrated, just happy and loving and wanting to make the most of every minute they did spend with us.
I dont know... i guess i think the whole 'go back to work -- hire a nanny' is unfairly judged, because as a product of it, I can tell you that i have a very happy and fulfilled life, with wonderful memories. I am happily married with two babies and love life.
I think the exes in The Nanny Diaries, were terrible examples of parents, i just wanted to say that not all families who hire nannies or help treat their children like this.
Laura Linney did not need a 24/7 nanny, as she did not work and went to spas and everything.
The point wasn't that she didn't need a 24/7 nanny, the point was she didn't care enough about her son to raise him herself.
I don't think the OP was referring to people like you who are single parents. I think most of the disdain is aimed at the two-parent families who have live in nannies and then go to spas and fancy restaurants all the time.
shareSometimes, a nanny becomes a live in, because it's more "economical" and pracitcal for both parties. Some nannies do not drive, or speak the lanquage well enough to get a driver's license. Whether or not you would want a non-English speaking nanny babysitting your child is a matter for another thread. But, generally, nannies are off duty after 5:30 or so--and are on their own time until the next morning.
I've been around quite a few nannies, and none worked around the clock like this or these nannies did. They only remained in the home and slept there for convenience. I'm sure that there are exceptions.
so the live in nannies literally have no life of their own? whats the point of them to even make money if they are literally working 24/7
shareI do think it's a little broad to say nobody should have a live in nanny. There are some situations where if it's handled well a live in nanny can be great. Especially if they are made part of the family and the parents find ways to be involved with their kids on the important things.
Every situation is different. And sometimes when a kid is born, the family doesn't plan on needing full time help, but circumstances change.
And you get the feeling in this film that even if Laura Linney had the time to take care of the child, she really doesn't want to. Which is why I found it so strange that in a last ditch attempt to save her marriage, she pretended to be pregnant again...did she really think that was the answer?
shareIt was pretty silly. In the book, she actually IS pregnant at the end, and it's kind of sad because when she announces it, it's seen as a way to trap her husband into staying because he was so close to making his affair with Ms. Chicago more serious.
shareI'm a nanny and I find this post a little insulting. I work for an EMT and a police officer. Both of them work shifts and run the risk of being called in in the middle of the night. When there is a parent home and they aren't sleeping they are playing with their kid.
It's better than the kid being put in a day care with no flexible hours. My charge gets one on one care and we go on field trips and play dates.
And no one gets a 24/7 nanny, every nanny I know gets at least 1 full day off that the parents generally spend with the kids.
Ive had a nanny all my life and its more than that
she takes care of many stuff so my parents could have more quality time
with me so its all great and i think anyone who can afford it should get one
Just look at Bale's Crotch.How people can't see that it's Bruce underneath
i believe that it's ok to have a 24/7 nanny, that is, under special circumstances with the parents. for example, if the parents are forced to work extremely long hours, and they at least make an effort to spend as much time with their kids as possible, then i guess it's ok to have such a nanny. but if it's like that family in the movie, i completely disagree. i wanted to punch that lady in the jaw and shank her.
*J'adore Dior <3*
[deleted]
i just watched this movie (haven't read the book) and it raised my eyebrow. i was wondering if people in the 'civilized' society of upper class new york actually treat people that way. i guess that just underscores the difference between being literate and being educated. i live in a 3rd world country where the gap between the rich and poor is unfathomable to anyone who's not grown up around it. most of the poor people don't have a life that meets minimum humane standards, but the rich live in the lap of luxury where they don't have to raise a finger to get work done.
in any case, i know plenty of people who were raised by nannies, and some turned out just fine whereas others are spoiled brats. my cousins' parents are doctors and are busy 24/7 and they needed a nanny. she liked the job so much that she stuck around later as a housekeeper and she's now been with them for 17 years. so it's not all bad. in fact her own child now lives at my cousin's place, and my cousins themselves are very nice people.
i guess it just goes to show that you can't just lump people together just because they share one common trait. i will not call myself rich, because i'm not, but i have more than what i need (4 TVs, at least one video game console from every new generation, 5 computers, 3 cars, etc just to name a few things). however, unlike most of the people in our salary bracket, our household does not have maids or cooks or nannies or butlers or anything of the kind. on the other hand some of my friends couldn't even pack their own bags for school, and one took pride in the fact that he did his own shoe-laces, EVERYDAY. wow.
i guess what i am trying is that some people do need a nanny. but some others just have them so that they can shirk their own responsibilities. it's important that you tell one from the other, which is easier said than done because anyone who keeps a nanny is obviously convinced s/he needs one.
laziest guy on God's good earth? ME!
I have been a nanny for every type of family out there. The first family I watched made the Xes look like the Cleavers but I learned from the experience and would not change it for anything because we all grew and now we are all better people. I had 7 additional years of wonderful experiences as a live-in and live-out nanny. The last live-in job I had was for a boy with Cystic Fibrosis and we all worked our butts off for him, it gave me a view of life I didn't understand until then and made me cherish how precious life is. As a nanny I was able to travel across the world and meet many fascinating and amazing people, also save up for college and get my degrees. With this job you not only teach the children they teach you how to remember life through their eyes. Everyone of them are now my family and have helped me through this difficult year of battling cancer. Now I'm going to get bitchy. I bet you're a person who believes everything from media, never goes outside your comfort zone and tries to see things in a new and yes scary light. Do I come by the your job and tell you stop letting people put dollars in your g-string NO!
shareso the live in nannies literally have no life of their own? whats the point of them to even make money if they are literally working 24/7
shareWe had/have a live in nanny/housekeeper mainly because my mom was busy and my dad worked. Just because a woman doesn't have a traditional job outside of the home doesn't mean they aren't doing other important things. My mom is a big time activist for helping those less fortunate. She is on many boards that help the homeless, help families that are poor and in need. Also my parents traveled alot and didn't want strangers caring for us when they were away. Our nanny/housekeeper only works nine months out of the year anyway because durning the summer months we usually went to Ireland for the summer, sometimes she would come but mostly she wouldn't.
Now although our nanny/housekeeper was incharge of getting us to and from school, my mom is the one that took us to afterschool events and extracurriculum activities when she could. Also my mom will tell you in a minute she's not a great cook and doesn't enjoy cooking so she needed someone that could cook and clean. We always had dinner as a family, there were many times my father wasn't able to make dinner due to work but our mom was always there. Also my mom was the one that put us to bed most nights.
Just because a woman is a so called stay home mom doesn't mean they are just gOing to spas all day and lunching with the ladies. The movie was cute and fun to watch but not necessarily real.
\\
"The movie was cute and fun to watch but not necessarily real."
In the movie's defense, while your mom was actually doing constructive and substantial things, Mrs. X sure as hell wasn't and really was just indulging herself and letting someone else raise her kid.
"With friends like these who needs friends?"
-Gossip Girl (CW)
I disagree that nannies shouldn't exist but their responsibilities and amount of time and work they do should be kept to a certain minimum.
In my opinion, a nanny really shouldn't be anything more than a glorified babysitter. Nothing wrong with having someone take and pick up your kid(s) from school and look over your kid(s) after school and during Saturday nights because the parents are busy making a good living and taking a night out with their friends or have a romantic evening. Nothing wrong with that AT ALL.
But a nanny shouldn't be raising their kid(s) at all times and their parents never spending any quality time with the kid(s).
"With friends like these who needs friends?"
-Gossip Girl (CW)
Every family situation is different. My best friend nannied one summer - not 24/7 but a good chunk of the time. I'd say she was a "Type B Nanny" - gave the mother "me time" every now and then but she was not totally out of the picture. The dad, however, was rarely seen except for one beach trip when I actually went with my best friend and the family to help.
I just don't know about bringing a nanny (let alone TWO!) with you on a family vacation. The whole point of vacation is to relax and spend time as a family.... what could the parents possibly be doing that they can't be bothered to spend time with their child at the beach? If the parents wanted to go out for dinner alone one night, I'm sure locals to the area could recommend a babysitter.
A 24/7 nanny IS needed in certain situations. My aunt was hired as a live-in nanny for a couple for 12 years, from shortly before the child's first birthday till they were 13. Both parents were lawyers, and worked full schedules. Although they were great parents when they were home, they never knew when they'd be called in to work out of nowhere. For them to have a live-in nanny was convienent, as there was no frantic calling-around to find a last minute babysitter when they needed one. My aunt got off most weekends, and the two tried to take as much vacation time as they could to spend time with their son.
sharewellwhy would someone have kids if they would need someone else to raise them for the majority of the time. Aside form the singke parent part, if 2 parents work really long hours why do they have kids? It just doesnt make sense to me. Ill have a child then work most of the time to the point where ill need someone else to watch them, to me that is selfish
shareNannies are nothing more than live in day cares. I was babysat or put in a daycare from the time I was 2 or 3, does that make my parents bad because they had outside help? Plus most people with children today have a nanny on call, they call her grandma.
Lois Lane=Leia Lane