Baby Costs - !!!!!
Discussion
Dave350 said:
So after 13 pages, are we any closer to a ball park average price to look after 1 kid & 2 kids per month?
Useful information for a committed 25 year old with a broody gf. Holding back for atleast another 2 years!
OK well from my experience:Useful information for a committed 25 year old with a broody gf. Holding back for atleast another 2 years!
Age 0-1, the direct cost is quite small actually. There is a reasonable capital outlay for a pram/buggy, car seat, cot, high chair. Let's say £1,000 (or £5,000 if you absolutely must have the most expensive Jane or Stokke stuff that is actually less practical). Others will buy you toys & clothes, and the latter cost peanuts anyway unless you go silly and start buying designer gear (though I'm amazed how many do - we got given some and sell them second hand for ridiculous prices). Nappies and formula milk (if you need it) let's say about £30 per month. Of course the major cost is loss of earnings - only you can know how much that is. Factor in that whoever stays at home will probably spend more on heating/power/water (say £10/month) and more on activities - things like coffee shops, national trust memberships, baby massage (yes that's real). Let's say an extra £50/month. But on the plus side no commuting and you'll be saving a fortune in pubs/restaurants/cinema trips.
Age 1-2 your cost is either loss of earnings (more than year 1 because no maternity pay) or nursery fees. In my area it's about £1100 per month full time per child, you tend to get a discount on the second child. Childcare vouchers are worth about £72 per month per parent IIRC. The new replacement childcare scheme will be worth a lot more - £2,000 per child per year. Direct costs are still quite low - you start to spend a little on clothing and shoes, but we probably only bought like 3 pairs of shoes in the year. They are off formula milk but are eating small meals, not all of which you will necessarily be home-cooked. Along with nappies, say £40/month.
Age 2-3 the nursery fees will drop because government carer:child ratios are lower, perhaps £850/month. The government funding costs continue to bring this down to sub-£700. You might choose to start spending more on toys, books (or just go to the library): £10/month? Meals are similar to yours except a fraction of the amount and they also do not have the bad eating habits you have (branded goods, coke, beer, snacks etc) so still cheap. They'll still be in nappies for at least part of this year though, so say £40/month still. However you'll probably ending up spending too much at Christmas now - say £200. Holidays will start to cost you more because you have to buy a seat for them on the plane and you might want a separate bedroom in an apartment for example. Say an extra £300.
Age 3-4 nursery fees have really dropped now, Early Years Funding kicks in (15 hours per week free) - depending on how the nursery and your schedules work this can either make childcare practically free or you might still be paying a few hundred. For example my son does two full days in a nursery and 2 half days in a pre-school. The nursery are savvy and open 8-6 (10 hours) but you can only use the EYF against 5 hours per day; you pay the difference even if you collect them at 4pm. I think we pay about £250 all said and done (which we use childcare vouchers for). Food still costs a little bit (£30/month?), but you can say goodbye to nappies. Holidays and gifts similar to last year.
4-5. Mine is only just 4 so this is a prediction: When school arrives nursery costs will disappear, BUT you will still have the costs of either loss of earnings or wrap-around childcare (breakfast/after-school clubs or childminder). Expect that to still be in the £2-300 region. School uniforms, shoes and other clothes are now a noticeable cost (£15/month?). The new big cost is holidays. Steel yourself for paying double or more to go in the school holidays. Expect to pay £100-£150 on their birthday party, and probably the same again on classmates' presents through the year. Maybe you will pay for some sort of extra-curricular activity.
To be honest, compared to costs before having kids, I reckon the net difference excluding childcare is close to zero. That's mainly because we don't go out nearly as often and we don't go on as many holidays (it's actually a proper hassle when they're young and they don't know the difference themselves). My advice would be to simply not worry about the costs of the kids themselves (i.e. buying stuff), work out the childcare and loss of earnings and that will get you 90% of the way there. Everything else is small beer.
Where it does add up is holidays I like the same number as before kids as who knows how long you have left
Going out for meals
SHOES - our oldest needs 2 pairs every 8 weeks (we only get clarks) and really they are not that much cheaper than adult shoes.
Your kids birthday parties, Xmas etc Gifts this really does add up
Hosting birthday parties at home or paying for a hall hire all the food and entertainment
They break things or have accidents. I'd say let's take one small thing Molton brown emptied all over the floor entirely an accident then again then again. Garden pots knocked over these are what £50 a pop
Etc etc
Going out for meals
SHOES - our oldest needs 2 pairs every 8 weeks (we only get clarks) and really they are not that much cheaper than adult shoes.
Your kids birthday parties, Xmas etc Gifts this really does add up
Hosting birthday parties at home or paying for a hall hire all the food and entertainment
They break things or have accidents. I'd say let's take one small thing Molton brown emptied all over the floor entirely an accident then again then again. Garden pots knocked over these are what £50 a pop
Etc etc
Dave350 said:
So after 13 pages, are we any closer to a ball park average price to look after 1 kid & 2 kids per month?
Useful information for a committed 25 year old with a broody gf. Holding back for atleast another 2 years!
Well this being PHs it can be anywhere between £250 per month to about £5000pm! Useful information for a committed 25 year old with a broody gf. Holding back for atleast another 2 years!
If you want kids just do it they will change your life mine got me up at 5:45 this morning and has just bought me a toy dragon to play with. I need coffee not toy dragons!
Dave350 said:
So after 13 pages, are we any closer to a ball park average price to look after 1 kid & 2 kids per month?
Useful information for a committed 25 year old with a broody gf. Holding back for atleast another 2 years!
Partially due to Pistonheads but also due largely to childcare. In my experience this is the biggest single factor affecting the majority. Where I live in Berkshire it costs upwards of £50 per day for a child aged between 1-5. In other parts of the country it will be less than half this and in London I'm sure it will be more again.Useful information for a committed 25 year old with a broody gf. Holding back for atleast another 2 years!
Then you have the factor of whether or not it will be required 5 days a week or not at all. If not at all if this is because of grandparents helping etc. or due to not working. If say your gf is not working now, will still not work and will look after the child(ren) full time then there's no drop in income for childcare. If she's dropping a day or 2 of work then this has a cost as well. Then there may be childcare vouchers / government top-ups that bring the cost of care down. This is why childcare responsible for a large part of the variation. Frankly you could even argue that private school is a form of chhildcare as well if they're boarding!
My advice to the OP would be to get a ballpark idea of the cost of childcare in their area and the cost of any drop in income for maternity leave / going back fewer days (remember this isn't a simple 20% for dropping 1 day in 5 calculation, use www.thesalarycalculator.co.uk)
walm said:
I love the assumption that somehow mothers (or fathers) know best or are by default the best person to bring up their DS or DD.
I mean sure they will love them more than a random nanny or daycare provider but much as my mum loves me - I am not going to take her advice on say whether I need an appendectomy or whether I have an iron-clad employment contract or on how to chip my 335d.
I GO TO A PROFESSIONAL.
Why on earth is it different for kids??
Surely a fully qualified professional is a BETTER alternative than mum or dad?
1. The little blighters need socialising so daycare/nursery solves that one.
2. The nursery can help with benchmarking various developmental milestones.
3. They will instill far more discipline than most over-indulgent parents (which includes me).
4. They will probably let them be more adventurous since they won't be watching their every move and wrapping them on cotton wool (also me).
It's odd to me that many appear happy to ruin their other half's career under the entirely unfounded belief that somehow they are the best person to raise a child rather than someone who does it for a living!!!
I agree but it's about doing it correctly. Send the child to the right nursery and the amount they learn on top of what they gain from their parents is hugely beneficial. Same with using a nanny, hire a professional who is trained. I mean sure they will love them more than a random nanny or daycare provider but much as my mum loves me - I am not going to take her advice on say whether I need an appendectomy or whether I have an iron-clad employment contract or on how to chip my 335d.
I GO TO A PROFESSIONAL.
Why on earth is it different for kids??
Surely a fully qualified professional is a BETTER alternative than mum or dad?
1. The little blighters need socialising so daycare/nursery solves that one.
2. The nursery can help with benchmarking various developmental milestones.
3. They will instill far more discipline than most over-indulgent parents (which includes me).
4. They will probably let them be more adventurous since they won't be watching their every move and wrapping them on cotton wool (also me).
It's odd to me that many appear happy to ruin their other half's career under the entirely unfounded belief that somehow they are the best person to raise a child rather than someone who does it for a living!!!
What does beggar belief in our part of London is the number of couples on 300+ incomes who then hire a wholly unqualified immigrant who has absolutely no comprehension of British society or education etc to raise their children instead of using a Norland. I find that shocking.
At the same time, they use nurseries which have no educational structure of any merit.
But, I suspect that this isn't representitive of the UK as a whole but it baffles me when I see other well educated parents hiring cheap, untraceable labour to raise their children instead of investing in professionals. To me that is greed and ignorance.
DoubleSix said:
walm said:
oldnbold said:
You and few others appear to be working out only whats best for you and your other half's career prospects and financial renumeration, nothing to do with whats best for the kids.
We're in the Finance forum.The OP was asking about the financial implications of having kids, in particular how it related to his wife's career.
Shoot me for focusing on that!
In any case we ARE trying to work out what's best for the kids but so far all I have seen is a bunch of people ASSUMING that mummy is best without really thinking about it, without providing any evidence or applying any logic whatsoever!
I think I am the only one to have provided any evidence and it says the exact opposite.
I will post it again: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/...
For those who find clicking hard:
"The results of the study showed that the amount of time parents – mothers, in particular – spend with young children doesn’t have a statistically significant impact on their development or well-being."
A lot of people seem to assume "mummy is best" but it's not that simple is it.
I'm very fortunate in that we didn't feel pressured to go one way or the other. We have the financial freedom to take a step back and look objectively at what was was best for child, mother and even me hoorah!!
On balance we decided 3 days at home with mum, two in nursery and then weekends all together as a family was the healthiest mix for ALL concerned.
The idea that you can't have a successful career and still be devoted and have time for your kids is hogwash, but I understand why people would like to believe it to be true - because it's annoying.
Edited by DoubleSix on Tuesday 14th April 19:56
For us, we'll both pro rata down to 4 day weeks, Nursury for 2 days, and my parents for 1 day a week.
DonkeyApple said:
walm said:
I love the assumption that somehow mothers (or fathers) know best or are by default the best person to bring up their DS or DD.
I mean sure they will love them more than a random nanny or daycare provider but much as my mum loves me - I am not going to take her advice on say whether I need an appendectomy or whether I have an iron-clad employment contract or on how to chip my 335d.
I GO TO A PROFESSIONAL.
Why on earth is it different for kids??
Surely a fully qualified professional is a BETTER alternative than mum or dad?
1. The little blighters need socialising so daycare/nursery solves that one.
2. The nursery can help with benchmarking various developmental milestones.
3. They will instill far more discipline than most over-indulgent parents (which includes me).
4. They will probably let them be more adventurous since they won't be watching their every move and wrapping them on cotton wool (also me).
It's odd to me that many appear happy to ruin their other half's career under the entirely unfounded belief that somehow they are the best person to raise a child rather than someone who does it for a living!!!
I agree but it's about doing it correctly. Send the child to the right nursery and the amount they learn on top of what they gain from their parents is hugely beneficial. Same with using a nanny, hire a professional who is trained. I mean sure they will love them more than a random nanny or daycare provider but much as my mum loves me - I am not going to take her advice on say whether I need an appendectomy or whether I have an iron-clad employment contract or on how to chip my 335d.
I GO TO A PROFESSIONAL.
Why on earth is it different for kids??
Surely a fully qualified professional is a BETTER alternative than mum or dad?
1. The little blighters need socialising so daycare/nursery solves that one.
2. The nursery can help with benchmarking various developmental milestones.
3. They will instill far more discipline than most over-indulgent parents (which includes me).
4. They will probably let them be more adventurous since they won't be watching their every move and wrapping them on cotton wool (also me).
It's odd to me that many appear happy to ruin their other half's career under the entirely unfounded belief that somehow they are the best person to raise a child rather than someone who does it for a living!!!
What does beggar belief in our part of London is the number of couples on 300+ incomes who then hire a wholly unqualified immigrant who has absolutely no comprehension of British society or education etc to raise their children instead of using a Norland. I find that shocking.
At the same time, they use nurseries which have no educational structure of any merit.
But, I suspect that this isn't representitive of the UK as a whole but it baffles me when I see other well educated parents hiring cheap, untraceable labour to raise their children instead of investing in professionals. To me that is greed and ignorance.
lukefreeman said:
DoubleSix said:
walm said:
oldnbold said:
You and few others appear to be working out only whats best for you and your other half's career prospects and financial renumeration, nothing to do with whats best for the kids.
We're in the Finance forum.The OP was asking about the financial implications of having kids, in particular how it related to his wife's career.
Shoot me for focusing on that!
In any case we ARE trying to work out what's best for the kids but so far all I have seen is a bunch of people ASSUMING that mummy is best without really thinking about it, without providing any evidence or applying any logic whatsoever!
I think I am the only one to have provided any evidence and it says the exact opposite.
I will post it again: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/apr/...
For those who find clicking hard:
"The results of the study showed that the amount of time parents – mothers, in particular – spend with young children doesn’t have a statistically significant impact on their development or well-being."
A lot of people seem to assume "mummy is best" but it's not that simple is it.
I'm very fortunate in that we didn't feel pressured to go one way or the other. We have the financial freedom to take a step back and look objectively at what was was best for child, mother and even me hoorah!!
On balance we decided 3 days at home with mum, two in nursery and then weekends all together as a family was the healthiest mix for ALL concerned.
The idea that you can't have a successful career and still be devoted and have time for your kids is hogwash, but I understand why people would like to believe it to be true - because it's annoying.
Edited by DoubleSix on Tuesday 14th April 19:56
For us, we'll both pro rata down to 4 day weeks, Nursury for 2 days, and my parents for 1 day a week.
The time spent in a good nursery is time kids really enjoy. We'll do exactly the same with number two.
p.s. I should probably point out the first full year was at home with Mum. Wouldn't want an <1yo anywhere but at home personally.
Edited by DoubleSix on Wednesday 15th April 15:10
lukefreeman said:
I think that's a good balance, as (obv in my opinion), child needs interaction with other kids, and parent needs interaction with other parents.
For us, we'll both pro rata down to 4 day weeks, Nursury for 2 days, and my parents for 1 day a week.
You sure both employers will allow that? 4 day weeks? For us, we'll both pro rata down to 4 day weeks, Nursury for 2 days, and my parents for 1 day a week.
At our company maternity/paternity rules have just changed. Previously up to 4 years following birth it was possible to take up to one week off each year in addition to your annual leave (unpaid of course) but this has just been removed - why uptake of it had started to increase and it made operational delivery problematic & costly/stretching on the residual teams.
Not many are aware/have paid any notice to T&C personally I'm not too happy about it (even though never used it the option was a nice to have)
Dave350 said:
Some very useful and scary costs floating around! Cheers for that.
We've been together 10 years and she keeps talking in 2 years time, I'm hoping that will be nearer 4 to be honest! Lol! I like money too much.
Money is merely a means to an end - once you have a certain level you don't need any more to sustain a comfortable lifestyle that said you could be very happy and potless. We've been together 10 years and she keeps talking in 2 years time, I'm hoping that will be nearer 4 to be honest! Lol! I like money too much.
I'd recommend doing it sooner as fertility drops and then you might have to incur IVF in addition to the already mentioned costs and it can be many multiple IVFs.
Welshbeef said:
lukefreeman said:
I think that's a good balance, as (obv in my opinion), child needs interaction with other kids, and parent needs interaction with other parents.
For us, we'll both pro rata down to 4 day weeks, Nursury for 2 days, and my parents for 1 day a week.
You sure both employers will allow that? 4 day weeks? For us, we'll both pro rata down to 4 day weeks, Nursury for 2 days, and my parents for 1 day a week.
At our company maternity/paternity rules have just changed. Previously up to 4 years following birth it was possible to take up to one week off each year in addition to your annual leave (unpaid of course) but this has just been removed - why uptake of it had started to increase and it made operational delivery problematic & costly/stretching on the residual teams.
Not many are aware/have paid any notice to T&C personally I'm not too happy about it (even though never used it the option was a nice to have)
A lot of people in the company I work for are part time/Work from home a few days a week.
Mrs C used to work at a couple of nurseries
The experience convinced her that she would not, ever, rent out the early years of her children's life.
Many of the parents were simply astonishing in their attitude, they couldn't wait to get shot of their kids. There were even complaints about the nursery being closed on Christmas day. Too stressful apparently, couldn't they just open for a few hours?
The nurseries were staffed mainly by girls who thought that looking after babies would be easy and cute and had a shock when work was involved. Do you know why babies are clean and tidy when the parents come to pick them up? Because that's when the staff finally get round to stubbing out their fags, stop talking about East Enders and change the nappies. Activities? Socialising? It is far easier to line the kids up in front of the TV and the staff know it.
There are plenty of alternatives for socialising and activities which are far, far better. Mrs C and one of her friends ran a mother and baby group for five years. They did it themselves. Mums attended with their kids. Random strangers or extortionate fees were not required. Frankly all these posts about the importance of social skills look like more excuses not to even consider any alternatives.
Career? MrsC never regretted her decision. Her friend who ran the baby group and used to earned more than either of us never did either. Both of them are now thinking what they are going to do next, now that the kids are older. None of their ideas involve going back to their old jobs or to their old employers. After a long gap those jobs were something they did at a different stage of their lives. So the career gap problem turns out not to be a problem, everyone has moved on anyway.
The experience convinced her that she would not, ever, rent out the early years of her children's life.
Many of the parents were simply astonishing in their attitude, they couldn't wait to get shot of their kids. There were even complaints about the nursery being closed on Christmas day. Too stressful apparently, couldn't they just open for a few hours?
The nurseries were staffed mainly by girls who thought that looking after babies would be easy and cute and had a shock when work was involved. Do you know why babies are clean and tidy when the parents come to pick them up? Because that's when the staff finally get round to stubbing out their fags, stop talking about East Enders and change the nappies. Activities? Socialising? It is far easier to line the kids up in front of the TV and the staff know it.
There are plenty of alternatives for socialising and activities which are far, far better. Mrs C and one of her friends ran a mother and baby group for five years. They did it themselves. Mums attended with their kids. Random strangers or extortionate fees were not required. Frankly all these posts about the importance of social skills look like more excuses not to even consider any alternatives.
Career? MrsC never regretted her decision. Her friend who ran the baby group and used to earned more than either of us never did either. Both of them are now thinking what they are going to do next, now that the kids are older. None of their ideas involve going back to their old jobs or to their old employers. After a long gap those jobs were something they did at a different stage of their lives. So the career gap problem turns out not to be a problem, everyone has moved on anyway.
Dave350 said:
Some very useful and scary costs floating around! Cheers for that.
We've been together 10 years and she keeps talking in 2 years time, I'm hoping that will be nearer 4 to be honest! Lol! I like money too much.
I don't think you'll ever have enough money or be truely 'ready'.... you either want kids or you don't. If you do, you'll make it work. If you don't, you'll definitely never, ever have enough money!We've been together 10 years and she keeps talking in 2 years time, I'm hoping that will be nearer 4 to be honest! Lol! I like money too much.
Presuming that you're in your late 20's, you can probably hold off a few more years and make the most of it. If you're in your 30's, don't leave it too late
cymtriks said:
Mrs C used to work at a couple of nurseries
The experience convinced her that she would not, ever, rent out the early years of her children's life.
Many of the parents were simply astonishing in their attitude, they couldn't wait to get shot of their kids. There were even complaints about the nursery being closed on Christmas day. Too stressful apparently, couldn't they just open for a few hours?
The nurseries were staffed mainly by girls who thought that looking after babies would be easy and cute and had a shock when work was involved. Do you know why babies are clean and tidy when the parents come to pick them up? Because that's when the staff finally get round to stubbing out their fags, stop talking about East Enders and change the nappies. Activities? Socialising? It is far easier to line the kids up in front of the TV and the staff know it.
There are plenty of alternatives for socialising and activities which are far, far better. Mrs C and one of her friends ran a mother and baby group for five years. They did it themselves. Mums attended with their kids. Random strangers or extortionate fees were not required. Frankly all these posts about the importance of social skills look like more excuses not to even consider any alternatives.
Career? MrsC never regretted her decision. Her friend who ran the baby group and used to earned more than either of us never did either. Both of them are now thinking what they are going to do next, now that the kids are older. None of their ideas involve going back to their old jobs or to their old employers. After a long gap those jobs were something they did at a different stage of their lives. So the career gap problem turns out not to be a problem, everyone has moved on anyway.
Sounds like she worked at some truly sThe experience convinced her that she would not, ever, rent out the early years of her children's life.
Many of the parents were simply astonishing in their attitude, they couldn't wait to get shot of their kids. There were even complaints about the nursery being closed on Christmas day. Too stressful apparently, couldn't they just open for a few hours?
The nurseries were staffed mainly by girls who thought that looking after babies would be easy and cute and had a shock when work was involved. Do you know why babies are clean and tidy when the parents come to pick them up? Because that's when the staff finally get round to stubbing out their fags, stop talking about East Enders and change the nappies. Activities? Socialising? It is far easier to line the kids up in front of the TV and the staff know it.
There are plenty of alternatives for socialising and activities which are far, far better. Mrs C and one of her friends ran a mother and baby group for five years. They did it themselves. Mums attended with their kids. Random strangers or extortionate fees were not required. Frankly all these posts about the importance of social skills look like more excuses not to even consider any alternatives.
Career? MrsC never regretted her decision. Her friend who ran the baby group and used to earned more than either of us never did either. Both of them are now thinking what they are going to do next, now that the kids are older. None of their ideas involve going back to their old jobs or to their old employers. After a long gap those jobs were something they did at a different stage of their lives. So the career gap problem turns out not to be a problem, everyone has moved on anyway.
t places. We've been viewing nurseries for our 14wk old son, for 2 days a week from next January.
The one we've chosen is a lovely old school that's now a nursery, all the children looked to be having a whale of time there. The staff produce a write up every day of what your child has done and every 8 weeks there is a sort of parents evening, so the level of feedback on his development even from that age seems brilliant.
He'll progress from the baby group at around 18 months to the toddlers then at around 3 into the pre school on the site, which was just like a school (as the name suggests but I've not experienced any of this before), uniforms, subjects like maths, English and French, PE, they have chickens on site and a huge playground and field that they get out in everyday weather allowing.
I really do believe that a combination of him being home with the wife 3 days socialising with others mums and babies and being at nursery 2 days a week is the best for his development, he needs the interaction with others and the development that will bring.
I'll be home from work pretty much everyday at 4pm to get him from nursery and then the other days spend time as a family together so I also believe we have a great work / life / family balance.
Yes me and the wife will be gutted to leave him that first day but I'm sure he'll love it and benefit greatly from it.
Spot on Matt_N
Quality of nurseries is no different to schools in that they normally reflect the local demographics - and you do your due diligence.
As I was reading the rather hysterical post above my 2 yo was hopping up and down the kitchen reciting her friends names excitedly in anticipation "Luke, Jemima, Poppy!; Luke, Jemima, Poppy!; Luke, Jemima, Poppy!" etc etc
We looked at quite a few before settling on one with a big natural garden, mature trees and nice light rooms. Now the weather is improving I often arrive to find the children sat in a semi circle on the grass eating orange slices whilst listening to a story book - tv and fags strangly absent!
All the girls are delightful most having kids themselves, some going on to degree studies, a few middle aged ladies too. Our child's key worker was in tears when she moved on to the 'Twos and up rooms', a really lovely girl, we bought her some decent wine and flowers to say thanks for the skill and effort she'd put in to support our kid on those two days a week.
Don't be phased by the initially tears it only lasts a few days to a week and whilst a little heart wrenching they soon twig that you are back at the end of the day. That whole process of being AWAY from Mum & Dad for short periods is what brings them on and makes them more rounded kids imho. You'll be amazed at how they flourish and build in confidence once out from under the wing.
Good Luck!
Quality of nurseries is no different to schools in that they normally reflect the local demographics - and you do your due diligence.
As I was reading the rather hysterical post above my 2 yo was hopping up and down the kitchen reciting her friends names excitedly in anticipation "Luke, Jemima, Poppy!; Luke, Jemima, Poppy!; Luke, Jemima, Poppy!" etc etc
We looked at quite a few before settling on one with a big natural garden, mature trees and nice light rooms. Now the weather is improving I often arrive to find the children sat in a semi circle on the grass eating orange slices whilst listening to a story book - tv and fags strangly absent!
All the girls are delightful most having kids themselves, some going on to degree studies, a few middle aged ladies too. Our child's key worker was in tears when she moved on to the 'Twos and up rooms', a really lovely girl, we bought her some decent wine and flowers to say thanks for the skill and effort she'd put in to support our kid on those two days a week.
Don't be phased by the initially tears it only lasts a few days to a week and whilst a little heart wrenching they soon twig that you are back at the end of the day. That whole process of being AWAY from Mum & Dad for short periods is what brings them on and makes them more rounded kids imho. You'll be amazed at how they flourish and build in confidence once out from under the wing.
Good Luck!
Edited by DoubleSix on Saturday 18th April 09:07
late entry on this thread, but with 4 kids I may be qualified to comment
1350 quid on a stokke system, probably THE most expensive pram you can buy
even brand new, a mothercare full 'system' is under 400
a Maxi Cosi baby car seat is 150, as dear as you'll get
the next stage Britax/Römer top brand is about the same price
an Ikea cot is less than 100, changing table/cupboard about the same
bodies cost about 10 for 5, pyjamas maybe 2 for a tenner
you don't need hundreds of them either
and all that stuff is very resellable
where anyone gets 5 grand from is unbelieveable
edit: if you want affordable children, move to Germany
70% wage for your year off work
in Düsseldorf max €500 a month childcare, no matter how many you have
1350 quid on a stokke system, probably THE most expensive pram you can buy
even brand new, a mothercare full 'system' is under 400
a Maxi Cosi baby car seat is 150, as dear as you'll get
the next stage Britax/Römer top brand is about the same price
an Ikea cot is less than 100, changing table/cupboard about the same
bodies cost about 10 for 5, pyjamas maybe 2 for a tenner
you don't need hundreds of them either
and all that stuff is very resellable
where anyone gets 5 grand from is unbelieveable
edit: if you want affordable children, move to Germany
70% wage for your year off work
in Düsseldorf max €500 a month childcare, no matter how many you have
Edited by Hugo a Gogo on Saturday 18th April 09:34
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff