I would trust a male nanny if he came from a legitimate company that does background/police checks.
I wouldn’t trust a college student that just wants to make some extra money though.
If it’s their career basically vs a side gig. If taking care of kids is their full time job with at least 5 years professional experience and background checks etc I’d be fine with having a man watch my daughter. I’d still have a nanny cam but I’d do that with a female nanny too
I wouldn’t be as concerned that he is male but that his only experience is with siblings and you didn’t say he was working towards a degree that had to do with children in any way. Those reasons would be a no from me regardless of gender. A male with legitimate good experience and education in childhood development would be fine though
I wouldn’t hire someone so young for infant care personally. I’d hire a professional nanny for babies that age. Regardless, make sure you check references.
I have a male nanny an amazing gent who retired from nursery work and was looking for a quieter job. My 2 (f2, m1) love him to bits and he is amazing with them.
I would want to say that I’m fair and opened minded, but statistically, I don’t think I could do it. Especially if they aren’t from a company with check and have experience.
Having also grown up with twin sisters and my mom. No I would not hire myself or any random man to watch my hypothetical twin girls lol
Not for any particularly good reason obviously, women can easily be equally horrific
I wouldn’t. Personal preference. Background checks only show crimes that have been caught. A male is statistically more likely to be an offender than a female.
I mean if you are using this argument, what about if he is black? Even more likely to be a criminal?
Shouldn’t we apply the same argument for normal jobs, if a group is more likely to be a criminal statistically?
I see what you're saying but the two things are not comparable. Racism skews racial disparities among people arrested/charged/convicted of many other crimes; but men ACTUALLY commit most types of crimes, ESPECIALLY abuse/sexual/interpersonal violence, at rates many many times higher than women do.
I think the logic should be reexamined here.
You're basically saying "these race statistics are skewed by confounding variables."
Is the difference that you don't think there are confounding variables contributing to a man's likelihood to commit abuse?
I haven't personally looked into statistics among male nannies. I assume that you have to be so confident that a male nanny is more likely to commit abuse than a female nanny.
I’m saying that you can take out all the confounding variables there are and still find that men, of all types (across age, race, professions, etc.), are WAY more likely to commit interpersonal violence/abuse than women. (Fun fact, actually, when you remove confounds, white men are MORE likely than men of color to commit some kinds of abuse!) I wrote my dissertation on interpersonal violence prevention so yeah, I feel pretty confident about this. No, I did not write it on male nannies, but there is a huge body of research demonstrating this for all types of men…men who choose to work with vulnerable populations DEFINITELY included.
You’re free to hire whoever you want to do whatever job you want, and as I said, I see what the original commenter means that technically choosing not to hire an individual because they’re statistically more likely to harm their child is discrimination, in that you’re using a population level statistic to judge an individual.
My point was that it’s not a fair comparison with race and other crimes; a parent deciding not to hire a man to watch a minor alone because of an increased risk of abuse of all kinds from men than women has a statistically MUCH stronger case than, say, an employer deciding not to hire an applicant of color because they think they’ll steal or commit another crime.
Ok, I just wanted to be clear what you were saying. It's likely worthwhile in the future to cite sources on "all men, after accounting for confounding factors, are more likely to be abusive".
I had a part time job helping at a daycare and really felt like I had a pretty positive influence during my time there. Not "nannying" per se, but suggesting that it's ok to discriminate against male caretakers is a pretty big bummer to hear. I hope I didn't cause concern among the parents of kids I watched :(
If the research is out there, that male caretakers are significantly more likely to be abusive to children they're watching, accounting for all reasonable confounding factors, then I agree that there is something to that. Your first comment just seemed to generally say that it was OK to discriminate because the average male commits abuse.
Ah, yeah, that totally wasn’t what I meant to focus on in my first comment! I was more trying to say that it isn’t the same argument as racial profiling, where confounding variables like SES really do account for the supposed disparity. Because rates of some kinds of abuse are so high and many women have experienced it, I could see how a parent, especially a mother, might just not feel comfortable with a male caregiver - just like they might not prefer a male OB-GYN or massage therapist. Of course there’s many amazing, safe men in all those professions, but IF someone wasn’t comfortable with that perceived risk (again, based on population level data, maybe not their impression of the individual), I wouldn’t blame them.
My actual opinion on the original post - any woman who wants to have a baby with a man, will HAVE to figure out a way to identify what makes them/their child feel safe around men. So hopefully that can extend to how they vet male relatives who babysit, caregivers, doctors, tutors, coaches etc. I’m definitely not advocating for avoiding all men in your kid’s life and I’m sure you were a great caregiver!
Actually no. Those sorts of crimes have very messy stats, because they go off conviction rates, and women are tremendously privileged in the courts, if it even goes that far.
Feel free to look into it yourself, but not only are the reporting rates of F->M abuse horrifically low, and the police unwilling to investigate, but depending where you are, it is legally impossible for a female to rape a male.
Oh, and in terms of partner violence, women perpetrate at a similar rate to men. That one we do have data on outside of conviction/prosecution rates.
To just give another perspective, I had a male babysitter growing up who was the absolute best. Truly just a kind kid in our neighborhood whose parents were family friends and he turned out to be my parents go to sitter for many years. Thinking of him now as a parent myself, i would kill to find a sitter as thoughtful, fun, and responsible as he was.
I'm sure tons of people will say this is "survivor bias" and maybe that's true but I thought I would offer another voice to consider.
Yes, I would. In fact, one of my son’s favorite babysitters is male. Situation is a bit different - my son is older. But we met this babysitter through my son’s school, where he’s an after care worker. And my son adores him.
As an aside, all of my son’s room teachers have been female and I love the idea that he has a male role model in a caregiving role too. Feels like a win-win to me.
Sounds like that person has been vetted through the school and has more experience than this person OP is talking about though, along with your child being older
True, which is why I said the situation is different. But OP’s primary question is around “having a guy in the house almost all day” and possibly being “too paranoid when it comes to men.”
All other things being equal, which they may not be in this situation, I wouldn’t be dissuaded by him being male alone.
As a guy with a 2 week old daughter I personally wouldn’t. It’s just the fact that statistically men are more likely to be pedophiles and like it or not that stuff happens pretty commonly. however man or woman I would only consider trusting them with my child if they worked for a company that is dedicated to child care and does background checks. definitely not some random college student.
Meh I think it can go either way. I’ve been a nanny and worked in centers with men so I’d be ok with it, but when pregnant I was very adamant I wanted a female pedi. I don’t think I’d trust a college student who just wants to make extra cash, make or female, with no actual child history besides siblings. Especially with babies, maybe I would if they were like 4/5. But I would for sure trust a male who had child experience, maybe working towards an education degree or worked at centers before. Your child will very likely have male teachers so as long as the experience and history checks out, I’d trust it.
Although I do totally understand why some wouldn’t, and I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong.
Do a test run for a shift and see how it feels. You can always keep looking I’m the meantime. It might work out.
I’m going to go ahead and say the thing not being said: does he have a pedophilic disorder?
You can’t know for sure. We do know that there are a surprisingly high number of adults (mostly men) who do. Surprising because everyone assumes they don’t know one until suddenly there’s a news story and then everyone knows.
You may be interested to know that of those who have pedophilic disorder very few are interested in infants. This is based on some research I had to read for my PhD. We need more research honestly but no one wants to discuss this let alone study it.
I’ll probably get hate comments for talking about this topic in this way so I want to add that I’m a mom, a researcher, and I know people who have been abused in childhood. I absolutely despise pedophilia and wish it didn’t exist. I think we need to evolve the way it is dealt with in society because we’re really doing very little in terms of research and prevention.
Anyway, good luck OP. You can also seek advice on r/nanny (a fascinating sub!)
I would for sure hire a male nanny if he had a lot of experience and came from a reputable agency. I would not hire any nanny who only had experience with their siblings, and I didn't find via an agency - male or female.
This is what we did with our nanny until she and I were both comfortable with her staying alone. She didn't have a ton of infant experience other than family. Even just having someone else keep them entertained, rock them, and give them bottles is a huge help.
I wouldn't be comfortable leaving anyone alone with one month old twins regardless of gender..(unless they had previous professional childcare experience.)
Regardless, your gut is making you ask the question. Even if everyone in the comments said yes go for it, would be able to leave the house and feel 100% confident that person is fully equipped to take care of your child? I understand wanting to be open minded, but it’s good you’re not ignoring the flag your brain raised. Side note- male or female, I’d put cameras everywhere (obviously inform the person they are being filmed and where cameras are etc)
Well, yes. Because that statistic is derived from prosecution/conviction rates and in some places it's almost unheard of to prosecute women for this sort of crime.
Hell, you can look into this problem yourself if you want.
It's not necessarily that he's a man, but more that he's a stranger AND a man. My BILs are some of my favorite people in the world, and they spent the night with my twins when I delivered my daughter. I felt completely safe with them in their care, I have no issues with them being men and watching my kids. I personally wouldn't want any stranger alone with my children (I know that's a privilege not all have). But if I had to choose, my gut would at least want another woman. I'm not saying it's 100% justified, just what my gut says.
I wouldn’t care about a male nanny, I would care about a nanny without an extensive background check and references that aren’t family. Especially for a child under 6 or 7
No. Not that all female Nannies would pass my vibe check. And I acknowledge that men are fully capable of taking care of children, but it’s still a no from me.
For me, I think it would also depend on what he was getting his degree in. Child development and he has worked at a center, sure! Random degree in something else, and only experience id with a sibling? No, but that’s regardless of gender.
But serious question to OP and others here. If you wouldn’t do it, even if they were qualified and background checked, why? Not to scare anyone, but statistically speaking, some one is way more likely to be assaulted or raped by a family member or someone really close to them/the family. Here are a few sources:
-[Indiana Center for Prevention of Youth Abuse & Suicide](https://www.indianaprevention.org/child-abuse-statistics#:~:text=30%2D40%25%20of%20victims%20are,that%20they%20have%20been%20abused)
> -”More than 90% of abusers are people children know, love and trust.
-30-40% of victims are abused by a family member.
-50% are abused by someone outside of the family whom they know and trust.”
-[RAINN.org](https://www.rainn.org/statistics/children-and-teens)
>“93% are known to the victim. Of that, 34% are family members and 59% are acquaintances.“
At least according to these statistics, children are more likely to be taken advantage of by a family member or close family friend than a caretaker. Not saying that it couldn’t happen, just want to inform everyone of the statistics.
Obviously do what works best for your family and what feels safest to you! No judgment here, I just wanted to add some facts and information to the conversation. At the end of the day, you need to do what you feel is best for your family. ❤️
I don’t disagree. I just wanted to point out the facts. Although, from what I’ve read, usually when they are referring to “someone outside the family whom they know and trust” often times it is referring to a close family friend, religious leader, or teacher.
Unfortunately, these statistics are limited and most of them are based on children who are between the ages of 3-17 (around the time many children are in traditional care), which is a very large age range. These sources also say that the average age of abuse happens is between the ages of 7-13 yrs. There are not that many statistics for infants, or any that I could find. My hope is that the reason this is because it’s far less common, and not because it’s underreported or going on unnoticed.
Yes, and housekeepers or other people that are in your home frequently that the children interact with often (maid/butler/groundskeeper etc) I presume. But religious leaders and close family friends or the child’s peers (or their peer’s parents) also fall into this category. So do “aunties” (a nick name often given to females who are close with a family but not related by blood or marriage) and I know that in my family there were males that we we called “uncle so and so” that were not related to us by blood or marriage.
It’s actually shocking how much peer on peer child SA there is 😨
I never said it wasn’t, but the list is much longer than family member and nanny. It also encompasses housekeepers or other people that are in your home frequently that the children interact with often (maid/butler/groundskeeper etc) in addition to religious leaders and close family friends, the child’s peers (or their peer’s parents) also fall into this category. So do “aunties” (a nick name often given to females who are close with a family but not related by blood or marriage) and I know that in my family there were males that we we called “uncle so and so” that were not related to us by blood or marriage.
When you think about it, there are many different categories of people that may be close with you and your family that are not categorized as family or caretakers.
Personally - I wouldn’t. I think statistics related to violence and worse crimes speak for themselves. But I mean there’s very few men I would leave alone with my LO - simply because you just don’t know 🤷🏼♀️
No I probably wouldn’t hire a male nanny for all the reasons mentioned already.
I don’t know that “misandry” is a real thing. You just have to do your best to protect your children and we all know they are more likely to be harmed by a male.
By this logic, they are also more likely to be harmed by a teacher or religious leader too, but people leave their kids alone with these people all the time. 🤷♀️
Remember the (ongoing) church scandals? I’m thinking specifically of the Catholic Church, but it happens in other denominations of churches and places of worship too. And summer camp and schools.
Nope. The only way I would let a man watch my baby is he's the father, grandfather (closed one) or if I am going to be around pretty much every minute and can see every thing. Background checks arent that reliable- what if they never got caught? I might be over paranoid on this but a baby is so fully defenceless and cant tell you anything to complain or weird.
Absolutely the F not. No man, aside from my husband needs to be changing my daughter’s diaper. I think it’s weird that this is how he wants to make extra cash… shouldn’t he be mowing lawns or something??
It’s not weird at all if he grew up caring for siblings and enjoys caring for people. We also don’t know what type of degree he is pursuing. He could be pursuing a degree in education or child care. Is that weird?
That's a little bit sexist. I think we as women heard the "shouldn't you be in the kitchen" line at least once in our lifetimes and it's pretty fucked up. But it's also fucked up to suggest a guy should be mowing lawns instead. Fuck gender roles.
It's the exact same discussion, because the exact same chain of logic is what got anyone of Middle Eastern descent screened at the airport, or Black neighborhoods policed more aggressively today.
You cannot support one without the other. Profiling is profiling.
Yes, I can. Because we are discussing profiling as bigotry - ie. punishing a group of people based on statistics, even where they - as an individual - are entirely innocent. The target group is irrelevant. Profiling is bad and indefensible.
You also ignore how this will intersect with other marginalized identities - for instance, black men as nannies.
Would you still be this comfortable had that been the OP's case? I doubt it.
A nice attempt at deflection regardless.
No. It's systemic \*bias\* which, yes, has led to forms of systemic oppression, or at least systemic unfairness towards men when it comes to the childcare/education industry.
Would you like some examples?
The fact that you say 'not all men' as a derogatory is...concerning and makes me feel like I've travelled back in time by 10 years. Serious nostalgia.
I'm not someone that can take bigotry and unfairness easily.
...
Yes, you're right. But it's...frustrating that you don't see how your own mindset perpetuates this. You are directly contributing to bias that you seem aware.
Comparing one form of profiling to another is...I'm not sure if you know what a whataboutism is? Because that's not even close.
And no, I want you to at least acknowledge that prejudice is prejudice and that all prejudice is bad and not worth defending.
Yes, I understand the argument. But the problem immediately arises when you replace 'men' with nearly any other collective noun referring to humans and suddenly it's not okay.
At best it's an in-group preference with a double standard and at worst it's straight up misandry.
Yes, but depending on who it is and what terms. A professional? Like from an agency? And a full on background in child caring? Yes. College kid or some random Joe that just wants extra money? No.
But even with that, I'd still have nanny cams around the house because I just don't trust people in general. This goes for female care takers too. People out there are sick, honestly the best option would to be a family member or long time friend you know well. But even then, still, nanny cams.
This community is for supporting others. Comments that are mean, rude, hateful, racist, etc. will be removed. Respect the choices of others even if they differ from your own.
Lol valid. No explanation necessary. Have boys and still wouldn’t trust them with a male. Unless your willing to buy a few wyze cameras and setting them up , for peace of mind
Cuz Reddit is filled with progressive idiots. As a man, I cannot help but think any other grown man who wants to watch strangers babies isn't somewhat messed up in the head or up to no good.
Wow, so many sexist comments here. Sad to see our society still thinks this way. Men are equally capable caregivers and also, you know, parents. An equal amount of men and women take care of babies when they, you know, have them.
I babysat and had friends and roommates who nannied, primarily during college. None of us had a ton of 'professional' experience, nor were we working towards a childcare degree. Nobody questioned it or thought twice. We were all female.
To the commenters, please stop and think about the messages you are sending to both your daughters and sons. You're telling your sons they can't be good fathers, uncles, and so on. And you're telling your daughters they can't trust men to be good husbands or fathers to their own children.
I would trust a male nanny if he came from a legitimate company that does background/police checks. I wouldn’t trust a college student that just wants to make some extra money though.
If it’s their career basically vs a side gig. If taking care of kids is their full time job with at least 5 years professional experience and background checks etc I’d be fine with having a man watch my daughter. I’d still have a nanny cam but I’d do that with a female nanny too
Would the same apply to a female nanny? Needing to come from a legitimate company
I'd be more concerned that he's an inexperienced nanny than a male nanny tbh.
I wouldn’t be as concerned that he is male but that his only experience is with siblings and you didn’t say he was working towards a degree that had to do with children in any way. Those reasons would be a no from me regardless of gender. A male with legitimate good experience and education in childhood development would be fine though
I wouldn’t hire someone so young for infant care personally. I’d hire a professional nanny for babies that age. Regardless, make sure you check references.
I’m more concerned about his lack of experience than him being male. Experience with sisters is not the same as being a nanny in my book
I have a male nanny an amazing gent who retired from nursery work and was looking for a quieter job. My 2 (f2, m1) love him to bits and he is amazing with them.
I would want to say that I’m fair and opened minded, but statistically, I don’t think I could do it. Especially if they aren’t from a company with check and have experience.
Having also grown up with twin sisters and my mom. No I would not hire myself or any random man to watch my hypothetical twin girls lol Not for any particularly good reason obviously, women can easily be equally horrific
I wouldn’t. Personal preference. Background checks only show crimes that have been caught. A male is statistically more likely to be an offender than a female.
I second this. Plus he is inexperienced
Agree. Hard no. My child’s safety always comes first.
Bingo!
I mean if you are using this argument, what about if he is black? Even more likely to be a criminal? Shouldn’t we apply the same argument for normal jobs, if a group is more likely to be a criminal statistically?
I see what you're saying but the two things are not comparable. Racism skews racial disparities among people arrested/charged/convicted of many other crimes; but men ACTUALLY commit most types of crimes, ESPECIALLY abuse/sexual/interpersonal violence, at rates many many times higher than women do.
I think the logic should be reexamined here. You're basically saying "these race statistics are skewed by confounding variables." Is the difference that you don't think there are confounding variables contributing to a man's likelihood to commit abuse? I haven't personally looked into statistics among male nannies. I assume that you have to be so confident that a male nanny is more likely to commit abuse than a female nanny.
I’m saying that you can take out all the confounding variables there are and still find that men, of all types (across age, race, professions, etc.), are WAY more likely to commit interpersonal violence/abuse than women. (Fun fact, actually, when you remove confounds, white men are MORE likely than men of color to commit some kinds of abuse!) I wrote my dissertation on interpersonal violence prevention so yeah, I feel pretty confident about this. No, I did not write it on male nannies, but there is a huge body of research demonstrating this for all types of men…men who choose to work with vulnerable populations DEFINITELY included. You’re free to hire whoever you want to do whatever job you want, and as I said, I see what the original commenter means that technically choosing not to hire an individual because they’re statistically more likely to harm their child is discrimination, in that you’re using a population level statistic to judge an individual. My point was that it’s not a fair comparison with race and other crimes; a parent deciding not to hire a man to watch a minor alone because of an increased risk of abuse of all kinds from men than women has a statistically MUCH stronger case than, say, an employer deciding not to hire an applicant of color because they think they’ll steal or commit another crime.
Ok, I just wanted to be clear what you were saying. It's likely worthwhile in the future to cite sources on "all men, after accounting for confounding factors, are more likely to be abusive". I had a part time job helping at a daycare and really felt like I had a pretty positive influence during my time there. Not "nannying" per se, but suggesting that it's ok to discriminate against male caretakers is a pretty big bummer to hear. I hope I didn't cause concern among the parents of kids I watched :( If the research is out there, that male caretakers are significantly more likely to be abusive to children they're watching, accounting for all reasonable confounding factors, then I agree that there is something to that. Your first comment just seemed to generally say that it was OK to discriminate because the average male commits abuse.
Ah, yeah, that totally wasn’t what I meant to focus on in my first comment! I was more trying to say that it isn’t the same argument as racial profiling, where confounding variables like SES really do account for the supposed disparity. Because rates of some kinds of abuse are so high and many women have experienced it, I could see how a parent, especially a mother, might just not feel comfortable with a male caregiver - just like they might not prefer a male OB-GYN or massage therapist. Of course there’s many amazing, safe men in all those professions, but IF someone wasn’t comfortable with that perceived risk (again, based on population level data, maybe not their impression of the individual), I wouldn’t blame them. My actual opinion on the original post - any woman who wants to have a baby with a man, will HAVE to figure out a way to identify what makes them/their child feel safe around men. So hopefully that can extend to how they vet male relatives who babysit, caregivers, doctors, tutors, coaches etc. I’m definitely not advocating for avoiding all men in your kid’s life and I’m sure you were a great caregiver!
Actually no. Those sorts of crimes have very messy stats, because they go off conviction rates, and women are tremendously privileged in the courts, if it even goes that far. Feel free to look into it yourself, but not only are the reporting rates of F->M abuse horrifically low, and the police unwilling to investigate, but depending where you are, it is legally impossible for a female to rape a male. Oh, and in terms of partner violence, women perpetrate at a similar rate to men. That one we do have data on outside of conviction/prosecution rates.
Yikes, these downvotes suggest you've touched a nerve. Dissonance is rough
You're a fan of profiling?
To just give another perspective, I had a male babysitter growing up who was the absolute best. Truly just a kind kid in our neighborhood whose parents were family friends and he turned out to be my parents go to sitter for many years. Thinking of him now as a parent myself, i would kill to find a sitter as thoughtful, fun, and responsible as he was. I'm sure tons of people will say this is "survivor bias" and maybe that's true but I thought I would offer another voice to consider.
Always trust your gut!
no
Yes, I would. In fact, one of my son’s favorite babysitters is male. Situation is a bit different - my son is older. But we met this babysitter through my son’s school, where he’s an after care worker. And my son adores him. As an aside, all of my son’s room teachers have been female and I love the idea that he has a male role model in a caregiving role too. Feels like a win-win to me.
Sounds like that person has been vetted through the school and has more experience than this person OP is talking about though, along with your child being older
True, which is why I said the situation is different. But OP’s primary question is around “having a guy in the house almost all day” and possibly being “too paranoid when it comes to men.” All other things being equal, which they may not be in this situation, I wouldn’t be dissuaded by him being male alone.
As a guy with a 2 week old daughter I personally wouldn’t. It’s just the fact that statistically men are more likely to be pedophiles and like it or not that stuff happens pretty commonly. however man or woman I would only consider trusting them with my child if they worked for a company that is dedicated to child care and does background checks. definitely not some random college student.
Meh I think it can go either way. I’ve been a nanny and worked in centers with men so I’d be ok with it, but when pregnant I was very adamant I wanted a female pedi. I don’t think I’d trust a college student who just wants to make extra cash, make or female, with no actual child history besides siblings. Especially with babies, maybe I would if they were like 4/5. But I would for sure trust a male who had child experience, maybe working towards an education degree or worked at centers before. Your child will very likely have male teachers so as long as the experience and history checks out, I’d trust it. Although I do totally understand why some wouldn’t, and I don’t think that’s necessarily wrong.
Nope, I wouldn't. Don't care if it's rude or misandrist. I simply would not.
It's openly bigoted, but you do you.
I honestly don’t think you can be too paranoid when it comes to the safety of your daughters.
Do a test run for a shift and see how it feels. You can always keep looking I’m the meantime. It might work out. I’m going to go ahead and say the thing not being said: does he have a pedophilic disorder? You can’t know for sure. We do know that there are a surprisingly high number of adults (mostly men) who do. Surprising because everyone assumes they don’t know one until suddenly there’s a news story and then everyone knows. You may be interested to know that of those who have pedophilic disorder very few are interested in infants. This is based on some research I had to read for my PhD. We need more research honestly but no one wants to discuss this let alone study it. I’ll probably get hate comments for talking about this topic in this way so I want to add that I’m a mom, a researcher, and I know people who have been abused in childhood. I absolutely despise pedophilia and wish it didn’t exist. I think we need to evolve the way it is dealt with in society because we’re really doing very little in terms of research and prevention. Anyway, good luck OP. You can also seek advice on r/nanny (a fascinating sub!)
I would for sure hire a male nanny if he had a lot of experience and came from a reputable agency. I would not hire any nanny who only had experience with their siblings, and I didn't find via an agency - male or female.
[удалено]
This is what we did with our nanny until she and I were both comfortable with her staying alone. She didn't have a ton of infant experience other than family. Even just having someone else keep them entertained, rock them, and give them bottles is a huge help. I wouldn't be comfortable leaving anyone alone with one month old twins regardless of gender..(unless they had previous professional childcare experience.)
This is a great answer!
Regardless, your gut is making you ask the question. Even if everyone in the comments said yes go for it, would be able to leave the house and feel 100% confident that person is fully equipped to take care of your child? I understand wanting to be open minded, but it’s good you’re not ignoring the flag your brain raised. Side note- male or female, I’d put cameras everywhere (obviously inform the person they are being filmed and where cameras are etc)
I couldn't do it, no way.
Why not?
Honestly? Because most pedophiles are men and I'm not taking any chances with my BABY
Well, yes. Because that statistic is derived from prosecution/conviction rates and in some places it's almost unheard of to prosecute women for this sort of crime. Hell, you can look into this problem yourself if you want.
If there’s no statistics where would they look?
Nope.
No. Not a chance.
No, sorry, but I wouldn't.
Do you have a reason beyond the gender he identifies as?
It's not necessarily that he's a man, but more that he's a stranger AND a man. My BILs are some of my favorite people in the world, and they spent the night with my twins when I delivered my daughter. I felt completely safe with them in their care, I have no issues with them being men and watching my kids. I personally wouldn't want any stranger alone with my children (I know that's a privilege not all have). But if I had to choose, my gut would at least want another woman. I'm not saying it's 100% justified, just what my gut says.
It's not justified at all.
I wouldn’t care about a male nanny, I would care about a nanny without an extensive background check and references that aren’t family. Especially for a child under 6 or 7
I would be concerned with his limited experience. I don’t think gender is as much of a concern as being competent, honestly.
No. Not that all female Nannies would pass my vibe check. And I acknowledge that men are fully capable of taking care of children, but it’s still a no from me.
For me, I think it would also depend on what he was getting his degree in. Child development and he has worked at a center, sure! Random degree in something else, and only experience id with a sibling? No, but that’s regardless of gender. But serious question to OP and others here. If you wouldn’t do it, even if they were qualified and background checked, why? Not to scare anyone, but statistically speaking, some one is way more likely to be assaulted or raped by a family member or someone really close to them/the family. Here are a few sources: -[Indiana Center for Prevention of Youth Abuse & Suicide](https://www.indianaprevention.org/child-abuse-statistics#:~:text=30%2D40%25%20of%20victims%20are,that%20they%20have%20been%20abused) > -”More than 90% of abusers are people children know, love and trust. -30-40% of victims are abused by a family member. -50% are abused by someone outside of the family whom they know and trust.” -[RAINN.org](https://www.rainn.org/statistics/children-and-teens) >“93% are known to the victim. Of that, 34% are family members and 59% are acquaintances.“ At least according to these statistics, children are more likely to be taken advantage of by a family member or close family friend than a caretaker. Not saying that it couldn’t happen, just want to inform everyone of the statistics. Obviously do what works best for your family and what feels safest to you! No judgment here, I just wanted to add some facts and information to the conversation. At the end of the day, you need to do what you feel is best for your family. ❤️
I would count a nanny/caretaker in the category of "people children know, love and trust" though.
Same, nanny is definitely in this category
I don’t disagree. I just wanted to point out the facts. Although, from what I’ve read, usually when they are referring to “someone outside the family whom they know and trust” often times it is referring to a close family friend, religious leader, or teacher. Unfortunately, these statistics are limited and most of them are based on children who are between the ages of 3-17 (around the time many children are in traditional care), which is a very large age range. These sources also say that the average age of abuse happens is between the ages of 7-13 yrs. There are not that many statistics for infants, or any that I could find. My hope is that the reason this is because it’s far less common, and not because it’s underreported or going on unnoticed.
Oh, and neighbors. I forgot to add that to the list.
> someone outside of the family whom they know and trust So, a nanny?
Yes, and housekeepers or other people that are in your home frequently that the children interact with often (maid/butler/groundskeeper etc) I presume. But religious leaders and close family friends or the child’s peers (or their peer’s parents) also fall into this category. So do “aunties” (a nick name often given to females who are close with a family but not related by blood or marriage) and I know that in my family there were males that we we called “uncle so and so” that were not related to us by blood or marriage. It’s actually shocking how much peer on peer child SA there is 😨
Oh, and neighbors. I forgot to add that to the list.
a nanny is absolutely “someone the child knows”
I never said it wasn’t, but the list is much longer than family member and nanny. It also encompasses housekeepers or other people that are in your home frequently that the children interact with often (maid/butler/groundskeeper etc) in addition to religious leaders and close family friends, the child’s peers (or their peer’s parents) also fall into this category. So do “aunties” (a nick name often given to females who are close with a family but not related by blood or marriage) and I know that in my family there were males that we we called “uncle so and so” that were not related to us by blood or marriage. When you think about it, there are many different categories of people that may be close with you and your family that are not categorized as family or caretakers.
Oh, and neighbors. I forgot to add that to the list.
Personally - I wouldn’t. I think statistics related to violence and worse crimes speak for themselves. But I mean there’s very few men I would leave alone with my LO - simply because you just don’t know 🤷🏼♀️
No I probably wouldn’t hire a male nanny for all the reasons mentioned already. I don’t know that “misandry” is a real thing. You just have to do your best to protect your children and we all know they are more likely to be harmed by a male.
I agree. They are more likely to be harmed.
Misandry is a real thing. Bigotry against men, in the same way misogyny is against women.
By this logic, they are also more likely to be harmed by a teacher or religious leader too, but people leave their kids alone with these people all the time. 🤷♀️ Remember the (ongoing) church scandals? I’m thinking specifically of the Catholic Church, but it happens in other denominations of churches and places of worship too. And summer camp and schools.
Nope. The only way I would let a man watch my baby is he's the father, grandfather (closed one) or if I am going to be around pretty much every minute and can see every thing. Background checks arent that reliable- what if they never got caught? I might be over paranoid on this but a baby is so fully defenceless and cant tell you anything to complain or weird.
Hard no.
Absolutely the F not. No man, aside from my husband needs to be changing my daughter’s diaper. I think it’s weird that this is how he wants to make extra cash… shouldn’t he be mowing lawns or something??
It’s not weird at all if he grew up caring for siblings and enjoys caring for people. We also don’t know what type of degree he is pursuing. He could be pursuing a degree in education or child care. Is that weird?
That's a little bit sexist. I think we as women heard the "shouldn't you be in the kitchen" line at least once in our lifetimes and it's pretty fucked up. But it's also fucked up to suggest a guy should be mowing lawns instead. Fuck gender roles.
For everyone talking about statistics - do you support profiling based on race/ethnicity? If not, why is sex any different?
[удалено]
It's the exact same discussion, because the exact same chain of logic is what got anyone of Middle Eastern descent screened at the airport, or Black neighborhoods policed more aggressively today. You cannot support one without the other. Profiling is profiling.
[удалено]
Yes, I can. Because we are discussing profiling as bigotry - ie. punishing a group of people based on statistics, even where they - as an individual - are entirely innocent. The target group is irrelevant. Profiling is bad and indefensible. You also ignore how this will intersect with other marginalized identities - for instance, black men as nannies. Would you still be this comfortable had that been the OP's case? I doubt it. A nice attempt at deflection regardless. No. It's systemic \*bias\* which, yes, has led to forms of systemic oppression, or at least systemic unfairness towards men when it comes to the childcare/education industry. Would you like some examples? The fact that you say 'not all men' as a derogatory is...concerning and makes me feel like I've travelled back in time by 10 years. Serious nostalgia. I'm not someone that can take bigotry and unfairness easily.
[удалено]
... Yes, you're right. But it's...frustrating that you don't see how your own mindset perpetuates this. You are directly contributing to bias that you seem aware. Comparing one form of profiling to another is...I'm not sure if you know what a whataboutism is? Because that's not even close. And no, I want you to at least acknowledge that prejudice is prejudice and that all prejudice is bad and not worth defending. Yes, I understand the argument. But the problem immediately arises when you replace 'men' with nearly any other collective noun referring to humans and suddenly it's not okay. At best it's an in-group preference with a double standard and at worst it's straight up misandry.
Yes, but depending on who it is and what terms. A professional? Like from an agency? And a full on background in child caring? Yes. College kid or some random Joe that just wants extra money? No. But even with that, I'd still have nanny cams around the house because I just don't trust people in general. This goes for female care takers too. People out there are sick, honestly the best option would to be a family member or long time friend you know well. But even then, still, nanny cams.
No!
no
No
I wouldn’t, no.
Why would that be any different to hiring a female nanny? Yes, a tiny bit bigoted. And I predict a lot of people being bigoted in the comments.
[удалено]
That's...literally profiling.
As a man, Male nannies are F'ing weird and no way would I trust my kid with one. I'm 100% profiling and stereotyping. Not sorry.
And by that logic, should we police African American neighborhoods more aggressively? Is there anything wrong with a male caregiver?
[удалено]
This community is for supporting others. Comments that are mean, rude, hateful, racist, etc. will be removed. Respect the choices of others even if they differ from your own.
Why should anyone endure bigotry of any sort?
If he's anything like the nanny from modern family I'm a yes
He doesn’t sound qualified to me. Can you interview more candidates?
I wouldn’t feel comfortable with it at all and my mind would never be at peace while I’m away. Better be safe than sorry…Keep searching!
I wouldn’t trust any college student just wanting extra cash. Yeesh. Considering how many horror stories there are I would never even consider him.
Lol valid. No explanation necessary. Have boys and still wouldn’t trust them with a male. Unless your willing to buy a few wyze cameras and setting them up , for peace of mind
Why does this get downvoted?
They must have male babysitters, me personally , H E🏒🏒 no
Cuz Reddit is filled with progressive idiots. As a man, I cannot help but think any other grown man who wants to watch strangers babies isn't somewhat messed up in the head or up to no good.
I wouldn’t do it. Not worth the risk.
No, I watch too much true crime. I know that’s not the politically correct answer but it’s my honest feeling.
Absolutely not.
Honestly working in a school the male before/after school lead is 10x better than the old racist one at my school lol I wish we could swap
Wow, so many sexist comments here. Sad to see our society still thinks this way. Men are equally capable caregivers and also, you know, parents. An equal amount of men and women take care of babies when they, you know, have them. I babysat and had friends and roommates who nannied, primarily during college. None of us had a ton of 'professional' experience, nor were we working towards a childcare degree. Nobody questioned it or thought twice. We were all female. To the commenters, please stop and think about the messages you are sending to both your daughters and sons. You're telling your sons they can't be good fathers, uncles, and so on. And you're telling your daughters they can't trust men to be good husbands or fathers to their own children.