The Nanny Issue for Mary

[biboquinhas]

I think having nannys when they are out doing their dutties OK, but having nannys all the time around them NO! For example having nannys on vacations I don't think that is rigth!

[MARG]

Originally Posted by biboquinhas

I think having nannys when they are out doing their dutties OK, but having nannys all the time around them NO! For example having nannys on vacations I don't think that is rigth!

Logically there are going to be at least two and probably three nannies. At times Frederick and Mary have late night and even overnight engagements and if there was only one nanny she'd be working 24/7! No days off, no nights off, can't be sick or take a holiday..........I think there are laws against exploiting your workers!
As for nannies on holiday, well let's face it, Frederick and Mary are probably in need of a break too. Tending to the all round needs of two active babies is a full on, hands on job.

Whether we like to admit it or not, we expect "Family Shots" at fairly frequent intervals, and there are usually one or two semi-official engagements factored in as well as happy, glowing 'departure' and arrival' photo calls as well. These are not issues that the normal working parents would ever have to accommodate.

[biboquinhas]

Originally Posted by MARG

As for nannies on holiday, well let's face it, Frederick and Mary are probably in need of a break too. Tending to the all round needs of two active babies is a full on, hands on job.

I don't agree! Taking care of our children is our second job, during holidays or not! When we decide to have children we have decided not to have breaks anymore

[Empress]

I disagree. Parents need time to be a couple. They need time to decompress so that they are able to be loving towards one another and their children. They need time to have a good relationship between themselves independent of their children. Even with children there has to be time for the parents to have a relationship between themselves where they are able to speak to each other about things other than work and their children. Yes, children are work, but every job gives you time off to collect yourself.

A loving, caring relationship where two people are involved needs time devoted solely to that relationship as well. And when there is that time, there is a better relationship to be had with your children. And the children benefit from their parents having time together as well, in that they see a happy, relaxed and loving relationship before them.

Most parents accomplish this through babysitters and family members. However in the case of this couple, the family members have as many social engagements as the parents, that are part of their job as well.

[Lady Bluffton]

The vast majority of "us" cannot afford nannies, and I guess, cannot imagine life with them. I certainly can't, having been raised by stay at home mother, who gave up her career to be a full time parent.

Is that why we seem to have a natural aversion to nannies? If so, why? Is that why the employment of multiple nannies by Fred and Mary is so controversial on this board? Why?

[Empress]

I don't think that it is so much controversial, as something to talk about. Mary unfortunately does not have the option of being a stay at home mom. Although, who even knows if she would want that. I for a fact know that I would not be a good stay at home mother. Some parents are better suited to that and some are not.

Lady Blufton, had your mother decided to continue her career, you would have needed to be taken care of by someone. Be it family member, day care center, au pair or a nanny.

I imagine, were Mary and Frederick to leave their children in the hands of a day care continuously, or an au pair, there would be outrage at not making sure that these children had the best as they are a prince and princess, and the public expects certain standards to be upheld.

I imagine that there would be an outcry no matter what they did, from one party or another, so they do the best that they can, and give their children the best that they can, just as any loving parent would do. They just have more to give than many. Count them lucky in some respects, and unlucky in that they have to raise their children in the full glare of the media and public eye. I don't think that I would want that.

God forbid that either of the children ever fall down and have a bruise that is noticeable, I can't even begin to imagine what the tabloids would write.

[UserDane]

Originally Posted by Lady Bluffton

Is that why we seem to have a natural aversion to nannies? If so, why? Is that why the employment of multiple nannies by Fred and Mary is so controversial on this board? Why?

Why indeed. I don't get it why Frederik's and Mary's use of nannies in particular is such a big deal? Joachim and Alexandra brought two nannies with them on a holiday and that doesn't seem to bother anyone - and Felix wasn't even a baby; we don't know how many nannies Felipe and Letizia have (as Larzen pointed out) - and do we know how many WA and Maxima or Phillipe and Mathilde have? No one probably believe that these couples do not also use nannies. So why is F&M's use of nannies so overwhelmingly interesting?

[princess gertrude]

Originally Posted by UserDane

Why indeed. I don't get it why Frederik's and Mary's use of nannies in particular is such a big deal? Joachim and Alexandra brought two nannies with them on a holiday and that doesn't seem to bother anyone - and Felix wasn't even a baby; we don't know how many nannies Felipe and Letizia have (as Larzen pointed out) - and do we know how many WA and Maxima or Phillipe and Mathilde have? No one probably believe that these couples do not also use nannies. So why is F&M's use of nannies so overwhelmingly interesting?

I think that the reason that there is such discussion about the nanny situation as it deals with Mary & Frederick is because of what Mary said before Christian was born about raising her children herself. Also, what Frederick has said about his own childhood might have a certain amount to do with it. Of course, these are only my opinions.

[msleiman]

What are they going to do? Put the children in full time daycare? Maybe find a night time care? They have a type of job that none of us will really understand. They have to have nannies!

[royaltywatcher]

There are royal people, for goodness sakes, and they travel regularly and often have evening functions to attend. They simply could not function without help even if they wanted to.

Having a nanny (or several) does not mean you can't be close to your children and involved in their lives. You can use nannies on many different levels.

[RachelD]

Here in the States, because we only have about 3 months maternity leave, unless it's a c-section, parents hire a live-in or come daily basis baby-sitter. Basically, a nanny. Or, they are put into a daycare. These people/places don't take away the responsability the parents have of raising their children. The children may be with the nanny's 8 hours a day, but as soon as the parent comes home, they take over. And while the child is with the nanny, she uses methods or rules that the parent has instilled. So, they are just a stand-in parent while the real parent can't be there. And, alot of nanny's while taking care of the child will refer to the parents. For example "Mommy said for you to play outside today"...or "Let's make Daddy and Mommy some cookies!".

[avrilo]

I dont see what is the point of this discussion. First of all they are ROYALTY not ordinary people like us (that is why we all here are so facinated arent we¿), and secondly who said the 3 nannies work at the same time¿! As I picture it, 3 nannies are hired to take "shifts" 8 hours/shift in 24 hours does the math for 3 nannies, plus this people probably had a life besides takin care of the children 24 /7. From a logistics pov I doubt they all work at the same time, that way Mary and Fred get help when ever they need it

[Bosana]

Raising one's own children doesn't mean that it has to be done without the aid of nannys. I can't imagine Mary would have meant this, especially since she is obliged to "work" as a Crown Princess. Teaching your children about the world, about values and good deeds, respect towards others.... and giving them a sense of security and worth, are things that Mary probably wanted to keep in her domain.

[Lena]

Originally Posted by princess gertrude

I think that the reason that there is such discussion about the nanny situation as it deals with Mary & Frederick is because of what Mary said before Christian was born about raising her children herself. Also, what Frederick has said about his own childhood might have a certain amount to do with it. Of course, these are only my opinions.

Well, I guess you are pretty much right. Both used very big words before they became parents. I guess many do that, me as well. But usually you are just saying things to friends and relatives. And not to ppl interviewing you and spreading things publicly, so that they are available for millions of ppl. I´ve said it before and I will say it again...interviews don´t always do a Royal a favour. IMO even less, the less you are familiar with the business. And one can´t really say, that Mary could knew about things really, when the NINKA iviews or the DR documentary were done.
Well, as it seems also our Royal superparents have realised that as well and we haven´t gotten real big interviews for a very long time.

I know I´m silly...but I always have to laugh out loud, when you are speaking about workind load in connection with M&F For the 3 or so duties, they are usually sharing a month and for the few duties, that are overlapping, also grandpop John could jump in. He doesn´t really come across as sickly old man. And they can self choose their office times mostly.
So if they would want, they could surely get along without a nanny. But I can also see, that one wouldn´t want that, if one can afford professional help...

I´m just feeling a little sorry for Christian and his little sister...because they probably would never experience, what me and probably also many others here, experienced in my/their childhood.
Up from kindergarten age till the teenage years, I could start playing after kiga or school...together with my brother and the other children in the street. We could go playing in the garden (house), in the woods, in the tree house, in the big attic of the neighbours. and so on. When the church bell rang at 7pm, we had to go inside...sometimes in summer, we also slept in self built tents outside. Our parents surely did a lot of things with us, but they also didn´t watch us all the time, when playing. They had other things to do as well. IMO this freedom made us quite creative and one could go all into the world of fantasy.
Royal children hardly ever can be alone. They are watched by nannies, who are nearly obliged to provide an paedagogic entertainment programme...or by security guards, by other staff at the castle. If they would want to play with other children, they need to be invited.
Nooo, in these things, I´m surely not jealous of a Royal childhood (even though such a big castle surely is a nice place...and even though, it must be enriching to travel the world at an early age)

[Duke of Marmalade]

That's an amazing discussion! I am sure all royal couples with children have a nanny or even more than one, they have babysitters, housekeepers, cleaners, cooks, drivers ... the list is endless. I can't imagine they do any housework like ironing, washing or the dishes ... simply because they have a lot going on, and when they happen to be off duty, they will spent some QUALITY TIME with their children, each other, their families or friends or on whatever they like or is important for them. It's the same thing in wealthy or very well situated "normal" families - whoever can afford support will make use of it. Fair enough - as long as a child is not entirely raised by a nanny - eg Prince Charles, and I am sure these times are over within the younger royal generation - I don't see a problem.

The only difference though is that each monarchy handles this "private" issue differently, some are outspoken about it, some are not. It depends on the history and the standing a monarchy has in a country. So Mary can have three nannies despite Fred still being on paternity leave (he hasn't done much since has he?) and people think it's ok while I guess there would be an outcry in Spain if Letizia would show up with two nannies despite Felipe working his socks off for his country

[acdc1]

I frankly don't care if she has a nanny or not. If the parents are playing an active role in the lives of their children, which Mary and Frederik clearly are doing, I think it's fine if they have a little help. After all, their demands as parents and their working role is quite different than average people's: We don't have to be patron of a billion different organizations, or have the future King of Denmark to look after at home!

[Aurora810]

There is a new story about some tabloid reporter chiding Mary for having nannies when she originally stated her desires for no nanny. I found the very complete story at the Danish royal watchers site.

Mary's quote: "My children won't be raised by nannies- definitely not." Now that is only a small part of her larger quote.

My thinking is this, Mary never said they would not have nannies, she just said that her kids won't be raised by nannies. That is open for interpretation. My thought is that it means she's involved very much so and that nannies maybe in her children's lives(as how could they not be) but certainly not involved to the point of them doing everything that a parent should do and essentially raising Fred and Mary's children for them.

That is my own thoughts. So what do others think?

P.S. To moderators: If this is too similar to another thread or too controversial for any reason do whatever you have to do to the thread.