As children transition into school, many parents strive to help their nannies find new employment when their services are no longer required. Frequently, they post on community boards seeking new families for these caregivers. In recent years, I’ve observed a trend: parents often describe their nannies as “outstanding,” saying things like, “our outstanding nanny is now available!”
A review of community posts reveals 519 mentions of “outstanding nanny,” yet no references to incredible, fantastic, or even good nannies. A quick Google search for “outstanding nanny” generates 28,000 results, including a mention by a celebrity describing her children’s caregiver, as well as various advertisements and nanny agency listings. Common qualities that I would prioritize when hiring a nanny—such as reliability and warmth—seem to be overlooked. The phrase “outstanding nanny” functions as a collocation, a combination of words that suggests a particular meaning, similar to idioms and clichés. This usage reflects a trend toward inflationary language, where increasingly extreme terms are used to express positive or negative sentiments. For example, while your coffee might simply be enjoyable, if you describe it as “incredible,” you are engaging in inflationary language.
But why is the term “outstanding nanny” so prevalent in job postings? I reached out to Dr. Amanda Lane, a sociologist and author of a study on caregivers. She responded, “Although many genuinely feel their nannies are ‘outstanding,’ this descriptor often serves as a way for employers to alleviate their guilt over placing a low-wage worker in a precarious situation. Parents understand that their caregivers may have families relying on them, deepening the sense of responsibility for the worker’s employment status. By labeling the caregiver as ‘outstanding,’ they hope to expedite the transition to another family to lessen their own discomfort with the situation.”
Is there any aspect of parenting that isn’t accompanied by anxiety and guilt? In January, I was offered a full-time position that I ultimately declined due to these feelings. I interviewed two nannies I had met, both of whom I knew to be caring and attentive. However, they were both undocumented, and I felt uneasy about the legal implications and the difficulty of conducting background checks. I felt guilty about leaving my children for 50 hours a week with someone lacking formal training and no means of verifying their identity. I felt the weight of the power imbalance; even though we would have compensated them fairly, I was aware we would be part of a system that often disadvantages immigrant women of color. Additionally, I struggled with guilt over my desire to return to work—why wasn’t I fully satisfied as a stay-at-home mom? And then there was the accompanying resentment: I felt frustrated that fair compensation would consume my entire paycheck, plus some.
Ultimately, I turned down the job offer, declined to hire the nannies, and continued my chaotic routine of squeezing work into evenings and naps while sharing childcare responsibilities with my spouse. This arrangement proved unsatisfactory for everyone involved—the nannies seeking employment, myself wanting a full-time job, and my children who were cared for by overstretched parents.
Interestingly, while many parents tout their nannies as “outstanding,” I frequently hear complaints about them not living up to this praise—being tardy, inattentive, and prone to excessive phone use, among other grievances. When discussing this with Dr. Lane, she noted that this disconnect mirrors societal views on gender roles, where caregiving work is often undervalued.
Culturally, we tend not to appreciate caregivers, who historically lack protections such as overtime pay and minimum wage. A new rule meant to guarantee these protections for home-care workers has been delayed. Because these jobs occur in private residences, away from coworkers and oversight, domestic workers are particularly vulnerable to exploitation. Written contracts are seldom used, and even those who are compensated fairly often face long periods without work, struggling to save for retirement. Dr. Lane observes that employers frequently return home late without compensating caregivers for the extra time or expect them to perform additional tasks without extra pay. Workers often comply to avoid the risk of losing their jobs.
Dr. Lane points out that parents often hold themselves to different standards than their nannies when it comes to caregiving. “Parents use their phones too. Even when we are occupied with children, we remain social beings. Childcare can be monotonous and isolating. I’ve seen grandparents at the park, ostensibly watching kids, engrossed in reading the newspaper,” she explains.
Had I accepted the job and hired a nanny, I suspect I would not have been a better employer than those Dr. Lane describes. My feelings of guilt and anxiety would likely have resulted in unrealistic expectations. After all, we would have been paying her more than our rent—I would have noticed every late arrival and every moment not spent in cheerful engagement. I would have been tempted to assign her household tasks under the assumption that caregiving is not that demanding, right? I would have wished for her to be nothing short of exceptional, more patient, more adventurous, and adept at arts and crafts than I could be—essentially expecting her to be a modern-day Mary Poppins while I played the role of the exhausted mother.
These two significant issues—the high costs of childcare and the undervaluation of care work—are contributing to a dysfunctional system in American parenting and caregiving. The expenses associated with hiring nannies or daycare can prevent parents from entering the workforce or result in them paying fees comparable to a mortgage. Meanwhile, the caregivers themselves often receive insufficient pay, lacking health insurance and retirement plans, facing long periods of unemployment, and frequently receiving under-the-table payments. As a national organizer for domestic workers expressed, “There is no good situation for a nanny in retirement.”
In a flawed system, no one truly benefits. The end of the employer-nanny relationship often involves the employer advocating for the nanny in job postings, trying to assuage their own guilt about an unstable situation.
It is essential to carve out space for meaningful structural reforms, such as establishing a well-trained, adequately compensated, regulated, and subsidized childcare workforce, along with pathways to citizenship for the women already engaged in these roles. We must recognize that childcare is a job deserving of respect, rather than something women simply do out of goodwill. The rationale for denying wage protections to home-care workers—that they are merely “companions”—is a perplexing mischaracterization.
The term “outstanding nanny,” with its implications of superhuman perfection, is, quite frankly, odd. It stands out in job postings, prompting the question: Should I be impressed? Is it too much to ask for someone who is reliable and not subject to financial instability, allowing me to work without contributing to an exploitative system? Achieving that would be genuinely—well, simply wonderful.
To learn more about enhancing your chances of conception, check out our post on fertility boosters. For a comprehensive resource on home insemination, you may visit this excellent guide.
Summary
The current childcare system in America is fraught with challenges, particularly concerning the undervaluation of caregivers and the excessive costs of childcare. Many parents feel guilt and anxiety about hiring nannies, often labeling them as “outstanding” while simultaneously expressing dissatisfaction. Structural changes are necessary to create a fair and regulated childcare workforce, ensuring that caregivers are respected and compensated adequately.
Keyphrase: Child care system challenges
Tags: home insemination kit, home insemination syringe, self insemination