The mother explained on the Facebook page that her son, who the grandmother watches 3 days a week for 2-4 hours, was actually very easy to watch.
Children who grow up around their grandparents are more equipped with doing better in the real world. They learn a lot from them and fully benefit from the unconditional affection grandparents have for them. In return, hanging out with their grandchildren will keep them busy and young at heart. Besides, the intergenerational relationship is built very early on. Busy parents fully take advantage of this set-up and they also get to save a ton on babysitters. However, is that really fair to the grandparents? After all, they are babysitting and probably spend a ton on the children in terms of food and toys.
It may sound absurd to compare grandparents to babysitters - especially since they splurge on their grandchildren out of love and there is no need to put a price on that. However, if you think about how they are mostly retired and may have no active income, it's just a matter of their own financial stability. This is the same dilemma one parent was in. They posted an inquiry to Mamas Uncut, a Facebook page where one can ask "anonymous mommy questions and get real mommy answers." This anonymous parent had the following question for the followers of the page: Should family be paid to babysit?
They continued: My grandma (62) watches my son (5) for 2-4 hours 3 days a week while I work, and she DEMANDS I pay her $65/week, and it makes me livid...add on Also he is not a hard child to watch. He’s the calmest, most independent child I’ve ever known honestly. He doesn’t throw tantrums or run around screaming. He’s very well behaved. The comment section was opened up to the people to give their opinion on the matter.
A great-grandmother had an opinion about this. Mildred Kelems wrote: I babysit my great-grandson. I raised my granddaughter she thinks I should do it for FREE. But each time he is over I spend at least 4 to 10 dollars on him. They never feed him when he is coming over. So I feed him 2 sometimes 3 times a day. I only have less than $800 a month and still owe on my property. So don't have extra money . so I do without so he has what he needs. SO YES PAY HER IT'S. WORK SHE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE DOING. She added, Oh, and I am 72-years-old. Raised 16 kids so grandma needs some rest before it's her time to go.
Another grandma also explained why it is important to pay up. Damaris Phoenix said: Okay l must chime in here. I left my career to help my son with his children. I am retired totally but would be employed still had this not happened. My son offered to pay me to care for his children 2, 4, and 8-yrs-old.l moved to the state he lives and we all live together. I would say honestly that all the money l receive goes right back into our household. He pays me because I would still be employed somewhere had l not moved here, bought a home, etc. In grams defense, yeah you should pay her if she needs it. If she is in a financial position to not need the supplemental income then she would undoubtedly do it for free. Just saying.
There were other grandmothers who said they would not accept money to take care of their grandkids. "I’m just happy and grateful to be able to do this for them and help them out," stated Carol Boltz Mellema. Another grandma agreed that they enjoy having the kids over. That is when another Facebook user pointed out that the grandma in question may not be as financially stable as they were.
Buffy Sutherland commented: Did you babysit for free as a teenager? Did your grandmother raise her own children? Who are you to tell your grandmother that her time is not as valuable as yours is? It is her time, not your time! Get a grip, you selfish woman! I want to slap you just for even having that "entitlement gene." The general consensus, as you can see, was - yes, she should pay the grandmother.