Okay, Theodore, it’s on.

My Dadwagon colleague is telling me that he doesn’t buy my anti-sitter stance, and (because I am a weenie liberal) I figure that if I just EXPLAIN myself, peevishly, all will be settled.

a) I fully acknowledge that I speak from a position of luck and advantages: principally, four healthy grandparents nearby, any of whom can be called in in an emergency. If we didn’t have them, or a close friend who could step in, obviously we’d have to make other arrangements. That said, a lot of those “other arrangements” would involve sitting at home with the kid ourselves, and I’d accept that. It’s lovely to go out to dinner or something now and then, but for these couple of years, it’s fundamentally an indulgence and a privilege, not something my wife and I feel entitled to. And I really get annoyed at people who talk about new-parent couples “finding some time for yourselves”–I really do think THAT’S where elitism comes in. Nobody tells a single parent holding down double shifts at a hardscrabble job to “take a mental-health day.” And he or she needs one way more than I do. We do without a sitter partly because we don’t really need–as opposed to want–to go out after work. (The distinction between “want to” and “need to” is addressed here.)

b) Of course daycare is different from calling someone in! Daycare is a group setting, so misbehavior (on the caregiver’s part) is unlikely to pass muster–the place is by its nature self-policing. Even if it weren’t, an administrator is there all the time. Other parents are dropping in and out, too.  There is state licensing involved. Everyone has legal recourse if something goes awry. Whereas some teenage kid or local singleton operates under none of these constraints.

c) Plus that person is in your house, alone. If it’s a close friend or relative, fine. But if it’s someone you’ve never met before? Name you took off a flyer somewhere? Heard recommended at school, at work, at church? That is FAR from the same thing, and if you ask me, a little sketchy.