Would You Hire a Male Nanny?

Norland College in the United Kingdom is renowned for training the best nannies for the wealthiest homes in the world. And now, thanks to Michael Kenny, Norland has its first male student:

"I wanted to work with children because I can understand young people a lot better. I find them a lot easier to get on with," he told The Telegraph. "I think I would like to be a nanny for a few years, because it is the whole reason you go through the training. But then after that I would like to do a PGCE and become a nursery teacher or work in a prep school."

More than 7,000 nannies have graduated from the school, which was founded in 1892 by Emily Ward and originally called The Training School for Ladies as Children's Nurses. These days, a degree from Norland involves more than simply learning how to read a book upside down -- though students at Norland are taught how to do that, too. There are classes on nutritional theory, cooking, sewing, sign language, social sciences, health, history, and early childhood education.

He will certainly be well-trained.

Link -via Glenn Reynolds | Photo: SWNS

Assuming you could afford the luxury of a nanny and wanted one, would you hire a male nanny?

Newest 5

Newest 5 Comments

We have a male nanny and no regrets. Not only did he impress us and have excellent references, but it was also consistent with risk management. The risk of infant sexual abuse is minuscule, while the risk of household accidents is real. Our nanny is strong as an ox and has been a CPR trainer. We also know he went into this career (after a successful more traditional one) out of a real desire to care for children, not because it was his only option or an expected one.

The bottom line is that real-life hiring decisions aren't of "a man" or "a woman"; they're about a specific individual.

Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

Geez, I'm glad I never had to really think about the "risk management" aspect of male vs. female. The great thing about rural living is that everyone I've entrusted my kids to is either a relative or someone I've known a long time. Twice we've run into bad experiences, both involving female caretakers. The day care center I paid for a while was shut down for a long list of violations. And a relative invited my kids over for a play date once, which we did one day when I was out of daycare options. I later learned she fed her own kids lunch, but not mine because I didn't send food! That problem never occurred to me because I'll always feed a kid at my house.

And now they are all old enough to babysit other kids.

Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

I find it hard to argue against your logic.

Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

That's really what it boils down to: risk management.

People shouldn't be offended and think I'm saying every male who cares for children is likely to abuse them. The simple fact is it's much safer to leave your children with a female than a male because males are biologically much more likely to be sexually deviant and a molester.

It seems many people might just be ignorant to how commonplace abuse is, but many children everywhere are victimized every single day by relatives, family friends, babysitters, strangers, priests, and even other children. And, guess what: in almost all cases the perpetrator is a male who probably appears trustworthy.

Hypothetical analogy for all my dissenters: if you had to leave your child in a room with a Pit Bull or a Labrador, which would you choose? My bet is you'd avoid the Pit Bull. But why?

Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)

Before parenthood: "Of course! Because of equality, etc. etc. etc."
After parenthood: "Nope, can't take that risk however remote. Equality be damned!"

Just being honest here.

Get Updates In Your Inbox