Nannies are very much in the news today.
- New York Times columnist Helaine Olen could help but read her nanny’s blog, whereupon she decided the nanny was a pill popping bisexual alcoholic whore – and not-so coincidentally was shortly thereafter an ex-nanny. The whole situation is now messy, and very public, because Olen decided to use the nanny’s anonymous blog as the basis for a Sunday Times piece. Olen comes off as neurotic and pathetic in lamenting her undetailed youthful indiscretions while spinning assorted snippets of blog text into a unflattering portrait of the nanny. The nanny must have been smoking crack to think that it was a good idea to share her blog URL with her employer (Washingtonienne anyone?), so it’s hard to feel sorry for her for getting fired, BUT to be pilloried in the Times when anyone with half a brain can easily find the nanny’s blog is reprehensible. You can read nanny Tessa’s detailed response.
You’re right. Olen is pathetic. That was one of the worst pieces I’ve read in a long time. And the nanny got a real life lesson.
Another piece of ficton from the newspaper that brought us Walter Duranty and Jayson Blair.
All I can say is Thank God I never needed nor wanted a nanny.
“I imagined the snoozefest that would ensue if I were to post: “
Well she looks like she was able to prevent a snoozefest with that self righteous bit. Too bad the girl got punished for her employer’s paranoia and attempt to get in the spot light as being sensitive, understanding, and hip.
It’s the type of article that I’d expect to see in Cosmopolitan; but perhaps it’s all part of the Times’ announced effort to increase circulation by reaching out to the “other America”. Unfortunately, most Americans can’t afford a nanny, attend literary readings, dine at trendy restaurants or haunt chic art galleries and they don’t really care about the angst of people who do so.
The Times is trying but it still hasn’t realized that not everyone is desperate to live in Manhattan.
I have no sympathy for Helaine Olen, her husband, or her nanny. They all deserve each other with their self-absorbed, non-judgemental judgemental crap.
Smitty, it’s the NEW YORK Times, written for New Yorkers, by New Yorkers. Maybe you should be reading USA Today.
The drama of a blogging ho-nanny seems surely aimed at a book and film deal. Poor children used as ruses for the evil ploy.
Some nanny’s are great and good and deserve respect and appreciation (and good employment conditions) but a nanny is only so good as her employers are astute. And ethical.
Works both ways. As does the debauchery when it continues. Unfortunately for the rest of us, some people dig debauchery. Thus, you get blogs, books and films about debauchery and just look who it raises otherwise: debauched adults raising more debauchery.
You know, these horror stories should not dissuade anyone from employing legal, ethical and reasonable domestic helps, however. If needed, when necessary.
About Jude Law, the guy’s just too easily indulged by too willing indulgents. As are many men AND women with wealth, prestige and physical appeal (or even those without the latter).
This NYT women is a LOSER
Yes, the nanny used poor judgment in revealing her blog to Olen, but clearly she did it because she trusted her boss–just as Olen trusted her with her children.
But that trust was not reciprocated, and the nanny has now been effectively outed via the New York Times and the subsequent media coverage. To whom? Anyone who can now (or forever more) make the nanny-Olen connection, including, most probably:
Her family.
Her friends.
The family and friends of her boyfriend.
Her graduate school.
Beware, future Olen employees–stay away if you value your right to privacy.
Barbara…don’t BLOG private information (or any information) if you don’t want it to be accessible to the public.
And, if you have issues of character that compromise your employability in a field, find another field that tolerates or disregards whatever your character issues are. Considering oneself a “nanny” while exhibiting behaviors/psychology that suggests/poses insecure situations to children is a foolish choice — no, it’s an irresponsible choice.
Someone doesn’t write in a blog IF they have information to discuss that they feel should be “private.”
Don’t want something read by the public? Don’t want something beyond your control? Don’t publish it in a public venue.