Lay in a course. Course laid in. Not course slated. (And it's 'dauphine.')
There's a movie based on a book (correction - 喜福会), with a scene that shows the taking of one woman's child to be raised by another. If I remember correctly, the author based that book in part on stories from the women of her mother's generation. The study material period drama (in my feed, not in the broadcast this time) reflects old court protocol, and the book reflected practices that existed when the characters' own children were young. What does that say, comparing a woman who wrote in the previous century about the generation before hers and a modern production of a fictional (I think it's a) TV series?
Of course there's politicking going on with the exchange of children (from the looks of it, that's a major driver of this storyline), but is it a daycare thing - division of labor, the birth mother returning to court-related tasks while another in the harem raises them to the age at which they leave the nursery? Or is it assigning these kids to specific people for what those people can teach? Seems less likely, especially in a court situation - wouldn't there be tutors for different subjects separate from the child minders?
I don't know if that system of polygamy still exists among the diaspora the way it was spoken of in the book, or if it's been absorbed into this ethical non-monogamy thing that keeps showing up in my feed. (I'll let that be another mark of your era, not mine.) But I think it's worth pointing out how it shows up in a 政权 that's using its entertainment to mold its viewers - being entertained in my formative years in part with animation that had surprisingly gray storylines, I find cause to say yeesh, this study material's past franchise territory and into Aesop.
Adding this because I'm not the only one who recognized the pattern.