My unreserved apologies(307 Posts)
It seems I have upset MN posters.
I am sorry if you have been upset by me. I apologise.
I wont do it again.
Thinking about it (always inadvisable with a Xenia post)
"We all know parents who work do best for their children and the chidlren of housewives have the worst outcomes of any in the UK" is a false opposition.
Surely the opposite of 'parents who work' is 'parents who are long term unemployed', not housewives?
And isn't the real correlation between educational attainmen of children and the educational attainment of their mothers - 'employment of the mother' may be a proxy measure for this, but is not an accurate one as it takes no account of the nature of the employment. The most significantly neglected children in the school I work in, in a deprived area,are in fact those where both parents are juggling 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet, and where the children are often left alone or with older or younger siblings for very significant periods of time out of school or in holidays. Those who have mums at home, by contrast, do better because there is someone feeding them, putting them to bed, talking to them, even reading to them and doing their homework with them.
But in the North London ghetto, such lives are probably unimaginable to you.
Xenia and Jabed are not the same person - one of them thinks SAHM are stupid lazy frumps whose children will fail and whose partners will leave them, and the other one doesn't know why people have children if they don't want to be at home with them!
Is Xenia joking? If not then she must be a very unhappy woman.
I don't think so Colleger. She is always saying stuff like that. It's all about the ££££ you see.
a) I don't think Xenia is joking.
b) I do believe her to be bitterly unhappy. Many of her opinions seem shaped by the fact that she is divorced / separated and thus the costs of putting (I think 4) children through private school has fallen on her shoulders.
I think Xenia has 5 DC and I think she's afforded the fees for all of them with a certain lightness of touch. She bought an island with petty cash.
I'm happy to start off teacher. I best fit Category 3.
1. DD1 has a very high 2.1.
2. The eldest four DC who have been through or are at university all attended or attend Oxford.
3. The eldest four who have taken A Levels have achieved 10 A*s and 6 As between them (stats skewed because 3 of the As predate the A* awards in 2010 and in a subsequent year would have been 2 A* and an A (I think), yielding 12 A*s and 4 As).
4. The eldest six who have taken GCSEs have achieved 56 A*s and 12 As between them. And one B.
I am a category 2er but my children are not old enough yet for GCSEs etc.
My mum was a clear Category 3.
- All 3 children went to Oxbridge.
- 2 1sts, 1 2.1, one went on to get a PhD
- No A or O-levels at less than an A. I think we have about 10 or 11 A-levels, 5 S-levels and 30 O-levels at As between us.
but then my mum is also an Oxbridge graduate - which seems to support the research that it is maternal level of education, not employment, that most influences educational outcomes for their children.
Category 3 is looking good then teacher
I didn't bother with AEAs.
Can't agree more.In fact, education and earning potential are not the same thing at all.A well educated mother will never be a bored frump and will bring her DC up better then any childminder/nursery would.
Out of interest are you and your siblings artsy or sciency or mixed?
We are all sciency.
My parents are both artsy...
I am an anomaly then, fortunately for me.
Let's hope my children are not...
How does that work I wonder? Interesting though. Actually DS1 went sciency early, against the trend.
Oooh, I like the way this thread has turned out (so far).
@yellowtip I'd like to claim that I'm too young to do this survey yet. But the truth is a mixture of me being still a little bit too young but also waiting till I was 30 to have my first child.
Since I am that dreadful thing a career woman who travels a lot, and even worse, one who is most definitely only doing it for the money and not for the love (well. I am definitely only doing it for the money and I certainly don't love what I do but I'm not bored by it either - I do the rather rare (in the context of my profession) thing that I do because my main thing in working life is living a little and not being bored) I suspect that we will not win any bouquets when I am in a position to complete the survey for one or all of my kids. I am undoubtedly a Bad Mother - this has been the clear opinion of the mummy mafia at the primary school since Dd1 started there. Ah well.
Mordion Category 3s can be Very Bad Mothers indeed. I'd actually prefer to be Category 1 but life didn't work that way so I'm a disconsolate Category 3 - and one of its bottom feeders at that.
I was just trying to de-rail the thread, but teacher outflanked me.
Ah, I see we are doing mothers as well. First generation of my family to go to university. Council flat upbringing, my mum was sick (dying - cancer in several bits one after the other) for most of my childhood and consequently I don't remember her working. Before she got sick she was first in service from the age of 14 (when her mum died) then she went into the army when she was old enough then after she left the army she was a civilian telephonist. I went to Cambridge, my younger sister went to UCL. I got a clean sweep of As for every exam, and got a very high 2:1 (I had more than enough firsts on individual papers to get a first overall but I had one 2:2 on a paper so that meant I could not get a first no matter how well I did on any other paper. Tant pis). My sister had a more spread set of public exam marks - As ad Bs at both O and A level and a CSE grade 2 in French. But she got a 2:1 in her degree too.
Basically my whole aim in life is for my kids to actually have a living mother into their twenties. It will be the first generation on either side of my family that has ever had that.
If it happens. Long way to go yet. DD2 is only 9.
But I think across your posts that you talk fondly of your young life and home? Is that right? That must inject more chance into any child than an arid bluestocking waving an impressive piece of paper.
I loved my parents yes. And I went to a great school. I could have done without the constant worry though. My mum and dad both told me I could do anything I wanted (although she wasn't keen on me going to Cambridge, she thought I'd find it too posh and I'd miss London too much) and that education was absolutely the most important thing. I believed them because, you know, why not? At that time, as you will remember, @yellow, we did have plenty of examples of people 'like me' who had got to the top in many many different fields, from business to the arts to politics to academia, through the power of education. It seemed a reasonable enough proposition in the early 80s. I didn't do what I really wanted to do though, and I do sort of regret that. My kids will have choices I didn't have and that's a good thing and makes it all worth while, I think.
Gosh, are we using just A level and university results to measure the success of our children? I was rather hoping my children would also be mentally stable, emotionally intelligent, good team workers, able to influence others ... and happy in their chosen careers.
My fondest hope for all my children (apart from the whole having a mum who doesn't die before they are done with uni) is that they should be TALL. After many years considering the issue I have realised that tallness is definitely the magic ingredient for both success and happiness. It trumps both maleness and talent (the other two big factors for s&h).
I am not tall.
Neither it seems, are my children and it looks like their destiny is to remain short (despite the fact that I married a very tall man).
It's desperately disappointing. Yet another instance in which I have failed as a mother.
I might buy a rack for Xmas. It's too late for the older two but they might yet be hope for teeny tiny DD2.
What I like to do when Xenia trots out statistics supporting her belief that SAHM are damaging their children is trot out some statistics on how much damage having parents that have gone through an acrimonious divorce does to children.
For example, see here or here. I could find many more examples if I wished. Children of divorce have higher rates of divorce themselves, higher rates of alcohol misuse, higher rates of mental health issues and, ironically for Xenia, are more likely to have low incomes.
I don't want this to cause any offence to any single parents but I am, hopeful, that it may make Xenia think again before rehashing the same old anti SAHM stuff over and over again with no consideration for who she offends.
Arid Bluestocking. <feels a name change coming on>
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.