Page 7 | To think there needs to be a public inquiry into child development

MaryMaryVeryContrary · 2024-05-19T10:53:49+00:00

It really seems like we have a looming societal crisis in terms of child development and therefore the quality of the public in 10-20 years time. Experienced teachers across the board seem to be reporting an overwhelming increase in delayed, aggressive and disruptive children. I’m extremely worried about how this will impact society when they become adults - it seems (as a guess) at least a tenth of children will be incapable of work of any kind, and many more will need copious amounts of support to live any kind of responsible life. AIBU to think we need an urgent public inquiry into this and what is going on? It seems to be the elephant in the room and anybody who tries to discuss it is shouted down. I’m sure some of it is due to cuts in services but surely that can’t account for it all - it’s very sudden and extremely alarming.

Notoyoutube · 20/05/2024 12:02

I think this is the issue with alot of your thread though. 'We need to do a study and fund out x y z.' But we have no statistics to compare it to from the past. You clearly don't believe in ND. It's common knowledge the raise in diagnosis is due to more understanding medically of ND adults that were missed in previous years and DC that were not seen during covid.

We actually have a growing working population. If schools are failing why is that? An improvement in parenting?

You said yourself, if you didn't do as expected, you feared violence from your parents. Children feel safer now. Yes they may feel more confident in expressing themselves. But then many learn how to behave appropriately rather than suppressing their emotions. Is that a bad thing? Alot of the issues society face at the moment are from troubled adults and previous patenting styles and teaching.

Original poster

MaryMaryVeryContrary · 20/05/2024 12:01

SprinkleofSpringShowers · 20/05/2024 11:56

It's all very well saying we need to put more funding into x, y or z. But if we have a reduced number of taxpayers, the money isn't available and even if it was, the NHS couldn't grow quick enough to meet the need.

And honestly, it’s often those who won’t recognise this that advocate most for all the services they’re entitled to.

Show quote history

I also agree with this unfortunately and that’s why I’m worried about the future. We will have the dual effect of both an increase in dependents which in turn mean even less tax payers to support them but even more need of provision. I think it’s really scary actually. Even if we don’t focus on disability ‘proper’ and just on mental health rendering people ‘incapable of working’, it will be enormous. Maybe an inquiry is useless as we’re doomed? I really hope there’s something we can do.

OP posts:

SprinkleofSpringShowers · 20/05/2024 11:56

FastAquaDog · 20/05/2024 11:52

We currently have a 5th or just under, of the working aged population not looking for work due to long-term sickness. Many of whom are aged below 35 and the reason for long-term sickness is "mental health" or ND.

It's all very well saying we need to put more funding into x, y or z. But if we have a reduced number of taxpayers, the money isn't available and even if it was, the NHS couldn't grow quick enough to meet the need.

Show quote history

It's all very well saying we need to put more funding into x, y or z. But if we have a reduced number of taxpayers, the money isn't available and even if it was, the NHS couldn't grow quick enough to meet the need.

And honestly, it’s often those who won’t recognise this that advocate most for all the services they’re entitled to.

FastAquaDog · 20/05/2024 11:52

MaryMaryVeryContrary · 20/05/2024 11:29

This is brutal but I don’t know how to escape the fact there is finite support a society can provide to dependants, if only because if (for example) 1 in 15 people need a carer, thats 3 people in 15 either disabled and in need of care, or caring for somebody who does (assuming 2 carers per person). That’s a fifth of people. Can we as a society manage this?

1 in 15 seems high but it tallies with reports that around this number of children, particularly in more deprived schools, are 4 or 5 and either have little or no language and significant needs beyond just a little extra support.

Like I said though this is a crude estimate on my part but that’s why we need a proper investigation, to assess the numbers and plan accordingly.

I agree a full investigation would be too long and sluggish and a task force may be better. I can’t see it happening - but I can see posts on here in 15-20 years wondering why on earth we kicked the can down the road and deploring the extreme crisis in social care.

Show quote history

We currently have a 5th or just under, of the working aged population not looking for work due to long-term sickness. Many of whom are aged below 35 and the reason for long-term sickness is "mental health" or ND.

It's all very well saying we need to put more funding into x, y or z. But if we have a reduced number of taxpayers, the money isn't available and even if it was, the NHS couldn't grow quick enough to meet the need.

NotReallyOnFire · 20/05/2024 11:44

I think these is also extra pressure on society because the medical services are keeping elderly people alive long beyond the point of total dependence, and then there is huge pressure on kids and families because practically everyone is expected to go to university now. Mums have to work and at the same time are held responsible for everything while being constantly critised no matter what they do.

It feels as though the demands on us all are totally impossible to meet.

What happened to the days of respectable blue collar employment?

Sorry, but I really do wonder what is going on.

Notoyoutube · 20/05/2024 11:41

I was at school in the 90s and 2000s, I struggled massively during childhood. I struggled in society in early adulthood. I spent most of my teen years suicidal. I then learnt my own way to cope in the working world. I now know I have ADHD and understand myself much better. But I was quiet at school so who cares? I could have done much much better at school if I had a diagnosis and understanding.

Original poster

MaryMaryVeryContrary · 20/05/2024 11:41

BertieBotts · 19/05/2024 21:26

Possibly, but I think this is a very tiny number; there are about 3,000 abortions on medical grounds per year (and bear in mind many of these would be non survivable conditions, rather than survivable-but-disabling like Down's Syndrome) whereas about 60,000 babies are born premature (which is about 10% of all births) so roughly 20 times more.

The last time I was on one of these threads, someone pointed out that there has been a shift in that diseases like Polio and Measles used to cause disabilities in children but because these have largely been eradicated by vaccination, those kinds of effects are seen less often and so this is a sort of shift away from physical towards cognitive impairments instead.

Also, it's not just neonatal mortality which has increased, child/youth mortality in general has improved (presumably healthcare, vaccines, improved safety and supervision) so that in 1970, 24 children out of every 1000 born did not survive to adulthood, with 21 of those not surviving to age 5, whereas in 2021 it is only 5 out of every 1000 children born who die before they reach adulthood, and 4 of these are under 1 year old (there is not enough of a difference in the data to report separate figures for 1-5 year olds). So there are more surviving children and statistically they are more likely to be from backgrounds where they will be disadvantaged, more likely to have delays, attention issues, behavioural issues etc. This doesn't sound like much because it's about 1.5%, but if an average secondary school has about 1000 pupils, that is 15 pupils throughout that school, a primary school has about 300 so 5 pupils in any primary school, who would not have been there in the 60s, 70s, 80s. These children are very vulnerable - so vulnerable that in previous generations they might actually not have survived.

And yes age of parents is relevant, I heard something the other day I think it was on a podcast, saying that the current estimate is that there is an increase of approximately 10% in rates of autism and ADHD due to age of parents. So that is quite a significant increase, although it's not like it's doubling (or more) which is what people seem to want to make it out to be. Apparently this is because the parts of the brain which are affected in these disorders are fairly "new" in terms of evolution - the genetic "templates" for them are less clear and so they can more easily be disrupted by gene mutations, which are fairly common - if a mutation is significant enough to disrupt foetal development massively, then it causes rejection of the fertilised egg, or if this happens at a slightly later stage of development then you would have a miscarriage, if a mutation is more minor that the foetus is allowed to develop, then it might not be clear unless genetic testing is done and then mutations such as those causing neurodevelopmental disorders are so subtle that we cannot yet reliably identify them. There is some research into genes which are involved in the development of ADHD and autism, but it is much more complicated, it's not like Cystic Fibrosis for example where you can have a clear marker and a test to see if you're a carrier for it, there are hundreds and maybe thousands of individual genes which can contribute to individual cases. It seems like we are a while off being able to understand the genetics of these things well.

Show quote history

A good post however bear in mind the prematurity statistics include any birth before 37 weeks. My oldest was born at 36, has no disabilities but would be in those statistics. Generally speaking a baby born after 34 weeks is unlikely to suffer long term effects from prematurity. Only a small % of those will be micro preemies born before 28 weeks and with much higher risks.

I have noticed (purely anecdotal again) that quite a few mums I know with ND kids who have severe needs, had multiple miscarriages before or after conceiving them.

OP posts:

Original poster

MaryMaryVeryContrary · 20/05/2024 11:37

Notoyoutube · 20/05/2024 11:35

Not all children are capable of your expectations and they never would have been. DC like that have always been in society, you're just not used to seeing them as they were previously locked away.

Children were not routinely locked away in the late 90s and 2000s. There’s a 30 year gap between commonplace institutions and this issue taking a steep upward curve.

OP posts:

Notoyoutube · 20/05/2024 11:35

Not all children are capable of your expectations and they never would have been. DC like that have always been in society, you're just not used to seeing them as they were previously locked away.

Original poster

MaryMaryVeryContrary · 20/05/2024 11:32

luckylms · 20/05/2024 09:19

Dear any SEN parent who maybe reading this thread.

you are wonderful, you are doing your best and it was not your fault.
the fight is real and not everyone will understand.
Also don’t worry that your child is in a nappy too long or non verbal, don’t worry if they haven’t quite got the hang of using a fork they will all achieve their own things in their own time.
they will be wonderful regardless and are all individuals with their own adaptions needed but doesn’t mean they can’t thrive. Some may never learn to read but they will learn other things and everything they achieve will be because of you.
your not the cause of their problems but your are the cause of their challenges they over come no matter how small or big.

See I find this incredibly patronising and detrimental in that it encourages us to turn a blind eye to a looming crisis in favour of Insta-worthy quotes about special parents and love conquering everything.

Have you read some of the utterly desperate posts on here by parents who have not slept in years, have their house wrecked regularly, can’t even do so much as a day out because their child has no concept of risk and runs into the road or attacks them?

It matters if children can’t speak, it matters if they can’t read, it matters if they can’t fully participate in society. Let’s not pretend.

OP posts:

Original poster

MaryMaryVeryContrary · 20/05/2024 11:29

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

This is brutal but I don’t know how to escape the fact there is finite support a society can provide to dependants, if only because if (for example) 1 in 15 people need a carer, thats 3 people in 15 either disabled and in need of care, or caring for somebody who does (assuming 2 carers per person). That’s a fifth of people. Can we as a society manage this?

1 in 15 seems high but it tallies with reports that around this number of children, particularly in more deprived schools, are 4 or 5 and either have little or no language and significant needs beyond just a little extra support.

Like I said though this is a crude estimate on my part but that’s why we need a proper investigation, to assess the numbers and plan accordingly.

I agree a full investigation would be too long and sluggish and a task force may be better. I can’t see it happening - but I can see posts on here in 15-20 years wondering why on earth we kicked the can down the road and deploring the extreme crisis in social care.

OP posts:

Notoyoutube · 20/05/2024 11:25

I'd imagine in terms of playing out there will be an element of survivers bias too. The sensible kids made it into school more often. I know my DH was incredibly hyperactive as a child, as the youngest of 5 he was told to play out from the age of 3 supervised by his siblings. He was hit by a car twice and spent long stretches in hospital/out of school with broken bones.

As PPs have said, DC like my autistic DS wouldn't have been in mainstream school a decade ago. I remember at school there being lots of teaching assistants for kids with very low level struggles. Now teaching assistants are supervising much more complex DC, some with high care needs eg still in nappies, needing help with feeding.

endofthelinefinally · 20/05/2024 10:24

One of my dc was in a class of 30 7 year olds of whom 10 had severe to moderate learning difficulties and/or behavioural problems. How on earth is a teacher and 1 TA supposed to deal with that on a daily basis? It was chaos every single day. This was 18 years ago, so things have been deteriorating for a long time.

ScottishScouser · 20/05/2024 10:07

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

TheMoment · 20/05/2024 10:01

SpudleyLass · 19/05/2024 18:09

I beg your pardon?

''Extra 500 a month for diagnosed children''. Can tell where you've pulled this from, as if you haven't even said which diagnosis supposedly gets parents this.

Its certainly not autism.

Show quote history

Poster is referring to DLA (Disability Living Allowance) - financial claims for Children who have extra needs.

NB: you don’t need a diagnosis to claim DLA.

VereeViolet · 20/05/2024 09:57

Once at school they often do after school clubs, wrap around care and so are still in a highly regulated environment.There is little free play. I think a lot of the behaviour issues are due to simple rebellion to not being able to do what they want. Even summer holidays many children are still in regulated activities.

I agree that this is part of it. I think kids and people in general need leisure time or at least time away from groups and structure - free time when they can do and think what they like and be relaxed. Of course, the fundamental reason that children need to be in structured activities is because the parents need/want to work.

Then when families do have free time, there are many things that need to get done, including eating/cleaning/shopping/organising/chores, so it’s not necessarily very relaxed or emotionally refreshing. To make life simpler, parents opt to hand over a screen instead of dealing with a tantrum or use a ready meal instead of cooking from scratch (which is reasonable if you are tired and stressed).

Basically, I think life would be better for everyone, and especially children, if the world was a little slower. People blame capitalism for this, and maybe that’s partially true, but I think it’s more complex than that. There’s a cultural expectation that people be productive all the time and competing in the marketplace. I feel that raising children is often seen as something to outsource, but teachers can’t do everything.

OutlawZeroHours · 20/05/2024 09:26

Ok I see people have read my comment at judgemental.

I'm an ND person with ND children. One autistic, one has ADHD.

However, I was also an early years teacher, worked in a range of mainstream setting and a specialist centre based in a mainstream school for children with profound speech and language difficulties. I have met lots of NT children who have never painted at home, don't have dough or plasticine, jigsaws, brio or days out, their mums apparently prefer iPads as they're tidy and easier to put away. Because the mums only did these activities at nursery themselves some don't even know it's a good idea to do them at home.

My kids were given a balance of screen time and other activities - we did swimming, ballet, martial arts, gymnastics, drama clubs, I worked full time AND am a single mum, but took them to activities several nights a week and did art, crafts & board games on other evenings.

Is it judgemental if there is a lot of evidence that something is bad for people and you say it out loud?

Should we not tell people smoking when pregnant is bad for babies because it's judgemental?

Should we not tell people drinking more than 14 units a week is unhealthy because it's judgemental? .

I'm curious as to what's judgemental and what's informative? How should I discriminate?

luckylms · 20/05/2024 09:19

Dear any SEN parent who maybe reading this thread.

you are wonderful, you are doing your best and it was not your fault.
the fight is real and not everyone will understand.
Also don’t worry that your child is in a nappy too long or non verbal, don’t worry if they haven’t quite got the hang of using a fork they will all achieve their own things in their own time.
they will be wonderful regardless and are all individuals with their own adaptions needed but doesn’t mean they can’t thrive. Some may never learn to read but they will learn other things and everything they achieve will be because of you.
your not the cause of their problems but your are the cause of their challenges they over come no matter how small or big.

FastAquaDog · 20/05/2024 08:45

I think the majority of posters talking about 'back in the day' parenting and lifestyles are talking about 50 plus years ago. More than half a century ago so not particularly relevant to compare to.

Fivebyfive2 · 20/05/2024 07:56

Tumbleweed101 · 20/05/2024 07:01

I think that childhood is just too heavily managed now. Children don’t get free time and when they do it’s directed into games/phones etc. Many spend significant amounts of time in childcare which has strict routines and the children are always on someone else’s agenda. The space is set up for children so they aren’t seeing what adults do and learning from adults day to day tasks. They might get trips out but overall they are isolated from wider society. They are with care givers who have a lot of others to care for.

Once at school they often do after school clubs, wrap around care and so are still in a highly regulated environment.There is little free play. I think a lot of the behaviour issues are due to simple rebellion to not being able to do what they want. Even summer holidays many children are still in regulated activities.

They need time to be bored, time with their family and down time doing nothing.

The use of screens should be limited in young children. It’s scary how many babies and toddlers are expert at using them.

I agree with you on this!

Fivebyfive2 · 20/05/2024 07:53

cadburyegg · 19/05/2024 23:06

Lower infant mortality. Off the top of my head, I can think of 4 children who had significant problems either whilst their mother was pregnant or during labour/birth, or in infancy. In the "old days" these pregnancies would not have been viable, and the babies would not have survived. All 4 children have some degree of developmental delay, ranging from never being able to walk or talk, to being able to be in a mainstream school albeit for only 2 hours a day. My dad's youngest sister, born in the 1940s, was born disabled, and they just let her die in the hospital as an infant. I am NOT advocating for a return to that, obviously it is an amazing thing that medicine has come along in leaps and bounds allowing these children to live with a decent quality of life. But society is not set up nor accepting enough of disabled people, and SEN provision is so lousy.

On a different note entirely I think that there is a lot more permissive parenting which is dressed up as gentle parenting. I actually struggle a bit with discipline myself, I've got better but am not perfect. However, I have had to let friendships fade with two mums that I really liked and got on with, because neither of them would do any basic discipline with their children. I stopped seeing one of the mums after we went out for the day and she allowed her DD to push around and hurt my DS. Similar with the other mum, we went round her house and she allowed her DS to push my DS2 off his scooter then chase both DS1 and DS2 around the house with a large stick.

It is almost seen as normal now - I went to a wedding recently and another mum said that both of her children were so badly behaved they both needed 1:1 at all times, despite being NT and the oldest one was in reception, so presumably in a class of 25+.

My 6 year old is the only one out of his group of friends who doesn't have an Xbox. When I was younger Xboxes and expensive games consoles were only given to older teenagers, not KS1 children. People are shocked when I say my 9 year old still plays with playmobil, my mum's friend had the cheek to tell us it was "babyish". Many children are in front of tablets indefinitely or taken out to organised activities, either way ensuring they are constantly entertained and have instant gratification, particularly on an addictive device. This doesn't help them problem solve or figure out what to do when bored.

Being bored is seen as a Bad Thing which must be avoided at all costs. The weekends must be packed with endless instagrammable fun for the sake of #makingmemories.

The fuss so many parents make at the end of each school year when their darling child who is exceedingly popular with many friends, has been put in a class with only a few of them, oh dear however will they cope. So little accountability and blaming teachers for everything.

I don't want to de-rail too much but the point you made about kids playing with toys getting called "babyish" really struck a chord with me.

My son is 4.5, doesn't have a tablet, only watches certain things on telly and they're very definitely kiddy/pre school things (except maybe the 90s Winnie the pooh which I remember watching as a kid so must have been a bit older) It's what he's into, he hates anything "scary" and isn't interested in superheroes or anything yet. He loves Playmobil and figures in general, always has.

His "imaginative play" is often reenactments of bits from books, telly, things he's seen that day like people having a delivery 🤣 It's extremely repetitive and his set ups need to be "just right" he remembers exactly what Playmobil pirate has each colour bandana and if they're mixed up he will very insist on "fixing it". But it's great to join in with and just watch as he goes through it all.

My mil and another mum friend have both said to me I'm "keeping him young" and it wasn't said in a kind way, it kind of stung. I worry about him not fitting in as it is, without people making me feel bad for him playing with perfectly age appropriate stuff!

queenparrot · 20/05/2024 07:09

Underdiagnosed FASD.
Unparented children who are hopped up on processed and fast foods, with poor gut health and low serotonin as a consequence.
Ridiculous amounts of screen time.
Imitating the poor behaviours they see on whatever platform.
Some or all of the above.

Tumbleweed101 · 20/05/2024 07:01

I think that childhood is just too heavily managed now. Children don’t get free time and when they do it’s directed into games/phones etc. Many spend significant amounts of time in childcare which has strict routines and the children are always on someone else’s agenda. The space is set up for children so they aren’t seeing what adults do and learning from adults day to day tasks. They might get trips out but overall they are isolated from wider society. They are with care givers who have a lot of others to care for.

Once at school they often do after school clubs, wrap around care and so are still in a highly regulated environment.There is little free play. I think a lot of the behaviour issues are due to simple rebellion to not being able to do what they want. Even summer holidays many children are still in regulated activities.

They need time to be bored, time with their family and down time doing nothing.

The use of screens should be limited in young children. It’s scary how many babies and toddlers are expert at using them.

Redlettuce · 20/05/2024 06:46

I agree there seem to be more kids that struggle. But some of it will be because there are far fewer special schools than years ago.

Non verbal kids would have been in special schools 30 years ago as would many kids woth asd etc.

MrsMurphyIWish · 20/05/2024 06:36

Phone addiction is rife. We have a no phone policy at my school but that doesn’t matter - pupils have smart watches and I see the constant tapping and scrolling on there.