Wrap around care for those who don't work??

I hope that children that need it get free wraparound care and some food. In fact I love it that they do.

I thought you didn’t want a nanny state?

Nope, they are about getting parents into the workplace!

Personally I don't mind some getting it free and us paying, means tested = equal opportunity. The major problem we have in our area is that there are severe shortages of places at wraparound facilities and a lot of working parents literally can't send their kids because the places are being allocated to children who's parents don't work. This applies to nursery places too.

Yes agreed and especially with the advent of AI as a matter of economics, not just social ideals, we need to be turning out kids who can get jobs and compete with the brightest and best from China, Japan, India etc if any of us want a decent standard of living. It’s quite literally an investment not a freebie.

@Raisinsandweetabix you do realise that it’s these kids who will probably be paying your pension? Wouldn’t you like them to leave school with some decent GCSEs?

Yes, or even makes their life slightly better regardless of educational outcome

Well said.

If you want to just slag off your SiL @Raisinsandweetabix , then be upfront about it in your OP.

If you want to talk about details of a policy that has been released, then at least link to it, so people can have a look at what you are talking about.

The reality is people who don’t need to probably won’t be using breakfast club because they have such early starts. I work full time but try and avoid breakfast club as I don’t like the very early starts and my children definitely don’t. Most chaotic homes aren’t getting the kids out and ready for a 7.30 start even if they might benefit from it.

Due to transitional protection thousands of parents are earning more and will continue to due so until at the latest 2029 for those that are currently in year 7. Those younger will have FSM until they leave primary school.

Our kids are all better off if the kids of parents who are not cared for properly at home spend more time at school getting care than getting substandard care at home.

So it's for the good of society.

Would it be better for those 6 children if they were spending the time in a (probably) overcrowded chaotic house, possibly late for school often or arriving unfed?

Would it be better for the kids who's parents don't brush their teeth, to just have life long, preventable dental issues?

Or is the harm to those children acceptable collateral damage in order to punish their parents

Maybe it might create a generation of well educated, decently nourished, happy and engaged kids with decent qualifications and the chance of a rewarding place in society? God knows it would be nice to try at least…

What is this thread about? It’s starts on a premise that the children of non-working parents should not get wrap around care. Then it changes to your SIL is a lazy cow. Then it was the state shouldn’t be developing children when the parents arent doing it well. Now I think we’re on to a more general benefits bashing. Where are we at, do you want us to go through these one at a time or wait for your next diversion?

Do you always complain when other people get the same benefits that you do? Is it a kick in the teeth that wealthy people can use the NHS , or that people who live longer than you get more pensions?

Sounds like a positive idea, as long as they have figured out the logistics before brining it in.

So you think after schools clubs discourage parents from getting jobs? Not sure of the logic on that one. Or are you saying kids with SAHP shouldn't be allowed to attend them? Can you see any issues with that opinion?

Maybe have a glass of wine and sort out your relationship with your SIL rather than bitching about her on Mumsnet.

The thing is, if the jobless parents get the kids in a few hours of childcare, they can theoretically use that child free time to attend job interviews etc and become employed

I actually agree with you here.

It's not ok to not brush your kids teeth. Or give them shit and sugary food and drinks. It's not ok to not have a set bedtime and time to read and complete homework.

It's not ok to keep having kids when you can't parent sufficiently or take care of your own kids, whether that's financially or otherwise.

Parents need to take responsibility for their own children, so many adults just don't understand that. They grow up learning that everything should be done for you and that it's ok to not do anything with your life. If we all did that, there's be no schools, no healthcare, no infrastructure, clean water etc. They're happy to take but very reluctant to give.

Because there are lots of very low income deprived households where kids need support despite one, or even both, parents being off work.

Think of parents who are ill, disabled, addicts, mental heath issues, alcoholics, living in poverty, living in a refuge, being looked after by extended family, carers, in houses with domestic violence. Quite likely that one or more of them might not have a job but would we really deny the child a place at breakfast club if it significantly improves their educational outcome?

Agreed.

A lot of our staff already do extracurricular clubs on a voluntary basis for an hour or so after school. However I doubt many would be signing up to do until 6pm even if it is paid on top of their usual workload. Staffing is a huge problem already in the day to day running of the school - we’ve got lots of agency teachers and teaching assistants. Staff turnover is high like most schools.

Maybe duke this out with your SIL instead of tarring all non working mums with the same brush.

You just said in one of your posts why - chaotic homelives. Same as childcare for children 2+ to try and ensure better outcomes for deprived children

Are you having a bad day?

Completely agree
From reading the comments, there are people who are only too happy to run with that narrative.