Recent study of children joining reception class

While I agree ‘readiness’ is probably overplayed and used as an excuse to delay…

… potty training from birth is pointless. As you discovered, as they weren’t out of nappies until 2 anyway!

To be fair, I also tried to potty train young.

Then I received advice from the health service that starting young can cause problems later on with continence, so to stop and wait for signs of readiness.

So we took a short hiatus.

Then the next bit of advice from the health service was "why are you wanting for signs of readiness? You just need routine" so we followed that and it didn't work. We were consistent to the T. It caused so much stress.

Then when we found out my son was autistic they recommended we speak to ERIC. I did and also did their webinar and everything that was said was contradictory.

Don't wait until signs of readiness, go to a routine, unless a routine causes apprehension and then wait for signs of readiness. Always change your child's nappy in the bathroom so they can associate the bathroom with toileting, except if the bathroom is a sensory nightmare for your child and then don't as it will cause trauma. Just get rid of nappies completely because they wick too much wee away for your child to notice, with the exception of if your child gets extremely distressed by being wet as crisis point isn't going to teach them anything. Never let them poo in a nappy unless they will only poo in a nappy and then allow them to poo in a nappy until they're showing signs of readiness. Always tell your child what to do unless your child has a PDA profile and then telling them what do do will just cause anxiety.

The stuff they were saying was all common sense stuff but didn't actually help us SEN parents or parents who's children were still not toilet trained by age 5. It just offered more confusion.

So between the NHS switching up their advice in what felt like an overnight 180, it feels like you can't get consistent support externally either.

I potty trained my son when he was 3 but he really struggled with it, all poos in pants for a full year. Wet and soiling accidents were common for him until he was 6/7 (he was under incontinence team at the hospital) he still has the occasional accident now and he is nearly 9.

He didn't go into reception in nappies but as someone has said before in the thread, the stat included children who had accidents - so he would have been included in that metric if he had been in the sample group.

My daughter on the other hand got potty training almost immediately with no issues.

I understand that this is about general trends and figures but I do think we need to not paint parents/children with a broad brush.

I have to say both my kids use Americanisms for most things - candy, trash etc. They have always had extremely limited screen time but it's just so pervasive!

Recently I've read two good books that are very informative and trying to explain what is happening. You might enjoy trading them, OP. One is a very underrated book by a British professor Sue Gerhardth- Why Love Matters, and the other is by Gabor Mate - Hold onto your kids.

It's a very complex picture but ultimately societies are changing too fast, there's no communities/ villages helping with child rearing anymore, looking after children is seen as a low paid, low skill job or even a non-job, the parents have far too much on their plates + they themselves have been brought up by busy, uninvolved parents. And the brand new digital world. We are all addicted and depleted by the little computers in our hands.

As someone who is very conscience about my parenting, always reading and trying to do better, I've noticed the pressure from both dc's peers and grown-ups too who are hinting my child is somehow behind because he's never done proper gaming and doesn't watch YT. We are part of this society and even if we don't think it's right we feel pressured to follow to an extent.
If you compare the happiness and behaviour of children in the first world to 'poorer' (peaceful) places, less exposed to the ways of the modern world, it will be very clear what benefits children the most.

Yes, so important. I worry about the introduction of screens in outside life too. Children get so much out of seeing their patent interact with the person taking the money in the supermarket, getting the chance to buy their own sweets etc.
I've seen so many people on Mumsnet say how they think the introduction of machines is great as they don't have to interact with anyone.

DS started reception in September and none of these behaviours are true for his cohort. We are lucky to live in an affluent area, and he attends a small nurturing prep, where all of the children either had sahms or nannies in the early years, and part-time preschool from age 2, and school-based nursery from age 3 (so just school hours and term-time). Some parents are 2 ft working parents, some are 1 ft and 1 pt, some are 1 ft and 1 sahp. Everyone in the year is very physically active and able, and everyone is toilet trained. There are a few Americans but even those children tend to use British words rather than Americanisms.

I don't doubt those reports in the OP though, I'm sure there is a correlation between socio-economic factors and school readiness, and that these issues are a problem in certain schools. Whenever the topic of private schools comes up it's often considered a waste of money at primary stage, but there is definitely a value for DS in that his teacher and TA can focus on teaching and not have to spend time dealing with nappies or helping with very basic life skills.

I have been on a number of discussions on MN where posters have debated with me how different 'standards' of parenting will bring about different outcomes. There is a significant proportion of society that literally do believe that 'all fed, nobody dead' is enough. They don't think children need enriching experiences or very frequent interaction. They will put them in front of a screens or encourage them to play for long periods of time alone so they can get on with other stuff. You see it in restaurants and shopping centres where kids are given a tablet to keep them quiet. Toddlers and even young children wondering around with dummies in their mouths constantly.

Many nurseries simply aren't equipped to single handedly raise a baby into a young child that's ready for school. Parents feel that the nursery should do the grunt work because that's where the child spends the majority of their time.

Children starting reception now wouldn't have been walking during lockdown. Sure, the parents may have been affected but blaming lockdown rather than the actual tangible fallouts we are still seeing today in services, funding and early years setting is more valuable than hyperbolic statements.

It's probably a combination of many things.

Long assessment times coupled with less spaces at specialist schools means there are more children starting school in mainstream with additional needs than before.

Of course there are some 'lazy', misinformed or overwhelmed parents who don't potty train or prepare children for school. I suspect the reduction in access to support services such as sure start play a sizable part.

Can we scream this ten times louder, please? The minimising of the very, very real damage caused by lockdowns has begun in earnest. Those who made the decisions about lockdowns (i.e. government ministers) have very comfortable lifestyles and homes, and forget how the other half live; and some of them don't even know, as they were born into wealth. Lockdown certainly did not affect their lives, and people from the Prime Minister downwards simply ignored the rules anyway; probably a lot more than we know about.

As for kids being unable to climb stairs; as they were ordered to stay at home, how about those who lived in bungalows, or flats, or high-rise flats where it's either twenty flights of stairs, or the lift? How would they practise stairs? Going by a literal reading of the absolute fucking crap which Saint Boris was telling us to follow in the early stages, venturing outside your front door was forbidden; and if you did, you were a ruthless granny killer, and a selfish arsehole.

Yes, why on earth would people think reduced access to this wouldn't have long term effects?

disagree.

Indeed, and this would suggest some physical issues that haven't been able to be addressed for whatever reason.

Very true!

We all know how difficult it is to actually get help with this kind of thing. Attentive parents who've noticed a problem and sought support are often left to it, languishing on some waiting list or other.

Actually a really important part of language development is hearing other people talk to each other. So those trips to the grocery store, story time at the library, trips to the playground ect… are really important parts of speech development. There’s been quite a bit of research into how the pandemic caused an increase in speech delays, the two are undoubtedly linked.

I know of nursery teachers in private settings who complain about “affluent neglect” - this certainly isn’t confined to those of lower socioeconomic/economic status.

children were ignored by hard working parents before, but left to play rather than left to screens

It's very hard for me to believe that reception children can't climb stairs.

not as much at all.

People have become way too obsessed with "readiness" when it comes to toilet training. I see it on here all the time. People seem to have lost sight of the fact that humans of all ages form habits and preferences when it comes to toileting; if you've gone for three years doing every crap in a nappy, you may well find it very hard to crap with a nappy off and may resist fiercely any attempts to get you to do it. The fact that people are literally waiting until the age when kids say "No" to everything you suggest is not helping.

I did "potty practice" with my babies from birth, pretty much (if they are going to pee when you take their nappies off, why not keep a potty next to the nappy changing area and just make it a normal part of the routine from day one, rather than getting soaked and blaming the baby?), and they gradually took over control of the process, with daycare taking over once they started going there. They were out of nappies completely by around the second birthday.

Knew

Whilst I don't doubt that there are lazy parents, I think the inability to get GP appointments, parents not being taken seriously about their children's difficulties and unable to get an ECHP for love nor money and schools lack of funding so unable to spot/care/support children with differing needs.

I tried to potty training DC1 at 2.5 years, never went back to nappies but they were having several accidents daily (6 in reception/y1 and 2). I got them assessed privately for any physical issues but HV's, GP's won't do anything until DC are 7! I expressed concern around their behaviours and was dismissed constantly as DC was above average intelligence, so again I had to have them privately assessed for SEN. I am not a lazy parent, I have fought tooth and nail for my DC but my DC would be included in the figures.

Even now i struggle with the school taking me seriously about DC needs despite them seeing a bright kid who is now really struggling because of their rigidity and failing to implement reasonable adjustments.

I disagree. My parents, in the 1950s, were poor. A 3 day week for my father was common. Work was in short supply. My brother and I had library books and were encouraged in every way. Terry nappies were hardwork. Potty training meant less drudgery. TVs weren’t around. We played outdoors and indoors. Parents interacted with you. We had no expectations of money and new things. But, children were able to communicate, take themselves to the toilet etc. And many, in my school on a council estate, passed the 11plus. There were no nurseries to help out. Mums did work hard, in the home and out of it. And endured hardships. We were happy and new nothing else.
It is a parenting choice issue from people who won’t be parents.

The elephant in the room is also high levels of inbreeding amongst certain populations which means these children will never master basic skills. It needs to be addressed.