So angry - music group wants to exclude nannies

mad.

hello threebob

I knew I'd written a load of crap and was hoping the thread would die so i didn't have to retract but never mind!

still waiting for completion date on flat. once we have that we'll book our flights and shipping. SHould be early September. Hurrah!

fed up with hanging around now and want to get on with it....

Succinct this, just registering at the OP. Ridiculous.

British Suzuki Website
Quote from their official website: "Parents have a very important role to play in the education of a Suzuki music student. Even before lessons begin, they are encouraged to play recordings of classical music to their young children. Once lessons start, they are expected to attend the lessons, take notes as directed by the teacher and supervise practice at home, including ensuring that the child listens to the pieces he or she is playing, every day."

A nanny is working in loco parentis and therefore I can not see why they would be excluded from a group with the above policy, as the nanny could: attend the lessons, take notes, supervise practice, ensuring that the child listens to pieces.

As they are a registered charity, I wondered what the Charity Commission would think of this... discrimination. Alas, it appears that charities do not have comply with Human Rights Act - see details

So it seems to me that they are legally able to decide who attends a group, though as I say above, as a nanny is in loco parentis, I don't agree with them 'banning' nannies.

Oh, Mrs J - our first row! How will I face you now in NZ?

You must be coming soon now.

no I know ignore me on Suzuki classes

my views have totally been coloured by a couple of frankly weird people I know who teach them who are obviously in the minority, and this topped it all off. I just got irritated with applying the same idea to 3/4 year olds and went off on a rant

am suitably told off by threebob & adamum

Just wanted to say, although I agree this particular Suzuki group is clearly daft, don't assume they are all like this. My daughter learns piano with a Suzuki teacher and loves it - we don't hothouse her at all, she plays five minutes a day and never has to be pressured into going to the piano. When our nanny took my daughter to lessons if we were sick/busy the teacher was delighted and involved her too. It can be a really really fun way to do music. Honestly!

But, surely, if the carer (nanny in this case) looks after the child some 50 or 60 hours a week, surely she is the one who should be going.

Why can't the carer who already looks after the child full time take on that commitment? I can possibly understand that thinking if the carer only looks after the child a few hours a week and those hours are spent at the Suzuki class.

Working parents need a different sort of music group to Suzuki - the parental commitment is huge, and if the class is when you work, then it will never work. So it's not discrimination - they are just being upfront about the method.

I don't actually think it's discriminatory against working parents. It is discriminatory against children of working parents. Agree with F and Z, I don't think it's illegal. But, really, what planet do they live on?

It's not illegal, or against his human rights, or anything. They can take who they like at their groups. It is annoying, and all that, but let's not get carried away now.

I have tried several times to come up with a response to this one and keep having to rub them out.

To summarise:

Leader of group is an arse.

Suzuki has it's strengths and weaknesses like any method of learning anything. It's based on learning to talk - and that's not considered unnatural or creating people that all sound the same.

I run music classes and will take mums, dads, nannies, grandparents, friends of family anyone. On a personal level I would prefer the same person each week, but life isn't like that, and I would never ban people on the basis of their carer.

Of course it discriminates against working parents so do lots of things, looks like that's Suzuki out for us then (bit of a relief one less thing to feel guilty about!)

that is bonkers.
And possibly illegal?

What a bunch of twits

OMG

and i thought it wad thechildren who were supposed to benefit from the group? regardless of who was looking after them

OUTRAGOUSE

I would not be going back (as a parent) to a class where the leader is SOOOOO narrow minded.

I have NEVER herd of classes / groups etc where ONLY PARENTS were welcome....

there are always nannies / child minders / grandparents etc joining in too.... which is lovely

I cant believe it its shocking!

BTW surely it must be against you childs human rights to be excluded because his legal parenst is unavaliable to take him? lol

MrsJC's explanation of the Suzuki method: tiny children schooled in how to play tiny violins in a totally mechanical and unmusical way like a bunch of automatons. So much so that few grow up to continue playing and enjoying music - it's just another thing to tick off the to do list.

Generally attended by hothoused children with interfering competitive parents, and taught by - if I may borrow the fabulous phrase Marina - Stalinist fusspots

let them go to a fun musical class and enjoy it! much more chance then that music will become a lifelong joy rather than a dreary rounds of exam result boasting and tediousness.

nice to see mumsnet and nannyjob getting on for a change!

So, does it start with an o or a c? I'm thinking o.

pmsl at "Stalinist fusspots"