To be really cross that David Cameron wants to limit useage of Sure Start Centre to families on low incomes.

[Housewife2010]

I have used them for the last 3 years & the majority of the mothers there are middle class. If they didn't go, the places I go to would be almost enmpty.
I use them a lot and my children have got a lot out of the classes/events there. We may not be poor, but our household income has dropped a lot since I gave up work to bring up our children. It is very helpful to be able to take them to some free classes and meet other local families.

But that is his point - restrict the usage, and then say they are not popular or providing value for money, and then scrap them altogether.

People on middle incomes are screwed under this government.

The daft thing is that he's referring to him & Sam as "middle class"! If he's middle class what can the rest of us be?

Whilst I see your point, I agree with what DC is saying. The trouble is the people who these centres are aimed at may not be encouraged to turn up if they are alienated by the middle-class mothers there (not purposely, but YKWIM).

I am generalising, but these groups will probably make no difference at all to the wellbeing and general success of m/c children, they'll be just fine without them. But they can potentially be very good news for the underprivileged. I imagine that's the theory anyway.

If middle-class means personal wealth of £30million and an Eton education, then yes, limit the use of sure-start....

But cat, I suspect that if you limit useage to lower income groups, then these opportunities simply won't be used, and then they will be removed altogether. Certainly, give PRIORITY to lower income families, but if they are not taking up the places, then why not allow so-called middle-class families to use them, and safe-guard the facility. Without a high up-take, they will be simply shut down.

I also resent his phrase "sharp-elbowed middle-class families" as though just because you're middle class, you are willing to push others out of your way to maximise your own child's opportunities. I find that very insulting tbh.

Tricky because obv its better that they are restricted than go altogether but some people will have a need for them that isnt shown up by their household income - so maybe restrict by money and referral from HV etc? Dont know.

but surely Every Child Matters? The Sure Start centres were indeed set up for underpriviliged children.These children could socialise in a fun and educational setting in order for them to have the basic academic and social skills in place prior to starting school.Fresh fruit is always served and basic nutrition and hygiene information is given out.But,the parents of the children these centres were set up for do fail to materialise.Perhaps they feel intimidated by 'officialdom'? Embarrassed by their own lack of skills? Or perhaps they just can't be arsed to give their kids a better start in life than they had.Perhaps the lure of Jeremy Kyle is too great and they would rather their children follow in their own fucked up footsteps.

YANBU

I have personal and professional experience of surestart and feel that they provide a service for all. It isn't just the less affluent that benefit.

Agree that restricted use of sure start makes a mockery of 'every child matters'.

Can you link to some info on this please?

Unfortunately, I think a lot of the kids who would really benefit from these schemes are the ones whose parents won't take them, and therefore they will become moribund.

I dont see how stopping certain people going will make other people want to go more. If you want to take your baby to baby signing for example, you will.

Yeah, he's real middle class.

This guy is getting as bad as Bush, Jr. for putting his foot in his mouth.

Yes.
Get your nose out of the bloody trough Housewife and fund your own stuff.
SS facilties will indeed close down when everyone becomes aware of the fact that they are indeed used and abused by people too tight to pay for their own affairs.

Good.

Sure Starts have by and large been a complete waste of time and money.

They are yet another example of the middle classes getting other (poorer) people to pay for things that they can and should do for themselves - setting up and running nursery groups, subsidising museum entry, Arts Council funding etc etc.

I don't know if I am completely barking up the wrong tree, and may get howled down, but anyway...

If SS facilites were set up for poorer families, but were 'hijacked' by the middle class mummies, surely that would put off the lower income (and lower class possibly) mothers using the facilities as well, through feeling intimidated.

So, if better off mothers are not allowed to use the facilities, then the poorer mums (who SS was designed for in the first place) will then start using the facility.

Just going on my feelings of utter inedequacy and fear going to playgroups as a teenage mother in an afluent area - was intimidated by the older, MC mums (who did curl their lip at me) so I simply stopped going.

OR - and this is probably the truth - this is the thin end of the wedge and SS will be a distant memory 5 years hence (the ultimate plan, essentially).

restricting it would kill it off in our town as it is a predominantly more affluent area. Remove the bulk of the footfall and the council would probably close it which would alienate those who need the services further.

The ss around my way are used all the time by the Jeremy Kyle, watching council estate dwellers[rolls eyes] and in all honesty,if you can afford to pay for your baby signing classes or whatever you should ..

It probably would actually LittleBlueElly as it can be intimidating if a centre is full of a certain sort of people. I used to run a playgroup in a very mixed area that was very much a tale of 2 halves and people just didnt mix much between the groups.

But as mentioned before the centres need to do more outreach in tandem with that.

Don't be so bloody rude, Moondog.

I do fund activities for my children - £25 a week for Waterbabies which is a lot! It does help that I can take them to additional activities which are free. Especially as I no longer work. I hardly abuse them. If people like me didn't go most of my local SS Centres would be empty!
My SS centre has twice a year feedback sessions where it asks parents what they think of the centre & what they want. I have been twice. Each time only 3 or 4 other parents bothered to turned up - and they were the type that Moondog would tell to get back into their troughs!

Maybe it depends where the SS centres are ..mine is in the middle of our council estate ..so its a bit no go for the MC mummies

£25/week?!

I just paid for 20 swimming lessons, 10 for each girl, for an entire term.

£70.

I have a 1 year old & a 3 year old. The classes are small & Waterbabies are expensive but very good.