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.

oh god i hope not. I run groups for PND mums at childdren's centres. Vulnerable is vulnerable, regardless of income ffs.

YABU

Becuase I wokred in a role fumnded by SS (in part) and mixing people together was huggely sueful in buildin g communities and giving the kids aspirations.

We did get lower income parents in quite effectively but it took hard work. I used to run a family group which due to the nature of my work was pretty exclusivevly accessed by lower income famillies (not exclusively available to but it was how it worked out within my remit nd geographical area). And from there people would come in to the building, and slowly see things going on and be encouraged to access things.

The SS scheme also made the bold decision toe mply a Mum who ahd previously needed support but was now looking for work- farr mroe effective to send into people than some MC educated eprson when trying to make ties (I used toe ven use my maiden name as was lcoal)

Then why complain about not getting other stuff for free?

You could easily ditch the Waterbabies and do several other activities for £25/week!

Incidentally, most leisure centres start swimming lessons at the age of 3. Again, much cheaper - £30-£40 for 10 lessons.

agree only middle class 'surrey mummies' in the ones i've gone to. close them down. keep them open in the poorer areas that really need them.

Or of course, SWC, being working class trying to do your best either

So anybody not on the breadline can't go and get advice about breastfeeding, or weaning, or speech therapy, or postnatel depression groups. I use it for all 4 of mine. DS1 goes to the play and stay and they are monitoring his (lack of) speech, I attend the postnatel group, and have been to the bf groups.

We earn over £20k, so would not be able to attend if this is rolled out.

Why can't they charge for activities, say a £1/2 for this and that. Low income families get it for free.

Why does it always boil down to money or class?

A middle income mum may have more need for it. It all comes down to personal circumstances imo.

Great, let's shove all the low income families into the "ghetto" playgroups then, shall we? defeats the entire point of every child matters IMO.

If they are so concerned that the facilities are being used by people who can afford to pay for them, why not charge a membership fee for usage of the services, but make it free for those on low incomes? You don't exclude anybody that way.

I use my children's centre loads and one of the things I love about it is the mix of people you get - and it's really inclusive, nobody is sneering at anyone!

Apparently our dads group has already been scrapped though because only middle class dads were going. I spoke to a few of the mums whose husbands used it and they said it was a shame as there were no other groups just for dads around and they had really enjoyed having an excuse "just to play" with the children. Not all the things that sure start helps with are related to having a low income.

Expat
I really enjoy Waterbabies & won't be giving it up. I love swimming with my 1 year old too. He could hardly be put in a class by himself! They both really enjoy the classes & will be continuing with them.
How much I spend on my children's swimming lessons isn't the issue here. This thread is about the SS centres and whether access to them should be limited due to your income.

Agree with charging a membership fee for those not in receipt of means tested benefits - seems a fair compromise. Although still have the referral from hvs for groups such as pnd etc.

smallwhitecat - it's not that being middle class is viewed as a crime...it's that being middle class means you/we should be able to stand on your own two feet, thank you very much, without poorer people's taxes going to wards helping little Jemima and Tarquin attend X and Y activity...

we had a mum using our service who turned up in tip=to-toe boden and a brand new merc. Her controlling abusive dh gave her not one penny to spend on herself or activities for her children. He'd buy her clothes and fill up car with petrol for her. Domestic violence, and severe post-natal depression - and no support from us because she's ''wealthy''??
Things are rarely black and white.

I'm in agreement with BertieBotts. If you stop 'middle income' families using SS centres, you end up with a two-tier early years set up, with poorer families using SS (or not!) and the rest attending their well-heeled NCT groups. I live in a large town and there is very little else available apart from waht's provided by those two organisations.

I'd be happy to pay for my use of SS facilities.

The baby massage at the Active Birth Centre is £12 a go. At the local surestart centre is £10 for a 6 week course.

Local surestart day nursery is half price of the local commercially run one.

Why should the government subsidise middle class (including high earners? - i have a friend whose DH works for an investment bank who has her DD at the surestart nursery as its cheaper for the same thing) - if middle class are allowed to use surestart they should be asked to pay full market price.

This was one of the stringest views I remember from all those election threads - people anxious that if the conservatives got in they would abolish Sure Start.

Sorry if I offended anyone with my last post, of course I could be completely wriong. I live somewhere which is close to a highly deproved area - city centre Gloucester, and know that SS is popular round here.

stretch, we get all of that at gp surgery.
why wouldn't you phone hv for all that ? i thought that was what hv's were for. its just a duplication of servcie.

Actually I see a big difference between health support eg breastfeeding / PND where everyone should have equal access, and "extras" such as baby massage where middle class mummies should be asked to pay the going rate.

Completely agree withh elliemental.

It isn't just those in reciept of benefits that need breastfeeding support, or suffer from pnd, or need weaning advice.

Long tiem since middle class equated to higher income anyway isn't it? Plenty of middle classs careers going down pan ATM.

I worked for HomeStart and we were there for anyone who needed it. Our famillies all had issues but they varied- a child with SN, a disabled or sick aprent, PND, isolation (quite often better of mothers who had given up work and whose DH was abroad or away an awful lot), whatever.

At no point did income come into it, and that was right and proper. I coften went from detahced house to council flat and that was at it should be.

The best aim of provision like this is to get people past rought imes (eg the breastfeeding support) and then to give thier kids a mix of experiences: tarquin gets to be friendly with Tyler (oh goodness i will upset someone with that won't I? sorry) and they get to mix experiences and ideologies and maybe if he didn;t ahve some Tyler will get a few aspiration thrown in (IF- many council housed kids do ahve aspirations obviously, writing this as a grad from the estates).

It's all short term pennies not long term change.

fee for those with reasonable income. free fro those with low income/benefits.
free for those that need particualr classes, pnd help, play group for sn children etc

that sounds fine.