To think every SAHM, low hour PT worker and carer should read this?

[Peachy]

Well i am not but it matters to you so you must

here

Changes to system WRT worker hours

have a thread in chat and don;t want a debate, or at least won't participate iun one as petrified as we will now certianly lose our home and not up to taking flak. But if it affects you, you need to know.

Why wouldn't a 12 year old or their parent be resourceful enough to find something to do over a 10 hour day? Goodness it happened when I was little, I could easily trust my 13 year old to be in the house / out the house / in the house etc over that period. Give children small and increasing amounts of responsibility and by 12 they should be resourceful enough to be able to cope, maybe it's their parents who cannot.
Just as an example, in the recent half term, son wakes up with me, I go to work, he does some homework, then goes to the swimming pool for 2 1/2 hour training, comes back for lunch, friend comes around, they go out to the cinema for the afternoon, I come home from work and make dinner, we all eat dinner together. It's really not rocket science, you teach them slowly how to cope, teach them how to prepare easy lunches, teach them how to shop, teach them how to read a bus timetable, teach them how to use a phone to phone friends!!!

to the comment about Hunty having another child on benefits. IIRC she had a partner at the time who was working and it was a lot do do with her disability / medication interfering with contraception and I also seem to remember that she is too young to be considered for more permanent means.

This poster looked for work in her unenviable position, secured it, which is a remarkable achievement in this day and age, had to leave due to childcare / SN issues, voluntarily did workfare, has had a horrendous past and is raising four children on her own who will experience a wonderful example of love and courage against all odds and will no doubt emerge stronger and more determined because of it.

Happymummy - when I had DS3, I was IN A RELATIONSHIP with my Ex-P, WHO WAS WORKING FT. I had no clue that he was going to fuck off and walk out when DS3 was 4mo, did I? Unless you think I possess some sort of crystal ball?

Thank you, WinterisComing. Your assessment of my situation WRT to DS3 is correct.

I am trying my bloody best to go back to work, but the lack of SN childcare for a 13yo with Autism is a HUUUUUUGGE sticking point. DD is not able to stay at home alone, it is not safe. In fact, my 9yo DS1 would be safer and more able to stay at home than DD is - and none of you would expect me to leave a 9yo at home alone for up to ten hours a day, would you? So how is it any different being expected to leave a 13yo with SN at home alone for between 3 and 10 hours a day?

Because even if I finished work at 5.30pm, due to my DISABILITY I have no choice but to rely on public transport (which, on NMW means the bus, taxis are too expensive). I would have to catch a bus to the nursery, pick up DS3, catch another bus to the after-school club and pick up DS1 and DS2, and THEN catch another bus to get to my house. I was getting in at 7.30pm after picking DD up from the SN childminder - so I can assume that even going straight home from the after-school club, I wouldn't get in until 7pm, so she would be alone for up to 3 hours EVERY evening. When she is functioning at an 8yo level.

(I am not allowed to LEGALLY hold a driving license, due to having uncontrolled epilepsy, I would have to be seizure free for over a year - and I haven't been seizure free for that long at all since my diagnosis nearly 8 years ago).

I am BLOODY TRYING MY BEST!!!! And yes, I DO have to pay my Ex-P back for the electric, because it is over and above the maintenance he pays me. The house move may make the situation better WRT to the bus fares, or it could make it even worse. I have a Prohibited Steps order against me barring me from moving DS1's school, or moving away from the estate that both me and his father, my Ex-H (not my Ex-P) live on. Which also happens to have the highest rents in my town - and I may be moved FURTHER away by the council. In which case, as I cannot move DS1's school, my bus fares would be MORE rather than less. It's SHIT. But I am BLOODY TRYING!

natation, you are not wrong! I was babysitting other children at that age. I got the bus to/from school alone and in fact was getting the bus to another town to visit friends at the weekend. We were certainly left alone in the evening for hours at home, in between shifts, given strict rules as to what we could and couldn't do......

Porto - But in my situation, I would feel safer leaving my 9yo DS1 at home on his own for that length of time than I would my 13yo DD. She functions day-to-day at around an 8yo's level - she just is not SAFE to be left at home alone like that. When DS1 is 11/12, I will have NO worries about him doing so except he will eat the contents of my fridge and play computer games far too much.

Yes, I was babysitting at DD's age - in fact, I was babysitting dc's with disabilities by DD's age - but DD is NOT NT and it is patently not the same as leaving an NT 13yo at home alone.

Sorry - I think natation and I were referring to ssd's post, not yours. Obviously in the case of SN it is entirely different.

My DD can't even manage to get the bus to the local shop without getting lost.

To be honest, I am still worried that it isn't going to get much better. What if, when DD is 16yo, DS1 is 12yo, DS2 is 10yo and DS3 is 3yo - what if she STILL isn't safe to be left at home alone. What if she isn't safe to be left at home alone when she is 18yo. By which point DS3 will be at Full-time school, and I will have to be out at work.

THESE are the sort of things that parents of dc with SN have to worry about - what if their dc is NEVER capable of living independantly?

You could have a dc that is PATENTLY incapable of independant living - yet doesn't qualify for any disability benefits (thus, you don't qualify for any Carers benefits) because they pass an ATOSsers test that deems them fit to work FT because they can walk and bend over to pick up a pencil.

Which means that unless ATOSsers deem your dc to be disabled, you will be subject to the same sanctions to your benefits as every other claimant, subject to the full levels of conditionality, and expected to leave any dc that is over primary age alone for up to 10 hours a day in the school holidays - even if that dc has no idea how to be safe in the house. And then has the ability (as they are unsupervised) to leave the house alone and wander off into the road, or even worse.

no,no way would I leave a 12 yr old at home all day alone in the school holidays. if others are happy to do this thats fine, I don;t know anyone who does it, nor would I do it

this would be for a 5 day week, 8-6?? no way, not at 12

in fact its probably illegal, maybe they;ll change the law soon to enable us to do that!

Huntycat is pointing out exactly the need for wraparound care in the UK for EVERY CHILD, from 7am to 6/7pm, like happens where me and Porto live in Belgium. And during the holidays, holiday camps too.... just like this one which runs where I used to live for children with special needs (I'm talking SN where children cannot be left unattended)
pegasusplayscheme.btck.co.uk/

With a high level of subsidised child care, it would be hard to justify parents not working. Of course there will be cases where some children have such profound special needs that their parents look after their children 24/7, but many many parents and parents with children with special needs, with the right child care in place, really should be working. Shared parenting instead of this culture of residence with one parent would also help to get more parents back to work too.

It would be a completely heartless person who would suggest ALL PARENTS SHOULD WORK, of course when some children have profound special needs, it's not possible, but it's time to change the culture of entitlement and dependence on the state.

yes, if there was care there I'd work, but childminders dont take kids over 12 round here and holiday playschemes are bloody dear and end at 3

It is NOT illegal to leave a 12 year old alone. Anyway why do you think childminders rarely take over 12s and why, when they do, they are not limited by OFSTED? It's because, unless there are special needs meaning a child cannot be left alone, it's a general age at which children are thought to be capable of being responsible for themselves.

Oh god I am so so sick of hearing all sorts of excuses for people for not being able to work. I've brought up 4 kids with a dad working all sorts of crap hours, I've had to work only part time for the last 15 years because of a combination of limited child care, the fact I have an autistic child who was quite difficult when younger (he is now able to look after himself and in fact was better able to look after himself at 12 than his younger siblings), the fact that hubby's hours varied from day to day, the fact that I have NO family, the fact that hubby was often sent abroad to work by his work, leaving me with a single parent existence for long periods, but never would I consider not working, never would I think of what I could not do. Why not start from the viewpoint that "yes I can work, I might not be doing the work I want or the hours I want but I can work", instead of "no I cannot work because X Y or Z".

Just in case someone does not believe that it is not illegal to leave a 12 year old alone, here's a link giving advice about considerations when leaving under 18 year olds alone at home and how to prepare children in these circumstances.

www.direct.gov.uk/en/Parents/Yourchildshealthandsafety/Yourchildssafetyinthehome/DG_070594

Here's how legal it really is.

There is no legal age limit for leaving a child on their own, but it is an offence to leave a child alone if it places them at risk. Parents can be prosecuted if they leave a child unsupervised ?in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to health? (Children and Young Person?s Act).

When you have a child that is in any way unpredictable, it is definitely illegal to leave them home alone. Mine recently put her meal in the microwave for 20 minute, then went off to watch telly.

natation I hope that rant wasnt aimed at me

I have worked since ds was born, going back to work when he was 9 weeks old, always part time, working around a dh who did shift work with no pattern I could follow, no family nearby to help, elderly parents needing my help too, blah blah blah

so dont think because I wont leave a 12 yr old for ten hours a day stops me from working

the things that stop people working are lack of childcare they can actually afford, lack of jobs and no flexibiltiy from employers

still many of us do continue to work, albeit around the kids/dh's shifts/finances

I know hardly anyone who chooses to Ynot* work, unless you married a man with money or have a sn child or other caring responsibilities, so you can wind your neck in

real, I don't know any 12 yr olds who aren't unpredictable

they can be sensible then do something daft, as they are still young, which places them at risk

i used to make myself dinner (well put a ready made Shepard?s pie in the oven ? old style I don?t think microwaves existed) once a week when I was nine/ten. I still remember the lectures about what not to touch.

What was the worst that could have happened? I could have burnt my hand. I dont think that is a terrible thing. I did much more damage falling off my bike, petting random dogs etc.

It would have been really sad if my parents stopped me taking risks as a child. it is an important part of growing up.

Hmmm
I am 44 and I remember very clearly the moral panic when I was a child because children were being left at home whilst their parents worked.

We were the latch key children.

And it was horrible coming home to an empty house. Not many 10 year olds can look after themselves properly and nor should they.

They should be just beginning to learn to look after themelves.

Whats the worst that could have happened?

A lot of things could have happened. But its not always what happens, its what is done after the incident and if you are a young child on your own, that is where the danger lies.

'What was the worst that could have happened? I could have burnt my hand.'

Next door to us, growing up, I'm in my 40s as well, were two latchkey kids, age 12 and 11. Two girls.

Both very sensible.

They started a fire in the kitchen cooking lunch one afternoon in summer, despite having done it a hundred times before. They panicked and tried to put it out themselves.

Thankfully, my dad was home that day and saw the flames. The girls were by then trapped in the kitchen and freaking out. Neighbours broke the window and pulled them out or they certainly would have died.

Because they were 12 and 11, not adults. That's why they can't live on their own at that age.

there is risk in all of life:

a car in front of mine was overtaken by another driver, on a bend, drove into a woman coming hte other way & killed her.

so should that woman have stayed in bed, just in case?

And that, Tilly, is why it's illegal to overtake on a bend (dangerous driving).

In the same way that leaving children alone if it's likely to place them at risk is illegal.

Irresponsible people break the law. Responsible people don't.

"Parents can be prosecuted if they leave a child unsupervised ?in a manner likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury to health? (Children and Young Person?s Act)."

it is only illegal if is is likely to unnecessary suffering or injury to health. it does not say any risk of.

And that's why 12-year-olds can't live on their own, consent to have sex, drive cars or do things people who are 15 or 6 years older can. Because their brains are not developed enough to adequately guage many risks.

"In the same way that leaving children alone if it's likely to place them at sufficiently high risk is illegal."