to not understand why those with lower income get free childcare even if they don't work

[PrincessScrumpy]

2 mums from a toddler group I go to are on income support and their DC start their free 2 days a week at nursery at the age of 2. I have dd1 age 5, and dtds 2. We couldn't afford childcare for 2 babies so I had to cut my hours by more than half and work from home around dc which is hard but we wouldn't cover the bills if I didn't. obviously twins was a surprise and a huge financial hit so savings are very low/almost non existent.

Anyway, I have another year until my dtds get free childcare while a lady with one dc gets it at age 2 despite having no intention to work. This feels really unfair and I just don't get the reasoning.
I'm not trying to benefit bash but it's hard not to feel angry. Willing to accept iabu, but can't help feeling this way.

Sometimes health visitors don't pick up on it though as they don't spend much time with the child. I phoned a hv and she had never seen the child awake as whenever she visited the child was napping (one of our concerns was the amount the child was sler

morethan - why is it disgusting? There is a clear link between socio-economic disadvantage and educational underachievement, so why not try to address this with early intervention?

LimitedEditionLady I know what you mean - I'm not 100% convinced he has SEN, but nursery saw enough to concern them.

I just feel if we'd had more time on this, working with nursery before he had to leave for school things would have been so much smoother. Being assessed in the summer hols between nursery and school is not ideal!

Sorry! Sleeping!

When you see a child everyday you notice more and speak to the parents more too.

I didn't particularly want to bring his assessment up, as it's so up in the air and uncertain....but there seemed to be people here who might know something about it, so worth an ask!

"And its weird that you keep ignoring the fact that people CAN get the hours if they are working."

I'm not ignoring that fact at all.

I have said nothing at all about my own thoughts about the scheme.

Someone else seems to imagine that I think it is unfair in some way that this childcare is offered to people who are deemed to need it, which is not the case at all.

The point I am making is that it could SEEM unfair to someone who was unable to work because they couldn't afford childcare.

Particularly if the person they know in receipt of this childcare was not working.

IMO it really, really matters that our benefits system is seen to be as fair as possible.

Creating a situation where it can be perceived that if you don't work you get more help with childcare, is very far from ideal if we care about (and I very much do) maintaining public support for social insurance and the welfare state.

It is silly, not to mention incredibly patronising, to keep insisting that it is not childcare. If the OP got those hours, she could afford to work more.

I doubt she would care very much whether it was given as childcare or early years intervention. If she could pay her bills more easily at the end of the month, it would be fine whichever it was.

I'm surprised, and saddened, by the complete lack of sympathy for a woman who has had to cut her work hours because she can't afford childcare.

I would have thought most women would consider that to be a pretty shitty situation.

And it does raise questions about what childcare is being made available and what we can do to provide more support for working mothers in low wage jobs.

Or indeed all families with childcare needs, of any kind.

Being that families with children have been repeatedly the ones losing out during this period of elective "austerity".

Thanks, Chunder, that's pretty much what I was trying to say.

As one poster stated up the thread, what really is the difference between 'early education' and child are when it comes to a 2 year old? Most child care providers will have targets and programs that they work to. Truly how different is it?

It sounds however like a real nanny state interventionist scheme to catch problems early. So honestly OP nothing to be jealous of. A life involving multiple consultations with an HV or involvement with Sws or SServices is something to be avoided and not something to be envious of.

That said inequity in support and service provision can always be a tough one to swallow. Hard work and doing a good job of raising your kids is its own reward. You won't get a pat on the back from the state.

Its not intended as childcare is it though!!!!that is the only way to express that its not to give the parents free time it is to give the child the opportunity!!

With the cut backs in the health visitng service in my area, a lot of developmental problems have not been spotted. Sometimes parents don't realise that their child has delayed speech because they know so little about child development.

I suspect the govenment wants to find a cost effective way of getting children under the radar of the nanny state. It is not feasible for health visitors to visit families every week. A nursery has a long term relationship with a family and is better placed to spot developmental problems.

I often wonder about this subject-I am on the fence with it- I can see the advantages to the child who is disadvantaged, but also the cost to government.

I qualified for 15hrs since 2, but dd didn't start using it till a few months before her 3rd birthday, Im not in work, shes my last baby, I don't really want to hand her over to someone else for 15hrs a wk-especially as shes due to start school at 4.1! even now she only goes 6 hrs.

I do sometimes wonder if me using not even half the entitlement means theres more in the pot for others....

I think if the gov could theyd do it free from two

I will use those 15 hours when my youngest turns two. I will use it to study my arse off, so I can get a qualification so that I can then pay tax to hopefully pay toward another two year old getting a boost.

Some 2-year-olds in England may also be entitled to free early education.
You must be getting one of the following:
Income Support
income-based Jobseeker?s Allowance (JSA)
income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
support through part 6 of the Immigration and Asylum Act
the guaranteed element of State Pension CreditChild Tax Credit (but not Working Tax Credit) and have an annual income not over £16,190
the Working Tax Credit 4-week run on (the payment you get when you stop qualifying for Working Tax Credit)
Children looked after by a local council are also entitled to a place.

So it is the same criterion used for FSM, it is not for all low income families as the lowest earners on WTC won't be eligible.
I totally agree with the scheme though, but once again hate the assumption that anybody in these categories automatically needs support.

know a girl who got a place and it took an hour to get there and walk back home.She did it though,walked there and home and again at the end of three hours.Hardly a rest is it.
I have two jobs, which between them both add up to just under 40 hours/week. My DH works from home part-time and is a full-time postgraduate student. I work some days, and make up my 'missing' hours on evenings and weekends, so that I can look after DD.
She has a funded nursery place. It takes me a full hour (by two buses) to get to DD's. Then I go and sit in the public library for two hours and work. Then I go back for her, and take the hour trip home, or if it is a day I go to work in the afternoon, my DH makes the hour trip in to get her and then takes her back home.
So no, not a rest, and not childcare.

I totally agree with the scheme though, but once again hate the assumption that anybody in these categories automatically needs support.
Not at all. This is not a mandatory programme, it is an option, and families that don't require it don't have to take it up.

We live in an area which is classed as one of deprivation. Dh was made redundant when I was pg with dc2, he has since been able to find a pt low paid job but we do not qualify for wtc. He is desperately looking for a ft job or one with more hours atleast but its so hard.

Due to our circumstances, dc1 was offered a nursery place at 2 years old, he started a week before his 3rd birthday. I have seen a very shy, anxious child gain so much more confidence and contentment since starting nursery and spending time with peers his own age. No play group or outing I took him on really helped socially the way nursery has.

I know very few people in the area we moved to, so felt completely isolated on top of battling suspected pnd after dc2, and my other anxiety issues. The nursery place was a lifeline for me, despite being a bit of a walk with two kids in tow. But I feel ds has been the one to really benefit from it. He is not disadvantaged in the stereotypical sense of being shoved in front of the telly all day and not interacted with. He is a very bright child who could recognise numbers, colours, a huge variety of flowers, birds and animals and some letters at the age of 2. But I cannot argue with statistics which prove as many pp have cited already, about children from poorer backgrounds inability to be on par educationally and have the same life opportunities as other children have from more comfortable lifestyles.

We are poor now. It is a tough truth to swallow. We will most likely never own our own home, we will never be able to afford luxurious holidays or dine in fine restaurants. Just about get by with careful planning but manage to feed dc well with good nutritious food. To give you some insight of the sort of families being helped by this scheme, a few months ago it was financially very tough for us, and I made sure to put £1 away separately in my purse every week for dc's fruit and juice nursery fund incase it got spent. One fucking pound OP. No naice toddler groups, or swimming lessons for babies or horse riding lessons in this house. I appreciate many parents struggle emotionally with young babies and toddlers but having this constant worry is soul destroying. Anyway let me know if anyone would like to swap places with entitled ol' me and my dc.

Here 2 year olds get 2 hours free a week if you are on income support unless you are in a flying start area in which case its more.

I got the 2 hours and until recently I got a whole days free private nursery place. The latter was paid for by a charity.

Sorry for having a disabled elder child who runs me ragged op. The free nursery place was for my youngest so I could concenrate more on ds and the other dc not because I wanted to sit on my arse all day smoking and watching my big telly. I nearly went under without this respite and im so glad I had it.

Sick of these types of threads now

Just when you think you've heard it all. People are getting their knickers in a twist because a small child, in potentially vulnerable group, is receiving some extra support.

I know Meglet, it's sad isn't it.

Christ at this thread.

Some of the opinions are bloody frightening,

I had no idea that such a scheme existed. And I am really pleased that it does. The fact that the government has implemented an initiative, based on solid research, which could enable an element of equal opportunity for those children deemed as in need of it is bloody heartening in my view.

I think it is extraordinary that people could be so churlish about the fact that single parents could access this extra support for their child.

My dd is 17 now and when she was a baby the maternity leave was 18 weeks at the statutory rate, 6 weeks had to be taken prior to birth so I went back to work FT when she was 3 months, I had to or I would have lost my job. I don't begrudge mothers today who can take 9 months off at the same rate of pay. I wouldn't resent anyone taking advantage of a positive change in legislation. Especially this extra benefit for the poorest in society.

I work for central government and see countless millions being spaffed on completely nonsensical schemes with little or no worth. I am glad that someone, somewhere agreed that this would be a good use of taxpayers money.

The absolute gall of someone complaining that she cannot afford baby signing lessons and resents that people on the absolute breadline are getting some extra money absolutely disgusts me, frankly.