Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be frustrated with two year old funding

28 replies

Rigbyroo · 22/04/2014 14:38

I know this has probably been done to death and mainly I'm annoyed due to my sil but argh!
I cannot get dd into nursery at all now, we recently moved and there are no places due to the new two year old funding, the nurseries have said this is the reason why.
Also I certainly noticed that dds previous nursery went downhill when the sudden huge intake occurred.
Sil doesn't work, has never taken her dd to any groups or socialised her in any way, I was paying a fortune in childcare vouchers and she's getting it for free despite not working. I honestly do not get it. Is it really going to make a difference? I can't begrudge my niece a place because without it she would have very little interaction but when I think of my sil sat on her backside doing sod all it makes me seethe. She genuinely does do sod all.

OP posts:
OwlCapone · 22/04/2014 14:42

Well, don't you sound lovely.

TalkieToaster · 22/04/2014 14:42

You've answered your own question there: 'Without it she would have very little interaction'. It doesn't matter what your SIL does, or doesn't do - your niece is benefitting.

But, yes, I get that it must be a huge pain not being able to get a place when you need it to be able to work.

LemonPipLimePeel · 22/04/2014 15:03

So your dd was attending a nursery, and was told to stop coming because they were giving her place to another child!?
I didn't know it was legal to do that!

devoniandarling · 22/04/2014 15:03

Op you are going to get flamed!

In essence I agree that the funding is unfair and doesn't help working parents. But then as a pp states, your niece is benefitting.

Waltonswatcher1 · 22/04/2014 15:11

I am ignorant on this subject - what's the issue ? My 2 year old is with me and I wouldn't dream of sending her to the local nursery ; even if it was free.

Waltonswatcher1 · 22/04/2014 15:13

( should state nowt against nursery as a concept but my local one looks skanky and the staff seem gloomy , unkept and lacking in any child friendly charm )

Original poster
Rigbyroo · 22/04/2014 15:14

I know I will get flamed and I know I'm being unreasonable really but it's just incredibly frustrating. My sil has had health visitor, offers from family etc to go to groups or just do something with her dd but she chooses not to.
My dd left previous nursery as we were moving area. I know I'm being horrible but it's just frustrating.

OP posts:
Sirzy · 22/04/2014 15:15

The preschool funding is designed to help the children not the parents.

If a nursery has gone downhill because they are up to their maximum numbers then its a poor setting anyway surely?

Ruushii · 22/04/2014 15:17

She's not getting it for free. Her daughter is. It's not free childcare to benefit the parent. It's a free space to benefit the child.

These threads are always the same. Selfish OP focussing on how the adult benefits from something aimed at the child and begrudging a child a chance for socialising and the chance to not get further behind.

It's so dull.

jacks365 · 22/04/2014 15:17

The 2 year old funding was brought in specifically to benefit children like your niece. Yes her mother could do more with her but she doesn't so it's your niece who suffers. The government is trying to help those children.

tripecity · 22/04/2014 15:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

UriGeller · 22/04/2014 15:19

What are you after? Free childcare or a stimulating environment out of the home where your child can play with other children?

Fwiw my ds Is 3 and has never been to a playgroup, I "sit" at home (SAHM) and my boy is very sociable. He can conduct an appropriate conversation about his interests to anyone who'll listen. Please don't be misled by the propaganda that children need nursery to "become socialised" which is a horrible term IMO and completely untrue.

Ruushii · 22/04/2014 15:19

Oh dear. Advance search to check for troll status reveals OP is a teacher. How sad that people like this who begrudge vulnerable children help are actually working with them.

Original poster
Rigbyroo · 22/04/2014 15:19

The thing is, if the parents are not going to implement same boundaries and actives as nursery then it's not going to make much difference is it? I'm only saying from what I've seen with sil, not anyone else. Nursery went downhill because there were suddenly lots of two year olds with absolutely no idea of how to behave in a social setting. I appreciate this is one of the reasons why the scheme has been set up.

OP posts:
PoundingTheStreets · 22/04/2014 15:20

I can sympathise Rigby as whatever else is going on here, you're basically falling foul of the fact that there aren't enough places to accommodate all the children who need them. That's a problem playing out all over the country and it doesn't begin and end with 2-year-olds either. School-aged children are affected too. Whether you're approaching this from the angle of education and social interaction for the child, or child care for the working parent, the point is that our infrastructure for children is inadequate in the UK at the moment and may well get worse.

But you could have said that instead of focussing on your workshy SIL.

SoonToBeSix · 22/04/2014 15:21

It's a bit insulting though , the government are basically saying if you are on a low income you are a crap mum and nursery could do a better job.

Original poster
Rigbyroo · 22/04/2014 15:24

Agreed poundingthestreets, I went about it completely the wrong way.

OP posts:
odyssey2001 · 22/04/2014 15:30

More judgemental than insulting. But much like the link between low income, free school meals and the pupil premium and adopted children and pupil premium plus, they have to use something to work out who probably needs it. Winter fuel allowance and bus passes for rich OAPs fall in the same category. It is the way it has to be.

For those who need support but either don't realise our won't admit to it, saying yes to something free that everybody in your situation gets is a lot easier than having to apply for it when you are too proud or can't be bothered.

Anyway, this is about the children benefiting not the adult. I would never begrudge that.

MiaowTheCat · 22/04/2014 15:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BigRedBall · 22/04/2014 15:49

I've never been to any baby groups with ANY of my children and nor have I made them "socialise" in any way. Is this really important? Confused.

MrsDeVere · 22/04/2014 15:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CannotthinkofaNN · 22/04/2014 15:57

Can I just mention that my DD gets 2 year funding due to having SEN, although myself and DH both work, so in my area at least it is not always related to the parents income.

sewingandcakes · 22/04/2014 16:00

Personally I think that baby/toddler groups are more for the benefit of the parent than the child. Could your SIL be depressed and isolated? That'd explain a reluctance to attend groups (it did for me anyway) and the HV suggesting that she attend.

candycoatedwaterdrops · 22/04/2014 16:15

It's a bit insulting though , the government are basically saying if you are on a low income you are a crap mum and nursery could do a better job.

No, the policy is suggesting that lower income families may not be able to afford nursery whereas higher income families will have the option of choosing.

elliejjtiny · 22/04/2014 16:23

YABU the 2 year old funding is to benefit the child not the parent. And I say this as a parent of a 3 year old who can't take up his funded place at nursery because the closest one is 2 miles away.