To think David Cameron has a nerve setting standards for good parenting?

[echt]

You couldn't make it up, though to be fair he thinks everyone is bit shit and needs Tory guidance, not just the feckless proles, for once.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jan/10/david-cameron-parents-children-lessons#comments

Want2be but that's how it does work for low income families. If you had an net income of £15k and spent £5k a year on childcare your income for HB purposes would be £10k.

My son has a smartphone and a non resident father.

Do I win a goat? :o

I mean, what a bollocks meaningless statement. Smartphones and lone parenting. Definitely the problems with our society.

Sorry want2be when I said earlier childcare wasn't included in Income I meant any childcare tax credits aren't included when working out HB. Also the remaining cost of childcare ( as you only get up to 70% paid) isn't classed as income.
I don't agree that children suffer if only one parent works. Having a Sahp can be very positive for children.

The issue is with parents who are earning just over the threshold to qualify for help but I respectfully disagree that having a SAHP is always positive for the children when the wage earner is low income.

Once the DC start school the childcare costs drop and if both have been able to stay employed during the early years they are likely to be able to earn more than minimum wage plus have a higher income over the long term. This higher income makes life easier for the couple.

Take a family with an income of GBP20k (GBP10/hr working 40hrs/wk) a year vs GBP40k a year through both adults working and I think the family with both adults working will have much lower financial pressures compared to the family where only one adult is working. The extra income of GBP1300 or so a month goes a long way compared to the one spouse not working.

I assume you have either 5 or 7 DC so I can understand one parent staying home. However i think most families have less than 3DC.

I have this feeling always hanging over my head that I am babysitting for the government, and if i do a bad job, they will replace me.

I don't like the idea.

There are so many aspects to parenting, and you may gain all the knowledge but that does not stop mistakes. You can lead a horse to water and all that.

Who is anyone to say how i raise my child? Certainly not the government. All they are meant to do is maintain civil obedience and make everyones lives a bit more equal, and they do a shoddy job at that. How am I to trust a parenting course provided by them? Even if an expert came along, i know my children best, i know what makes them tick. So i know how to parent them well.

What they should do, is support the parents who have genuine daily struggles on their hands, such as the addicts, the disabled parents whose children have become their carers, provide more transport for kids to get to school, put more cash into the pupil premium, help working parents by installing cheap childcare in school settings.... This is what helps parenting.

Not some government scheme for some shitty course which tells you how to praise your child as if you are an incompetent fool raising a bloody monkey.

I also think dave cameron is an ignorant twerp who wouldnt know how to parent his own kids, because the highly costly private school that we paid for his kids to attend have done it for him.

He's a judgmental idiot who thinks the problems of the world lay with the commoners who use the nhs and state schools. He cannot see that the problem starts at his own arsehole.

"Families are the best anti-poverty measure ever invented. They are a welfare, education and counselling system all wrapped up into one. Children in families that break apart are more than twice as likely to experience poverty as those whose families stay together. That’s why strengthening families is at the heart of our agenda."

I'm a lone parent with two children. That has been the case since the second they were conceived (via sperm donor). We are a family. We are not a "broken" or "weak" family simply by virtue of the fact that there is no father. We are not poor or uneducated because there is no father. And, despite me being a scum of the earth lone parent, I have thus far managed not to leave either of my children anywhere, let alone in a pub. So fuck off with your parenting classes Dave.

Yep elizabeth hes pointing the finger at single parent families, implying that they are the reason for antisocial teenagers or young adults.

Yes want2be I can see that parents earning just enough not to qualify for help struggle the most.
Yes we have 7dc with five under five so childcare cost would be astronomical. Plus I would struggle with employment due to my disability.
I think a family living in poverty with a sahm would fare worse than a family with both parents working and a good quality of life.
However £20k where I live NW, is enough to raise a family with a sahm.

He's a twat.

Elizabeth's quote is quite chilling, as well. A family with an abusive adult as part of it is the literal opposite of a "welfare, education and counselling system."

Nobody wants to break up a happy, well functioning relationship, get real. Trying to demonise divorce and separation just puts more pressure on abuse victims not to leave, which causes FAR more problems. We already have a culture which excuses far too much within relationships.

Also, if you follow Dave's logic, a family like mine (i.e. single parent by choice) is not going to "break apart" and therefore, by his reasoning, we are much less at risk of experiencing poverty. Shouldn't Dave actually be promoting this family set-up if he is so concerned about "family breakdown" causing poverty?

(tongue firmly in cheek, I am not suggesting that my set up is better than anybody else's, it just seems to be completely beyond some people's comprehension that children from single parent families are not a homogenous group of neglected, poverty stricken, young offenders)

Wow, this course sounds amazing! Maybe his parenting tips could include a baby fashion module too? Something like: "Top 5 Hoodies That Make Your Delinquent Child Look More Huggable"...

The most antisocial/awkward/aggressive child in our entire street is a child from a two parent family.

They don't seem to want him around much so he is outside a lot of the time and desperate for other children to talk to or play with. He resorts to threats and starting fights and lying to get this attention.

It's desperately sad and they are the kind of people who I don't think would accept an offer of parenting classes. I think they just fucking can't be bothered, or don't like him much, and frankly, neither does anyone else

This policy is going to do very little for kids like him. The kind of parentswho will accept classes are often the sort with the best intentions anyway, and those with no investment in their child anyway, aren't going to give a stuff.

It's nonsense.

David Cameron's children go to state schools, albeit very naice ones.

I think there's a ridiculous amount of chippiness on this thread, the govt is offering something potentially hugely beneficial to everyone (well, I found classes beneficial) and you're all moaning about it and taking it as criticism.

'This policy is going to do very little for kids like him. The kind of parentswho will accept classes are often the sort with the best intentions anyway, and those with no investment in their child anyway, aren't going to give a stuff.'

I think you're probably right Pipistrella but what's the alternative? Parents like the example you describe are not hugely uncommon (in my experience) and the damage they do to their children is immense. Its absolutely the government's role to step in when harm is being done, and also at an earlier stage to try to prevent harm being done in the first place.

And please people, enough about DC's pub incident and parenting skills in general. We have absolutely no clue what sort of parent he is, and as far as I know, he's not actually planning to deliver these parenting courses himself, so its irrelevant.

andnowits7 With all due respect, £20k is about £1300 a month after taxes. That is not a lot of money to support a family on. You can swing it but there will be stress from having to watch every single penny. Most families have 1-3DC and when you they are cheap but the cost rapidly rises as they grow and hit their teenage years.

It is hugely detrimental when you take a break from working. You start again at the bottom and build up your salary. It's one of the reasons why men earn more than women. L

Yes , however a family earning £21k with three dc would receive approx £750 a month in tax credits and CB, taking their income to over £2k a month. That's without HB that they would almost certainly be also entitled to.

While in the short term there is no real financial incentive to work, over the long term there is and the government should be giving families the option. I would not want to be reliant on benefits given the Tory manifesto. Also, while you might make minimum wage when you start having DC, after a decade of working I doubt you continue to make minimum wage. There will be promotions that come up and also pay increases based on the experience you gained. So earning GBP20k a year today would probably mean earning GBP25-30k a year in today's money (ie not adjusted for inflation) in 10-15 years.