Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

for not wanting to send my 2 year old to pre school?

41 replies

Giantwhoopsie · 12/07/2017 14:45

Everyone keeps telling me I should send my 2 year old to pre school in September, she'll be 2yrs 5 months. I'm currently on maternity leave with my second child so I don't have any childcare needs for sending her to pre school but everyone keeps telling me she would benefit from going a couple of mornings a week and I should start her for her sake.

We go to several toddler groups each week including a music class and Forest school so she does have the opportunity to mix with other 2 year olds and is learning new things plus we're teaching her colours and numbers and sing nursery rhymes etc.

When we go to groups she's very happy and joins in but she also keeps me within her sight . I will be sending her to nursery next year once she's 3 but I'm not starting to wonder if I'm being unfair to her and she will miss out by not going in September.

Anyone else feel the same?

OP posts:

PymelaAnderson · 12/07/2017 16:40

Also, I'm not saying that the government is deliberately lying of course! But that it's not in their interest to question the status quo on this issue.

OvO · 12/07/2017 16:45

Yanbu. She sounds like she's getting plenty of time with others her age anyway.

I didn't send my youngest to nursery (or is it pre-school? I get confused) until he was 5! He managed to not turn into a feral beast with no social skills despite this.

drinkingtea · 12/07/2017 16:58

Being bright doesn't equate to needing early educational intervention - in fact probably the opposite! A bright child will learn from the activities an emotionally present parent naturally does with them. Formal childcare/ formal educational initiatives for under 3s have only ever been shown to benefit children who start off behind their peers.

gluteustothemaximus · 12/07/2017 17:04

DC1 and DC2 never went to nursery or pre school.

Apparently they should have gone to learn social skills from other 2 year olds.

Nothing wrong with their social skills at all. DC3 won't be going either.

It's your call, no one else's.

BrieOnAnOatcake · 12/07/2017 17:05

drinking exactly!! evidence shows it could be helpful to those with a more difficult start her 2yr old funding for those in certain groups.

DotForShort · 12/07/2017 17:06

If you don't want to send her, then don't. She will be fine. Pre-school and nursery can be beneficial but are by no means essential for 2-year-olds. Back in the dark ages I never attended any sort of pre-school. I also didn't attend baby groups, toddler groups, classes of any variety (if they even existed back for tiny tots then). I did have siblings, cousins, neighbour children to play with. Started school at 5 without any difficulties whatsoever.

BTW I definitely do not believe that having a SAHP is in any way superior to the use of nursery/pre-school/childcare. But that isn't really the issue here.

MamaHanji · 12/07/2017 17:14

Mine started in January for 2 mornings a week. I didn't want to as I am on maternity leave and didn't need the childcare or especially want her to go.

But she was desperate to go. She would see other children going to school and it was all she talked about was when she was big she could go to school. We went to 3 or more playgroups or play dates a week and always did a lot of activities, but she was desperate to go.

She adores it. She really really loves going. To be honest, it doesn't make the day any easier as going there and back and there and back and feeding the baby in between, doesn't leave anymore time anyway. But she really had benefited from it and made some lovely friendships.

Urubu · 12/07/2017 17:14

YANBU
Both nursery and SAHP/nanny have their advantages for the children, I wouldn't say one is better than the other.
FWIW my 3.4 yo DT have never been to nursery and are very sociable, play nicely with others, recognize all letters and can count to 10. I was so worried they would miss out as we couldn't afford me not working plus paying for nursery that I was very motivated to teach them things myself!
As long as you attend lots of playgroups or see friends with DC often no problem at all.

averythinline · 12/07/2017 17:17

My DS went 2 2hr sessions a week and really enjoyed it ...we did other stuff and also just chilled but I think it was good for him as he did different things than we did together and gave me a break too....he made friends there that we carry on seeing for years and they were his choice of people to play with...i think it was good for him to play independently to me..
the parents I met then are still part of my social network now ...years later....we still bump into his key worker and he loves to say hello even though he's taller than her now..
friends that did this when they were on mat leave also found it worked well for them to have 1:1 time with the new babe too

I would start and then stop if it didn't work for you...

sofreakingnoisy · 12/07/2017 17:18

I agree that being bright doesn't equal needing more childcare, but she's with me for 156 hours a week and at preschool for 12. She's constantly asking about letters, numbers, clocks, telling the time, colours, shapes, and with the best will in the world I have a young baby to care for along with being a SAHM! I answer her questions and play with her for around 9 hours on a preschool day and 12 hours every other day and I don't have the time, budget or inclination to make or buy hundreds of resources to keep her entertained! It was the best thing for us sending her to preschool, but before 2.5 I felt I was meeting her needs adequately at home! Each to their own and only you know what's right for you.

d270r0 · 12/07/2017 17:47

A lot of preschools won't take children until they are 2 years 9 months. So it would not neccessarily even be a preschool, it would be a nursery. Not neccessary at all, I'd wait.

RandomUsernameHere · 12/07/2017 18:42

Yes exactly d27

Ours prioritises children in their preschool year and will take limited numbers from 2 years 9 months but only if there is space

BestZebbie · 12/07/2017 18:46

In your situation it sounds as if it would benefit your second child quite a lot to have the first go to preschool for a couple of days a week (because they'd get one to one time with you and could do baby groups/swimming etc), and your older one would be unharmed but not actually gain a great deal (as they'd socialise with friends and learn independence but get less time with you).

user98765797837 · 12/07/2017 18:57

Do what you feel is best for your family.

I was a sahm, so my children stayed home with me until they started school nursery. We had no separation problems when they started, they were happy to be left, settled well and made friends easy.

tinypop4 · 12/07/2017 19:00

yanbu. If you don't need to and don't want to then why does she need to go? As long as you see people with other children sometimes.
It is called pre-school as it is designed for the year before they begin school - this is not until they are 3 turning 4. It is wise to send them by then so they can get used to being away from home and in a more school like environment but at 2 there is no need if not wanted.

Groupie123 · 12/07/2017 19:04

Do what you need to do. I sent my DC part time from 3 months to pre-school then nursery before they started school. Both bright, articulate, socially confident kids.

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread