To think it's free nursery not free child care

[SleepingStandingUp]

Sat through another rant about how unfair it is unemployed parents get free childcare from 2 years when they will just sit around anyway vs to parents who actually deserve help aka working parents.

I get how hard it is to pay for childcare around work but the 15 free hours are meant to give kids of sahp some opportunity not afforded to them being stuck at home with parents so actually THRY benefit not the parent

Oh sorry, you didn’t make much sense. Are you saying someone had a go at you for using fifteen hours free?

I was in full agreement until the 'stuck at home with parents' comment.

If a parent prefers not to let their child engage in playgroups/other social activities, why would they even think about using the 15 free nursery hours?

I think the financial cut off for assistance is way too low - we have very little money and don’t qualify for help and can’t afford childcare for twins. We will now get funding for one as he receives DLA. I’ll be sending them two mornings a week for their benefit rather than mine - all my friends kids have developed massively after starting nursery.

Well I’m a SAHM and my children are far from ‘stuck at home’ with me. We’re out and about at various groups/clubs/activities/out in the fresh air every day.
You’re right about the 15 hours though.

I think it should be available to either everyone, or no-one.

Biker47 the 15 free hours from 3 years old is available to everyone.

@SoyDora I think she means parents that are literally stuck at home

Its not just for SAHP - the income cut off is just over £16k so its possible to have one parent working full time at min wage and one working a few hours a week and still qualify. You also qualify for children with complex SEN and children who have been in care.

Its also, and has never been, 'free' hours. They are subsidised hours. In most cases subsidised by both the local council and by fee paying parents as the amount the council pays doesn't cover the cost of the place.

It's not for all kids of SAHP, it's for disadvantaged children - evidence shows that children of parents on very low incomes are much less likely to be read to or intellectually stimulated, which puts them at a disadvantage when they start school. The free 15 hours is meant to help redress some of the balance.

There’s plenty of evidence that interventions in the early years ie before 5 makes the biggest difference in terms of a child’s outcome.

This has got muddled up with giving free childcare - but the original reason was to reach disadvantaged children, ie help the children themselves not to get parents back to work.

Ah are we talking about the free hours from 2? Sorry I was confused. Everyone gets 15 funded hours from the term after the child turns 3.

Children receive 15 hours extra funding from the term after they turn 2, for families that are eligible (low income etc)

All children receive 15 hours funding from the term after they turn 3

children receive 15 hours extra funding from the term after they turn 3, for families that are eligible (working etc)

It is indeed muddled. The free hours for 2yos and the free 15 hours were about improving outcomes for kids. The free 30 hours is for working parents to help with costs of childcare. I think it's self evident that nursery does provide childcare as well as education. As does school, for all that Mumsnet tries to deny it - you're not expected to pay for back up childcare just in case school randomly closes with no notice.

I think OP is trying to explain, albeit badly, that some people qualify for 15 hours nursery for 2 year old children. Often these will be parents on a low income so perhaps due to their financial status they aren't able to pay to go to kids farms/softplays/baby sensory/ballet etc and may be in areas which lack free/cheap child activities which enable socialisation.

I wish this had been available to me. I was a SAHP whilst my DH worked full time. The kids and I would have really benefited from this as I struggled to make time for each child individually. Probably sounds silly, but I was terrified of taking my DT’s and DS out to groups by myself.
There were none close by and I didn’t drive. In hindsight there were many things I would have done to fix this, however couldn’t see past it all at the time.
It is a wonderful thing to have available, however I agree with a PP, it should be available to all, or those who don’t meet the criteria could maybe have a few hours made available. This would be in an ideal world obviously

I don't think everyone gets 15 hours from 3y.o., I thought only EU/UK citizens?

SEN children get 15 hours free at 2yr regardless of parents income.

It's all a bit confused. They initial (way back) 15 hours at 3 was advertised as childcare this then changed to early years education then when the 30 hours for working parents came in became childcare again. It's not that 'free' either as a PP pointed out.

There are at least for all LA's i know card on how many children can receive the 15 hours for 2 years olds. Which means ime that actually children with high levels of additional needs can miss out (nursery will accept easier and cheaper children).

Overall there is a real lack of funding and importance placed on early years despite there being good outcomes for the original sure start programmes.

I don't think there's a nationality restriction on the 15 hours

Caps not card

None of it is free. It is funded.

Bit pedantic that. Free at the point of delivery.

Yes it’s for the benefit to the children of low income families.

The actual point of the free hours (at age 2) is so that professionals can support children that are disadvantaged either financially/physically/emotionally etc. Yes it does benefit the children, it also benefits the parents as they get either a discount on their overall bill (DD recieved it and I went to work) or time to do chores etc without kids in tow. People denying it benefits them as parents are annoying. It is not the point but it is the result!