About sending DD to nursery targeting deprived kids?

[EssentialHummus]

I sorted a nursery place for DD(2) literally years ago, but that nursery forgot to tell me that actually they no longer offer the morning only times I wanted, and are still dicking us around.

I SAH and work when DD sleeps. All I want is a couple of morning sessions at a nursery for her to do different things and get used to a setting, and for me to crack on with work and get a bit of headspace. Everywhere is full, long waiting lists, don't do half days etc.

Yesterday I took her to a stay and play session at a nursery we'd never been to. Staff were lovely and clearly experienced from how they interacted with the kids, setting was small but full of creative areas/toys etc, nice garden. I asked the manager if they had nursery places and they have two morning sessions free from September (they are otherwise full). I could have kissed her!

But:
We live in an area that's 50% £££££ houses and 50% acute social deprivation, and this nursery falls in the latter, and I have the impression that most of the kids are probably from deprived families. And deprived in our area doesn't mean "can't afford Boden", it means "can't afford breakfast".

Their stated aim is to "support new parents and families facing difficulty". Their website talks about their commitment to providing 1:1 family support and outreach. The fee is really low. So we're not the target audience, for lack of a better term.

I asked for feedback on the local FB group, and the two mums who replied with kids there are women I vaguely know and who I'm pretty sure have mild learning difficulties. (They're both nice, fwiw, and liked the nursery.)

Not sure what I'm asking really. I'm inclined to take the place - it's a great nursery, near home, lovely staff, cheap, and DD is bright and happy and doesn't need much from nursery other than the chance for a bit of independent play. I'm sure some smartass will come along shortly to say I'm worried about DD "catching poor" - I'm not, but sending her to a nursery that specifically targets families in difficulty? Would you? AIBU?

No. They really didn't. They wanted to improve outcomes for people in disadvantaged groups.

When they realised that wasnt happening without time and a major shuffle in wealth distribution, they realised they could use the gentrified population using the services to skewer statistics.

The issue was that middle class parents (for want of a better word) were making use of the activities, the sessions and so on, whereas those for whom the scheme was actually designed were not engaging

That’s not the fault of the parents. If these services were supposed to only be for parents in deprived areas, they should have been designated as such.

Then you have your answer - a fab start to your child’s education x

The vast majority in the ‘two’s room’ came in pushed in buggies, with dummies in their mouths. Their speech was very limited due to both always having a dummy in, and often not much language at home due to drug and alcohol issues, neglect, very young unsupported mothers etc. They were all in nappies. They had very limited attention span and couldn’t follow instructions. Couldn’t put on any items of clothing. Many couldn’t hold a pencil/paintbrush etc. Lots of other issues, some around additional behavioural needs, some not.

You do know that some of the things you mention are perfectly reasonable for the developmental stage a 2 year old is at. Depending on distance walked and what else mum had to do en route to and from nurseries using a buggy as transport may be entirely appropriate, I don’t get the hand wringing about a 2 year old with a dummy, or indeed them not being fully toilet trained at 2. In fact you’ll see threads here on those issues where mums are encouraged to go at the child’s place.

I don’t know any 2 year old that walks absolutely everywhere, I know a fair few who use a dummy and whose language skills are developing and both my children really struggled with toileting.

I don’t understand this drive to have very small children fully functioning before they can walk the length of themselves. Or you’ve just picked every middle class stereotype and applied it to a group of vulnerable young mums.

Posts like this is exactly who I chose the school/nursery I did for my children - there’s a much better sense of the very wide developmental arc that small children go through and no judgement of parents whose 2 year isn’t ready to be toilet trained. The whole thread reeks of thinly veiled middle class judgmental snobbery and yes, a fear that our nice normal children might catch deprivation from “those families”.

They were initially set up in deprived areas. It's just that those areas were already subject to gentrification. Especially in London.

If you are not driving everywhere, you will be using a buggy for 2 year olds. 2 year olds can not walk very far or very fast. i still remember when my buggy was broken having to take 2 year old on a shopping trip round a shopping centre. That really was not easy as he was just so slow at walking.

No. They really didn't. They wanted to improve outcomes for people in disadvantaged groups.
Yes , however they knew that few of the target group of parents who attend if it didn’t appear to be aimed at everyone.

• would attend

I too would think twice about whether I was taking up a space needed by others. But there is also no point in second guessing the nursery staff; if they have space and are happy to offer it to you and you to accept, do so. You don't have a crystal ball and can't predict if, five minutes later, someone needier might come along or conversely the place stays empty for a year.

Regarding the quality of the care or influence of families with specific needs - nurseries catering for communities up and down the income spectrum can have individual issues, many you won't anticipate. It's by no means a cert that the children will be worse behaved or have more learning disabilities.

I don't know. I have involvement with the online community of my US university and some of the alums seem to have selected schools in districts to ensure there is a mix of social and economic diversity. Of course this is no bad thing. And yet - sometimes, reading their posts, I do sort of wonder about how they're coming across in these environments, if there is any element of the crusading sentiment that comes across as super patronising.

If you take up the nursery place - and I see no reason you shouldn't - just take it at face value and go from there.

Not according to that targeted group. One of the reasons they didnt engage with services is because the other parents were so far outside their peer group and they felt intimidated, judged and isolated.

HarryElephante why reported? It’s true. If you see my later post, there was also an issue at one of the local schools. From what was described, it wasn’t an environment anyone would want for their children going well beyond the normal challenges of deprivation.

I remember the account of one service user who said she was often late to the SS class because she lived in a hostel which had a weekly room inspection on the same day as the class.

One of the other mums said something about it being disturbing to her baby when she comes in with pram late in session but she didnt want to admit to her that she lived in a hostel. The woman asked the leader of the class if she would put a time limit so nobody could enter.

This was a person who said it was difficult to attend but she went because she thought it would be good for the baby + her social services assessment. The type of person who should be there,even if they come 20 mins late because it's aimed at people like them to improve their outcomes.

That's the person who said "nobody looks like me or knows my life there".

I think that your child seeing families that are differently structured, from different cultures and/or socioeconomic situations would do nothing but broaden her experience with people and possibly even maybe help to create a more accepting/empathetic child and ultimately grown up. I don't see the downside to it, you said you thought the staff and facilities were up to par.

They had very limited attention span and couldn’t follow instructions.

Surely that’s the very definition of a 2 year old.

Kewlwifee

@Passthecherrycoke

They didn't have the power or resources to stop it happening. In gentrified areas, those mums would know in advance about the classes (because they have the knowledge and power to know how to know these things) and tell all their friends and book out the classes. Online registration made it easier for staff in one sense but meant they were completely powerless to do anything themselves to get individuals who were in an At Risk demographic from being prioritised.

For £20 baby massage courses? Why did they offer them?

It all sounds a bit cloak and dagger. My HV told me about children’s centres- I of course wouldn’t have known they existed not having other children

I don’t get the hand wringing about a 2 year old with a dummy, or indeed them not being fully toilet trained at 2

Hahahahahaha cloud cuckoo land 🤣 My two (now well-balanced professional adults) still had three dummies on ribbons at the age of four, and certainly weren't fully toilet trained at 2. Someone I knew had a child that was 'toilet trained' at eighteen months, but it was the mother who was trained to know when the child was likely to need to go. So the child wasn't trained at all, and was back in nappies when all the 'lagging' children were fully toilet trained.

@jellycatspyjamas I was just thinking the same! DS went to a private nursery without obvious levels of deprivation, but loads of children had dummies and nappies aged 2, and many came in buggies too.

It is possible for 2 year olds to be toilet trained, but most won't be.

The government wanted rich people to use sure start so poorer parents didn’t feel stigmatised

Yea , right .

My two times going.
First time some snob kept watching my DS as if he was going to just attack her kid . He did not .
Second time there is Mrs MC with 2 of her chums giving the evils Wouldn't mind , but I bet they would not have set FOOT on our council estate if not for the FREE SS sessions that were intended for the "poorer".

They were initially set up in deprived areas. It's just that those areas were already subject to gentrification. Especially in London.

Correct . Apart from my area , lol That will never gentrify thank god . Nearby big town though, its so very different to what I knew growing up there.

I expect you'll find that everyone there is a regular person and you'll fit right in. From your description (well trained staff, nice equipment) it sounds pretty good. Isn't there Ofsted or something?

Think you're just being anxious - there is no way everyone in your area apart from you is either a millionaire or totally destitute, there will be everyone on the financial spectrum in between. Like yourself.

Our area has some very affluent people living here, lots of millionaires, but even most private nursery’s cater to the majority who are the less well off as our county is classed as deprived. I thinks it’s great to get a mixture of people from all backgrounds.

Not according to that targeted group. One of the reasons they didnt engage with services is because the other parents were so far outside their peer group and they felt intimidated, judged and isolated

Absolutely my experience .

@Passthecherrycoke

They were free at first. All services were free.