To think that a child who has never been camping is not necessarily from a ‘deprived’ background

[Urbandweller]

DD’s school organised a camping trip for Y5. DD is younger and didn’t attend but her class teacher went to chaperone. I was chatting with her about it today and she said she was so glad the school was able to organise the trip as so many of the Y5 kids had never been camping and would never otherwise get the chance to go. It was clear that she felt sorry for the children who hadn’t been before and was shaking her head sorrowfully, saying many of them are the same poor kids who have never been to the beach and this is one of the saddest aspects of deprivation...

AIBU to not see the link between camping and deprivation? We’ve never taken DD because it’s my idea of hell, nothing to do with lack of funds!

*Ok - I don't live in Aberdeen and I'm not on UC. When I was on benefits I was on income support and UC did not exist. Your calculations are irrelevant"

And neither was I when I gave the details of my actual benefits from way back. UC didnt exist then.

They are absolutely relevant as you were suggesting someone is far more hard done by the system if they live in Scotland. But evidently, when you can see using UC now, the comparison is like for like, but on tax credits, the like for like would have been you hundreds of pounds worse off.

But it's ok. The calculator has the option to flick the results into what you would have received on the legacy system. This is where I'll suddenly jump hundreds ahead, you say...

CT benefit is entirely separate to UC, still through local council so the band you chose makes no difference.

I mean, this is just complete nonsense now. The band makes a difference whether you claim on the legacy system, or via UC. You understand that surely?

My children come from a pretty affluent background, and they have never been camping.

The reason they have never been camping is that I was made to do it a couple of times when I was a child and I hated every fucking minute of it.

If they ever want to do it, I wouldn't stop them, but I'd have nothing to do with it, apart perhaps from transferring them money when they wanted to call a cab to get them the hell out of there.

@Purpleberet

Wow lots of disheartening responses here, some people need to check their privilege.

I think the teacher didn't articulate themself very well, seems the intended point was that some kids don't get to go anywhere on holiday. They don't get to turn their nose up at camping, because they simply don't go away at all! Not everyone has the luxury of choosing to stay in a hotel or go abroad.

This. Vast numbers of kids never leave their own estate or immediate area. They didn't experience things that others take for granted. That's why school trips are a massive thing for a lot of kids. I too am sure all the teacher meant

@Eatenpig vast majority of people don’t take their privilege for granted. We make good life choices and work hard to do things such as holidays/days out/ trips abroad.

We prioritise certain elements in our lives so our kids have experiences.

@SleepingStandingUp

Its really worrying that so many people who you would assume are fairly intelligent cannot work out the difference between "choose not to" and "cannot choose to"

No. It was the teacher who failed to distinguish between the two. She expressed pity for children who had not been camping and linked it to deprivation. There was no caveat such as “some low income families might choose do something else rather than camping so their children are not deprived”.

She wasn’t talking about children who haven’t been on any kind of holiday. I’ve already said she sneered and talked in disparaging terms about plebs people who go on All Inclusive holidays rather than educational ones. So yes, she might feel sorry for children who haven’t been to the beach but she’s thinking of a visit to a nice beach, maybe a trip to Broadstairs followed by a visit to the local Charles Dickens museum perhaps. Not a beach in Costa del Sol. That isn’t a valuable experience for a child.

I’m not sure how to explain this better, how certain teachers apply their values to lower income children and expect families to participate in activities they think are worthwhile. I’ve seen it over the years as I was educated by some of those teachers in a deprived area and continue to see it today.

If any of you have a moment I’d point you towards an excellent podcast called Nice White Parents (NY times). It’s based in New York but it might enlighten some of you: affluent, white parents enrol their children en mass in a predominantly Black/Hispanic school to save it from closure, take over the PTA and begin imposing their worldview of the ‘right’ types of activities the school has to organise. So camping is enforced (one tearful white dad says his heart ‘filled with joy’ when he saw the poorer Black children sleeping in a tent for the first time next to his privileged white child. The white journalist who led the podcast described the moment as excruciating) and the new parents make the school introduce an English/French programme although Spanish is the predominant second language. The opinions and preferences of the lower income parents were routinely ignored.

My kids love it and so do I. They've never been abroad though as couldn't afford travel, hotels etc.

Even camping is usually 25+ quid a night with a toilet block and I've collected all the necessary camping stuff over the years. Then there's travel, food, trips out etc. So have to save up each year.

Children who are deprived are those whose families can't/don't go anywhere at all for various reasons.

Are you going to run out and buy a tent? 😆
It is a lot of people's personal hell and bloody hard work too!

@Urbandweller

I have personally found that teachers who grew up in the Home Counties/outside London and work in areas of high deprivation sometimes have a slightly patronising attitude towards the “poor kids” they teach. There seems to be an assumption that these kids are missing out because they don’t take part in outdoor activities like sleeping in a draughty tent in the middle of a freezing field or other “enriching” experiences.

Most childhood experiences are just part and parcel of the environment they live in. Does anyone think a child growing up in a rural area is missing out because they haven’t taken the tube through central London?!

Whilst we aren’t really rural, we don’t live near a major city. Both DC were selected for school trips to London (including a tube ride!) on the basis they’d never experienced it. They also got places on school trips within Europe as it was known by the school that family holidays weren’t something we were able to offer them.

I’m in my 40’s, I’ve never been on the tube, have never had what people consider a ‘proper’ holiday (certainly not one that involved flying) and now as teenagers, my children have both travelled more than I will probably ever do. I’m forever grateful they were identified as ‘missing out’ as they both gained so much from the experiences offered. I really believe it has inspired them to want more from life.

All that said, they also got taken camping by the school - they hated every second!

@EvenRosesHaveThorns

Woah, what's 'utterly miserable' about star gazing and campfires and marshmallows?

Sleeping on the ground? Sharing facilities? Freezing in bad weather?

I'd much rather stay at home

Woah, what's 'utterly miserable' about star gazing and campfires and marshmallows?

Sleeping in a tent afterwards.
I can do all those things in my garden then sleep in my nice comfortable bed!

You don't need to sleep on the floor. We have slightly raised cots and luxury inflatable mats.
Camping teaches children lots of useful soft skills.
Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean it can't be fun and rewarding :)

I mean, this is just complete nonsense now. The band makes a difference whether you claim on the legacy system, or via UC. You understand that surely?

@TwinsandTrifle I think you're the complete nonsense. Of course I know the band affects how much you pay but UC and CT benefit are entirely separate. You don't put your council tax band in to a UC calculation because you apply separately through your local council for that. You understand that surely? Anyway all of this is irrelevant. I'm telling you what I paid, for my own personal circumstances, when I was claiming IS, not UC. I don't need you to believe me but I can assure you I'm not making it up. I do wish that people would realise that everyone's circumstances are different but it's a very mumsnet trait that people can't imagine a life outside of their own small experience. You see it all the time and it gets frustrating.

Also @TwinsandTrifle you are using the online calculator which is incredibly inaccurate. You need to do a manual calculation for UC to get an accurate result. There are so many variables. I never said I was hard done by because I live in Scotland but costs of living vary massively between Local authorities and even areas within them let alone from country to country. Fwiw I did a manual calculation for UC the other day which worked out I'd be around £3/4 pw better off on UC than the tax credits and small amount of housing I still receive now I work. Not worth the 6 week change over, so I agree that the difference appears minimal whether you're on legacy benefits or not. I can't say what I'd get if I wasn't working and I certainly can't be bothered to do a manual calculation just to find out, but I know that they haven't increased CT benefit as council tax rates have been frozen for quite some time so that would be the same as before.

Also @TwinsandTrifle you are using the online calculator which is incredibly inaccurate.

It's actually spot on.

You don't put your council tax band in to a UC calculation because you apply separately through your local council for that. You understand that surely?

Er, yes you do. UC directly replaces the old CT and housing benefit that you had to apply through the council to get.

If you were still on the legacy system, you'd apply to the council. If you are on UC they replace that with their equivalent benefit.

Literally, Google "UC" and it tells you this.

Right. Just read your other post, and you are on the legacy system. So you deal, separately for tax credits and CT benefit at each separate department. And it seems you genuinely don't understand how UC works, because of things like you don't think you put your council tax band into the calc. You do. It amalgamates lots of benefits that were historically claimed separately.

Use the calculator "policy in practice" it will be spot on to the penny.

I hope this helps you...

You're wrong! You apply to your local council for council tax benefit (now council tax reduction). UC only took over housing benefit

Seems it is you not understanding. Anyway none of that is relevant to what I paid on legacy benefits, which is very honestly what I paid. Only students got full council tax covered in our LA. Everyone else kid something which increased depending on the band

u went where curtesy of benefits

This is my council tax bill I get single person discount & I have one dependent child

my bills start from new tax year April as because I pay d/d my bill spread over 11months, but my council revised bill as everyone got £150 discount due to covid this says June-Jan (I had already paid April)

I pay rent as well as all standard usual utilities bills: water, gas & electric.

Use the calculator "policy in practice" it will be spot on to the penny.

The experts at universal credit essentials always tell you to do your own manual calculation as all the calculators are inaccurate. I had my own calculation looked over and was correct only 3 weeks ago which was very different to the calculator prediction so I understand exactly how it works. They were very clear (as is DWP website and all the LA websites) that it DOES not include council tax benefit/reduction and that you apply for that separately through your council. I do not qualify though , for school meals for any Scottish government grants. I earn 9k pa. the reason I checked the UC entitlement is because my tax credits were dropped £100pw in April (430pm) because of a £400 overpayment. Not sure why I have to pay 5k (12 months of 430) back because of that but they insist it's right so.....

Hey TwinsandTrifle and rantymcrantface66, you know there's a private messaging system here?

I get what your DD is saying and I think it's misconstrued. People below the poverty line wouldn't be able to afford the kit and the site fees, but yes once you have it it's a cheaper holiday than going abroad. So it's a low cost holiday if you are on a low income, but if you are going to food banks like some families are it is out of the question.

FWIW we haven't been skiing or centre parks (skiing is my worst nightmare to be honest) so I guess that makes us deprived. We go camping because my youngest would be absolute hell on a plane or ferry

Hey HeyDemonsItsYaGirl

The private message system has a history about being as private as public forum here

@HeyDemonsItsYaGirl you could have pm'd that... 😆. Joking - sorry. I know I shouldn't have got sucked in but it's annoying to be accused of lying when I'm only sharing my experience, and when someone is giving false information and adamant they are correct. In that instance it is actually useful for some people to see the correct info (ie as stated by the dwp or council websites). Apologise again, I won't engage further.

But that's not the way kids see it - it's about the kids not you.
All kids, @tartanblanketdog? Are you sure?
And actually, family holidays aren’t just about the kids anyway. They are about the family enjoying something together, so if a major component of the holiday - where you are actually sleeping - gives one member of the family (adult or child) the horrors, then you don’t do it.

@Ifitquacks

Woah, what's 'utterly miserable' about star gazing and campfires and marshmallows?

Sleeping in a tent afterwards.
I can do all those things in my garden then sleep in my nice comfortable bed!

Yup. I agree with this. All those things can be done while staying at home/in a hotel/in a cottage. Sleeping in a tent with dark schlepps to the loo , no privacy, other people’s snoring keeping you awake, no respite from the damp if it rains, suboptimal comfort (whatever sleeping arrangement you have, it isn’t as comfy or easy to access as a bed) etc etc etc is not enjoyable for me and I question how it can be for anyone. I think it’s like all the people who progress to love autumn who are thinking about a crisp sunny dating kicking through leaves when it’s usually, cold , wet, muddy and foggy. Camping may well be tolerable, even a laugh, if you are in your 20s, not bothered by insects, don’t need to wee in the night, are a bit of an exhibitionist so like public shower blocks etc etc. Not for most.