Thank god we don’t live in Sweden. AIBU?

[sw1v]

I was just reading in another thread that in Sweden, you are basically forced to send your babies into day care settings at the age of 1. Apparently 50% of 1 year olds are in full- time nurseries (very long days inc. parents’ commutes) and 95% by the time they are 2! Plus (unlike in the U.K.) there is apparently no minimum ratio for staff to children.

But what if you are a mother who simply doesn’t want to do this (or father)? I personally, would hate this. So how is it acceptable for ‘the state’ to be interfering in people’s personal spheres and family lives by making this ‘the societal norm.’ Is it because they are a high tax society and want more tax? Is this it? Well, it seems like an infringement on personal liberties to me (without wanting to sound too dramatic).

AIBU?

My horror was the U.K. mother and toddler groups. Was so glad to escape to the office and my babies could socialise without me in nursery

I find the post amusing, since we look at the UK in absolute horror, where you send young children to actual school in uniforms and children aren't allowed outside to play freely (these are our prejudices

Pretty accurate!

Oh for gods sake. Childcare over there is highly subsidised and it means people can go back to work easier. Maybe they want to go back to work! Also not everyone has the luxury of part time work or family nearby.

@mugandspoon

Nobody physically forces children to nurseries at age 1, but the whole system is based on that. There is no tax relief for families to make it cheaper for parents to stay at home (men cannot 'give' some of their income to their spouses to save on tax). Taxes are high - it is more beneficial to have two smaller incomes than one large.

But: parents have a right to reduce their hours to part-time (75 % or more) until their youngest child turns eight. Employer cannot refuse this. Employees can change this when they want to and it suits them.

Parents have an unlimited right to stay at home from work with children who are ill.

Parents can save maternity/paternity days until their children turn eight, and use that to extend summer holidays for example. This right supersedes holiday, which has led to issues in some careers where x people must work: some parents (say nurses) will take maternity/paternity days over Christmas every year - thus forcing other people to work, the employer has to first approve maternity etc.

So there are good things, and bad things.

That all sounds good to me, not bad.

May be why Sweden is vastly more equitable for women than the UK (or anywhere). When men's salaries are large and women's small, there are power and control issues, financial abuse, poverty in old age for women, and on and on.

@PandoraP

My horror was the U.K. mother and toddler groups. Was so glad to escape to the office and my babies could socialise without me in nursery

Yes - I was very grateful to escape to full time work and escape from the competitive yummy mummies whose kids were all walking, talking and receiving offers from Harvard by the age of 18 months old.

Honestly how can any western well run country "force" babies into CC FFS! You could just as well say here in London say ,where a large proportion of women work, and DC in Nursery the same thing! No one is forcing them OP .They are taking advantage of good CC and Career opportunities

@Porfre
I completely agree that the funding should be more flexible like you said term time only etc but I’m not sure giving people the cash would work either because too many people would simply misuse that money and wouldn’t use it for what it was intended.

I have lots of Danish family. They cannot believe how much our childcare costs and ask why we bother working at all if we don't cover costs of childcare plus commute. On the other hand, everybody feels like they have to work full time because it makes financial sense and that's the done thing. I have cousins, both male and female who wish they could spend a bit more time with their kids when they're little. Can't win really, can we?

I moved from the UK to Norway, so it might not be exactly the same, but there are some knock-on effects here from society having supposedly higher levels of equality between the sexes.

Most women here work, and those who don’t are regarded as unusual. There is absolutely an expectation that married/cohabiting women with children will work.

While you can choose not to, or if you are unable to find a job and don’t therefore receive benefits (common if you move to Norway as a “following wife”) then it’s quite possible you might find yourself in a difficult situation if you eventually split up.

Unlike in the UK, where assets are evenly split in a divorce, it’s assumed in Norway that the woman will be able to support herself and that she will have her own pension. Your pension is directly related to how much you’ve earned over the years. You are not entitled to any of your husband’s pension if you divorce, so if you’ve earned nothing, you will only receive whatever basic pension you are entitled to.

There is child-support, but it is capped, so no matter how much your ex is earning, you are not entitled to more.

Even if you are married, if the house was bought in your spouse’s name and he’s paid the mortgage, you are not necessarily entitled to any of it.

So supporting your husband and children so he can more easily climb the job ladder does not benefit you much if he leaves you later. Equality is seen as a responsibility as well as a right and you are responsible for yourself, rather than the possibility which exists in the UK of working as a team, where one of you works and the other looks after the house and if you split, the assets are (theoretically) split evenly between the parties.

Apparently there is periodic discussion about the fact that older women are significantly worse off in Norway than older men. Perhaps it will resolve itself in time, but for now, the system isn’t anywhere near as equal as some people would have you believe.

To give another perspective of the reasoning behind the early preschool and 'women out to work' - here's a

@DressedUpAtAnIvy

Where did you read this, Xenophobia Today?

Genuinely made me LOL.

To give another perspective of the reasoning behind the early preschool and 'women out to work' - here's the reasoning behind a parliamentary motion (2020/21:1993) by 11 left-wing MPs who proposed that preschool should be mandatory for all children from the age of 2.

They noted that ‘the idea about a strong welfare state is built on the ability of individuals to extricate themselves from class, gender and family background. This emancipation should start when children are of nursery age’.

Individuals and their right and relationship to society is the basis – not the family as much.

@EchoNan i love you!!

Lol at someone from the UK criticizing ANY country.

“I am Swedish.

Swedish policies have for many years been to encourage women to remain in the work force. One of these ways is to heavily subsidise daycare/preschool, but not subsidise families where one parent wishes to stay at home - simply because that parent pretty much always ends up being the mother and it's detrimental to women's careers, wages and in the end pensions and so on to be SAHP:s. We have ended up with a culture where pretty much all children go to daycare/preschool from about 18-24 months old. The care is very good, normally, and trained preschool teachers are employed.

It is true that one consequence is that parents who stay home with their children will find themselves a bit lonely. The playgrounds are a bit empty alright, and the "open preschools" where parents with small kids can go to hang out do a sort of "preschool light" thing tend to be occupied with parents on parental leave ie with very small children. Not much to do for older kids! However from the age of three children are entitled to a place in daycare/preschool for up to 525 hours/year, whether the parents are working or not, so older children will meet other kids that way (most children do go). “

Thankyou.

If someone where to post, ‘Thank god I don’t live in England and have to send my kids to school in a uniform aged 4,” I’d think, fair enough. I’m not British anyway and this is still a little peculiar to me.

But this is what I mean by cultural norms as nobody really questions it here. If you are out and about in the week with a 4/5 year old, people might well be thinking “why is that child not in school? Are they ill?”

But where I live is literally pram-jam and toddler-central in the week. It would be very weird if all the children were in daycare and a mum with a toddler would be the exception out and about.

My Swedish mother would be horrified if i was a SAHM. It's just not something most Swedish Women would consider.

@sw1v

“A quick google would have given you the stats : 50.5 percent of one-year-olds attended preschool, 90.6 and 94.0 percent respectively of two- and three-year-olds and 95.3 percent of all four- and five-year-olds according to the statistics database of the Swedish National Agency for Education. May 2021”

Thanks. There you go then... it’s true!

I wonder how many 3 year olds are in nursery in the UK. As all children get 15 free hours of education a week I’m guessing its pretty high.

@AnyName1

Lol at someone from the UK criticizing ANY country.

😂

Forced isn't quite the right word.

However, when you have childcare that is very inexpensive and convenient, it can make it more difficult for parents to choose to stay home. The economic loss of not working starts to look huge for the individual family. And over time cost of living begins to reflect that two incomes are normal, things like housing prices adjust, and more and more people will simply not be able to afford to say no.

So it can create situations where it's really only a viable choice for the very well off. Whereas in places like the UK or Canada it is still an option for the rich but also, oddly, it can also be a reasonable economic decision where at least one parent is in work that will only barely cover the cost of childcare. This is my family - if I pay for childcare, my take-home is negligible, and actually I prefered to stay home. I dealt with it by staying home when my kids were young but also taking some children of a friend - this gave me some income and her good reliable care from people she knew and a home environment for her kids. That would have been less plausible in a place where state childcare was on offer.

It's worth realizing that subsidized childcare can create some choices but can take away others.

The OP's point was essentially accurate. She clarified that it was a "societal norm" for nearly all children to go into daycare, so everyone claiming she was wrong because of a bit of hyperbole when she said "forced to" is being a dick.

I recall watch an interview with a Swedish politician (I think) who essentially said that it was policy that everyone should work, SAHP are not going to generate the economic output they need to fund high social spending.

Speak for yourself with that title!

@sw1v

“A quick google would have given you the stats : 50.5 percent of one-year-olds attended preschool, 90.6 and 94.0 percent respectively of two- and three-year-olds and 95.3 percent of all four- and five-year-olds according to the statistics database of the Swedish National Agency for Education. May 2021”

Thanks. There you go then... it’s true!

So where is the compulsory element covered?

OP - I am interested to know what your plans are when your children go to school, or whatever stage you plan to release them. Do you have a career to go back to? Have you thought about life beyond children, because, you know, they do grow up, and you are going to have to accept that at some point.

Sweden has one of the most generous parental leave (föräldraledighet) systems in the world. Parents are given 480 days of leave per child, and 390 of these days are paid at a rate of 80% of your salary up to a capped limited of 1006 SEK a day.

@AnyName1

Lol at someone from the UK criticizing ANY country.

? There are many far worse countries to live in than the UK - even with Brexit (and stupid rules about school uniform) - I think it's fine for people to criticise things in other countries if they are well informed and accurate in their criticism. But the OP was neither of those things.