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?

The last thing this country needs is affordable childcare. Good on you OP.

@RickJames

I'm glad I don't live there. There are so many creepy murders. Or at least that's what Netflix tells me.

@MacMahon

The worst thing is how bloody happy the Swedish are. Ranked 7th in the world. Fucking happiness. I'm glad I live in 17th-placed UK.

UK is ranked 17th? Here? Among the top twenty happiest campers in the world?

Ahahaha!!!

Thanks, that really, well, cheered me up.

I was pretty miserable before so we might be ranked 16th now.

Sweden is so great. I'd like to move there in the next 5 years.

Someone said that the fact that children go to preschool aged 1 does not mean they go full-time. No, but many do! I cannot find any exact stats on hours, but a newspaper article from 2015 shows stats and comments on the fact that too many children spend too much time in preschool.

In Solna, a suburb of Stockholm, a child attended on average 36 hours per week. That was the highest average. Six other Stockholm councils had an average of 35 hours per week. Five very rural councils had the lowest average number per week and child: 24 and 25 hours. And this is the average.

Between 2005 and 2015 the national average number of hours spent have increased from 29 to 31 hours.

In Karlskrona council, 100 children attended preschool 55 hours per week. (Hardly in the interest of the child, and that's what the people interviewed are saying: that we need to also look at the effects on children who spend that many hours away from home.)

Here's the article for anyone who wants to google translate: www.aftonbladet.se/relationer/a/ddGVzO/barn-gar-for-langa-dagar-pa-forskolan

In my view (ex-pat Swede, now Brit), some Swedes have become over reliant on preschool, not trusting their own ability to care for their own children. For example, siblings of newborns have a right to attend nursery school 30 hours per week, even if one parent is at home with the other child. This is believed to provide continuity of care for the older sibling, and more time for the parent to focus on the newborn. Fair enough.

However, in Stockholm, intense lobbying led to the city increasing this to full-time, 40 hours. Could anyone argue that in a standard situation, it is better for a sibling to attend nursery school 40 hours per week, when mum/dad is at home with the younger sibling? The new policy led to an immediate increase in uptake: diagram here, ka.se/2017/04/21/fler-barn-gar-heltid-pa-forskolan/ ('Andel barn med nyfött syskon som går heltid): not quite a third of all 30-hour children immediately went up to 40 hours.

Presumably those stats are because, having available quality and affordable daycare, parents opted for it.

So you don't like the idea of parents making their own choices to put kids in daycare, because it's not the choice you want to make? Your idea of liberty is strange.

You could equally say that it's awful that in the UK some women are made to become SAHMs because their jobs don't offset childcare bills. The Swedish way in fact gives a lot more choice, you can't be mad just because more people in that situation chose differently to how you want.

Anyway, I do apologise if the title came across as a bit goady (but this is AIBU ). I do have to be perfectly honest though and I will say I actually am glad I don’t live in a society where I would feel highly- compelled to use full-time childcare for my kids from 1 or 2. Obviously, I can only speak for myself, but that’s how I feel. I wouldn’t want ‘societal expectations’ or the state to impinge on my personal sphere in that way. Yes, I think affordable childcare is a must for those who want / need it. But nothing should be assumed and I wouldn’t want to live in a society where I was regarded as an outlier, simply for having a few kids at home with me in the week!

Hi, lived in Sweden for a while, and I do not recognise this forced approach. Excellent childcare yes, excellent shared parental leave yes, but with some mothers (albeit small in number with great childcare), still choosing to stay at home. Compulsion was not part of the offering.

So you're basically twisting the fact that childcare is affordable and good quality, into people somehow being "forced" to send their babies to nurseries. Many people would give their right arm for that provision in the UK, because the cost of childcare is crippling, and for many it's not worth returning to work after maternity leave. But it seems from your post that that is what you want, women to be encouraged via financial pressures to stay at home. If that's not what you want, I don't understand your post, as all Sweden has done is remove some of the barriers to returning to work, then it's up to individuals what choices they make as a result. What else are you not in favour of? Do you think legislation to force governments to pay women equal pay for equal work should be ripped up? That way, if they're paid less than men, more would choose to stay at home. How about we also make it legal for employers to get rid of a woman's job whilst on maternity leave, for no good reason. That would work, wouldn't it, a woman is going to find it really difficult to return to work if there's no job available anymore. And how about legal dismissal of pregnant women, so pregnancy becomes a legitimate excuse to fire someone? All that sounds right up your street OP.

@AnyOldPrion

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.

There is definitely a real difference in perspective involved about what equality really means. This seems to be the general direction a lot of modern societies seem to want to push for in how they approach it, but to me it seems deeply anti-woman, and mainly of benefit to those who own capital and stand to get the most from having as much of human life as possible monetized.

I haven’t RTFT yet, at least not all of it, but OP, where on Earth are you getting your misinformation from??!!

What I’m saying is, if I lived in a society where over 90% of 2 year-olds were in full-time daycare, then I would probably have felt compelled to do the same (even though I didn’t actually want to).

Why would you do this? Do you do lots of stuff that you don't want to do just because "everyone else" does?

Just because you seem incapable of making your own decisions about what is best your child, that still doesn't equate to being "forced" - which is the exact wording you used in your OP.

You wouldn't be being "forced", you would be "choosing" this option.

There is a huge difference between the two.

More than 90% of people in France eat cheese.
I don't like cheese so I don't eat it.
Should I start?

@Lotusmonster

It’s not being state mandated! I don’t hear many Swedish women actually complaining about this….the opposite! The Nordic countries are hailed as good models for enabling women who want to return to work being able to. Mother’s in Britain have poor pensions, lower earnings, lower prospects of reaching senior management and much stems from our lack of affordable childcare. We should be ashamed of ourselves in the UK.

I've heard Swedish women complain about it, I don't imagine there is one universal viewpoint among all of them.

Nonsense… We are not forced. Most women work part time in Sweden so choose to put their child in nursery.

We also put the baby in nursery so they can learn to socialise and if we have to run errands that day it’s also fine for the little one to be there for a couple of hours. So the little one is able to learn to be around other children (not siblings). This is good FOR SWEDEN. I know it might not work for other countries, but this works well for us for women to be able to return to work and we know that we have good reliable child care.

We have subsidized child care and for us this is normal, but no woman in Sweden is forced to do anything. I understand we are extremely lucky and privileged due to this.
Due to childcare and just how things are set up we have a lot of choices. Also, if you’re trying to force Swedish women to do anything then you’re going to have a difficult time doing that. 😂

Childcare there is brilliant, shared parental leave is excellent. My sister and her Swedish husband are both able to share working and childcare straight down the middle. It means fewer people choose to stay at home because it’s made easier and more straightforward to return to work. Isn’t that what lots of women particularly, want to see here?

the Swedish government make it really easy and cheap for children and babies to be in childcare.
One suggestion (from a Brit I know living in Sweden) is that it started so the government could 'shape' children's lives from an early age. ie. make them do what is deem as healthy and right to produce desirable citizens- lots of exercise, good food, but also rule following and other social traits.

My God the stupidity is quite astonishing! Sweden has fantastic subsidised high quality childcare available so that parents who want to return to work can do so without crippling themselves financially. Do you have no critical thinking skills at all OP?

I don’t mean ‘forced’ as such, obviously. What I mean is, if 90-95% of two year-olds are in full-time daycare, then that’s a very small minority who aren’t. Your child would be an outlier if not in daycare and this alone would be a compelling reason to send them, regardless of finances. I mean, I don’t know what the stats are for home-schooled children in the U.K - a few percent maybe? Most people don’t think to home school (I know I didn’t) because it’s not really the norm. Parents who home school are seen as kind of opting out of the normal cycle of things and I wouldn’t want to feel like that with a two-year old if I opted out of full-time daycare.

It’s probably not quite the same thing at all, but just trying to explain.

@RowanAlong

Childcare there is brilliant, shared parental leave is excellent. My sister and her Swedish husband are both able to share working and childcare straight down the middle. It means fewer people choose to stay at home because it’s made easier and more straightforward to return to work. Isn’t that what lots of women particularly, want to see here?

It's what people who make money off of workers want.

The ability for a family to live on one income, and security if there are problems like death or divorce, might appeal to many, if it were on offer. But work that isn't part of the paid economy only benefits the individual and family and community, not those who make money from workers.

I think also people need to understand that Swedes value social cohesion a great deal. This is our culture.. we all should do our part to ensure everyone has a good life. And we believe that children need to be around other children (not only siblings).

No one in Sweden is forced to do anything.. , but we are in favour of everyone working together to ensure a healthy society. And one pillar is that can (if the parents choose) go to nursery. You are not a social pariah for not doing this.

We have a lot of choices and help for women in Sweden. Help to stay in work and help to go back to work, it’s perfectly normal to work part time If you have children and no one is punished for this.

We also have help available if our husbands or partners run out, so we don’t have to stay with a man for financial reasons. We can be with a man because we want to. We are not held hostage by finances or childcare I think. Which I know is an absolute privilege.

And I know Sweden is not perfect. I know Scandinavia is not perfect. But we have a different way and a different culture and this is what works for us.

I wouldn’t want ‘societal expectations’ or the state to impinge on my personal sphere in that way.

OP, you seem to be labouring under the delusion that having a child means you have opted out of the requirement to generate enough income to feed and clothe yourself and to keep a roof over your head and that of your child. Sure, someone else is currently doing this on your behalf, but that's a pretty precarious position to voluntarily put yourself in.

@LilyTheMink

the Swedish government make it really easy and cheap for children and babies to be in childcare. One suggestion (from a Brit I know living in Sweden) is that it started so the government could 'shape' children's lives from an early age. ie. make them do what is deem as healthy and right to produce desirable citizens- lots of exercise, good food, but also rule following and other social traits.

And make them non reliant on their parents. Sweden is a bloody weird place to live and for all you people wanting to move don't be expecting a warm welcome - it is the most Xenophobic country I have lived in - and I've been around!

Also I’m curious as to why it is bad if all the little ones are at nursery?

This is a genuine question as I assume most on here are British and I believe British women wish to have work outside of the home. So why is it seen as bad the Swedish women are working out of the home ans putting the chidlren in nursery ?

Is this something bad in British society? And you think it’s better for the child tk be around the mother mainly until an older age?

I am always interested in different opinions on how we view childcare.

I

I wonder what % of UK citizens are 'forced' to use the NHS for emergency and non-elective care?

My understanding is that this is nonsense however childcare is state subsidised so very cheap compared to the U.K. therefore a lot more people will use their nurseries because it's a viable option for more people there than it is here. Happy to be corrected though.