To be appalled by nursery funding for children living in poverty

[Crunchyapplez]

Re. The Times today:

If you work for less than 16 hours a week on the living wage (ie your children are being raised in poverty), then you get only 15 hours of free nursery hours.

If you are a 3 or 4 year old, living in poverty and on a child protection plan (when a child is regarded as suffering or likely to suffer significant harm), then you are STILL not eligible for more than 15 hours of funded nursery a week - even when it is formally recognised that your home is not always a safe place.

BUT a child whose parents earn as much as £200000 a year is eligible for 30 hours a week, fully funded by the government.

Please vote:
YABU: I find this an acceptable funding structure
YANBU: I find this unacceptable

15 hours a week from 2 seems fine to me, if they are on a child protection plan an extra 15 hours term time isn't going to be to difference , they need different intervention

@Lockdownbear

This is a school nursery. The only term time "state" option in my area is the Gaelic Medium nursery which is 9-3 term time. As it happens I'm using 1 long and 3 short days but will hopefully be able to pay for additional hours if a school hours job comes up.

The 15 hours are enough for the children living in (actual) poverty and potentially at risk to be kept an eye on. It's not only for that though it's to bridge the educational gap between children in low income families and those in higher brackets. It won't be a perfect system but at least a lot of the most vulnerable children can have someone else checking in on them.

@sanbeiji

Why do you think people should get free childcare when not working?

These type of threads always seem to go the same way. Even though the OP has pointed out a VERY good reason (though not the main reason) people still ask WHY the poor children deserve it. Poor kids are despised by society before they've even started their school life

So what is the VERY good reason @Looneytune253 and, more to the point, why is additional childcare the best (or only) answer?

@Porcupineintherough

So what is the VERY good reason *@Looneytune253* and, more to the point, why is additional childcare the best (or only) answer?

It's in the OP? Keeping an eye on the most vulnerable children. Ones that don't necessarily have the nicest of home lives. That's a decent reason in itself but also bridging the educational gap between children in low income families and others of higher incomes so they can all start school with a more even playing field. I genuinely can't believe grown adults begrudge this for the little children. It's disgusting

And childcare is the answer as a lot of families might not bother with the health visitor at that age (or at all) and there's not necessarily social services involvement yet

I think @Looneytune253 people are simply saying 15 hours more free childcare is papering over the cracks of wider issues within these childrens lives. If the families need additional support this should be provided and where it would be beneficial children can be and are given more free hours. But there is no reason a lovely kind supportive family who have fallen on hard times but works 15 hours cannot nurture and look after the child the rest of the time and access free support etc. Equally giving the child of a terrible neglectful abusive family 15 free hours are nursery (TT only) doesn't solve the issue.

The threshold is 100k, not 200k, and there is 15 free hours for 2 year old, which is only available to children from deprived backgrounds.

At 2 they were teaching ours to recognise their name, do mark making practice, looking at books and being read to, starting to learn colours etc.

Most children learn those well at home with parents at that age.

I'm sure it's not perfect but I do feel the need to point out more hours at nursery do not mean the children learn more, learning doesn't work like that so while it's important to get children who may be disarray nursery, increasing the hours is unlikely to impact on the impact. It's like extending the school day, children can only retain and learn so much at a time. The 30 hours are great for those working parents who need it, but I would suggest much more than 15 hours does become childcare rather than education.
It may serve different purposes, and that is a different story, but to close the gap, I'm not sure 30 hours rather than 15 would actually have much of any impact.

@OfstedOffred

At 2 they were teaching ours to recognise their name, do mark making practice, looking at books and being read to, starting to learn colours etc.

Most children learn those well at home with parents at that age.

I didn't say they don't, I was replying to the post about there being no education before 5, just playing. And isn't the argument that children in low income homes are less likely to get as much positive intervention at home than their comparatively richer peers?

Although of course lots of kids in nursery free hours at two come from perfectly good homes, just low income. The advantage then is access to activities Inc socialising that you might not be able to pay for that other families can

@4pmwinetimebebeh

I think *@Looneytune253* people are simply saying 15 hours more free childcare is papering over the cracks of wider issues within these childrens lives. If the families need additional support this should be provided and where it would be beneficial children can be and are given more free hours. But there is no reason a lovely kind supportive family who have fallen on hard times but works 15 hours cannot nurture and look after the child the rest of the time and access free support etc. Equally giving the child of a terrible neglectful abusive family 15 free hours are nursery (TT only) doesn't solve the issue.

Yes, this. Said more eloquently than I could.

‘ I actually used to work for myself but I would need 30 hours a week to begin with to start advertising for clients’

I may be wrong but I think if you start a business you can claim 30 hours and there’s no minimum earning requirement for the first year?

‘ you don't get the 30 hours until you're already ready to start that job, but the nurseries and childminders in my area have waitlists until September.’
This is a huge problem. If you get a job the childcare isn’t available for months. And lots of nurseries won’t let you use just the free hours, they insist you must top up to full time even if you can’t afford it.

15 hours a week is enough to provide an education. As others have said 30 hours is to help parents get to work. What you are trying to do here is plug the gap for bad parenting but you couldn't do that even with 30 hours free child care. The gap in attainment is down to what the parents are doing with their child at home - educational activities, reading stories etc - there is no way to make up for that and I am not sure that is the tax payers responsibility either

DTwins will be in 15 hours next Jan. School only does half days. No way to get a job around that unless I can pay for private nursery until I get the 30 hours free but also the extra costs that those hours don't cover as I also have an older DS. So needs to be term time part time or will cost a fortune in wrap around for him. I get the logic of why it works how it does but it does feel counterintuitive unless you've got a lump of savings to get through those first months before free hours and UC childcare stuff is paid

@FateHasRedesignedMost

Childcare isn’t charity. The funding for 2 year olds allows disadvantaged children to access nursery, while other parents (who may work but just miss the threshold) have to pay for their own childcare. Nursery can’t make up for a child living in poverty, and if they offered FT nursery places to these children it would be even less incentive for the parents to work and fund their own childcare!

Working 30 hours a week doesn’t mean a family can afford childcare; without that funding a lot of women would be unable to re-enter the workforce full time (or at all). People often pay hundreds a month in childcare and use the 30 free hours to top it up to full time.

More needs to be done to tackle poverty, neglect and children being raised in unsuitable housing, but more free nursery hours won’t solve anything.

It’s not about the parents paying for their own childcare

It’s about getting the kids world experience outside of their dysfunctional family bubble

It’s a very successful preventative measure and social services have been giving out free full time nursery places for kids who they deem need it

It’s a good way to keep a closer eye on then and improving their chances of turning into functional adults

BUT a child whose parents earn as much as £200000 a year is eligible for 30 hours a week, fully funded by the government.

It's an incentive which brings in more tax then it costs a family like the above. However I think kids from certain home lives should be eligible regardless of hours worked

Children don’t need 30 hours education at that age though. The additional 15 hours (on top of the initial 15) is for the benefit of the family as a whole - so that the parents can work and provide for them.

The initial 15 hours is enough to meet their needs for interaction and education - or at least that’s the decision that’s been reached.

My kids didn’t get it either as at the time I was self employed and worked in an industry with very high overheads - it was based on gross not net, but my gross was equivalent to a much lower gross salary for an employer person.

Anyway I’ve since left that highly stressful industry!

I agree child protection is another thing. Sadly those children most in need won’t be sent to anything that isn’t mandatory.

I'm pretty sure here in Wales there is paid childcare for 2 year olds related to being on certain benefits too. Any free childcare when you don't work seems pretty good to me

Just wanted to say I think this is fantastic idea. Not that you should have to do it though and these things should be easy for her to access in the future.

I am very fortunate I am in the situation where I can do it!

My DS’s DLA is currently up for renewal and I can’t describe how stressed I am about it.

It is so stressful! We also have a motability car as we need adaptions and something big enough to carry her stuff. If we lose DLA, we lose the car and that would be a big problem for us. We hold our breath every time and this last one took them 11 weeks to come back to us!

It’s about getting the kids world experience outside of their dysfunctional family bubble

Not all children of families who work part time are dysfunctional.

It’s a good way to keep a closer eye on then and improving their chances of turning into functional adults

And there are other ways to identify and support these families individually. Giving 30 hours childcare to everyone working less than 16 hours a week is an expensive sledgehammer and means there is less funding available for those who actually need it.

Giving 30 hours childcare to everyone working less than 16 hours a week is an expensive sledgehammer

Do you think? It's max about 3.5k per child for the year, so I think it's affordable for children from bad homes personally.