Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that what's best for the children gets left out of the free childcare conversation

1000 replies

Ilikepinacoladass · 15/03/2023 15:47

I'm all for parents being able to get back to work if they want to, woman's career's not being put on hold, the economy doing well etc..

But I find it quite worrying that what's best for the children seems to not be mentioned at all in the reporting around the govt introducing more and more free childcare hours, or considered in the policy making to begin with..?

I thought the reason it was 15 free hrs originally, and term time only (as is still the case) was because the original aim was to ensure children have access to early education? So they are not turning up at school aged 5 having had no preschool etc as their parents couldn't afford it?

Not to enable parents to get back to work as soon as possible leaving their children in childcare?

OP posts:
Original poster
Ilikepinacoladass · 15/03/2023 18:36

Magentaa · 15/03/2023 18:34

I think it’s 9 months as that’s how long most get mat leave. You can take 12 months but the last 3 months are unpaid.

Show quote history

Ah yes you're right. That sounds more like the actual reason. Than it being anything to do with what's best for the child.

OP posts:
aSofaNearYou · 15/03/2023 18:36

Yes perhaps, and if so I'd like to see these studies / findings, or at least hear them mentioned by anyone? My point is actually they are not talking about children's welfare at all it doesn't even come into the conversation?

But they announced lots of things in the budget and they didn't offer studies for why they were good for people beyond economically. We weren't told why going back to work was good for retired people, either.

Irecan · 15/03/2023 18:36

journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0141076820903494

you can find a lot more studies on Google scholar

IAmTheWalrus85 · 15/03/2023 18:37

Irecan · 15/03/2023 18:26

@57NewPosts nobody wants evidence based advice on here do they? you have to laugh. I work in children’s mental health, and absolutely suicide and other mental health issues are related to poor early childhood outcomes such as attachment.

I don’t dispute attachment theory at all. But I’ve read Bowlby on attachment theory - have you? He talks about serious disruption to attachments formed at the very early age. Through early abuse, neglect and trauma. Illness, death and drug addiction. He certainly doesn’t doesn’t say anything about well-loved and cared for children going to nursery while their parents work for a living. And it’s really fucking offensive to equate the two.

Trixiefirecracker · 15/03/2023 18:37

Magentaa · 15/03/2023 18:30

You are so wrong!! My two children started nursery at 9 months old as that’s when my Nat pay ended. They have both been ahead with speech and language skills and also social skills. I know as I have numerous relatives that didn’t start nursery until 2/3. Also I have other family member me who’s children started at 9 months and again her children’s speech language and social skills are exceptional.

Show quote history

But that’s just your experience! How naive to think that means it’s the same for everyone across the board! My daughter went to Steiner ( but not until 5 and at that point she could not read or write) she is now extremely ahead of most of her piers but who knows if she was just exceptionally bright. You can’t just take a straw poll of folk you know and then claim it’s a given. 😂

57NewPosts · 15/03/2023 18:38

pointythings · 15/03/2023 18:35

@57NewPosts I worked in MH research for 12 years and those studies we had where attachment issues were a factor it was always around parents with serious mental health issues of their own/history of abuse/substance misuse. Not loving families where both parents worked. It's a nice narrative for the antis though.

Exactly. Some of the stories I hear are just dreadful. Abuse, neglect etc. These little babies and kids never stood a chance with their mental health, given their upbringing. It is offensive to them, to compare their childhood issues to kids of loving working parents who use childcare.

Reugny · 15/03/2023 18:39

ParadiseLaundry · 15/03/2023 17:58

*Not all friends have children the same age group at the same time or live near.

Not all places have playgroups open. Our playgroups are run by churches and part funded by the council. The volunteers are mostly older ladies who after Covid stopped volunteering so only one runs near us for those who live in a deprived estate.*

Firstly the children don't have to be the same age for them to socialise and be round other children.

If there is no playgroup in your area you (not you personally, just generally speaking) could volunteer to start one or pick up one that is no longer running. You can arrange meet ups in parks via social media. These are great ways to meet friends for both you and your children. You might not want to do these things of course, but it's not just a choice of sending a child to nursery to socialise or sitting at home alone with mum.

I work full-time as the higher earner in my relationship, so no I won't be doing that.

You sound exactly like the first childminder who responded to me - she presumed I was the one working PT not my DD's father.

avocadotofu · 15/03/2023 18:39

I agree OP but I think a lot of families need both parents working full time to afford everything.

Riapia · 15/03/2023 18:39

Surely childcare is there to help support those women tied to feckless men that don’t provide for them.
😁😁

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 18:40

Irecan · 15/03/2023 18:36

journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0141076820903494

you can find a lot more studies on Google scholar

Fuck me that's 1 of the worst written articles I've read

😂

SouthLondonMum22 · 15/03/2023 18:42

Yayyayitsaholiholiday · 15/03/2023 16:24

I agree OP.

Having worked in private nurseries I feel sure it’s not an ideal place for the under 2’s, or even under 3’s.

Very young staff who have gone into childcare as they’re not academic, rather than for a love of children.
New key workers all the time, so the bonds the child makes are regularly severed.

A lack of affection day to day. We weren’t allowed to kiss the children (understandable, but not ideal for the kids) and some settings (most, if not all now, I’d think) have a rule that no children are allowed on laps due to safeguarding.

I can’t see how it’s not damaging to their development when they’re in full time.

No amount of messy play (which is constantly highlighted here as a reason to use nurseries) can make up for lack of a stable, loving attachment to an adult for much of their waking day.

That is the opposite experience I've had so far. Maybe you just worked at bad nurseries?

At the nursery we use, there's one girl who is young and that's because she's at College and still qualifying. The others are all older and experienced with little turnaround.

DS has just started recently and at 3 months, is the youngest in the baby room so he gets lots of attention and affection. His keyworker is great, he is very attentive and wonderful with DS.

His nursery does have a good reputation to be fair and I put his name down when I was 12 weeks pregnant to hopefully get a place and thankfully, I did. Some childcare settings are poor but some of them provide excellent care.

Original poster
Ilikepinacoladass · 15/03/2023 18:42

MargaritMargo · 15/03/2023 18:26

This new policy is to allow women to get back to work if they need / want to and actually be able to afford some level of childcare.

Also as many have pointed out, is NOT full time. It’s nowhere near.

Stop looking to blame women for the choices they often feel they HAVE to make. And even more importantly WANT to make.

traipsing your toddler round Asda and the local park 3 times a week is not better than a professional, governed and secure early learning setting.

Again, were not really talking about toddlers. Free hours were already available for toddlers. There is lots of research to suggest toddlers do benefit for an amount of time in a childcare setting.

Would a 9 month old, or under two would be better off going shopping and to park with a parent 3 times a week than in childcare? I think maybe yes in a lot of circumstances?

It doesn't seem to be part of the debate at all.

OP posts:
Magentaa · 15/03/2023 18:42

Ilikepinacoladass · 15/03/2023 18:36

Ah yes you're right. That sounds more like the actual reason. Than it being anything to do with what's best for the child.

Show quote history

Your missing the point!! What do you want all women who have children to sit at home and claim benefits cos if I didn’t work that’s what would happen as we could not afford it otherwise. I really don’t get your point. Yes I was sad I had to leave my 9 month old at nursery for a few hours each day but they have been happy and thrived and tbh i actually like work and having adult conversations using my brain and I love picking my children up and hearing about their day and what they’ve been up to. You do you, but don’t put working mums down!!

Pinkdelight3 · 15/03/2023 18:43

Not rtft cos it's so long, but @Ilikepinacoladass -

the original aim was to ensure children have access to early education?

Did you notice that the government changed since that original aim? So it may well have put more focus on ensuring children had access to early education, but now it's about getting people out to work for the economy. Not rocket science, is it? The government is not one homogenous thing for all of time.

pointythings · 15/03/2023 18:44

@Botw1 agree, that is one incredibly bad article. For a start:

  • Conflating 'childcare settings' with Russian orphanages - that's just a mind boggling level of strawman
  • Failing to mention that the 'aggressive behaviour' quoted in the studies fell within the normal range of behaviour for that age group
  • Taking data from large US nurseries where children start as early as 6 weeks and extrapolating that to childcare settings which are radically different

That's not science, that is a biased hatchet job.

begoneday · 15/03/2023 18:45

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 17:51

@EasternEcho

Are you aware of any long term ill effects to Danish children?

Are you a country of sociopaths?

Danish children benefit from an outdoor education at that age. Forest schools and the like. The culture is different here in the UK. Have you ever spent a day in a nursery or childminders house ? It's not the idyllic outdoor childhood experienced by children in other countries where play and nurturing is valued as much as formal education is. Childcare here is designed to allow parents to go to work, it is NOT designed to benefit young children. The intention may be there, but the reality is very different.

playgroundwarrior · 15/03/2023 18:45

Completely agree and I say that as a working mother. We're just economic units to them without thought of what's best for the children.

I'd prefer to see real incentives for flexible work (including leadership positions) and better support for both men and women to stay home or work flexibly if that's what they want. Starting with a culture that normalises paternity leave.

Low cost childcare is good but I'm reluctant to celebrate a policy that sees more 9 month old babies in nursery 30 hours a week. Of course, we don't have much choice but to do this at the moment and this is the only option for many excellent parents.

Maybebabyno2 · 15/03/2023 18:46

Ilikepinacoladass · 15/03/2023 18:42

Again, were not really talking about toddlers. Free hours were already available for toddlers. There is lots of research to suggest toddlers do benefit for an amount of time in a childcare setting.

Would a 9 month old, or under two would be better off going shopping and to park with a parent 3 times a week than in childcare? I think maybe yes in a lot of circumstances?

It doesn't seem to be part of the debate at all.

Show quote history

Thats nice, but mooching round the supermarket and going to the park isn't going to pay my bills.

Giving up my job would result in my family losing our homes. My kids would get lots of time at the park then because they would be sleeping in the tunnel slide.

I feel this might be more detrimental to their overall health than 3 days at the childminders.

Tandora · 15/03/2023 18:46

Penniefarthing · 15/03/2023 17:52

I don’t think that’s the point. It’s good that the government is providing it for those that need and want it but women are already pulled in enough directions and if you don’t want and don’t have to go back to work then that’s a perfectly valid decision. In some ways this debate just highlights the many ways women are made to feel guilty whatever decision they make.

Show quote history

Of course if women choose to stay home that’s valid! But doesn’t mean that families shouldn’t have support with childcare fees if they need it!

Hostofgoldendaffodils · 15/03/2023 18:47

62% of mothers would stay at home if money was no object. So why don't they use the money they're putting into free childcare to pay these parents to stay at home?

NerrSnerr · 15/03/2023 18:47

Hostofgoldendaffodils · 15/03/2023 18:47

62% of mothers would stay at home if money was no object. So why don't they use the money they're putting into free childcare to pay these parents to stay at home?

The economy, the gender pay gap etc etc

begoneday · 15/03/2023 18:47

It may help working parents (and I am one) to feel less guilty by ignoring the realities of childcare in the UK but the fact is that the industry is struggling to nurture children.

ParadiseLaundry · 15/03/2023 18:49

@Reugny I literally said not you personally, it was a list of ways someone could provide opportunities for their child to socialise with others/meet new friends with similar age children if they wanted to so I have no idea why you are giving me your personal circumstances as some kind of gotcha Blush

Maybebabyno2 · 15/03/2023 18:49

Hostofgoldendaffodils · 15/03/2023 18:47

62% of mothers would stay at home if money was no object. So why don't they use the money they're putting into free childcare to pay these parents to stay at home?

Because most mums earn a lot more than £4.50 an hour / 30 hours a week. I couldn't afford to drop to that! I don't know anyone who could!

Tandora · 15/03/2023 18:49

LadyHarmby · 15/03/2023 17:52

Are they annoyed? I think they’re just wondering if the priority is taxes, economy, individual choice and children’s welfare, in that order.

Show quote history

Individual choice?! So you think child welfare is protected by enslaving women?
OF COURSE it’s in the interests of child welfare to provide social and economic support to families. why is this even a debate?? If women were being forced to go back to work, that would be awful; but all that’s being proposed is help with the extortionate costs of childcare , so that mothers can go back to work; and afford children.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet Log In
This thread is not accepting new messages.