Page 13 | To think that what's best for the children gets left out of the free childcare conversation

Ilikepinacoladass · 2023-03-15T15:47:10+00:00

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?

Rockmehardplace · 15/03/2023 19:09

totally agree OP. I wouldn’t do a 10 hour day at work so don’t know how anyone can think it’s more beneficial for a baby to do this at nursery.

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 19:09

@Littlefaeries

How many women were in positions of power in the 60s and 70s?

How many female mps? Doctors? Scientists? Lawyers? Judges?

Somebodyelsestrain · 15/03/2023 19:10

When I rule the world, all mothers will be given a full year maternity leave on full pay, in recognition of the fourth trimester/importance of the mother/child diad.

Fathers will be forced to take a year's paternity leave when their babies are between 1 and 2 (I accept this is totally unworkable but hear me out). They can have full pay too. This gives the children more excellent 1:1 care from a parent and, as men will have to take lengthy leave the motherhood penalty will be evened out. No more employers discriminating against women - men too will have long periods out of the workplace.

Then from 2-6 (for in my utopia, school starts at 6 not 4) all families will be given an allowance to either pay for childcare, or work part time, or pay for grandparents to help out, or be a SAHP, or whatever works for them.

There will be zero pay gap between men and women and there will be no greater expectation on women to work part time or be a SAHP than for men. The experience of fathers being a full time SAHP for a year means both parents will take equal responsibility for children.

There will be no penalty for working part time either, so both parents can choose to do so without feeling that both of them are jeopardizing their career. And on full time hours, a 35 hour working week will pay enough to give a good quality of life. I'd also end the long work hours culture.

The childcare on offer will be of really high quality, with well qualified staff who are paid accordingly.

I accept I have no clue how to make this work...

Reugny · 15/03/2023 19:11

Littlefaeries · 15/03/2023 19:04

Whilst I think parents should work if they wish I don’t think the country was on its knees in the 60’s and 70’s when women stayed at home with dc.

Show quote history

What the 3 day working week?

Strikes?

Yeah right....

kc431 · 15/03/2023 19:13

Reugny · 15/03/2023 19:11

What the 3 day working week?

Strikes?

Yeah right....

Show quote history

Not to mention the 25% inflation! Yeah, great times!

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 19:13

@early30smum

It may not have been your intention but I also always think there's an air of a sneer, a bit of a superiority thing when women say,

Well of course, some women just aren't cut out to be a sahm! They'd be miserable poor dears. They just couldn't do it. Poor kids

Like it's the ideal every woman should be striving for and if she's not then either she's lying or she's defective

Thats shit is never levelled at men though.

WelHong · 15/03/2023 19:13

In my experience, being a SAHP suits very few people

There are so many things to disagree with (and agree with) on this thread that I'm picking on this one.

In my experience, most mothers would love to be SAHMs but can't be because their families need both incomes. I had a hard-earned professional career that meant fuck all to me once I had children. I was fortunate in that I could give it up, and even though it would be better for me now if I'd kept my career, I would still make the same decision when I think about how much my DC and I gained when they were small.

Unless the family is severely dysfunctional, I can see no benefit at all to the child being in any form of childcare under two at the very earliest. I'd say three was the ideal age to start with pre-school for a couple of sessions per week.

Reugny · 15/03/2023 19:14

@Botw1 don't worry your pretty little head as you couldn't get a mortgage, bank account etc without your husband's say so.

And if you wanted to work but he didn't want you to then.....

Reugny · 15/03/2023 19:17

@WelHong Being a

SAHP would be my idea of hell. My DP on the other hand....

I actually work and have worked with women and men with the same mindset as me.

@Botw1 there are a few on this thread it seems.

Darkstar4855 · 15/03/2023 19:17

Blimey, what a judgemental post! Some kids thrive in childcare, some do better at home. It’s not black and white. As PP have said, this only gives you about 2-2.5 days at week when averaged over the whole year so it’s far from full time.

What it DOES do is give mothers - all mothers, as opposed to just financially comfortable ones - a choice.

My son (only child) went to preschool 3 days a week from the age of ten months so I could go back to work. He has thrived from the social interaction, play and learning he gets at his small, friendly preschool. I in turn am a better mother on the other four days because my life is balanced. I can afford (mentally and financially) to do far more with him than I would have managed as a SAHP. I have a well paid job so could afford childcare but not everyone is lucky enough to have that choice.

My only concern is that the government don’t underfund nursery providers to the point where they all shut down.

beAsensible1 · 15/03/2023 19:18

MysteryBelle · 15/03/2023 16:22

Agree, op. Such an important topic. We were latchkey kids and I hardly saw my mother. She didn’t have to work but my father told her to. It affected our childhood negatively. We were an afterthought. I did things differently as an adult.

I'm the alternative where both my parents worked and I was never a latchkey child.

I was either at an after school activity from which my parents would collect me or i'd meet them at work to go home.

It a choice that parents make at the end of the day.

early30smum · 15/03/2023 19:18

@Botw1 I’m really sorry if it came across that way because I 100% agree that when a child has two parents they should be equally responsible for them, and all decisions about them- and that includes childcare. I have lost count of the number of times my husband has been applauded for taking out our baby on his own (!!!) for example- it’s ridiculous.

NeshNamechanger · 15/03/2023 19:19

Mischance · 15/03/2023 16:23

I am with you OP in some ways - I am concerned that in this new drive for child care outside of the home, the value and importance of child-rearing as an important aspect of life is being forgotten - the idea seems to be that you are only working if you are getting paid and are paying taxes. The concept of child-rearing as worthwhile work is in danger of going down the pan. It is a valid choice of career to be a parent at home with your child, just as it is to be at external work as a lawyer or whatever.

All parents raise their children whether they SAH or WOH..
I've seen nothing that suggest children are better off with a SAHP, in fact all the studies shows girls in particular do better with a WOH mother.

We have a huge problem with child neglect and poverty in the UK and I think it's fantastic that these children will get opportunities they wouldn't otherwise.
There are children going to school not having eaten and children who start school with zero socialisation and basic skills.
This will hopefully also help those mothers who can't afford to work and also benefit their children.
Look at the terrible cases of child neglect recently.
People are applying this to their own MC life, if you don't want to use CC, then don't but don't stand in the way of those parents and children who desperately need it.

beAsensible1 · 15/03/2023 19:19

Somebodyelsestrain · 15/03/2023 19:10

When I rule the world, all mothers will be given a full year maternity leave on full pay, in recognition of the fourth trimester/importance of the mother/child diad.

Fathers will be forced to take a year's paternity leave when their babies are between 1 and 2 (I accept this is totally unworkable but hear me out). They can have full pay too. This gives the children more excellent 1:1 care from a parent and, as men will have to take lengthy leave the motherhood penalty will be evened out. No more employers discriminating against women - men too will have long periods out of the workplace.

Then from 2-6 (for in my utopia, school starts at 6 not 4) all families will be given an allowance to either pay for childcare, or work part time, or pay for grandparents to help out, or be a SAHP, or whatever works for them.

There will be zero pay gap between men and women and there will be no greater expectation on women to work part time or be a SAHP than for men. The experience of fathers being a full time SAHP for a year means both parents will take equal responsibility for children.

There will be no penalty for working part time either, so both parents can choose to do so without feeling that both of them are jeopardizing their career. And on full time hours, a 35 hour working week will pay enough to give a good quality of life. I'd also end the long work hours culture.

The childcare on offer will be of really high quality, with well qualified staff who are paid accordingly.

I accept I have no clue how to make this work...

your first two paragraphs a basically finland

mrshenny · 15/03/2023 19:21

Whalesong · 15/03/2023 18:10

I agree OP. I'm actually from a Scandinavian country, and one of the reasons I chose to raise my children in the UK was that SAHP are a completely foreign concept there. They practically don't exist - apart from anything else families need both parents to earn, due to the way the tax system is built up. And if someone is a SAHP despite this, it's a very lonely existence. No playgroups for children over about a year old (when everyone else goes back to work), coffee mornings etc.

Even when families have more babies and go on parental leave again, the older siblings are left in nursery since it's free - and it's considered best for them to stay in a routine, raised by the State to become good little Scandinavian citizens who do everything exactly like everyone else.

SAHPs are looked down on. When mine were little and I was a SAHM here in the UK, it was clear that friends and family in my original country had zero understanding for why I chose to do it, especially as I have a high level university education.

So whilst I'm all for choice and do welcome this new initiative, like OP I'd also like to see more of a debate about what's best for the children (and I'm absolutely not saying that that's necessarily having a SAHP). Let's make sure that we don't remove the choice in the other direction, as a society.

As a SAHP I do worry about this too. Will I be looked down upon for choosing to stay at home? (Even though it's out of choice as my husband has a good salary and we can afford it and I want to.) Will society switch to expect mums back to work or will there still be a balance? I hope it doesn't swing too much the other way!

I'm happy with the news for the many families who will benefit from this financially and for the women who want to work! This is something women have been campaigning for!

OP I do agree with you to an extent, I do however believe that women having the choice is powerful and beneficial and it's up to each parent to decide what's right for their kids, not the government. For those that want to stay at home because they really want to and can afford it, I don't think this will all of a sudden change their mind and have them doing their CV's anytime soon! For everyone else it gives them options which is great!

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 19:22

@early30smum

No, not your comment specifically, it just reminded me

ort1gia · 15/03/2023 19:22

Absolutely OP and I was thinking the same thing today.

The govt don't give a toss about families - they just now want 'inactive' mums out working because their moronic Brexit has meant the workforce has shrunk. Who would have guessed it? It's all about economic expediency dressed up as "Ooh look you lucky mums - now you can hand your 9 month olds over to an institution for FREE - and be run ragged doing some some shit job so we can get our money's worth out of you ... yay! Sod the child's welfare - they'll survive.., Off you go.,,"

Albiboba · 15/03/2023 19:22

MsJD · 15/03/2023 18:58

I have been trying to get my head round putting a 9-month-old baby out to child care.

Statutory maternity pay ends at 9 months, I don’t see what’s to difficult to understand.
The majority of women take off less than a year for maternity.

Botw1 · 15/03/2023 19:23

@mrshenny

Do you worry that currently working mums are looked down on by society?

TeenLifeMum · 15/03/2023 19:24

I once had this argument with david laws mp… I was sahm at the time to 3dc under 4 and he was at my door campaigning and telling me the Lib Dems would provide childcare so I could work. I asked what made him think my dc would be better in a nursery rather than with me?

maybe it would be better for us to be able to live on a normal single income rather than forcing dc into childcare and making mums feel guilty for wanting to stay home while dc are little?

I’m not really sure what the answer is. I work full time now but took 2 years out when dc were small which I’m truly glad I did, although it was forced on me as I couldn’t afford childcare. I just think, with hindsight, I would have missed lots.

catshreddedthesofa · 15/03/2023 19:24

I do see what you mean OP. It feels like only one piece of the puzzle.

Yes the government should provide more support for people who want to work, but they should also be doing more to stem the cost of living so it's not essential for both parents to work full time to have a reasonable (or even basic) standard of living. Not to mention what is done to support single parents...

And they should be doing more to tackle the assumption that it's the woman who will stay at home, give up her earning potential and pension contributions because it's "not financially viable" for her to work. We need a more equal parenting split, where both parents take equal responsibility for their kids. Some forward thinking companies are moving in the right direction, but there is so much work to be done!

How we do any of that I don't know 🤷🏼‍♀️

TheWayTheLightFalls · 15/03/2023 19:25

There are just too many variables to assess imo:

quality of childcare on offer (I can’t be the only one, in a bijou part of London, seeing very young kids looked after by disinterested 19yo apprentices on £4-whatever an hour?)
quality of childcare at home. Not just extreme examples of mental ill health but the difference between planning fun and enriching days with young children, gently introducing them to new foods and experiences, and someone who doesn’t have the practical, emotional, logistical or financial resources to do much more than bung the telly on and hand over chocolate buttons for the majority of the time
Not that anyone would delve into it, but children are individuals. I have twins. One is sociable and wants nothing more than to explore and play with every person or animal we see; the other clings to me like a limpet and wants one on one time and stories. Is nursery going to be equally beneficial to both?

TheWayTheLightFalls · 15/03/2023 19:25

(As a start!)

NerrSnerr · 15/03/2023 19:26

No one is forcing anyone to use childcare they don't want. If you're a SAHP and can afford to do it then that's great.

Don't you think the parents who currently can't afford to return to work after having a baby should be given support to do this? Why is this perceived as a bad thing? We all know that the longer the career gap, the harder it is to get back to work.

It appears that many of the people getting annoyed on this thread are those who are SAHP by choice and have the family money to either work or stay at home. I can't believe people are that naive to think that others don't have the choices they do?

noworklifebalance · 15/03/2023 19:27

Ilikepinacoladass · 15/03/2023 15:59

Yes of course having a roof over their heads and food on the table is essential. But it think we should be aiming a bit higher than just survival?

And a parent forced to stay at home looking after children against his or her will is probably not going to be great for a child's well being. And in that case maybe childcare from 9 months would be a better option.

But for the other people?

I haven't heard it mentioned once in the news about what's best for the child. It always just seems to be about the economy and getting parents back to work.

Isn’t it for the parents to decide what is best for the child and family as a whole - the child does not exist in isolation ?
The additional free hours empowers them to do so to greater extent than before.
It is not for the government to decide whether a parent should stay at home to raise the children - each family’s circumstances are unique.