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

[Ilikepinacoladass]

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?

I was just thinking the same.

@TeenLifeMum

Did your oh mind missing out?

Countries with some of the highest maternal employment also have the happiest kids based on UNICEF research (eg Iceland, Denmark).

I agree it has to be high quality though and not a way of pushing early academics - kids in those countries spend all day playing until they are 6 or 7!

I know it's a choice to take up the free hours.

I do think having 30 free hours available from 9 months will encourage more to go back to work at that point (or earlier than they would have done) which is of course the whole point of the policy.

It also then becomes harder to justify (to yourself and others NOT going back at this point)? As you're wasting the free hours, and potentially earnings you could be making?

And is this good for children that's what I'd like to hear more discussion about, not only about whether it's good for the economy.

I honestly don't get this idea that a family should be supported by 1 wage.

Where does it come from?

And in the media childcare always seems to be by default equated to nurseries? Childminders and nannies barely get mentioned as an option, it seems bizarre to me?

I wasn’t allowed to do after school activities. I had to sign my own grade cards with a parent’s name because they couldn't be bothered to look at them. No guidance, support, or anything. Couldn’t be bothered to come watch me in a school play. Very little time spent. I don’t understand the point of your comment ‘It’s a choice that parents make at the end of the day.’ Uh, yeah I know that. I did things very differently when I became a parent.

LOL

@MysteryBelle

Whats funny?

Good point!

Figure it out.

No the point of the policy is to enable women to go back to work if they want to. I see no reason at all why it would compel women who don’t want to.

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 really wouldn't worry. This debate has been going on on MN since I joined in about 2006. Nothing has actually changed. Some women want to be SAHMs and can afford to be. Some want to be SAHMs and can't afford to be, so peddle the myth that childcare is beneficial. Some genuinely don't want to be SAHMs, in which case childcare probably actually is beneficial. Some want to be SAHMs but would actually be really crap at it (because their idea of bringing a child up would be to shout at them and slap them), in which case 'free' childcare is a godsend to the child.

You agreed with OP re childcare provisions not always being the best route for children's well-being with both parents being at work.

I provided an alternative and pointed out regardless of parents working or not, children's best outcomes will be based on parenting, not necessarily if they work.

@Botw1 it would be nice if it were possible for a family to support themselves on one wage where both parents agree that one should stay home. However, it should always be a free choice made by both with no pressure from one on the other to do something they do not wish to do. I was not cut out to be a SAHM. Ideally I would have gone part time, but back then that option wasn't available. And full time was fine.

@MysteryBelle so your parents were a bit rubbish, weren't they? Because it is actually possible to love and care for your children, to support them at school and be there for special events, even if you are working full time. You just have to make the effort. I'm sorry your parents didn't.

This is really sad and shit, but does the option of giving parents more free hours childcare hurt the children in situations like this? Seems to me they would likely benefit from a childcare setting tbh.

But not all mums do want that. Some mums want to work but can't because of childcare and this will help them.

Why is it ok for working mums to potentially feel guilty but not SAHM's? That seems to be what some people are saying anyway.

And some of the best maternity leave policies (Iceland 12 months at 80% pay and a further 16 weeks unpaid, Denmark 12 months paid, can do 2 years unpaid, shorter working week and more annual leave).

I haven’t read the full thread, but I think anything that gives people a choice can only be a good thing.

also consider it the other way round- I work and send my son to childcare, I went back to work as a lawyer when he was 6m old. We can afford the childcare and im lucky enough that I earn more per day than it costs for childcare (albeit not mega bucks- I’m still in lowest tax bracket).

I appreciate not everyone is in that situation, and for that reason I think the changes are great as they enable people (mostly women) to go back to work should they wish .

the funding will mean I, and others in my situation can reduce my hours as I’ll be spending less on childcare so it will offset things, and can probably afford a 4 day week. the money I would have spent in childcare I could take as an unpaid day off instead and actually see my child instead of working 50+ hours a week sometimes

it will re balance things for everyone who chooses to use it to their own advantage depending on circumstances

A lot of people on this thread need to learn the difference between opinion (expert or otherwise) and evidence. It’s terrifying to read what are unproven, tentative, gut based links at best being spouted under the banner of ‘evidence’. But that’s mumsnet for you.

@botw1 yes he did. He had a long commute but changed, took a pay cut and took a more flexible job that was closer to home. He now actually does more childcare than me as he works from home and covers taking them to clubs whereas I’m in the office 4 days a week, home one.

@pointythings

Nice? Maybe. But not essential.

It seems an odd ideal to me

@TeenLifeMum

Thats good.

Shame he missed out on the early years though

Yes, for sure, but parents stay home for a year then overwhelmingly they go back to work!

It's also when a lot of people run out of maternity pay.