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?

@57NewPosts

I wonder what magically happens at four/five that these mummies can let their kids be ‘raised’ by a stranger.

They're older, and start appreciating and needing stimulation with their peers. Before this age, they are not neurologically developed enough on a social level to want or need to play for long periods of time with others. And in reference to your previous post, I was never a stay at home mum - I worked four days a week (shorter days) so had a good mix of looking after the babies/toddlers and pulling in a wage, albeit part-time.

it was really hard for women to keep their job when they married, whether they had kids or not

yes my mum had friends who kept the fact that they were married a secret so they could keep their jobs (this was in the 1960s). My mum said where she worked, she earned the same as the men did for the same job. That must have been super-unusual for the time.

She worked part-time from when I was 6 so I was brought up with the idea that it was normal for mums to work.

I wonder what magically happens at four/five that these mummies can let their kids be ‘raised’ by a stranger

Yes I have always wondered this too. And of course it's only the "mummies" who are letting their kids be "raised" by strangers. The fathers don't come into it. This is all so depressing on a site mainly used by women.

The time delay is a concern. Around here several nurseries and other childcare settings have closed as they can't afford to keep going.
There won't be enough places for parents to use their funded hours and how much will they have to top up? The quality of provision with the new ratios and lack of other investment is also a concern.

@Blueisthecolour1

Except the question is

What would the baby / child want

You honestly think if you asked a 4 yo if they'd rather go to school or stay home with mummy they'd pick school?

Anyway I don't think British kids are physiologically different from Nordic kids, who seem to do just fine with universal childcare from a young age.

You honestly think if you asked a 4 yo if they'd rather go to school or stay home with mummy they'd pick school

Yes. When I started school (at 5) when we got to the playground I apparently said to my mum "you're not coming in with me are you". I loved the idea of school!

Also - if kids don't want to go to school maybe they'd prefer to stay at home with daddy. Just saying, like.

@lieselotte

Except posters have been very clear that it's mum at home that's best. Not dad.

Dad is an irrelevance.

(except to pay the bills ofc)

People arguing that a child shouldn't be separated from its mother are unlikely to think a 4 yo will be happy being separated from its mother

@Botw1

There's a hell of a difference isn't there between "want" and "need." From personal observation (just with my two) I would summarise that at the age of 4 onwards they actually enjoyed going into nursery. Little ones (we're talking here about 9 months - 3 yrs approximately) need their parent(s). They don't need full-time nursery. Not at all. Neither do they want it. It just upsets them

From what I’ve seen the pandemic has finally meant the sector I know has become much better at being flexible.

It used to be woeful and high cc costs together would just result in younger female employees as so many left. It was quite depressing to see hardly any older faces, and age 40 and over female was very rare.

30 free hours really helped and was introduced at some point after 1st Dc.

Costs are so high here both flexibility and decreasing them should help. It’s a shame in many other posts pp think Labour won’t go ahead and chances of it happening are minuscule. Women will be making decisions and consistency would be helpful.

@Blueisthecolour1

Thats not my experience of babies in nursery

They were perfectly happy.

Seems that what's best for the kid really means what the mum is comfortable with

Hypocrisy is strong.

It doesn't upset all of them, and this is purely opinion. You cannot definitively say that it does not benefit any children under 3.

Nor can you say they don't need it.

If there's no one else to watch them, they definitely do.

I agree, OP.

Do you have any understanding of child development at all?

@Botw1

Also let's be realistic here about the whole "mum/dad" thing. You keep bringing it up because it obviously hits a nerve. Babies want mum more than dad (in the main.) Especially if mum is breastfeeding. Dad can't replicate that, even if mum pumps and dad feeds - it kinda works but it's not the same. So yes, I'm saying that babies want mum more than dad in the early stages. And that does not in any way minimise the dad's input - it''s just that his input takes a slightly different form in the early days. (Generally speaking.) The roles mum and dad play, whatever they are, are not mutually exclusive are they?

@ArabellaScott

There are some individuals here who clearly don't have any understanding of child development. It's really annoying

I totally agree which is why I previous wrote I’m not talking to your husband - im talking to you. You have worded it better.
Its like listening to my two primary aged boys squabble about who’s in the wrong.

@Blueisthecolour1

I keep bringing it up because its so important.

Im not sure what nerve you think that is?

I strongly believe in the huge benefits of equal parenting.

To children and parents and society.

Mums and dad's aren't interchangeble. But they are both capable of parenting equally.

1 is not more important than the other

Well there is actually alot of research into how important a child's first 1000 days are and how important their primary caregiver is. That's a disingenuous comment there's no way a very young child would benefit for full time nursery, ignoring the research, common sense and basic human nature would tell you this

Or some of us choose to have children with men with integrity that won't screw us over?

My DS started nursery at 10 months and doesn’t seem damaged by it, he’s a happy, confident child. My mum went back to work when I was 4 months old and I’ve survived with no major trauma. I’m a frontline NHS worker, like many of my “mum” friends are, if we all stayed at home to raise our children instead of staying in work, the NHS would be in even more dire straits than it already is. My children are important, but so is my work. I’m sure everyone saying that women should be at home with their children also expected a midwife to look after them in labour? Factor in that I’m also the higher earner so had to go back to work as I’m quite keen on avoiding homelessness & being able to buy food etc. Anything that makes life less of a struggle for those of us who have no choice but to work - and / or genuinely want to work - is welcome.

@Ilikepinacoladass

you only need to do a quick google to see lots of studies that show the impact of childcare and preschool education on children long term from an educational perspective - particularly children who come under the 'disadvantaged' category where outcomes at A Level are considerably improved. Of course, there will equally be studies which show a detrimental impact for some children, I am sure. It is up to each family and set of parents to make a decision that works for them - in my case, my ex husband walked out when we had 3 under 5 and it was essential I worked full-time to support our children because he never did. All 3 are doing perfectly well - eldest is at university, the other two are on track to follow, they all have friends, socialise, make mainly sensible decisions and aren't out terrorising the local neighbourhood. They are children who had free school meals for a while, were subjects of the Pupil Premium for many years and who statistically are considered disadvantaged both because of my single parent status and where we live which is also statistically a pretty dreadful place to be. But I am educated to Masters level with professional qualifications and a career - and there is much in the research literature about educational outcomes (which is what we're talking about here) being linked mainly to maternal levels of education. In other words, it was statistically unlikely they would have poor outcomes because of who I am.

I would have loved to have stayed at home - I am sure my children would have had a very different childhood if that had been the case. I am not sure that would have made a difference, however, to where they are now. Just a different path to get there.

doenst make much of a difference.
Right ok. You have the opinions that I mentioned in my earlier thread.

1. Mental gymnastics to Justify
2. Every argument starts with me and I and what the woman wants. Never want the baby needs.

It’s the same over and over.

@PurpleWisteria1

The baby needs a loving home with secure attachments

Perfectly doable while using nurseries

No conflict of needs