To think it’s crazy you can parent whatever way you want?!

[ItsGivingJudgey]

This OP will sound judgey has hell hence my username. I’ve NC but long time user.

I know it’s a free country (in the UK at least). I also really support human rights, however I still find it mad that you can have a child and raise them whatever way you want no matter how batshit so long as it doesn’t meet the very high legal requirements for removal.

Examples:

ONE:

My SIL does F all with her child and he’s now 2.5 years old. He literally does not leave the house other than for absolute essentials such as medical appointments. He doesn’t go to nursery despite it being free (she doesn’t work). He’s never been swimming, to feed the ducks, to the beach or the local park. He’s never met other children outside of his cousins. He’s only ever been to soft play twice when I have physically picked them up to take them with me and my dc.
He only ever leaves the house when my in-laws take him food shopping with them just to get him out. He can literally go 1-2 weeks without being outside his front door.
SIL on the other hand goes on holidays, days out with her boyfriend, cocktails with friends etc. She just has the in-laws babysit when she does. Her reasoning? ‘It’s a faff’ ‘the weather is bad’ or she ‘can’t be arsed today’. She was very lazy before becoming a parent but her laziness now has extended to her child who literally lives his entire life within the confines of the house. It’s nothing to do with mental health on her part, it’s pure laziness. She’ll only take him out if a member of the family with a car physically goes and picks them up and drops them back off home. The nursery is less than a 5 minute walk from her house. She was badgered by the health visitor to enroll him so she did it, took him for a week and then never bothered again as it was ‘too much faffing about for just a few hours’.

He lives off microwave meals and tinned food. Wakes up and spends the entire day in front of the tv or with his tablet. When my in-laws went away last year he didn’t leave the house for 3 weeks!!

It doesn’t meet the legal requirements or thresholds for social services. He is fed and clothed and has lots of toys. But it’s crazy that he is able to spend his entire life within the confines of a house and that’s that.

TWO:

My cousin. Very well educated, affluent and has always been a bit eccentric as is her DH. However over the years they have joined a kind of weird religion/cult like group and are massive conspiracy theorists. They homeschool their kids (fine), but have indoctrinated them with mad beliefs. The kids including the baby are vegan. Their unvaccinated. They can only bath in this specially filtered water. The kids are feral and not allowed to watch tv, listen to any type of mainstream music only this specifically selected whale like music. They avoid any type of radiation and limit sources of power so in the evenings the house is lit by candlelight and an open fire. The kids wear this robe like clothing that seems impractical. The kids no nothing outside of their parents beliefs. They have no awareness of the outside world. They only socialise with the other people in this conspiracy group that also homeschool.

My cousin and her husband are well meaning and obviously it’s their right to believe what they wish. But their kids won’t know how to use the internet, any real world references, learn about other religions or cultures. Surely this will do long term harm in some way?

The children couldn’t tell you what spaghetti bolognaise is or what a smartphone/tablet is or that there was ever a world war or even how what a kettle
is for. But they can tell you about crystal healing powers. What if when they get to 18 they want to live a ‘mainstream’ life and join society? How will they manage? Get a job? Make friends with peers?

It’s not that I believe there’s only one right way to parent or anything because I don’t. However I find it mad that you can have a baby and so long as you meet very basic standards, you can literally do as you want with actual human beings.

Please tell me if I’m being unreasonable to think it’s not right and if I am being unreasonable why so? I feel so sorry for these children.

How does your SIL fund this lifestyle of staying home all day gaming?

If she's on Universal Credit, once her son turned 1 year old she would have to attend regular appointments at the JC to take part in activities to prepare for work etc. Then apply for part time jobs of 25 hours per week. Her son would have to go into nursery using the free childcare she qualifies for then. Single parents can't choose to remain unemployed with no JC contact these days unless child is under 1 year.

They do.

all home educated children are required to be registered with their LA and are monitored.

Can I ask out of interest how this works? Say you’re on UC and you have a 1 year old- and you say you have to go to the JC and do activities and then apply for jobs. What if you have no one to look after your child during said activities? What if the only jobs you can get won’t pay childcare? Genuinely interested.

I think you are all nuts. Why does a 2 year old HAVE to go to nursery?? Research shows that children benefit more from being with their main care giver until they are at least 3.
All my kids have been with me or grandparents u til they start school nursery.

A 2 year old absolutely does not have to go out every day. Playing with mom, discovering foods, role playing, being in garden etc is just as beneficial.

That's not correct. You have to look for work once your child is 3.

That's not true, there is no such requirement.

It doesn't sound like the little boy is doing any of that. In that case nursery could be beneficial.

You know nothing about home education so take your ignorance elsewhere.

Get your facts straight please. There is NO legal requirement in the UK for home educators to register with the LA. It is also UNLAWFUL for LA's to monitor home educating families.

There's been free 15 hours from the term after two for CERTAIN kids for years. DS is 8, we qualified. Household income under a threshold, certain health needs. It's due to change but at this moment in time, if you qualify in England you should get a card through the door notifying you. Does your partner work?

Research shows that disadvantaged 2 year olds from some families do actually benefit from nursery which is why the government offers 15 hours to certain 2 year olds.

Unless the children are being abused it is none of your business. Out of interest OP, do you have children of your own? If you do have children I would suggest you focus on bringing them up in the best way you see fit, instead of making judgements about other peoples' choices and lifestyles. If you don't have children of your own I would say you should never tell anyone else how to tie their own laces if you have never walked in their shoes.

Research also shows a dramatic increase in cortisol and stress levels when children 3 and under are placed in nursery full time.

You can find research that supports children growing up with working parents too.

Such as research shows that working mothers especially benefit girls as they are more likely to grow up to have their own careers and be more financially secure than girls who grow up with SAHM's. Working mothers also benefit boys as when they grow up they are more likely to contribute to housework and spend more time caring for family members.

I somewhat agree with this. When I was growing up - very rurally - my father was often away for 6 weeks at a time and my mother didn't drive. We didn't have the all the activities that it seems children have now - we just had the library and a park near by. None of us went to pre-school. We didn't have a huge amount of toys, either, as we weren't well-off, and our we lived far away from any family, too.

But in MN terms, we were severely neglected?

I agree. That sort of attitude is getting into very dangerous territory.

I agree with this, I would say nursery is beneficial in cases where kids aren't actually stimulated or interacting with their caregiver/s and instead just plonked in front of a screen

Yep. I was a child in the 60s and my first experience of any children other than family or neighbours was when I started school at the age of five, and I'm not even sure there was anywhere for me to go. Somehow I, and my friends, managed to cope with life. My young world revolved around my parents and my grandmother - there was no such thing as soft play (whatever that is, I'm not in the UK) or a myriad of activities which children apparently "should" be doing.

And in Australia. Aborigine children taken away from their parents because white people thought they didn't parent well. Aborigine parents did things like teach their child to hunt, allowed them to not wear clothes, sleep on the floor on a hunting trip.

It's so difficult to tell what is a cult and what damage does it do? Or does it not do.

Some ultra orthodox jews live their lives within their own communities.

Amish are similar.

They believe they are doing the best for their children and community. Who is to say whether they are or are not?

Example 1 is border line neglect especially if she goes out. BUT he will go to school soon so will have social life and will make friends.

I grew up with no social life outside of school apart from Family and lots of cousins as I was too abnormal for the kids at school. Fine they played with me at school but being a different ethnicity and religion meant I was excluded from everything. My parents were relaxed but no one wanted to befriend me as I was different. I grew up fine I have strong family bonds.
But my parents were fantastic and did loads with us, trips, outings, swiming, roller blasing, biking etc etc. They were very hands on.

2nd one isn't as bad as the first. I agree with them on a few things. Yes the government and water companies acknowledge water contamination but cant be arsed to fix it as it wip coat £30billion to tax payers. There are peer reviewed studies on the contaminations. Power to them if they can afford filtered safe water. Us peseants just suffer.

We will be homeschooling our kids and we do not vaccinate (I have a million vaccinations as I worked in the NHS). Have done my own peer reviewed research. We also don't do TV
But allow monitored screen time on my Mobile / Laptop. Our child is bright and super social.
We actually go to loads of groups but again being and looking different no one includes us any groups outside of the playgroup. they do lots but never tell us.
We try to integrate but the door has been shut closed on us.

So yes your judgment is fair in some parts but the reat is opinion. But the first one is concerning. Instead of judging I would just be more hands on aunty and get the kids out more often or have sleep overa so they have a good 2 days for freedom. Staying indoors for weeks is not healthy for anyone.

There is being concerned for a child/ren and there is being a overinvested busy body

That sounds like my early childhood; I spent a lot of time at home doing simple things like finger paints and reading/being read to, and a lot of time walking round our village, with just my mum. No money for structured activities and I'm not even sure there were any. Not many toys either. We watched kids' telly (such as it was in the late 70s) but I had hardly any screen time compared to what's available today.

And no, I wouldn't say either of us were neglected. But going to the park and library with a parent like (I assume) you did, or walking round the village, looking at and talking about plants, horses, birds etc, and doing simple craft things, like me, isn't the same as hardly leaving the house and mainly having a tablet for stimulation.

I think this sounds sensible, particularly about society, freedom and consent. The rule of law applies to us all, regardless of social/religious/cultural differences, and I think everyone should be exposed from a young age to the concept of it. If someone wants to teach their child at home that (for example) in their religion being gay is a sin, then I personally think that's execrable, but they have freedom of belief. BUT everyone should also be aware of what the actual laws are on issues like this.

I don't think anyone is saying that. For a start, most posters who have said they think the OP's nephew is neglected have acknowledged that it isn't severe when you consider the forms that neglect and abuse can take. And the child does have a huge amount of toys apparently - it's not material things that are the issue, but the lack of interaction and the fact that the mother seemingly can't be bothered to do things with him. (I agree with those who have suggested that she may in fact have some mental health problems and be in need of support and education rather than punishment however.)
It is in fact the lack of the basic stuff like going to the park and library etc that is the worry. To my mind, the fact that the child apparently does not go outdoors for weeks at a time is a concern. Unless they live somewhere like Hampton Court Palace and he has the Long Gallery to run around in, how does a child who rarely leaves the house get enough physical exercise and develop motor skills? You need space that a typical house just doesn't provide. And what about Vitamin D? We know a significant proportion of the population, especially in the more northerly parts of the country where there is less sunlight become Vit D deficient in the winter months even if they do spend time outdoors and rickets, though still rare, is making a comeback. So a child who does not go out and has a suboptimal diet must surely be at greater risk than average ?
I grew up in a small industrial Northern town in the late 60s/70s and we didn't have much either. I spent most of my time within my immediate family or with the neighbours. There weren't many organised activities for kids and what there were we couldn't afford. But I was never stuck in the house all day or short of physical activity, even if it was just the daily walk to the shops sometimes. I bet you weren't either.
The world has changed. You can't make direct comparisons with the past.

As an ex primary teacher and now home educator I find your comments laughable and so naive. The irony too…

You really need to educate yourself on what home education is! The irony of your post is that all the home educated children and young people I know are MORE educated on the things you’ve outlined than most school children. What do you think they actually teach in schools?! They barely scrape the surface of your examples.

Oh and the irony of your comment about ‘what is freedom’ ! Home educated children have the ultimate lived example of freedom just by not being in an institution.