To think the level of state involvement many posters expect is bonkers?

[FaeryRing]

It seems like there is nothing the state shouldn’t be responsible for any more! Feeding your kids, getting them to school, hiring ‘behaviour specialists’ for every classroom because parents don’t want to discipline their own children, giving you money towards virtually anything you ask for because it’s not fair you have to pay for anything yourself.. I find it absolutely wild and don’t think it’s at all realistic or representative of what most adults believe?

Nobody is ‘milking the poorest’. They’re milking the middle. The poorest are topped up and the rich are, as ever, very rich.

have is the school or state providing for them to slightly narrow the gap between them and their better parented or more resource rich peers

Do you know the cost schools pay for 1-2-1 children who have anger issues? I’m not talking about children with health conditions or disabilities, children who have poor home lives.

There is no intervention strong enough to change the parents input. There is no intervention strong enough to prevent to cycle reoccurring. They are the product of poor parenting. They will themselves become poor parents. Or absent parents.
Throw in SS CAMHS police, NHS, etc and you have some very expensive children who are on a destructive path.

No but I begrudge the mother! Contraception is free, highly effective and there are many methods on offer. How there can be so many ‘accidents’ is baffling!

@MistressoftheDarkSide

Well said!!!!

Ummmmm.......

Pensioners are the weirdest to me, so many refuse to accept a pension is a benefit (it's the biggest part of the welfare budget), they don't believe they should have been planning themselves for their own personal retirement for the best part of a half century

I think you’ll find paying NI from 16 to 66 is “planning themselves for their own personal retirement for half a century.” Most of today’s pensioners also have occupational pensions on which they pay income tax.

It's a slightly different flavour to the usual threads as it encompasses more than just benefit bashing, I suppose. But my comment about new posters stands.

I haven’t come across a 1-2-1 for anger is this actually a thing or quite unusual? The kids in DD’s class who have them are disabled (very clearly disabled)

Well let’s move on and discuss personal responsibilities then. Which responsibilities do you believe individuals should have, if any? Is there anything which isn’t the responsibility of the state, in your view? (Genuinely asking)

Is this true or something you just made up to be angry about?

IME of working with people who are in greater need of services provided by the state, the attitude of entitlement you speak of is extremely rare. Its far more common for people to have high levels of gratitude for support (even where it's woefully inadequate) and to be embarrassed by their need for it.
I know that doesn't fit a lot of preconceived ideas about vulnerable people, but I've worked with these demographics for over 30 years, and have more confidence in my experience than in a few anecdotes about what someone's entitled neighbour thinks they should be getting.
Regardless, the vast majority of support people resent is aimed at children, who without it would suffer greatly. As galling as it may feel to some of you that their parents are also the indirect beneficiaries of the statutory support aimed at them, would you prefer those blameless children to go without?

Did I then follow that up with ‘as requested by all parents without exception’?

Given that it wasn't parents at all behind the initiative.... well, nuff said.

In that case it has happened under every government forever. Perhaps we have to accept and acknowledge that some folk will always be dysfunctional. Laudunum, Gin, Cannabis, etc. At least we no longer have baby farms and work houses. Money is not the answer, look at Constance Martin.

Perhaps we have to accept there will.always be fecklessness, mental health issues and general neglect and stop facilitating the parents but protect the children. It is Perhaps time that some parents faced consequences and I am not persuaded that social services has the the solution or has had it for the last half dozen generations. Regrettably an excuse culture has prevailed.

. IME of working with people who are in greater need of services provided by the state

Interesting you think that’s the states job and not the employers.

The falling UK birth rate is a causing concern for people more educated than you or me. We'll be grateful in decades to come for children these women are having, IF we invest in the kids' futures now.

I'm still staggered that you've openly come on here to complain about the money spent on ensuring a child doesn't die during childbirth, doesn't die screaming of preventable causes in childhood, and is taught to read and write. I've read some nasty, nasty opinions on social media, but this is a new low.

Eh?

Just about to respond similarly....

The slippery slope is a ln argument that fails as it is a logical fallacy or reasoning error.

People can think what they like. I am telling you that I wasn't saying what you thought I was saying. I would prefer you not attribute opinions to me that are not what I have said.

I would have thought most DC starting school in nappies have SEN. In the past they would have been at a special school .

We won’t be grateful if the child becomes enmeshed in a cycle of benefits and doesn’t work themselves, which is much more likely if the parent is.

I won’t even reply to that second bit as it’s a total distortion of what I said and you know it’s absolutely false.

Quite.

Do we want that now?

Most of the measures in place are to protect children. Benefits so they can eat, housing so they're not on the streets, support in schools because they're not getting it anywhere else, tooth brushing so their teeth don't rot. The way the support is provided has been chosen not to sheild parents from consequences, but quite simply, because its the cheapest. If you withdraw this support and criminalise parents who don't provide it themselves for their children, the cost to the public purse will soar.

I'm a teacher and one child in my class gets picked up and dropped off by the headmaster every morning and afternoon because his dad doesn't drive. We also feed some children in the mornings as the parents either forget toor they 'don't have time'
I've been asked to do speech therapy and anger management sessions for children in my class. It's crazy