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?

The post I responded to specifically mentioned five year olds. 🤷‍♀️

Not inferring anything, just wondering why.

?

Why people start threads? Idk why does anyone

A large number of people don't 'pay in' through income tax for whatever reason and often are the people taking the larger share.

Could it be argued that without all these accidental pregnancies there wouldn’t be enough babies being born?

Any parent sending their child to school in nappies for no certified medical reason, ie not 'he/she's not ready', should be required to go to the school as required to deal with the consequences of their laziness. Nobody in a school should be expected to deal with this.

A genuine question: how much of this is down to the NHS and the Welfare State? Pre WWII adults were responsible for their lives; they might pay into a Union welfare fund or pay for the Penny School
for their children and the coming came if you could pay. I am not saying that it was fair and certainly not ideal but you knew what to do and took responsibility for your life. It was grossly unfair for some but now hasn’t the pendulum swung too far the other way and some adults think that they don’t have to take responsibility for anything. Thoughts?

The number of times when told be a stroppy parent in school 'I pay your wages' I've wanted to say 'No, those who bother to get out of bed in the morning pay them, me included'. Strangely these were the type who knew all about mi'rights' but oddly didn't know the word responsibilities.

Read The Road to Wigan Pier would be my first thought. Followed by The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, perhaps.

I don’t know, I had a COVID baby (just before really). I also struggled with severe PPD so wasn’t the best mum for the first year or so (I don’t think I even bonded with her until she was over 3) She was still potty trained by 2, taught to use a spoon and a fork etc. I was deeply depressed for 2 years and I still managed it, it wasn’t easy but I have responsibility for my child regardless of how I feel, having a strong sense of duty is sometimes the only thing keeping you moving.

I would also say the majority of children my DC was with at nursery were either potty trained or on their way there. There was only one mum who objected to nursery telling her to potty train. But we aren’t in the UK and I think that makes a difference. People just get on with it.

@Proudtobeanortherner the issue is that the quality of state provision is dire. We removed our dc from state education because the teachers couldn't construct grammatically correct sentences, spell or correctly label the x and y axes. Add in the continual airing of their political views and dictatorial attitude regarding nutrition when 50% of the staff were clearly obese and it was a no brainer. Thank goodness we had a choice.

Similarly, the NHS denied my DC grommets despite continual pain and unwellness, because the average child caught up by age 7. On what basis they decided our dc were average I shall never know. We paid.

When our DC were born, the then head of the HV service published an article in the Times saying the role of the HV was to teach mothers the three Cs: cooking, cleaning and communication. I don't know if my HV could cook, but she looked grubby, was unable to answer any questions beyond what was published in the leaflets despite telling me she was responsible for my baby developing speech and immunising him and failed to arrive on time for a 9am appointment at the start of her day. So communication and cleanliness were non starters.

How those in need can be successfully helped when the standards of those responsible for support and interventions is woefully low is beyond my ken. Those who should help aren't capable of it and are too liberally woolly ever to provide guidance in relation to right and wrong.

Surely having experienced being homeless firsthand, you wouldn't want anybody else to go through what you did? (Social housing is cheaper for the state than temporary accommodation, btw, for PP concerned about state finances).

You say one of your DC is disabled. Lots of disabled people can work but many others can't (or struggle to find businesses willing to take them on). Your own DC might one day need social housing. Or would you rather they ended up homeless?

Social housing is very much needed and there should be no shame being a social tenant. However I don't think it would cause a massive fall in house prices.
Even if prices fell a little, it would be across the board (except luxury mansions). Your house might see a small fall in value but so would the house where you want to live. Your position would be the same as now. You can't afford where you want. Either that changes one day (higher wages or some other change in circumstances) or they won't.

There wouldn't likely be big falls in prices because many people would still like to own. Later in life the mortgage will be paid off (and there'll be equity if they need to free up some cash). Whereas social renters will, in retirement, still have the extra monthly cost of rent.

You post implies you're struggling to afford your home? Budget stretched to the limit? I definitely hope it doesn't happen but what would you do if you lost your job or became ill and couldn't afford the mortgage payments? Homeless and temporary accommodation again.... Unless there was more social housing.

I think you're talking hyperbolic shit.

I've not seen anyone ever say they think the govt should pay for their children to get to school, to pay for all food, to get someone else to do parental discipline.

That doesn't mean people should not get free travel, free school meals, or extra support in the classroom where warranted.

Sadly for some children school is the only normality in their lives, the only guidance they will receive, the only support they will get and the only happy memories they’ll have.

What the heck??

So...the chaotic should pay peanuts?

They probably get a ''Five finger discount'' anyway.

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.

That’s me. And still working a couple of days a week too.
Let’s hope assisted dying and a choice about when to die is passed as law. Because I also would like a safe, pain-free choice, rather than the DIY alternative.

Well Mrs Scott was possibly incorrect. Apparently bogey eaters have better immune systems. Good for the microbiome too innit 😂

Not state as such, but relating to personal responsibility. The older I get, the less inclined I am to sympathise with people who make poor life choices then expect people to feel sorry for them. We're living in a climate where people feel comfortable to make any manner of fuck up and then blame anything/anyone but themselves (though perhaps the nanny state has played it's part in this attitude?).

Self pity is amongst the most damaging of emotions, but it's become an expectation that we should encourage each other to wallow in it.

#bekind (😬)

Exactly right. Once parents realise that the teacher will do their kids morning tooth brushing routine, they will stop doing it at home.

I worked long hours when my kids were small, but would have been ashamed to have a teacher teach my kids to use a toilet, keep clean, use cutlery or read, or provide them with uniform items.

It's utterly shameful how much some parents are expecting the schools and other people to do for their kids. It's always been the way, but I think it's getting worse/

Yep, toothbrushing, feeding breakfast and lunch and now increasingly nappy changing, toilet training, use of cutlery, putting shoes on, pulling up pants in the toilet not in hallway, teaching how not to be aggressive, swear at adults, throw things when instant gratification isn't provided, teaching how to self soothe. Expect children to learn how to read, write, become numerate and develop critical thinking skills in addition to the 20 or so other topics on a curriculum... Maybe by age 12 instead of 8.

Look at Bronson Battersby's mother. She left her two-year-old son with his sixty-year-old father over Christmas, and he starved to death after his father died of a heart attack. The mother blamed Bronson's social worker for not forcing her way into the flat when she didn't get an answer, even saying, "we rely on social services to keep our children safe". She hadn't even tried to contact her own toddler or his father for weeks, yet she blamed the social worker.

There was an MN thread a while ago saying children should be in school until late evening every day! People were agreeing and saying the current school day is "not fit for purpose". The purpose of school is to educate children, not to facilitate parent's careers!

Regarding children starting school in nappies, I find it hard to believe that a 5 year old child with no special needs/disabilities is unable to recognise the signs of needing to use the toilet

And not be embarrassed by it.