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?

We had one, it was called surestart and one of the results of it was a huge improvement in the health of children, beyond the 13,000 hospital admissions prevented. But the Tories scrapped it.

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n2303.full

Againname
Bob Crowe strongly believed that social housing should be mixed, not 'poverty ghettos', and he understood the value of stable community. As a PP says he also didn't do Right to Buy. RTB is a major reason why there's now a shortage.

Can you explain a bit more?

I ask because I really think the first thing that needs to happen to try to address the social housing shortage is to have a debate about what and who it is for, not just to build willy-nilly all over the green belt, and your answer above has puzzled me!

If social housing should be mixed - where do you draw the line? People who are affluent but just fancy a council property? (If so, please can I have one of those nice flats by the Thames?) If Bob Crowe meant 'People shouldn't have to leave their council homes just because they become wealthier over time', then what should happen...should their rent be raised to more of a market level in order to fund more social housing schemes? I think it should.

I agree that it's grim when social housing is just given to the most feral, untidy, anti-social people. But our society has changed out of all recognition since the 1950s - so what do we do? How do we a) allocate s.h. and b) ensure that s.h. estates don't just become dumping grounds for the anti-social underclass (Marx's 'lumpenproletariat).

I do agree that RTB caused some of the problems we have today.

No one is saying parents shouldn't be teaching the basics to their kids

The problem is that for a variety of reasons, some do not.

So do we do nothing, which seems to be your approach or do we try education?

Seeing a dentist and altering behaviours can help prevent children having even more work done on teeth.

1:5 children have had serious dental issues, why not try and make that 1 in 10 or 20?

I also think (unpopularly, I'm sure!) that social housing in central London should be for key-workers, or at least people who need to be there. Some key-workers earn very little and face long and gruelling commutes to the centre.

Difficult to organise, I know.

As to the 'I don't want to move away from family and friends' argument. Well, who does? But many of us have to, whether we live in social housing or not, and I think it's not an unreasonable expectation. Whether people like it or not is another matter. Life isn't about not having to put yourself outside your comfort zone. I had to move to find work, and I'd do so again. I wouldn't WANT to, but I accept that you can't always have your own way in life!

No offence but you still can't complain that has nothing on how much private renters pay. Like damn I know someone privately renting a two bed apartment for over a grand a month and someone else living in an identical version of that apartment renting it from the council for less than 500. Sooo go figure. Not that you should be made to feel some kind of lucky/guilty way. But you can't really complain either.

Have a look at properties to rent in your area on Rightmove and you'll see what I mean

If there's one thing we learnt from covid, it's how endlessly expandable the words key worker can become.

But this kind of stuff doesn't cost money. So no excuses for saying you are too poor or whatever to make kids brush teeth or eat with a knife and fork

yet again
From an older thread.

The Elephant and Castle neighbourhood is being physically, socially and ethnically transformed. This started with the demolition of the Heygate estate, a classic for stigmatised perceptions of council housing and the people who live in it. As the local 35% Campaign has meticulously documented, a succession of promises to Heygate residents were broken to arrive at a situation where 1,214 council homes were demolished, to be replaced with 2,704 new homes, of which only 82 (3%) are for social rent. The HA partner was London and Quadrant. To be eligible for the cheapest one-bedroom home built by them on the Heygate site, people needed a minimum household income of £57,500. The average household income in that part of Southwark is £24,324

You do know that HA stands for housing association right?

"if you were still working in a care home i would be advising you to leave now You wont get thanked for doing it"

DHs words to me in March 2020. Attitudes like yours have proven him to be prophetic

Then dont moan when there is no one to look after Granny

JenniferBooth · Today 15:13
CoffeeCantata · Today 15:01

I also think (unpopularly, I'm sure!) that social housing in central London should be for key-workers, or at least people who need to be there. Some key-workers earn very little and face long and gruelling commutes to the centre.

Difficult to organise, I know.

As to the 'I don't want to move away from family and friends' argument. Well, who does? But many of us have to, whether we live in social housing or not, and I think it's not an unreasonable expectation. Whether people like it or not is another matter. Life isn't about not having to put yourself outside your comfort zone. I had to move to find work, and I'd do so again. I wouldn't WANT to, but I accept that you can't always have your own way in life!
Then dont moan when there is no one to look after Granny

I had to look after my ailing mum for nearly a year from 200 miles away. I had to get on the motorway or the train most weeks and battle with care-giving authorities and hospitals. I do know what that's like - it's gruelling - but what I don't understand is - why do you think we shouldn't expect to do it, wherever we live? It's just harder if you're someone like me - but I don't think it's a reason never to move more than a street away from your family. Where would we be if everyone had that attitude?

Just because something's hard doesn't mean you shouldn't have to do it!

Oh, and I know of a number of people who 'never moved away from family' who abdicated responsibilty for elderly relatives, so staying put isn't always the magic bullet.

Desecratedcoconut · Today 15:03

If there's one thing we learnt from covid, it's how endlessly expandable the words key worker can become.

Medics, para-medics, refuse collectors, police, teaching staff, cleaners.

How about that?

Maybe not 90% of parents but given there are apparently three of us on this thread with a similar experience it might be higher than we realise. I'm not saying tooth brushing shouldn't be part of basic parenting at all. I'm saying that parents didn't instigate the tooth brushing initiative and one size doesn't fit all. If some parents can't/don't/won't then it's not necessarily just down to laziness - we need to know why and address it at both ends. For the remaining few, to prevent children suffering and needing more intervention down the line at yet greater expense, preventative programmes may help.

If there was enough social housing available then they would be at market rent as landlords wouldn't be able to extort as much rent as they do now.

If tenants couldn't meet their rent then housing benefit would be paid to the local authority, rather than a fortune going to private landlords.

@CoffeeCantata Nearly a year? Oh bless you There are people on the elderly parents board who have been doing it for YEARS including a post about a man in his 70s who has been doing it for his mum who is over 100 for years.

When poorer people on Carers Allowance do it and then the person they are caring for dies, they then trot off to the Job Centre to be treated like they have been a scrounger for the last few or several years. Can you really not see why people dont want to do it when they are treated like they are shit on someones shoe afterwards (and sometimes during) for doing it.

Regarding teeth/ dentists - in my state in the US, every child has to have a physical exam every year and also a dental exam when entering kindergarten, 2nd grade, and 6th grade in order to enroll in school or stay enrolled. Children in private or parochial schools are not exempt from the requirement.

The exams are free for children on Medicaid/ AllKids and for students whose family's private health insurance plan covers routine exams. For all others, there might be a co-pay amount.

Beginning this autumn, school boards across the state will be responsible for putting into action an annual mental health wellness check for all students in all schools in the state (a new state mandate).

The annual medical exam is an expected part of American life for children and adults. The required vision tests are usually done as part of the annual medical checkup (where children and teens also receive required vaccinations).

School districts, child care facilities, private schools, and parochial schools are also obliged to provide annual free vision and hearing tests to students aged 3 to 8 or who have been referred by a teacher. These are administered by state department of health personnel in the schools during the school day. They're basic exams, and if an issue is flagged, parents are notified and asked to arrange further investigation themselves.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5771574/
A study concluding that it would be beneficial for more states (in the US) to mandate comprehensive health and wellness exams in order to catch and treat problems early, when treatment makes a difference.

Health barriers to learning are a problem that affects everyone's experience of school, not just the experience of the children who are suffering them. You can harrumph all you like about feckless parents - it won't make the problems caused by poverty and/or caregiver or family dysfunction go away.

The choice a society is left with is when, not whether, you're going to pay for the fallout of these issues. If you choose paying later, you'll end up paying more. Prison costs a lot more than early intervention, and the cost of sending barely literate and numerate students out into the world when they leave schooling is huge. Convict ships are not an option any more. Public opinion needs to catch up on this development.

Care for your parents? You are only after the inheritance.
Dont care for your parents? how lazy and selfish you are.

See You cant win

Why is it about winning or losing? It's a logistical rather than moral issue in the long term.

GiacomettisCornetto · Today 15:27

Thank you - appreciate your points.

JenniferBooth · Today 15:28

My point is simple: the fact that you may have to step up to take responsibility for family members at some point in the future isn't a good enough reason to say you can never move away. Obviously you wouldn't do that if their decline was imminent - but I'm talking about young, or younger, people who need to build a career.

It's not a misery-memoir competition!

Im actually a 45 min walk away in social housing from my elderly parents

@CoffeeCantata your last comment about misery memoirs is deeply offensive and proves beyond all doubt that you wouldnt want to put your money where your mouth is re, Carers Allowance

This is a great idea - I would back this 100% and pay into a system that did this. Some parents would be embarrassed into doing it, and if parents 3 x in a row were shown to be still not doing it they could and should face repercussions.

it’s not the same though as expecting teachers etc to brush daily. It’s educating them monitoring parents and calling them into account.

How do we a) allocate s.h. and b) ensure that s.h. estates don't just become dumping grounds for the anti-social underclass (Marx's 'lumpenproletariat).

For A) We need to build more, including homes suitable for older people, the disabled, and include homes for childfree people. Also end RTB.

People register on waiting lists and wait their turn but get moved up if in dire circumstances (like homeless, DV, disabled and needing accessible home). The 'queue jumping' issue might cause resentment but that's solved if there was more SH built, because then there wouldn't be such long waits for everyone else who needs it.

For B) By not telling people to immediately move out as soon as they're not in abject poverty. Have more social housing available, so it's more mixed. A proper community. Working people on low but also medium salaries, the disabled, the elderly, families, child free couples, and single people.

My ideal model would be like Singapore, where about 80% of housing is public housing. I realise though that's probably too idealistic for the UK, but we could at least aim for more like things were 50 years ago. Back then it wasn't only people unable to work on benefits or the very lowest wages. It was people on medium wages too.

I get why people will think those like Bob Crowe, on higher than average incomes, shouldn't have it, but I think the majority in his position would choose to buy so it's a mostly irrelevant issue. He was the exception rather than the rule.

He recognised the value of stable community. People moving away for work or housing is one reason why there's increased social problems.

Lack of care and support, loneliness and isolation and feeling displaced (no coincidence the rise in people off sick with depression and anxiety).

Even when someone isn't disabled or older and doesn't need care, most people need a bit of temporary help or support at times. Not always financial. Practical or emotional. When they're a longterm member of a community, and know their neighbours and have family and friends nearby it makes a difference. Add in good public services and opportunities (work, education, training) and health is better so there's less state dependancy.

I am sorry I just don’t agree. There is no excuse not to be brushing. If people can’t/don’t and won’t then it’s a huge issue and I don’t see another reason than being lazy or “too busy”. The poster on another page said in her class or 5 year olds nearly everyone had rotting teeth. It’s not right and something needs to be done; but making someone else do it just isn’t the answer. People need to be forced into taking responsibility so that children don’t suffer.