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?

Sure if that makes you feel better.

Parents are not incapable of saying no to teeth decaying fizzy drinks no matter how they are peddled.

It can’t always be someone else to blame for actions.

I’m in my 30s and went to a fancy school and we also had the warm milk and only now have I realised, from your posts, that that’s why I hate milk.

The government wastes a lot of our tax revenue whilst claiming not to have enough for essentials. It is infuriating.

This is disgraceful and not her job.

Giraffesandbottoms · Today 16:09

This is disgraceful and not her job.

Too bloody true.

But the issue is the huge increase of parents who just can’t be fucked to do this stuff properly. If they know there’s a back stop it would be even fucking worse. It’s a shame for children who have feckless parents but burdening the underfunded and busy schools and overworked teachers is not the answer.

eg nits - if you had nits you used to be sent home until you got rid of them. It was an inconvenience for parents so they had to actually get rid of them. Now you can go to school with them - DC’s private school had a nit problem which went on for an entire half term. The parents are uneducated or on the breadline, they just can’t be fucked to do basic things to avoid nits spreading. It’s bullshit.

tbh would be better off pouring funding into social workers going and checking parents are doing their job/penalising them if they aren’t.

Sorry this should say the parents are NOT uneducated or on the breadline

Say what now 😢

Absolutely, are people saying 'parents who won't feed, clothe, or care for their children appropriately should just keep having money chucked at them, in the hope that they eventually will?'

First of all I can't imagine there are many six year old who don't t have some type of medical issue or developmemtal delay willingly going to school.in nappies even if they have never been toilet trained a typical six year old would be very aware that most kids are not in nappies and also not want to be in them
Regarding whose job it is though to change children who are wet and or soiled ,somebody needs to do.it ,according to the ERIC guidelines knowingly leaving a child wet and or soiled. Is tantamount to neglect .

Child benefits etc need to be spent on the children. A toothbrush/toothpaste is not expensive and toothbrushing takes a few minutes out of a day. Potty training is free!

it would be far better to help children by actually checking parents are doing what they are supposed to be doing with the money they are given, than just forcing teachers to be parents.

i would imagine that the poster’s cousin wouldn’t have minded if the child had special needs. There are plenty of children on mn from the threads I’ve seen who aren’t potty trained by 3.

I'm willing to pay more in taxes to fund these services. I would rather have a state similar to Scandinavian countries where citizens pay higher taxes have better services.
The hope would be that with better schools, funded before and after school and holiday clubs that aspirations would be raised for the next generation coming up and the burden on the state would be reduced. I believe it would be a wise investment.
I think when Iceland invested in state funded sports activities for children they saw a massive drop in underage drinking and antisocial behaviour .

There's no such thing as public money.

Also: there's no such thing as EU money.

Absolutely agree with all
of this

And is that cry of 'neglect!!' Targetted at the parents in this case where there's no additional needs, or just at the school?

x2boys · Today 16:19

First of all I can't imagine there are many six year old who don't t have some type of medical issue or developmemtal delay willingly going to school.in nappies

I can assure you that it's true and confirm no special needs. She's been told by parents that its her job to toilet train their kids.

Three isn't really an issue though that vast, vast majority of kids will be toilet trained at some point between their second and fourth year ,and some kids do take a little longer ,my oldest was reliably toilet trained at 3 years two months ,we had tried for a good year before than but it didn't quite click with him.untill just after his third birthday,
And there's a big difference between being in nappies at just turned three and six ,if its six i can almost guarantee there is something else going on.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/jan/05/children-school-early-years-education-pandemic-covid

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13234337/Parents-ban-children-nappies-starting-school.html

https://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/news/article/huge-numbers-of-children-starting-school-developmentally-delayed-study

According to a You Gov survey based on a sample of around 900 teachers and staff many children starting school last September were not toilet trained, struggled to socialise with other children, express themselves, or understand basic instructions.

Also special needs doesn’t always mean you can’t potty train - it just means it’s a lot harder and takes more effort. It’s shit and it’s difficult but that’s parenting. My best friend’s son has moderate special needs and you had better believe she send him to preschool toilet trained. It look a lot of dedication and I respect her so much but you don’t get to just opt out and make it someone else’s problem.

SN is also not the get out of jail free card that people sometimes think it is.

People are living longer with much more complex health needs ,people may have gone in a home, in days gone by because, they were widowed ,lonely etc but still.fairly independent with their self care needs
Often those that that are in homes these days Need nursing care ,full assistance with feeding ,dressing etc
I can understand why they are vert expensive.

@x2boys My relative was in a mixed home. She just needed a bit of support and companionship but some of the residents needed full nursing care. The difference was in those days staff could afford to do the job because there was more affordable housing available even if their job wasn't super highly paid, and most care homes including hers weren't privatised. Often large private companies make millions from owning a group of care homes but run then on a shoestring. Understaffed and the staff they do have are poorly trained and badly paid.

I'm beginning to also think people can't win. They're told to eat healthily, not smoke, and have a healthy lifestyle but then everyone is dismayed when they don't die younger and there's an ageing population. I also understood that life expectancy is no longer rising?

Also many of the complex health needs build up longterm. Lots of working age people struggling to see their GP and often when they finally manage it, fobbed off, and or stuck on long secondary care waiting lists. So their health has deteriorated by the time they're diagnosed. Or people living in poverty which affects health. Consequences later down the line is more older people with higher care needs.

So much goes back to the false economy approach.

Regardless of what the parents say ,surely the six year old themselves want to out-of nappies at that age ???

Am fairly sure you could contact hrmc on Monday and ask them to take more tax?

Unfortunately a subset of the population seems to want to outsource parenting - of course the rich always have hiring nannies and using boarding schools, but there's less affluent who don't want to take responsibility for their children.

It starts with weaning, I know a health visitor who is sent by social services to houses to teach them to actually feed their infants, then there's potty training and using a pen, and cutlery, arriving at school unable to do these things. Teachers are having to do these parenting tasks, explain to parents they need to read with their kids ... then there's parents who only bother to take their kids to school when they can be bothered, blaming mental health or whatever when it's not that it's laziness so often, I had a job for a few weeks picking up dc from 3 houses and taking to school (parents were fine picking up as didn't involve getting up in the morning!) none of these households were disabled, their were just chaotic.

Ok rant over

x2boys · Today 16:27

Regardless of what the parents say ,surely the six year old themselves want to out-of nappies at that age ???

Personally, I'd have thought so, but it would seem that a few don't care.