To think there needs to be a public inquiry into child development

[MaryMaryVeryContrary]

It really seems like we have a looming societal crisis in terms of child development and therefore the quality of the public in 10-20 years time. Experienced teachers across the board seem to be reporting an overwhelming increase in delayed, aggressive and disruptive children. I’m extremely worried about how this will impact society when they become adults - it seems (as a guess) at least a tenth of children will be incapable of work of any kind, and many more will need copious amounts of support to live any kind of responsible life.

AIBU to think we need an urgent public inquiry into this and what is going on? It seems to be the elephant in the room and anybody who tries to discuss it is shouted down.

I’m sure some of it is due to cuts in services but surely that can’t account for it all - it’s very sudden and extremely alarming.

Ok I see people have read my comment at judgemental.

I'm an ND person with ND children. One autistic, one has ADHD.

However, I was also an early years teacher, worked in a range of mainstream setting and a specialist centre based in a mainstream school for children with profound speech and language difficulties. I have met lots of NT children who have never painted at home, don't have dough or plasticine, jigsaws, brio or days out, their mums apparently prefer iPads as they're tidy and easier to put away. Because the mums only did these activities at nursery themselves some don't even know it's a good idea to do them at home.

My kids were given a balance of screen time and other activities - we did swimming, ballet, martial arts, gymnastics, drama clubs, I worked full time AND am a single mum, but took them to activities several nights a week and did art, crafts & board games on other evenings.

Is it judgemental if there is a lot of evidence that something is bad for people and you say it out loud?

Should we not tell people smoking when pregnant is bad for babies because it's judgemental?

Should we not tell people drinking more than 14 units a week is unhealthy because it's judgemental? .

I'm curious as to what's judgemental and what's informative? How should I discriminate?

Once at school they often do after school clubs, wrap around care and so are still in a highly regulated environment.There is little free play. I think a lot of the behaviour issues are due to simple rebellion to not being able to do what they want. Even summer holidays many children are still in regulated activities.

I agree that this is part of it. I think kids and people in general need leisure time or at least time away from groups and structure - free time when they can do and think what they like and be relaxed. Of course, the fundamental reason that children need to be in structured activities is because the parents need/want to work.

Then when families do have free time, there are many things that need to get done, including eating/cleaning/shopping/organising/chores, so it’s not necessarily very relaxed or emotionally refreshing. To make life simpler, parents opt to hand over a screen instead of dealing with a tantrum or use a ready meal instead of cooking from scratch (which is reasonable if you are tired and stressed).

Basically, I think life would be better for everyone, and especially children, if the world was a little slower. People blame capitalism for this, and maybe that’s partially true, but I think it’s more complex than that. There’s a cultural expectation that people be productive all the time and competing in the marketplace. I feel that raising children is often seen as something to outsource, but teachers can’t do everything.

Poster is referring to DLA (Disability Living Allowance) - financial claims for Children who have extra needs.

NB: you don’t need a diagnosis to claim DLA.

One of my dc was in a class of 30 7 year olds of whom 10 had severe to moderate learning difficulties and/or behavioural problems. How on earth is a teacher and 1 TA supposed to deal with that on a daily basis? It was chaos every single day. This was 18 years ago, so things have been deteriorating for a long time.

I'd imagine in terms of playing out there will be an element of survivers bias too. The sensible kids made it into school more often. I know my DH was incredibly hyperactive as a child, as the youngest of 5 he was told to play out from the age of 3 supervised by his siblings. He was hit by a car twice and spent long stretches in hospital/out of school with broken bones.

As PPs have said, DC like my autistic DS wouldn't have been in mainstream school a decade ago. I remember at school there being lots of teaching assistants for kids with very low level struggles. Now teaching assistants are supervising much more complex DC, some with high care needs eg still in nappies, needing help with feeding.

This is brutal but I don’t know how to escape the fact there is finite support a society can provide to dependants, if only because if (for example) 1 in 15 people need a carer, thats 3 people in 15 either disabled and in need of care, or caring for somebody who does (assuming 2 carers per person). That’s a fifth of people. Can we as a society manage this?

1 in 15 seems high but it tallies with reports that around this number of children, particularly in more deprived schools, are 4 or 5 and either have little or no language and significant needs beyond just a little extra support.

Like I said though this is a crude estimate on my part but that’s why we need a proper investigation, to assess the numbers and plan accordingly.

I agree a full investigation would be too long and sluggish and a task force may be better. I can’t see it happening - but I can see posts on here in 15-20 years wondering why on earth we kicked the can down the road and deploring the extreme crisis in social care.

See I find this incredibly patronising and detrimental in that it encourages us to turn a blind eye to a looming crisis in favour of Insta-worthy quotes about special parents and love conquering everything.

Have you read some of the utterly desperate posts on here by parents who have not slept in years, have their house wrecked regularly, can’t even do so much as a day out because their child has no concept of risk and runs into the road or attacks them?

It matters if children can’t speak, it matters if they can’t read, it matters if they can’t fully participate in society. Let’s not pretend.

Not all children are capable of your expectations and they never would have been. DC like that have always been in society, you're just not used to seeing them as they were previously locked away.

Children were not routinely locked away in the late 90s and 2000s. There’s a 30 year gap between commonplace institutions and this issue taking a steep upward curve.

A good post however bear in mind the prematurity statistics include any birth before 37 weeks. My oldest was born at 36, has no disabilities but would be in those statistics. Generally speaking a baby born after 34 weeks is unlikely to suffer long term effects from prematurity. Only a small % of those will be micro preemies born before 28 weeks and with much higher risks.

I have noticed (purely anecdotal again) that quite a few mums I know with ND kids who have severe needs, had multiple miscarriages before or after conceiving them.

I was at school in the 90s and 2000s, I struggled massively during childhood. I struggled in society in early adulthood. I spent most of my teen years suicidal. I then learnt my own way to cope in the working world. I now know I have ADHD and understand myself much better. But I was quiet at school so who cares? I could have done much much better at school if I had a diagnosis and understanding.

I think these is also extra pressure on society because the medical services are keeping elderly people alive long beyond the point of total dependence, and then there is huge pressure on kids and families because practically everyone is expected to go to university now. Mums have to work and at the same time are held responsible for everything while being constantly critised no matter what they do.

It feels as though the demands on us all are totally impossible to meet.

What happened to the days of respectable blue collar employment?

Sorry, but I really do wonder what is going on.

We currently have a 5th or just under, of the working aged population not looking for work due to long-term sickness. Many of whom are aged below 35 and the reason for long-term sickness is "mental health" or ND.

It's all very well saying we need to put more funding into x, y or z. But if we have a reduced number of taxpayers, the money isn't available and even if it was, the NHS couldn't grow quick enough to meet the need.

It's all very well saying we need to put more funding into x, y or z. But if we have a reduced number of taxpayers, the money isn't available and even if it was, the NHS couldn't grow quick enough to meet the need.

And honestly, it’s often those who won’t recognise this that advocate most for all the services they’re entitled to.

I also agree with this unfortunately and that’s why I’m worried about the future. We will have the dual effect of both an increase in dependents which in turn mean even less tax payers to support them but even more need of provision. I think it’s really scary actually. Even if we don’t focus on disability ‘proper’ and just on mental health rendering people ‘incapable of working’, it will be enormous. Maybe an inquiry is useless as we’re doomed? I really hope there’s something we can do.

I think this is the issue with alot of your thread though. 'We need to do a study and fund out x y z.' But we have no statistics to compare it to from the past. You clearly don't believe in ND. It's common knowledge the raise in diagnosis is due to more understanding medically of ND adults that were missed in previous years and DC that were not seen during covid.

We actually have a growing working population. If schools are failing why is that? An improvement in parenting?

You said yourself, if you didn't do as expected, you feared violence from your parents. Children feel safer now. Yes they may feel more confident in expressing themselves. But then many learn how to behave appropriately rather than suppressing their emotions. Is that a bad thing? Alot of the issues society face at the moment are from troubled adults and previous patenting styles and teaching.

But we can’t have a failing society with no public services as the cost of people ‘being themselves’. We just can’t, how would that even look? If ‘being themselves’ means a huge increase in mental health issues and a scary looking welfare state, how is it any better than the past?

Our growing workforce is down to immigration, and the children I’m referring to aren’t even in the workforce yet.

You seem to be burying your head in the sand because the truth is frankly a bit brutal and not in keeping with your worldview. Go on the teaching thread and read just how many children have these issues now. I find it very gaslighty when people try to convince me (and teachers with 30+ years of experience) that it’s ’always been like this’, it hasn’t.

Its not about 'being themselves' it is about learning how to function appropriately as an adult. Suppressing emotions and abusive backgrounds leads to a cycle of abuse which is what we see alot in society.

My brother's a primary school teacher and he says that children now struggle with that he described as creativity and imaginative play.

For example he was making wreaths with his class, gave them the basic wreath, lots of crayons, glue glitter etc and encouraged them to give free rein to their creativity. About half of them couldn't do that and needed directive instructions.

he also says he sees fewer imaginative games in the playground eg mums and dads, quests, all the make believe games kids have played for milennia.

He blames screens.

"Children were not routinely locked away in the late 90s and 2000s. There’s a 30 year gap between commonplace institutions and this issue taking a steep upward curve."

They are still locked away now in hospitals and assessment /treatment units. Or in residential provision hundreds of miles away from their home.

I’d disagree. There’s a marked change even in last few years. Seeing toddlers with phones propped in front of them in a cafe or buggy is a very new phenomenon.
Girlguides, pre Covid I can’t recall any bring a phone. Not we have to make them put on side and several repeatedly pick them up and use them when we aren’t looking.
Helping on a recent brownie holiday lots had never made a sandwich, washed up etc. Those type of chores used to be standard for junior school age children.

I have an old Brownie Guide handbook (or it might be a badge book?) that talks about babysitting. Not being babysat, babysitting.

I'm not sure we should go back to 10 year olds babysitting, but surely there's a happy medium where children get some responsibility/ jobs to do.

I saw about 10 yrs ago two girls playing “ Horse and Driver’” along the pavement outside our house-
A skipping rope was the “Reins” and the “ Horse” high stepped and tossed her mane, and the “ Driver” was equally in the zone
ir was lovely too see- a game that we too used to play as kids.

Phones kill creativity.

Jesus Christ so what are you proposing, a cut off?? No kids if you're over 36 or had a miscarriage oh and don't forget if your baby is prem or born with difficulty, well it's too bad we'll just let nature take it's course??

I've been reading and contributing to this thread with interest but there's some extremely troubling views being implied as it goes on.