Are parents in Cambridge uniquely ineffectual?

[ohrly]

Name change. I apologise for the clickbait title, my observations are based solely on our (primary) school and not all parents here.

We moved here six months ago from a more working-class area. Although that area had its problems, parents generally ensured their kids had basic manners, proper grooming, and weren't violent.

However, at my son's new school, I've noticed a significant lack of manners among many kids. Parents don't seem to enforce them either. The children demand things from their parents and others and are generally rude.

There are a few kids, despite being over seven years old, who frequently hit and push others. Parents respond with mild comments like "Oh no, that's not nice" instead of a more assertive, proportionate reaction like, "Do not hit. If you do that again, we will go home."

Parents also don't seem to enforce boundaries effectively. Instead of saying "5 minutes until we leave the park," they ask, "Are you ready to go now? Okay sweetie, no worries."

Moreover, parents often talk about their kids in a way that suggests the children are in control. They say things like, "Oh, she won't let me..." or "Oh, she doesn't like..." A common issue is kids refusing to let their parents brush their hair, resulting in matted hair.

At parties, no parents watch what's happening, and the kids go quite wild. I've had to stop myself from telling off so many kids.

These observations span a mix of nationalities, but all are middle-class families.
Is this a common occurrence now, or is it specific to Cambridge, this school, or the middle classes? Or am I just going mad?!

I honestly thought I was a super liberal parent until I moved here!

YABU - Stop judging / this isn't a real thing
YANBU - Yes these parents sound dreadful

Reading this thread is so interesting. I am from a relatively upper middle class background in the US - here, it would be 'only' middle class I think. My DH is from a background that would probably be considered working to lower middle class (he is British) but middle class in the US.

It is amazing how much we have in common.

DH is very particular about shining our shoes, even now. His father always wore a tie and a dress shirt. The would never go out "ill-groomed" - I am seeing the ways this can be considered a class thing here.

My mother is also very into clothing in particular events: "Will we dress?" she says. Mum - look this is a small church event in the village. And plus: NO ONE WILL BE LOOKING AT YOU.

She went to a college where they had to dress for dinner every night and be served tho. Old habits die hard.

It's fascinating to me my in-laws and my parents manners are almost identical on many things despite the culture gap.

But I also think my parents behaviour and those of people around them could be a consequence of 'clinging' to that socio-economic status as well.

I have never liked people like this. I know the type. I avoid them.
I think people saying these kids grow up to be successful are simple meaning they make a lot of money. They ignore the huge advantage these kids start with of a good education and family wealth and connections. So I would frankly be surprised if they did not get decent jobs given the advantages they start with.
But do they make good marriages, good friendships, are they happy? Money is not the only measure of success.

@AvrielFinch

But do they make good marriages, good friendships, are they happy? Money is not the only measure of success.

Hmmm, I think this is a bit of a cheap shot and a slightly false dichotomy tbh. It’s always tempting to position this in this very binary way eg: rich, neurotic and miserable vs poor, close knit and happy. The reality is always much more complicated. For several reasons:

Firsly I think you are conflating two different types of people here. Academics aren’t usually people who are obsessed with money. They are obsessed with intellectual self realisation. There is snobbery for sure but it’s not money snobbery.

There plenty of arseholes, arrogant and dysfunctional people in this world and sure a lot of their kids have problems.

But I don’t think inculcating your kids in the idea that loyalty to family always trumps personal self fulfilment is necessarily a recipe for success either. The logic behind assiduously pursuing academic success is sound: it may not guarantee happiness but let’s be honest it’s sure as hell easier to be miserable with a good job and money in the bank than to be miserable and skint, financially trapped and living in a shit area. Would you actively discourage your children from pursuing careers on the basis that they will have happier family lives?

Theres much to dislike about this world but I don’t think you really understand it and are over simplifying it.

Exactly, little 4 yo Esmee in Cambridge who is rocking about with matted hair and dirty face in her older brother's cast off, 2 sizes too big Boden or Frugi that's stained with holes is lauded as not following social convention. But switch it for Govan and dirty, holey too big Adidas with matted hair and dirty face people would be on the phone for child neglect!

DC knew quite a few students like these at Cambridge. He said they tended to be very superficial and prone to taking drugs and drinking to excess and would also be each others suppliers. I’ve met some of their parents at events and they seem more like their dcs friends than their parents.

I have a good friend who gentle parented and it worked fine with her first 2 dcs who were naturally obedient children but her third child didn’t respond to it at all and was the typical spirited child. He was forever in time out for his behaviour that I swear I didn’t see him for months on end because he was confined to the car or a room most of the time.

And yet I would be most worried about little Lucy who is always dressed in perfect outfits with shiny clean hair but her mum is emotional cold /angrily abusive behind closed doors.

My step children always looked immaculate but their mum bragged to me about how she didn't comfort them if they were injured or ill (among many other horrifying but quite outing examples)

Well obviously, but that's a different issue.

To me, a slightly too big/small t shirt is inconsequential compared to emotional neglect/abuse

But maybe others care more about outward appearances

@WindsurfingDreams @DoreenonTill8 whether or not a child’s hair is brushed or matted tells you nothing about whether they have an abusive parent. It just tells you about their social values and perceptions about what status signals they want to send.

It just happens to be the case that working class families tend to see untidy hair as a risk factor whereas middle class ones tend not to and have different class hangups.

@Thepeopleversuswork you misunderstand. I am not saying it is a dichotomy. People can make money and have happy marriages and lots of friendships. And top academics are not ultra wealthy, but they are very well off. I work with top academics. They all have big houses in the country and often an apartment in London, and often a holiday home as well. We are not talking about lecturers without tenancy in a lesser known university.

For example: my mum could not really have bestirred herself to care if my hair was brushed. But she would dressed me down in public if I used the word “toilet” or “serviette”.

Class horses for class courses.

That's the precise point I am making. Hair and clothes don't tell you anything. Unless "neglect" is having an unfashionable t shirt.

In certain social classes (aspirational working class /lower middle class) some people do feel the need to have perfect looking children and perfect looking houses, but that tells you nothing about whether they are good parents. In fact being overly controlling would be at least an amber flag to me.

I didn't even know what "toilet" meant until I was about 8 . I had only ever heard it called the lavatory!

I think clothes that are far too small are uncomfortable. I would not wear them, so why would I put my children in them?
I think comfort matters.

Oh agreed there, but on a slim child things can be a bit on the short side without being remotely uncomfortable

If your kid is wearing a stained t shirt because they have been playing and got dirty then who cares. But the truth is some of this is about social status. It is a way of signalling that they belong to a higher social class than those working class people.
And how is this clear? Because it is never about stained holy clothing from ASDA. If they really did not care about appearance why not buy very cheap clothing? The kids wear stained holy clothing from acceptable brands that are deemed quality clothing.

Sure. But people are talking about not caring if their child is wearing clothing 2 sizes too small. That is just neglect, however much money or education you have.

But I buy decent clothing precisely because it lasts longer (and I can afford to). I don't think clothing should be disposable

This is spot on. It’s about (very subtly) saying: “fuck you I don’t have to worry about people looking down on me or what social services would think, so I can wear what I want”.

@WindsurfingDreams ASDA make some decent quality clothing that lasts. Not all of it, but some of it is very good quality. Its about wearing the right brands. But parents like this never admit that.

So is dressing your child in perfect outfits but never giving them a cuddle or reading them a story..that's all I am saying. Some of the worst neglect is hidden behind a veneer of perfection.

Sometimes people spend more time worrying about running the perfect home with perfect looking children than they do about enjoying life and nurturing their children.

There are different types of neglect.

And , knowing some of my friends, some of their children with autism etc get so attached to a t shirt that they insist on wearing it long after it is a bit too small. So maybe that t shirt was the child's choice.

Agree. Simple things like hair and teeth brushing have been medicalised - it’s now a ‘sensory aversion’ etc

Kids lack the absolute basics as they rule the roost - good sleep, good food, fresh air, proper socialisation - and their parents only seem good for making CAMHS referrals and ‘fighting the system’ on their behalf

An interesting perspective.

The two children I know with sensory aversions both have a genetic condition that also gives them autism /autism like traits. They live a very outdoorsy lifestyle filled with healthy food, gardening, bike rides etc. They just really struggle with people touching their hair although their mum has eventually found a hairdresser who seems to get how to make them feel relaxed.

But by all means judge away if it makes you feel better about yourself

How do they lack fresh air if they are most commonly seen being feral and dirty in the park? :-)