Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Keir Starmer "sick and tired" of hearing about children who aren't school-ready

615 replies

Kirova · 28/09/2025 14:08

I get the point he's trying to make, of course, but it seems like a stick to beat parents with (and particularly mothers, of course). There's no sense in saying you want all children to be in the same place when they start school. Apart from anything else, some are nearly a year younger than others in their cohort, so clearly they are not going to be in the same place.

My youngest daughter was born premature, has a significant hearing impairment and various other difficulties. She will soon be two, and while she's doing brilliantly, I doubt she'll be "school-ready" by the government's current definition when she is four.

Not sure what my point is exactly, it just seems like another absurd over-simplification on the theme of failing our children, state of the country, etc.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
GagMeWithASpoon · 29/09/2025 17:10

Happyjoe · 29/09/2025 10:12

Are you telling someone that her experience is simply not true? Wow.

The company that does the school readiness yearly survey does not mention nappies. They categorise not toilet trained as having regular toileting mishaps. This can and does include a child that struggles to wipe, or pull their clothes off or back up, or having accidents etc. In none of their reports have they actually mentioned children in nappies.

Happyjoe · 29/09/2025 17:21

GagMeWithASpoon · 29/09/2025 17:10

The company that does the school readiness yearly survey does not mention nappies. They categorise not toilet trained as having regular toileting mishaps. This can and does include a child that struggles to wipe, or pull their clothes off or back up, or having accidents etc. In none of their reports have they actually mentioned children in nappies.

Ok, look elsewhere then? It's there to be read. There are reports of too many children starting school in nappies.
1 in 4 children not school ready in the toileting dept is too many.
20 years ago vast majority of children were toilet trained, this is falling. Why?

Am sorry, any children (other than SEN) starting school in nappies is a fail imo.

GagMeWithASpoon · 29/09/2025 17:32

Happyjoe · 29/09/2025 17:21

Ok, look elsewhere then? It's there to be read. There are reports of too many children starting school in nappies.
1 in 4 children not school ready in the toileting dept is too many.
20 years ago vast majority of children were toilet trained, this is falling. Why?

Am sorry, any children (other than SEN) starting school in nappies is a fail imo.

Edited

Show me one report /study that specifically mentions children in nappies.

sittingonabeach · 29/09/2025 17:33

@GagMeWithASpoon as stated previously I work with schools where the number of children coming into school in nappies are discussed

Happyjoe · 29/09/2025 17:35

GagMeWithASpoon · 29/09/2025 17:32

Show me one report /study that specifically mentions children in nappies.

Try google. It's online, very useful, been around a while. You can read about school children in nappies on news websites.

Happyjoe · 29/09/2025 17:36

sittingonabeach · 29/09/2025 17:33

@GagMeWithASpoon as stated previously I work with schools where the number of children coming into school in nappies are discussed

Thankyou.

GagMeWithASpoon · 29/09/2025 17:40

Happyjoe · 29/09/2025 17:35

Try google. It's online, very useful, been around a while. You can read about school children in nappies on news websites.

Not the same as a study, simply interpretation, just like on here.

If we’re talking about this we need to know exactly what we are talking about. Especially since people insist there are “swathes” and “hordes” and “vast numbers “ .

GagMeWithASpoon · 29/09/2025 17:41

sittingonabeach · 29/09/2025 17:33

@GagMeWithASpoon as stated previously I work with schools where the number of children coming into school in nappies are discussed

Do you have some percentages available ( or approximately)? Sorry for asking . I’m not trying to be a dick.

Happyjoe · 29/09/2025 17:44

GagMeWithASpoon · 29/09/2025 17:40

Not the same as a study, simply interpretation, just like on here.

If we’re talking about this we need to know exactly what we are talking about. Especially since people insist there are “swathes” and “hordes” and “vast numbers “ .

Who insists? I don't see anyone insisting. If it has been reported on news outlets, I do not presume they all plucked it out of thin air.

I do however think 1 in 4 children not toilet ready, as well as other things like using cutlery is far too high. This needs to be addressed, this is a failure of parents.
The fact you want a study on nappy wearing only is irrelevant imo and a strange stance to take. We are letting down our children, this has to stop.

BertieBotts · 29/09/2025 17:46

samplesalequeen · 29/09/2025 16:37

But we’re at a point where softly softly isn’t working. He isn’t talking about you or your child who (possibly) has additional needs. He’s talking about and to the parents of the swathes of underparented children or children who haven’t been parented at all.

Does he or anyone else think that those parents are listening to this speech thinking "Oh right, oops, better get a move on then hadn't I" ?

Parents who can't be bothered to parent don't think like that, do they? They are probably more interested in whatever the latest tiktok trend is or where to get their next fix. Or perhaps they're neck deep in conspiracy theories and poised to distrust anything that comes out of a politician's mouth.

I don't buy this idea that there are swathes of parents who are interested and invested in their children enough to not be total deadbeats but they are lazy and stupid (aka making the wrong choices). It sounds much more like a convenient scapegoat than anything else.

So it just comes across as criticism of parents who are interested and invested but their children have additional needs or other difficulties relating to development, and therefore haven't met milestones for reasons other than parenting (let's remember there are years-long waiting lists for basic interventions like speech therapy FFS) and as OP said, being a parent to a child with developmental issues is brutal in the guilt stakes as it is.

HV check ups have been halved since my eldest was tiny and scrapped altogether in some areas. The UK is already way behind in developmental checks compared to other countries - it's mad. When DS1 was tiny we had a home visit at about 10 days, the 6w check, baby jabs and then a 9m check, a 2 year check and then they had a preschool check. We live in another European country now and there are check ups (outside of jabs/newborn checks) at 6 months, 12 months, and then yearly until age 5.

As far as I am aware the UK doesn't do a preschool or 2 year check up any more. It's one single check at about 10-12 months after the newborn period and then the jabs, which are usually given by a nurse with no medical examination of the baby other than a general are they well enough to be vaccinated. And many of the most vulnerable babies have parents who opt out of vaccinations anyway.

And it sounds to me like the UK is still following a "wait and see" model for developmental interventions rather than the US-style refer anyone with any slight concerns to early intervention and some of the EI children will catch up whereas others will continue to need support longer.

Wait and see is fine if, like what happened with me a couple of weeks ago - I took my 4yo to his check up and said I'm concerned his speech is still not that clear. The doctor agreed and said yes, find him a speech therapist but not before October (October is the fourth "quartile" so starts a new insurance funding block). His first appointment is this week, so we've barely had to wait at all. It means a bit of running around for me to get the insurance slip in time but not a huge issue. I don't actually think DS3 has huge issues with his speech, I don't think he'll need long in speech therapy at all. A bit of a targeted approach which we can follow up at home, and he'll be great.

It doesn't make sense OTOH to have a wait and see approach and then a waiting list of over a year especially for things like speech which can affect their development of other skills like social/emotional/communication. It's completely bonkers. Wait and see plus a prompt response is fine but that doesn't seem to be happening.

If the government are saying we have this huge issue with children being delayed at age 4, does it not also make sense to look at the fact children's developmental checks and support are underfunded to the point of being non-functional?

MumTeach88 · 29/09/2025 17:51

I'm sick of hearing about "school ready" when they only start school the age they do because it was the last item on the adjenda years ago, with men who had no idea what they were talking about, needing to pick an age!
Maybe if they stopped cutting support and actually provided support, we wouldn't have so many unready children...

Or maybe, if so many as 1 on 4 aren't school ready, the problem is the expectation...

Happyjoe · 29/09/2025 17:54

MumTeach88 · 29/09/2025 17:51

I'm sick of hearing about "school ready" when they only start school the age they do because it was the last item on the adjenda years ago, with men who had no idea what they were talking about, needing to pick an age!
Maybe if they stopped cutting support and actually provided support, we wouldn't have so many unready children...

Or maybe, if so many as 1 on 4 aren't school ready, the problem is the expectation...

They have more official and government backed help than they did in my generation and my parents/grandparents generation. No, don't think that is it.

LaDamaDeElche · 29/09/2025 17:54

SpikeGilesSandwich · 28/09/2025 14:58

My DS could read fluently and do basic maths when he started school at 4 but was still in pull-ups for medical reasons. Starmer can go fuck himself.

My daughter was the same, could do e everything that people are listing here, but had ADHD, although we didn’t know that at the time because 3 and 4 year olds aren’t diagnosed. Often kids with ADHD have issue with this as they don’t recognise the urge as they are hyperfixated on other things and wet themselves. She wasn’t fully dry at night until nearly 8. She was so upset about wetting herself at school and having to keep changing her knickers and trousers that she started to hold herself and ended up seeing a urologist as she’d had so many UTIs she had a small scar on her kidney. It’s just not as easy as so many posters are saying and I really don’t see the problem with pull-ups if a child needs them. Not all children have a diagnosis at that age.

Weald56 · 29/09/2025 17:55

With the exception of children with special needs, no child should still be in nappies (for example) when they start school. If they are in nappies, a parent should accompany them every day - no teacher or TA (or anyone else working in schools) should be expected to change nappies.

freakingscared · 29/09/2025 17:56

Then start school later after 6 as most of the world

Vroomfondleswaistcoat · 29/09/2025 17:57

If more parents were encouraged (whatever form this encouragement might take) to have their children 'school ready' then wouldn't it make it easier to pick up those children who might have SEN? Those parents whose children weren't 'getting it' could get more help, and if that didn't help then perhaps those children could be put on the diagnosis pathway?

Of course, that would be in an ideal world, of course. My DD was school ready as were all my kids back in the 90's. She has SEN, but undiagnosed until she was in her 20s, because her SEN didn't affect her academically or developmentally.

persephonia · 29/09/2025 17:58

Is that true? I know countries like the Netherlands get held up as being examples where formal schooling doesn't start till 6. Children start at 4 but it's mostly just play for the first two years. But, even there it's expected they are potty trained etc. There's a difference between taking it slow on starting reading/writing and not doing basic things like toilet training.

Edit: sorry that was a reply to @freakingscared and I meant NT children.

yaysummerisover · 29/09/2025 18:00

He is quite right. The parents these days havnt got a clue or frankly are lazy. It’s not rocket science get them dry get them talking spend time with them. Get them off iPads. I teach teenagers to drive and it’s just embarrassing how clueless they all are. It’s taking years as opposed to months for them to gain any level of understanding. Iv lost count of the number of them that can’t ride bikes can’t swim and have no common sense. All down to terrible parenting sorry but I dread for the future of this Country

AngelicKaty · 29/09/2025 18:02

GagMeWithASpoon · 29/09/2025 17:41

Do you have some percentages available ( or approximately)? Sorry for asking . I’m not trying to be a dick.

https://www.netmums.com/child/more-parents-are-sending-their-children-to-school-in-nappies
Specifically: "Reports indicate that 24% of children in Reception aged 5 are not toilet trained, and 37% are unable to dress independently."

and

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvglrmg08kgo
Specifically: "Anne Longfield, founder of the Centre for Young Lives, said: "I have heard many concerning experiences from school staff about children arriving at reception wearing nappies, still using buggies, and unable to communicate at the expected level or to socialise with other children."

Child playing in a nursery with toys in foreground

Children starting school 'in nappies and wearing buggies'

Sheffield teachers among education leaders concerned about new starters' 'school readiness'.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvglrmg08kgo

MumTeach88 · 29/09/2025 18:04

I disagree. There were far more toddler groups and health visitor support in my area when I was a child (to quote my mother).

PerspicaciaTick · 29/09/2025 18:05

persephonia · 28/09/2025 16:13

In fairness. Nice middle class women can also suffer from mental health struggles/postnatal depression. And it can be hard to see from the outside how well someone is doing with the whole parenting malarkey. I had a lovely friend who became very unwell after her second pregnancy, but this expressed itself in extreme perfectionism- being beautifully put together, having perfectly dressed children, perfectly clean house. Even if it meant staying up all night cleaning (which just made her more unwell). Or having a huge emotional overreaction to some clothes getting dirty. On the surface of you walked past her in the street she probably would have fitted the description the other poster wrote. But once you saw a bit more it was obvious she was deeply unwell and needed help for her own and her children's sake.

That's not to invalidate the fact that having a space filled with smug middle class types could put off other service users. Maybe there need to be more spaces/more peer support. But it's not always the case that everyone who looks well put together isn't drowning.

The other problem is if you target groups (young mums, mums recieving benefits, lone parents or whichever group you want to reach), the support group will be stigmatized as being for bad parents who can't cope. And then the target groups avoid them.
It isn't true, but people bring assumptions with them.

Putneydad7 · 29/09/2025 18:05

Fundamentally it's mainly a socio economic divide. If the parents are richer and better educated and have made career and financial sacrifices you can bet that (disabilities aside) their child will have been read to, probably can do some reading themselves and certainly be able to dress and go to the toilet. They may be precocious and self-entitled, but they will be school ready.
Most people don't realise that you don't have to send your child to school until their 5th birthday and your primary school has to hold your place until then. My sister's kids was late in the year and she kept him in his Forest School nursery until he turned 5 as he was thriving there. She is a bit of an outdoor nut though and felt "that he will spend most of his childhood indoors with books/screens" so why not be outdoors as much as possible. It didn't do him any harm and he could read, etc. by the time he went to school. So if your kid is late born don't feel forced to send them.

Blueytwo · 29/09/2025 18:09

A teacher is there to teach … not tho to teach how to do your cost up, how to go to the toilet and wipe your bottom, how to sit for short periods of time This is called parenting. It is a parents responsibility not the teachers. Very very few children in main schooling are “developmentally challenged”. I’m so sorry for the parents whose children are. But sadly the “developmental challenges “. a percentage of those labelled children face are their parents (Now wait for the outraged flak…!)

CoralPombear · 29/09/2025 18:11

I have no skin in this game as mine are teenagers now and could meet their targets by school age. But we’re blaming lazy parenting when the general public are anything but lazy. We’ve got both parents outside of the home working all the hours and having to outsource childcare. Picking their children up, food, bath, bed, start prepping for the next morning, waiting for a period annual leave to potty train for example and just doing whatever they have to do to get through the day.

HereBeFuckery · 29/09/2025 18:16

I’d like them to be school ready by age 11. Not needing the toilet every fifteen minutes, unable to sit in a chair without endless reminders, unable to stop talking, unable to walk down a corridor without pushing or shoving or hitting display boards, not pushing into the queue in the canteen, not leaving rubbish all over their desk… I’d be bloody delighted, frankly. —I can dream, right—