Is there a worrying class divide with parenting?

[teaandcupcake]

I saw a tweet (and subsequent TikTok) about this and found it interesting.

The author of the tweet and the girl on TikTok were basically saying they notice the way their middle-class friends parent their small kids is screen-free, lots and lots of books, lots of time and attention. Their toddlers can read and write. In contrast, teacher friends at deprived primaries have shared stories of reception starters in nappies, children who have no idea how to turn the page of a book or use a knife and fork.

The concern being that the divide between middle-class and working-class children is going to be so vast in the future we ‘can’t even fathom it right now’

I found it interesting as the topic of reception children starting school without reaching basic milestones has been discussed on here many times before but not whether it’s class issue and what’s causing this.

Not the ones who have been going since they were babies. Free hours at nursery are also a benefit.

Not sure what any of that has to do with my post tbh.

Where did I mention boredom?

Who mentioned boredom?

There has always been a class divide, this is not something new. The gap is widening though and funding to places like Sure Start and childrens' centres has been slashed, making children in deprived areas even more disadvantaged.

I volunteer in a community hub type place in a very deprived area (and I live in the area now). What I will say is that the gap between white deprived families and 'migrant' families who are in the same economic bracket is quite stark. I can see why white, working class boys are at the bottom of the rung, and it's largely to do with parental knowledge (I'm not calling it education in the formal sense) and attitudes. I've found the whole experience to be a real eye opener.

@Differentforgirls

Where did I mention boredom?

I'm not responding only to you, specifically. It's a comment about a general theme I see at the moment in comments on Mumsnet (and elsewhere) where people suggest that a solution to all the problems we see in child-raising is to "just allow children to be bored": people talk about how if their children weren't over-scheduled they would magically revert to den-building and damming streams and dressing up and all the rest of these 1950s fantasies.

It's become a catch-all phrase in response to concern about "helicopter parenting". But while on the one hand its good to encourage self-stimulation and resilience, removing all opportunities for children to participate in external or organised activities in the name of "encouraging boredom" doesn't work, in my view. All you're doing is removing opportunities, let's be honest. And most of the time if you remove all external stimulation you just force them back onto screens, unless you remove all screens from your house or police them 24/7.

I completely appreciate not everyone has the luxury of these activities, but the idea that "boredom" is intrinsically a better way for children to be raised than participating in an external activity seems very backwards, to me.

I'd rather my kid learn a language or play a sport in her spare time than doss about in front of hours of YouTube and if that makes me a helicopter parent, then so be it.

Then rant at the people who say that - not at me who didn't. Thanks.

It's also aspiration. Like I said I recently discovered I have a nice singing voice. I loved singing as a child. I remember watching the Sound of Music on TV and spending days running around the house singing Doh Re Mi and Climb Every Mountain. My mother later told me she noticed how I was pitch perfect and had a very nice tone. I was often picked to do solos in school concerts etc. But nothing was done for me, I was not taken to music lessons or anything of the sort and it kind of got forgotten about until I rediscovered it recently in my church choir (I'm in my 50s now).

My friend who grew up middle class had a sister could sing well too, it was noticed by their church music director who pointed out to her parents how well she sang. She was immediately booked into weekly private singing lessons with the aim that she should get a choral Scholarship at the Cathedral School. She did and she proceeded to do very well out of life, going on to study at Cambridge (she did struggle with mental health and eating disorders in her teens and my friend never ceases to point out what a "miserable cow" her sister is, she's definitely someone with a lot of deep issues about her self and what she's achieved in life. But the point is she was offered great opportunities because her parents immediately thought big and were ambitious for her. I got to university myself but it was a long, hard slog for me and I definitely never got anywhere near Cambridge.

I once asked my late mother why she had never thought to look into music lessons for me as a
child (not accusatory, I was just curious as I bent over backwards to make sure my children had everything I could possibly manage for them) and she just looked bemused and said "well I wouldn't presume ... I mean... we couldn't afford things like that. And lots of children can sing I mean its nothing special..."

Can you see the stark difference in attitude? From ambition and thinking big to apathy and "well I wouldn't presume ... that's above our a
station...you were nothing special..."

That's the difference I'm talking about with the more "pushy" middle class parents versus the lower class one. It's often more a side effect of low confidence and not feeling that certain things are attainable or that they are for other people, not you. "Knowing your place" as it were. In the psst Grammars did help with this but the really are not relevant now at a time when higher education is so much more accessible and a good comp will provide the same opportunities to bright or talented children from less well off backgrounds. Its down to individual schools to ensure that they do.

Well yes, aspiration is a big part of the attitude. I have been genuinely shocked at the differing attitudes, but can now see why there is a difference between outcomes for white and BAME children who grow up in similar socioeconomic brackets.

@Differentforgirls

Then rant at the people who say that - not at me who didn't. Thanks.

I’m not ranting at anyone, I am having a discussion. Its a discussion thread, that’s literally the point if it. I have already said this isn’t directed at you.

You seem to have a hard time grasping the point of this thread. Someone poses a question, other people respond. Please don’t tell me what to do.

You seem to have a hard time grasping the fact that you quoted me when you apparently weren't posting to me. It was a long winded rant!

@KHMP1971

That's the difference I'm talking about with the more "pushy" middle class parents versus the lower class one. It's often more a side effect of low confidence and not feeling that certain things are attainable or that they are for other people, not you. "Knowing your place" as it were.

Totally this. Confidence is about 75% of success in life. Children who are encouraged to try things will grow up with the sense that a path is at least theoretically open to them. Children who are discouraged from trying things or face an apathetic response when trying to do them will instinctively feel that this is “not for the likes of me”.

Far better for a child to try things out even if turns out s/he is not cut out for it, than be made to feel that trying is a waste of time.

@Differentforgirls

You seem to have a hard time grasping the fact that you quoted me when you apparently weren't posting to me. It was a long winded rant.

My initial response was to your ignorant and insulting little jibe about people who “farm out their children”. You yourself posted a fairly long winded rant about your son making a den once under a table.

The subsequent responses about boredom were directed at another poster. It was you who chose to personalise them.

You’re entitled to your opinions, I am to mine, thanks.

We have a similar free roaming childhood. I love that my DC have a very different life to mine, I'm surprised that we made it to adulthood with the stupid things we done for entertainment.
We played around a derelict buildings for hours, we did get hurt, my friend fell through the floors, we dragged her out, wiped her clothes and said nothing to parents.
My mother was one who thought she was cautious because we would pop back every hour or two.

You brought up farming out DC. I don't understand what sort of response you expected from such a cruel mean-spirited comment.
People have to work, use childcare providers who are trained and qualified workers, to dismiss the set-up as farming out was rude.
Then you said, parents who reduce hours to be with DC are great, insulting pp's that cannot stay at home and claim UC.

My opinion is as valid as yours.

Stop quoting me then if you’re replying to someone else. I’m not a mind reader.

Pps have mentioned difference in aspiration between social groups, and I think this is really important. I think the differences (put crudely, I admit) are:

Middle class: parents see no limits to what their children might aspire to.
Working class: parents have aspirations for their children but may have a more humble, less 'pushy' ('My child's so gifted!') approach and may not always manage to grab all the chances available - or indeed, have the finances for them.
Underclass: no educational aspirations for their children. A general failure to consider the future at all (no 'deferring of gratification', which is necessary for long-term achievement).

( remember the fantastic lollipop lady at a school I taught at. She came from a really difficult background and told me that, since getting the job, she was bullied and ostracised by her neighbours for daring to have a job! They told her she was getting above herself. This is the problem faced by a lot of people who try to improve things for themselves and their families if they come from that sector of society.)

Same with the derelict buildings. There was that patch of waste ground nearby which was used as a fly tipping spot, it was full of trash, usually broken furniture and other large items which people had dumped as they didn't want to pay for council removal. There were some derelict workshops and the remains of an old factory too.

We found used condoms, needles etc. Homeless people were also known to sleep and hang around there.

We loved going to the Croft, we would play "house" with the broken chairs and tables we found and sometimes we'd find something cool like a cassette player which still (barely) worked or a toy or some description and take it home. Absolutely gross and awful.

I really don't know how we survived without serious injury or harm. There were definitely cuts, bruises, scrapes twisted ankles and such and honestly I didn't really enjoy it. We had no mobile phones or any way to contact our parents if anything had happened to us. My mum didnt even have a house phone.

It really didn't do anything or teach me anything of value other than what a scary, grim place the world can be.

Would much have preferred to be at music lessons or horse riding or stage school or art club or any of things my children were able to do. It's probably why I did go a bit "helicopter" parent and drove them to lots of activities. I can't imagine what they would think of my childhood. My DS was upset when at 15 he was hanging around in the park with his mates and someone offered him a vape. He immediately rang me to come and pick him up.

And I'm glad. People who romanticise the free roaming days really need to take their rose tinted glasses off.

Same with the derelict buildings. There was that patch of waste ground nearby which was used as a fly tipping spot, it was full of trash, usually broken furniture and other large items which people had dumped as they didn't want to pay for council removal. There were some derelict workshops and the remains of an old factory too.

We found used condoms, needles etc. Homeless people were also known to sleep and hang around there.

We loved going to the Croft, we would play "house" with the broken chairs and tables we found and sometimes we'd find something cool like a cassette player which still (barely) worked or a toy or some description and take it home. Absolutely gross and awful.

I really don't know how we survived without serious injury or harm. There were definitely cuts, bruises, scrapes twisted ankles and such and honestly I didn't really enjoy it. We had no mobile phones or any way to contact our parents if anything had happened to us. My mum didnt even have a house phone.

It really didn't do anything or teach me anything of value other than what a scary, grim place the world can be.

Would much have preferred to be at music lessons or horse riding or stage school or art club or any of things my children were able to do. It's probably why I did go a bit "helicopter" parent and drove them to lots of activities. I can't imagine what they would think of my childhood. My DS was upset when at 15 he was hanging around in the park with his mates and someone offered him a vape. He immediately rang me to come and pick him up.

And I'm glad. People who romanticise the free roaming days really need to take their rose tinted glasses off.

When I drove past the Croft a few years back for the first time in forever I was happy to see that the old derelict workshops and factory has been demolished and it was now a nice comfortable new housing development, no doubt inhabited by families whose children are driven to football and art club. Things have improved.

My mum had zero confidence. She would see things as trying to get a choral Scholarship as "above our station"

I wonder how much that shitty 11-Plus system and her 'failing" the exam and being told she was "not academic" and being kicked out at 15 to work in a bakery instead of possibly studying Classics or English at University (she would have killed it as she was a highly literate woman) had to do with that? That system despite the minority of success stories has a great deal to answer for.

I still struggle with my confidence but I at least know that social background doesn't have to determine a whole life and that I can dare to dream for myself and my DC even if those dreams don't come true.

Raising aspirations of lower income families us absolutely vital if you want to address social mobility. Helping children see their own individual gifts whether or not they are "across the board" high achievers or just talented in one area. And encouraging them to reach high.

My mother was the working class variant. Couldn't afford singing lessons. Wouldn't presume to think I should have them or that I was good enough to get a Scholarship etc wouldn't have entered her head. Wouldn't have known where to start. That's something "other people" did and anyway loads of kids could sing, wasn't anything special. Wouldn't have dreamed of being pushy or presumptuous enough to enquire. She knew her place.

Not saying I would have got a Scholarship but kind of sad to wonder what if and how different my life would have been.

The thing is that what you have called the working class and underclass, are put together and called wc. For obvious reasons the underclass isn't a formal group in policy. According to the sociological definition, many black and brown children from the underclass category go on to achieve great things that their white counterparts don't. So it's not just a class thing per se, there are intersections with race, religion, ethnicity etc.

I’m white, probably considered “underclass” my mother didn’t have a job on benefits etc and I had my first child at 16 but my children are very well taken care of always do homework don’t vegetate in front of a tv or iPad.

I think child neglect and bad parenting is mostly a drug addict/alcoholic thing

Just my opinion. All the neglected children I’ve known have had addict parents.

Why? It's not uncommon for children to be reading before starting school. I was and so was my daughter. I was raised in a council house by working class parents.