To be upset that DD1 class be told all about Afghanistan when she's 5?

[MrsPurple]

I don't think I'm over reacting and am looking for reassurance. My DD1 (year 1), came home from school yesterday telling all about fighting and the war in Afghanistan.

I had many difficult questions off her.

It turns out a classmates uncle came in to talk to class about his job etc.

No letter was sent out re asking parents to come and talk about jobs and no letter that it was going to happen, because I would have wanted her excluded from this.

I know children need to know re some stuff but when she's older, at the moment it's my discretion.

The man told them all about fighting and war and guns.

I had a problem re a teaching game used a few weeks back called shoot out that the teacher used (I asked for help on here re that). The teacher ressured me they wouldn't use it again.

I now fell that my worries weren't listened to and want to email the Head, who I know quite well. AIBU?

If it was talked about in a neutral way I do not see the problem. I would be pissed off if a certain political stance was taken. I would also be pissed off if the violence was made to look heroic etc. But if it was just explained I would see no issue.

I don't think it's appropriate for year 1 children, you're not over reacting. I would write to the head and calmly explain your concerns.
Be gentle on the teacher though, who may not have anticipated exactly what the guest was going to say.

I gather it was heroic as he was a soldier and was protecting us from the 'baddies' coming in the boats and planes.

I just think year one is a little early to be learning about the horrors of war and guns etc.

From the questions we got it was a bit too factual!

peasholme thanks.

I really like the teacher but feel like she hasn't listened to my concerns re last problem around guns as teaching aid, and she may not have know what guest would be saying, but as no guests were asked for among parents I begin to wonder why they were even there?

The current topic at school is old toys and all guests came in just after christmas. The topic is closed on toys so I just want to know what relevance it has to current curriclum?

Sorry I'm ranting

I am very open with my children about most things but I remember dss getting very upset (not sleeping) when he was about 7 about the war in iraq.

i think it is very important for children to realise that the world isnt all rosy, but not so early on. And it should be far more gently introduced. And at 5 why introduce all that worry into their lives

so YANBU

thanks noonki, I agree the world isn't rosy but as a child they don't need to know the full horror of the world.

My DDs watched comic relief and although they only watched upto watershed they are both obsessed with Mosquitos in case they catch maleria (I have explained you can't get this in UK and the reasons why, but it is obviuosly remembered)

Well, I'm of the opinion that trying to shelter children from subjects that are somewhat controversial doesn't do them any favours in the long run.

DD (8) is aware of the various wars going on around the globe, she knows about the G20 protests that will be kicking off here in London tomorrow, she knew about the Baby P case and I answer any questions she has on any issues as honestly as I can.

Whilst DD is in Yr 3, I've never shied away from gritty issues with her. I think it's an important part of growing up to know that the world can be a nasty place, that wars, famine and death do occur and that life can be difficult for many people around the globe. I think that this knowledge perhaps helps children in this country to appreciate how lucky they are and to have a little more understanding and compassion towards others less fortunate.

Furthermore, learning about foreign policy and conflicts around the globe will enhance a child's knowledge of geography and world politics, both of which rank fairly highly in my opinion of things worth knowing about, irrespective of age.

Rockin although I appreciate this is your opinion and I have my opinion, I don't appreciate the fact that my views on this as a parent have not been considered by the school.

I was not notified about it or even warned. If it was part of the National Curriculum I would have been aware and been able to deal with it better, even if I didn't agree. But it's not on the national curriclum and I would not have allowed my DD to participate as it's not even a subject thay have even touched upon (ie peoples jobs)

But, with all due respect, surely once children are at school, you have to accept that you can no longer control all their access to information? They're going to be exposed to other children's lifestyles, points of view etc.

At my DD's school, she has friends from a huge variety of backgrounds. Some rich, some poor, some with parents from a multitude of countries, others who have lived in London for years. The children have different lifestyles in terms of beliefs, religions, working/SAH mothers etc. Single parents and people with both parents.

The National Curriculum is only a part of the overall learning process. Children will become increasingly influenced by their friends too, which is something that you just have to accept.

The more that they hear about, however controversial, the more they'll be able to form their own views and opinions as they get older. The more the hear, read, listen to etc, the more they can decide what their own opinions are and can begin to critically analyse information. I'd rather my DD was exposed to a whole range of information to give her a better sense of what life's all about, rather than trying to shield her from things which she's inevitably going to be exposed to at some point anyway.

Agree with RSB. Some children actually have to live through this, not just discuss it at school and go home to a loving, warm, safe enviroment.

Surely this is the best way for children to learn about the Real World? In a safe, structured environment, with their peers then supported by their family at home.

Id be pretty annoyed tbh, my ds is in reception one and is not an easy child in the slightest, if he had had this disscussion it would most certainly cause us all sorts of problems and id be hacked off with school. you definately should have been forewarned about this so that you could of kept your child off school/away for am/pm or whatever. id complain to the head.

I can cope with them seeing the news or something at home, where im there to answer any questions/concerns but i beleive this should of been discussed with parents first.

rocksock, yes children need to learn about these things, but IMO year 1 is far too young for them to be discussing/worring about guns/shooting/people dying etc

I'm not adverse to different lifestyles etc. As we have a large travelliong community in our school and my DD has whispered the 'gypsy word' because she's heard it from others. I did sit her down an explained there is no difference between gypseys and her we are all the same., this goes for colour religion etc.

It's the guns/war/too much information for a 5 year old. I know I can't controll all her access to information, but n o one was ware (including other parents) that this guest was coming in, and if we had been doing about different jobs I might have understood a little more.

But there seems to be no reasoning behind why this gentleman was even in school let alone what he talked about as it doesn't fit in with anything the class are currently studying.

If they had been learning about war etc (which I really would not like), but I could have been prepared. Although I still think Year 1 is too young for this kind of material/education.

spero, yes some kids have to live through these things, but thats entirely different, there is a nescessity to explain to them whats happening, kids grow up far too fast nowdays and as I said imo i think they shouldnt be subjected to this if not nescessity at age 5.

class sizes on average are 25-30 children, there is no way the teacher can be there to support each child in the absorbtion of this information and the fears/questions it would raise, also at age 5, children are not particulary "peer supportive"

SMW, no I don't think it is different. Children have to cope with some truly awful things and most still make it, I think a lot of parents are much too precious about what they are prepared to let their children learn about.

I agree some children have to grow up too quickly but in our society that seems to be due to inappropriate exposure to sexuality, not sensible measured discussion about the world.

I'm not claiming 5 year olds are 'supportive' but that if something is happening at school they won't necessarily think it weird or awful if everyone is doing it.

If children are being removed from certain classes by their parents, I would imagine this would make it quite difficult for their relationships with the other children at times.

What is wrong with trusting the school?

But was it a sensible measured discussion?

"I gather it was heroic as he was a soldier and was protecting us from the 'baddies' coming in the boats and planes."

This is truly absurd. Children are not equipped to absorb the significance of items on the news until they are 8 or 9. Before that their little egos consider it to be all to do with them, and so the invitation at 5 will be for them to think it is all their fault.

Also, how is it possible to have a 'neutral' discussion on a topic that is involving killing on a massive scale.

Trusting the school? With this sort of nonsense you can see why people do balk at that position.

why should a 5 yr old have to learn about guns/war etc if there is no immediate necessity?
i hate all this bollocks about precious parents. We don't need to teach children about atrocities in order to fit in with some daft pc attitude.
Inappropriate exposure to the use of weapons and their consequences is just as bad as inappropriate exposure to sexuality. Both can cause confusion and potential harm.

I disagree that there's a 'magic' age whereby children can suddenly begin to absorb information or see things from another's perspective.

Surely it's a gradual, drip-drip process, where as they learn more information, they learn the skills to analyse it and think things through from different angles.

I don't think it's impossible to have a measured discussion on conflict. In terms of Afghanistan, children can learn the basic history (culture and liberalism decades ago, increased radicalism, Taliban, 9/11 etc) and the role of Western troops there (peace-keeping, democracy). They can also learn that not everyone agrees with this strategy and different people have different ideas about what the 'best' way to live is.

DD and I went to Vietnam when she was 4, and I explained the basics of the war there, we looked at areas where significant fighting took place, we went around the War Remnants Museum... DD accepted the basic outline, asked some questions and was certainly not perplexed by anything.

I think the idea that a child somehow loses its innocence as it learns certain information is hard to substantiate. Children can be young and carefree, as well as being knowledgable and exposed to 'real world' issues.

I don't think anyone has stated a "magic age".
And the talk given at the op's school wasn't a drip drip process was it?

Wouldn't bother me, but we travel a lot so DS has SEEN a lot of unpleasant things first hand - along with machine gun carrying policemen etc.

He is always asking questions about the world (it is exhausting!) he seems to absorb info pretty well and certainly doesn't think any of it is his fault as a PP suggested.

Much better this than the Disney experience of goodies and baddies that kids seem to be immersed in these days. That would have been my concern, there are too many shades of grey for the soldier to have talked about protecting from baddies.

Isn't it rather normal these days to have parents/relatives in to talk about their jobs? My neice has had talks from a fireman, a policeman, an accountant and a lawyer - all related to children in her class.

While I can understand that it is difficult when our children come home with thorny questions about issues/events we wish we could shield them from, surely it is our duty as parents to answer those questions in a way we feel is appropriate?

Obviously, the war is a contentious issue for many of us, myself included, but I feel we can't shield our children from the fact that bad things happen in the world.

However, I must admit to be having a particular point of view on this.

In three week's time, I will have to sit my 2.5 year old son down and explain that his daddy won't be here for the next six months because he is in Afghanistan "at work". Thankfully, our 8 month old baby is too young to know what's going on. I would love to have the luxury of being able to choose when and where to talk to my children about issues such as the war.

While I share your concern about relevance of talks/visits to the curriculum etc, I would hope that - come the time when my son is in school/nursery - the school will not shy away from confronting the issue that he is a child with a father away at war and helping him through that time, rather than sweeping it under the carpet because it's not a 'nice' topic.

I would be furious if I were you. This kind of talk would really upset my dd. At this age they could discuss conflicts in terms of friendship groups but war and guns, fighting, NO! What have they got out of this discussion that you want them to have? Nothing imo.

Hmm, my dh was in the Army until last year, and he was in Afghanistan and stuff....our Boys know, ageappropriately about this....I don't think there is anything wrong with that....I am sure the guy didn't go into gory details, etc...so, in that case YABU...if, of course he went into more gory stuff, yanbu...obviously...

"I am sure the guy didn't go into gory details, etc...so, in that case YABU...if, of course he went into more gory stuff, yanbu...obviously... "

Absolutely! Going into gory details about IEDs etc would not be approprite, but a general talk about life as a soldier is surely a reasonable thing.

This thread is really highlighting just how sheltered some of our children actually are.

There are child soldiers in Africa, being forced to fight, loot and kill other children. There are toddlers being forced to work in sweat shops. 60+ years ago, children in England were being evacuated to strangers' homes or having bombs falling on them.

Why, all of a sudden, are our children of this generation so precious that they can't hear about the realities of the world? The world is not a happy, peaceful place for an awful lot of people. Bad things happen. How is pretending that everything is fine and dandy going to help a child in the long-run? Surely by being pragmatic and realistic about life, you're helping your child gain valuable skills to deal with the things that go wrong, and to understand that not everyone has the advantages and privileges that most children in the UK do.