Children arrive at school incapable of learning

[Brycie]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2222176/Chaotic-homes-creating-children-incapable-learning-says-Gove-Teachers-report-year-olds-nappies-speak-sentences.html I wonder what people think of this. Is this child abuse?

What kind of intervention can be offered? On a school thread the other day one poster was talking about how long it can take to teach a child to ask to be excused for the toilet. It seems nuts not to start intervention earlier. Can these children in danger be identified for special programmes from say age 2? How can a programme be created which "discriminates" against children from better organised families to prevent the Surestart problem (ie being overtaken by the enthusiastic parents who don't really need it as much). There must be lots of social workers here who have an opinion but other people too.

yy to this, this is the thing i think is frowned on now -you will hear 'you can't make them' 'In their own time' 'not worth getting stressed over (like anyone is saying getting stressed will help!) ' about many things

Now that puts me in mind of Freud , much sidelined and dismissed these days but he did talk about certain personality traits resulting from the way in which parents deal with issues such as weaning and potty training. In your own time certainly may make children what we see - I dont know and I doubt Freud did either. :)

Amen to that Colditz.

Parenting is a job. like most jobs, large parts of it are dull.

And a suplementary Ronaldo what if the main care giver isn't doing the feedin, clothing and cuddling adequately? And I'm not talking ready meals v fresh, rather biscuits instead of protein?

Thats probably the point at which someone has to step in and remove the child/children. I dont hold with the " helping" thing here. Removal.

That's not going to happen- any other ideas?

strangely ronaldo i think it is the Freudian notion of the potential for damage that motivates the 'in their own time' ethos. people are afraid of harming their children through coercion - even positive and gentle coercive methods.

i dont understand the kids arriving in school in nappies thing.

I was told by the nursery teacher that they wouldnt take my dc aged barely three if he was in a nappy. That meant that I worked very very hard to get him out of nappies that summer. He was one of the youngest in his class, but he was dry by day because i worked at it. Until age 3 I used the 'in his own time' mantra, but there is apoint beyond which that just cant/shouldnt be done.

night time was another point entirely.

This is increasingly bizarre...

In your own time etc REFERS TO THE FACT THAT CHILDREN DEVELOP AT DIFFERENT RATES eg some walk at 9 months, some at 16, some talk at 1, some at 2.

I never used a potty, I waited until mine could use the loo (with a seat), because I couldn't see the point of the potty fuss. They have managed to grow into functioning and successful teenagers nonetheless.

That's not going to happen- any other ideas?

Then that is societies decision.

At that point other individuals have to make their own decisions as to how they are going to deal with the situation created by societies big decision.

Unless there are problems there is a time when D.Cs are ready for potty training etc. and don't need pushing but encouraging and having the potty in front of them; I remember when working as a C.M. having parents of mindee saying "oh she'll go straight on the toilet" (she was a tiny little timid thing) who would've fallen down the hole even in the special seat !) so I just bought a potty from my home and she was fine but some people are just ignorant (they were highly educated BTW).

strangely ronaldo i think it is the Freudian notion of the potential for damage that motivates the 'in their own time' ethos. people are afraid of harming their children through coercion - even positive and gentle coercive methods

Except that isnt what Freud said. Its how he was interpreted by the let it all hang out brigade.

Ronaldo I would be the first person to agree that children who are the product of married parents who stay together for the duration of their childhoods are less likely to be feckless and dysfunctional, but you need to separate causation from correlation. Commitment to the responsibility of the family you planned, wanted and created with a willing and equally committed partner is what tends to be the common denominator in most successful parents - not a marriage certificate hurriedly obtained in order to fulfill an enforced obligation.

Potty training was interesting with DS (easy with DD - one week at home with wet pants). I tried and tried with DS but at 3 he was moving to pre-school and his nursery said to him in front of me. Well you cannot go unless you are potty trained. Two days he then did it on his own and never had an accident after that. Clearly he was ready to do it then and my attempts before had been too early.

Two points I would like to make....

1 - I agree that all children develop at different stages, some of mine could dress themselves at 2 and were very independent very early, some couldn't do their buttons at 6 no matter how much they tried. They all got there in the end!

2 - I agree with the one on one parenting being a completely fabricated, 21st century notion. My parents and their parents and their parents etc weren't brought up like this, albeit in a different culture. They were in very large, extended families living together - the women were always very busy with the housework (it all had to be done by hand) and the men were never around. In fact many of my grandparents' generation lived their whole life in America or Australia in order to put food on their families' table, my own greatgrandma didn't see her husband for 20 years and this was very much the norm in her village. Women were in effect single.

There were generally groups of 10-15 children in the same household (cousins etc) and they ran feral outdoors all day.

There were alcohol problems, those were the dysfunctional families, my mum talks about taking in a woman in her basement with her 7 children as her husband used to get drunk and nearly killed them all one night. But you have to distinguish between that and a different model of parenting. There isn't one right way of parenting, you cannot view things from one point of view only, otherwise you risk becoming blinkered.

Ronaldo I would be the first person to agree that children who are the product of married parents who stay together for the duration of their childhoods are less likely to be feckless and dysfunctional, but you need to separate causation from correlation. Commitment to the responsibility of the family you planned, wanted and created with a willing and equally committed partner is what tends to be the common denominator in most successful parents - not a marriage certificate hurriedly obtained in order to fulfill an enforced obligation

In the past - before divorce became so easy a lot of " hurridly obtained" stayed together long enough to raise a family well. Whilst I am fully aware of correlations and causes being different things, I do think we have to look at the idea.

I didnt say by the way that people should be made to marry once the deed was on the way but that they should be made to marry FIRST - ie before a family was considered.

I think the biggest issue in preschools is many are small and and charities and currently struggling as people mostly waiting for free funding term after 3rd birthday. I think all kids should get funding from age 2 that way no ones discriminated against.

However i wouldent place my 2year old-well nearly 2 in a preschool until hes least 2.5 free even though most now take from age 2.

Private day nurserys different as they have seperate rooms for differemt age groups, quite a few toiliets and sleep areas .

The ratios are less after 2.5 but a developmentally delayed 3year old may be as demanding as 2year old which then will affect the education of the majority of 3year olds within that group

I dont see why incomes a barrier to basic parenting.

I have 3 kids 6, 3 and 19months

meal times e all sit at table
they all use forks or spoons including 19month old.
3year old was potty trained just after 2 wears nappies for nights
she still has bottle for bed and dummy when tired.
her teeth are great by way according to denstist.
all 3brush their teeth.

we generally bath every other night or as and when they needs wash.
They wash their hands before meal/after toiliet
they say please and thankyou.

they have set bedtimes.

sometimes do toddler group with younger 2
got told by hv I wouldent like the sure start wasent for likes of me.
I dont drive so on walks we count, sing songs, play eyespy.
we near country so go walks foraging and seeing animals ect.

older 2 love the libary which is free.
done 2museums in summer hols-thats free
community farm is free,
we do picnic in park
libary does free crafts in hols nd chucrh cheap crafts.

I do baking/crafts with them.
I read them stories bedtime and other times.
if weathers ok they go out bike scooters to park.
we take them swimming when we can and do try plan ew nice day trips a year and fit in one cheap uk holiday.
occasionally we take them out for dnner at restaurant or cafe not down local pub.

yes they do watch tv and occasionally play computer.
we play board games with eldest.

my 3year old started preschool in sept was pottytrained and more than ready. infact she slightly ahead but shes done private day nursery 1day a week from 18months.I dont work but try give all 3of mine one to one time despite hubby working long hours and families miles away.

I have worked in very deprived areas and know exactly what some posters mean.

Three some snobbery over schools here but none of the schools local are awful or sink schools but their is judgements arounds sats, sen and free school meals or if school just happens to be near a council estate.

I think it sad we in this state. feel sorry for the kids.

Ronaldo. I am in agreement that DC's need a main CARER to see to their needs. I am NOT in agreement with you that it NEEDS to be the Mother, and I am NOT in agreement that it needs to be until they are 5yo.

Most Lone Parents are not Lone Parents through choice. Most people who have DC's with multiple partners don't do that with neglectful intentions.

I personally have 4 DC's, with 3 different fathers. With DD's father, we weren't married, but were engaged. However, I lived with my Granny, and when I found out I was pregnant, I was kicked out, and due to housing rules, had to move 600 miles away to an area that I had a 'local connection' to, in order to gain secure housing for me and my baby.

15 years ago, continuing a long distance relationship, without the Internet or mobile phones, proved impossible for a 16 & 17yo.

4 years down the line, I was married, and had a baby with my husband. When DS1 was 9mo, I caught him in bed with an OW. Strangely enough, I divorced him. Why should I stay with someone who couldn't be faithful to me?

I then met a new partner, who I had DS2 with, and then DS3 seven years later. He walked out when DS3 was 4mo. After a 9 year relationship. Did I choose that? No. I expected us to continue to be a family.

So yes, I qualify as 'chaotic'. Doesn't mean I don't teach my DC's what they need to know. And if it was environmental as in my 'chaotic' life had caused these delays, then surely DS1 would have been similarly affected?

Instead he is more than likely heading to a superselective Grammar school that consistently tops the league tables for the whole country. So I scoff at those who say that a 'chaotic' home life causes developmental delay.

IMO, neglectful parenting can cause delays, but having a 'chaotic home life' is different from being neglectful. You can easily have one without the other.

And neglectful parenting certainly isn't unique to the 'lower' social class. In fact, at my Primary, with an intake that is mostly MC, with a smattering of 'council estate' (

Pottytraining - I hesitiate to say this because so many females think gender doesnt make a difference but often simultaneously I see the "DD was easy, DS harder comment".

I think you need to understand that boys are different when it comes to having a pee.

Ronaldo "T'was ever thus" maybe a cliche but it's a true one. I remember in the 50s when women were generally in the home and married too !! There were plenty of feckless, feral kids,teddy boy gangs etc. There was far less publicity about child snatching, abuse etc. It didn't stop it going on though.

I like the use of so many females

I think Surestart needs all types of parents. Separating children into types worries me.Often as parents we need role models and advice,I have a degree in early years and certainly do.Being excluded from parents better equipped to parent is utter madness.

I agree with Gove and think some degree of intervention is needed maybe in compulsory parenting classes,home visit team etc.

I do think parents struggling isn't limited to one section of society though,we all struggle from time to time and think support across the board is woefully inadequate.I worry that piling money into "less organised" families would mean many other families will continuously get overlooked.

To be honest I think the term "less organised" needs clarification.

Oh and dp and I have 3 degrees between us,have been together for 22 years and find parenting waaaay harder(I had 3 in 15 months) than my friend (who I am old enough to be the mother of)who had her first at 17.Said friend is the model parent and teaches me loads by example.

Basically I think we must be careful not to stereotype.Surestart was fab for me,said friend didn't need it.

I did that too Hully, You'd have thought the world was going to end when people were aware of it.

There were plenty of feckless, feral kids,teddy boy gangs etc. There was far less publicity about child snatching, abuse etc. It didn't stop it going on though

But in the fifties and sixties - I dont recall the fifties as I was not really old enough but things stayed the same for long enough in the sixties - those teddy boys and ferel children came from certain types of family even then didnt they?

We just didnt categorise them in the same way back then.

I can recall several such families in my street and around and certainly at school. The factors seem to be the same then and now.

As a former Nanny, I've worked & lived with families who are amongst the highest earners in the country & I can honestly say that a lot of children I've observed have the same issues as those whose families struggle financially & live at the lower end of the social spectrum.
Examples are not teaching manners to pre-schoolers as "they'll learn them when they're old enough". Not correcting behaviour because "they're only young & this is what 1/2/3 year olds do". Allowing children to be rude & violent towards adults & other children without ever making them apologise because "they're too little to understand what they've done" watch them break toys, rip book, turn plugs on & off and say " how clever & inquisitive he is, he's desperate to learn how things work".
These children also rock up at preschool with no boundaries & lack of basic skills.

goodness

what do you say to the parents?