Out of interest is there anyone else who thinks that schools do things that should be left to parents?

[hurricane]

Do you object to the following being carried out by appropriate professionals in schools (assuming you are kept informed of these things taking place and results of any tests etc)?

1.) vaccinations (like BCG)
2.) eye tests/ dental checks
3.) PSHE
4.) sex education
5.) cooking classes/ healthy eating
6.) PE

If yes, why?

meant to put " ..." around first sentance

I think that if you take responsibility away from people then they become more irresponsible. If schools take over the parenting role then more parents will stop parenting.

It could be more convenient to offer vaccinations, eye tests and dental checks in school. However, I see no reason why these offers can't be sent from the pct to the parents giving a choice of venue - in school or local clinic.

No objection to P.E.

Cookery classes - a great idea to introduce children to different recipes, budget meals, nutrition. I do object to the pushing of good food/bad food by unqualified people, lunchbox policing.

Sex ed. - covered in biology. I don't feel comfortable at all with things like how to use condoms in group settings. All children are not the same. I object to teachers talking to the children as though all of them are already sexually active when some (most) are not. In fact, I have a few problems with how this is presented.

PSHE - I'm not even sure what this is or is supposed to be. When I ask my children I get responses of "oh it's a daft lesson about a mix of things" and lots of vague remarks like that. It would be nice if the school could let us (parents) know just what's involved with these lessons. Thinking about it, I should probably investigate more to find out just what the school is trying to teach my children in these lessons (which is possibly a small example of a parent passing responsibility for something over to the school and not bothering in a way that Auntythesis describes).

I agree with a lot of what Auntythesis has posted particulary "COMPLIMENTING THE PARENTS rather than replacing them "

'i am at this point astounded that as a self reported well educated person you cannot see that the primary care giver has the most influence.'

But of course I think that the primary care giver has the most influence. I've never questioned this and I actually think it's interesting and revealing that this is how you've interpreted my comments. I repeat why do you think that the odd PSHE lesson, sex ed and vaccinations threatens the role of the parent or changes it at all? I really find this odd. Of course the attitudes of a child's parents, their education, how they have communicated with their child are going to be the biggest influences on that child's life (and be huge factors in whether teenagers do or don't get pregnant) but that doesn't mean that schools shouldn't teach sex ed etc etc to kids at school which will have the effect of supporting what good parents do at home and helping educate the kids who don't get this at home.

'I Would argue that if parents know how to communicate with their children regarding sex education that these statistics would differ enormously.'

Erm, who wouldn't? But see above. And remember again that today's school kids are tomorrow's parents.

'again i would like to point out that it is not sex ed that i am against'

What on earth are you complaining about then?

'my argument is that the school should compliment the parent.'

I think you'll find that this is what I've been saying too.

Can I also say again that although I consider myself to be pretty well educated and a very caring and responsible parent and although I will and have educated my parents about sex (I see this as an ongoing discussion from birth not a sit down and talk about the birds and the bees when they're 11 sort of thing) I do recognize that there are teachers and health professionals who have more expertise than I do in this area. I am quite happy for one of these admirable people to show my kids how to put a condom on a banana when they're 13. And I think my kids will be quite a lot happier that it's not me doing this.

Also, although I have taken my kids swimming since birht it was at SCHOOL that dc1 actually learned to swim. Likewise with reading although I'm an English teacher. The influence of peers and teachers can and should be often as important and more important than parents. I repeat I'm not big-headed enough to under-estimate or under-value the importance of these influences.

Btw in countries where sex education in classrooms is successful ie. low teenage pg rate, later age of first sexual experience, schools work closely with parents to deliver sex education - schools have the support of parents and parents ALSO take responsibility.

It is too bad the whole climate in the UK is so combative ie. Schools VERSUS parents. If we cultivated more respect for both roles of parenting and teaching then our children would be much better off imo.

(am loving mental image raised by hurricane's "I will and have educated my parents about sex" )

everything else you either say is stupid and i havent responded to - i feel that i have - either on this thread or the other.

my main message is that i am not against any of these things

to be against them - is indeed stupid.

but my opinion is that i feel that the government is increasingly puttig pressure o teh education system to deliver things which i personally think good parents would deliver anyway.

so the kids of good parents - get it twice. from primary care giver - a message carried through and affirmed byt he schools system

the kids of pants parents - get a message from teachers - i argue can only be taken seriously if given by parents or carried out by parents in the first instance.

with the exception of vaccinations which are clearly being done in the most expedient fashion throught he schools system.

I argue not that it isn't expedient, but that this is a health care role which has little place within the education system than fpr the govt to take over a parentig role through an existing institution - becuase we as parents cannot be trusted to maintain herd immunity throughout the population

Hurricane you appear to have needed schools and teachers for your children. If that's the case then I can see why you are so pro schools doing parenting of children.
You also appear to have little confidence in your own parenting abilities if you believe that without 'professionals' your children wouldn't have learned the things they have.

My children had swimming lessons at school but learned to swim outside of school. My younger children don't go to school but are learning to swim regardless.

One of my older children learned things from his peers which I much rather he hadn't as they were of a criminal nature and caused the family as a whole a lot of upset.

As for putting a condom on a banana at 13 in a group situation, my children have found hugely embarrassing and one was completely affronted by the whole idea. Totally inappropriate for mine at that age.

My 8yo has learned to read, without school or a qualified teacher. It happens.

I'm not even sure what I'm debating now as I don't want to do down schools as I think there are areas where they do a fantastic job but I do object to being over-ridden as a parent by the school system.

I would like to add that the offer of vaccination within the school system completely misses out children who are home-educated and so agree that although schools could deliver this the offer should come from the pct to the parents in the same way as pre-school vaccinations are offered.

"the odd" lesson isnt the odd lesson

everything in isolation only takes half an hour.

the half an hours add up.

but it only takes the school half an hour - it cant take the parent half an hour?

and your argument is that its best done through school becuase there are shit parents a very MC condescending view that backs up that assertion by citing SUre start for economically deprived communities.

at the moment the education system is taking over basic parneting functions

if it really takes so little time why dont parents do it?

as you are a teacher i am astounded that you arnt up in arms that this government and others - but increasingly this govt - uses the education system this way.

I do advocate parents and schools working together

they can teach the things they have degrees for

i will teah my child to be a fully functioning member of society - and maybe if inbetween all these "small" amounts of time the teachers manage to actually help my children get a gcse that will help them with a decent future - great

small amounts of time indeed. the secondary that my twins attend are fond of telling me that they only have just over 4 hours of teaching per day

rtake your small amounts of time from that.

I actually think your failure to realize that some parents are not able or willing to look after their children as effectively as you or I might Custardo is what's condescending and naive at best. I have taught many children whose parents had learning difficulties, drug or alcohol habits, were going through enormous psychological trauma, were single mothers with demanding jobs struggling to make ends meet. As I've said I've been putting off getting my dc her MMR booster because it would mean taking time off work (teaching other people's kids and taking her out of nursery where she's learning) To suggest that they just need a few parenting classes and the schools just stop helping to educate their children in ways that they can't or won't and stop providing vaccinations, eye tests etc and everything would somehow be BETTER is ridiculous beyond belief.

And now that you've basically done a massive U turn and said that you have no problem with sex ed in school (when your starting point was that you felt it had no place in school) you're returning to the idea of time wasted. You can't defend your arguments purely on your opinion and ignore the evidence.

I don't think that PSHE, vaccinations, eye tests, cooking is any less valuable than Pythagoras (personalyl I think it's more). Most other parents would agree with me. But even if you did you have the option of not signing the consent forms and taking your child to get the vaccination done separately.
And as far as I know we're talking about 1 potentially life-saving vaccination in 5 years at a maximum amount of missed lesson of 30 minutes!!!
1 PSHE lesson per week at a maximum amount of 1 hr.
I cooking lesson = 1 hour.

What this adds up to is a minute fraction of the timetable as a whole and NO MORE non-academic time than there ever was. As I've said no less time 'wasted' than when I was at school 20 years ago. And don't forget the time that's been gained since the 60s through photcopiers and ocmputers which means kids no longer sit at their desks spending hours simply copying off the board. And I really don't think there's anyone out there apart from you Custardo who thinks that PSHE and vaccinations is somehow getting in the way of apostrophes and spelling. My kids are getting a great education thanks.

Your kids' school may be different because it is a faith school. Do your kids have to go to services and relgiious festivals etc? Do you object to that?

Juule, yes I do 'need' schools and teachers to help educate my children. Don't you? Don't we all?

'You also appear to have little confidence in your own parenting abilities if you believe that without 'professionals' your children wouldn't have learned the things they have.'

This is absolutely bizarre. Why would I send my kids to school if I didn't think they were going to learn things there that I can't teach them? Of course my kids have learned things from professionals that teach them. Although I'm an English teacher with a degree, a PGCE, an MA and 2 diplomas I'm not trained to teach at primary level. I'm useless at maths. I'm hopeless at competitive sports. I also can't teach my kids how to get on with other kids without the other kids.

I can't believe that amount of self-satisfaction and big-headedness that underestimates and undervalues the contribution made by teachers, schools (by which I mean lunchtimes and playtimes and PSHE and assembly as well as just lesson time). This absolutely doesn't make me an unconfident parent. Quite the opposite. I'm confident enough in my abilities as a parent and in my kids to not feel threatened by what happens in school.

And quite often my kids will do things in class when they have teachers who they adore and their peers who they adore all encouragin them to do it (like swim) that they wouldn't do for me. That's actually normal.

'at the moment the education system is taking over basic parneting functions'

I just find this a bizarre and paranoid mindset. How do you feel about teachers supervising your kids' lunch and playtimes then? Don't you think that's 'taking over basic parenting functions'? And what about if a primary school teacher helped a child learn to tie its laces or tell the time? Is this 'taking over'. I just call it education. And if it's educating the whole child and checking their eyes and giving ONE (yes ONE of maybe TWO) vaccinations during the whole time they're at school thus saving the NHS 1000s of pounds in admin and cuasing less disruption to the education of my child and every other child in their class then that's great.

Okay let's get one thing straight. I don't underestimate or undervalue the work of teachers or the expertise they have in their subjects. It's the school system that I'm at odds with. It's the numerous gov't initiatives that make me groan. It's the interference in family life rather than the support of family life that irritates. NOT teachers who on the whole do a fantastic job under sometimes dire conditions. Teachers' knowledge and skills are undervalued by a gov't who impose such a structured NC that they cannot always teach in the way they would like to.

"Juule, yes I do 'need' schools and teachers to help educate my children. Don't you? Don't we all? "

While we may (or may not) need teachers, a lot of people do not need schools.

"Although I'm an English teacher with a degree, a PGCE, an MA and 2 diplomas I'm not trained to teach at primary level."

Your lack of confidence in being able to teach your own primary age children is quite sad. I don't have all your qualifications but I know that I can at least help my children attain what they need to know by the end of ks2. (and that isn't big-headedness, I'm just not indulging in false modesty).

I think it is more condescending to say there should be compulsory parenting classes for adults than to say it is desirable to have a broad curriculum that backs up what is being learned at home and provides the few that don't receive it at home with an alternative.

Still, the basic idea that schools are, and should be, purely academic seems very narrow focussed to me considering the sheer amount of time a child will spend at school during his/her lifetime. IMO schools provide another realm where the development of the child, academically, socially, physically can be addressed. I know that there are alot of parents who think that grades are the only thing that matters in school but I take issue with the total focus of a child's development for x many hours a week being ONLY about attainment levels and arbitrary academic results.

Surely it is best for schools to try to meet the needs of the whole child, with a focus on academic development, just as it is still my job to educate my children even though that function is primarily fulfilled in school?

Rants, it's Custy's idea to have compulsory parenting classes for adults not mine. I agree with your points above.

Juule
'Your lack of confidence in being able to teach your own primary age children is quite sad. I don't have all your qualifications but I know that I can at least help my children attain what they need to know by the end of ks2. (and that isn't big-headedness, I'm just not indulging in false modesty).'

I think you're kind of missing my point and also attacking me and my parenting without knowing me or anything about my parenting. I am a very confident parent and very confident teacher thanks. I just would not presume to think I can replace the teaching and experience which my kids get at school from teachers and peers who have different, diverse and many skills and approaches and ways of motivating kids than I have. Anyone who can't or won't say this is desperately big-headed or has got their kids in the wrong school.

So to repeat my point, I can and do read to my kids and have from birth. I am better qualified than my kids' teachers in my subject. I have fostered a love in reading in my kids from birth. However, I do not have 20+ years experience in teaching young children to read. I teach 6th form and was trained and started teaching at secondary level. Nor can I re-create in my home the dynamics which go on in a classroom where a teacher (who has a very different job from that of a parent) and teaching assistants are encouraging children of the same age to learn to read. Nor would I want to. Nor, more importantly, would my kids want me to.

I support and expand on and provide the foundation for the learning that takes place at school for my kids but I am not their teacher. I am their mother.

If you and Custy feel that the 'education system' is interfering in family life I think you need to recognize that this is a personal opinion which is not shared by parents or families generally. You wouldn't believe how many parents have asked me and my colleagues for MORE help often more than we are able to give.

Custy, as far as your approach goes. What I understand is that you think Sure Start, Health Visitors, Parentlien, free parenting classes, courses offered by FE colleges, infor on healthy eating etc given by NHS to pregnant women, ante-natal classes, post-natal classes, free nursery education, midwives, parenting advice and contracetpion and health eating lessons in school, PSHE etc etc are inadqueate at supporting parents. You think there should be more investment in parents and parenting. And the one thing that you have suggested to better what is already there and which would mean we could stop teaching PSHE and sex ed and giving vaccinations in school and eye tests (even though as Martina pointed out you can be the best paretnes in the world and still not notice that your child is short-sighted)???

Compulsory parenting classes when people have already become parents???

Is this really the best you can do? And please tell me how these would work? At wha point would you attend them (before your child is born - I thought this was called ante-natal classes? When they are 1? Before you get pregnant i.e. when you're at school or university?)? how many would you go to? And who would look after your kids?? And what would these classes consist of? And who would teach them?

Do you think perhaps the classes on cooking might be a little bit redundant for Jamie Oliver? Do you think that perhaps Tany Byron may not benefit from classes on children's behavioru? Do you think my DP would benefit from classes on managing teenage behaviour when he works in a school for kids with severe emotioanl and behavioural difficulties and has regular training on this? Is it perhaps that you feel you need parenting classes? Or is it that that kind of information and education should be taught as part of the school's curriculum when kids are in school and then targeted to those parents who need it (through HEalth Visiotrs, midwives, Home Start, Parentline etc etc)?

Just out of interest, how old are your children Hurricane?

Also, I apologise if I appear to be attacking you, Hurricane. That's not my intent. I was passing comment on how your posts appear to me.
Not meant as an attack on your parenting.

"You can't defend your arguments purely on your opinion and ignore the evidence.

I don't think that PSHE, vaccinations, eye tests, cooking is any less valuable than Pythagoras (personalyl I think it's more)"

you can defend your arguments on a personal basis though?

ignore what evidence? - that from your own admittance there are failing parents - we both know this - you as a teacher - me as a worker in these communities.

i assert that parenting classes for all to support encourange and introduce a thriving culture of parenting would be benefitial

and i can assert that all i like becuase its my opinion.

you are free to disagree and even be increasingly rude for no reason.

If you gain your victory from propagating a 'u-turn' fiction - then my dear you are welcome to it.

I maintain that these things should be done in the first instance by the primary care giver

if i have not been clear i shall qualify that with

and if the schools are to do anything - they should support the parent

rather than the other way round.

Sure Start, for poor people
Health Visitors - dont give out healthy eating advice as routine, social morality lessons, sex education to your children
Parentline - a free telephone line - a resource for desperate parents rather than a tool
free parenting classes - not nationwide - in poor areas mostly,
courses offered by FE colleges - becuase you can go to college with three kids and a full time job
"nfor on healthy eating etc given by NHS to pregnant women, ante-natal classes, post-natal classes "- i think that you will find the content of these classes will vary from place to place - but i'll give you the benefit - lets say that healthy eating for PREGNANT WOMEN or FOR BABIES is covered

"free nursery education" - this has nowt to do with the price of eggs
, "midwives" - do what? dont they help you with your pregnancy and birth ?- not sure what this has to do with anything either,

"parenting advice and contracetpion and health eating lessons in school, PSHE etc etc "( thats this partic argument then "are inadqueate at supporting parents. "

yes - becuase if it all was that pissin great perhaps jamie scooter and the chicken man wouldnt have to socially educate us about food through the pissin telly.

as for your "tell me how it would work" rant - no - do i look like a fucking social policy expert?

i have an opinion and i've been rather nice with it until now. extolling the virtues of teachers, watching how i phrase things - and i love a debate on mumsnet - but your just a rude person.

No, Custardo, there is plenty of evidence to support the value of vaccinations in schools. Likewise with eyetests (even looking at the anecdotal evidence on this thread e.g. Martianbishop's eye probs being picked up at a school check) and cooking. I made it clear that it was my opinion that these things are MORE valuable than Pythagoras (which I have to confess I've never needed or referred to since the age of 16 until now). There may be other people who want to argue the other way around and that's fine but there is no EVIDENCE to support your OPINION that vaccinations should not be given in schools.

Similarly your arguments that schools are 'taking over basic parenting functions' and that vaccinations (ONE or TWO in 5 YEARS!!!) and PSHE and cooking are taking over the curriculum (and I note that school photos do not fall into either of these evil categories - i.e taking over parenting functions or wasting curriculum time) are pure opinion. There is no EVIDENCE for either one. GCSE pass rates continue to rise. I continue to teach kids who get 8 or 9 A*s and (weirdly) can do quadratic equations even though they have been taught PSHE and been vaccinated just as I was 20 years ago (although it was called EPR then Education in Personal Relationships).

Custardo, I have always said that some parents, MANY parents fail their kids in many ways (most of us probably fail our kids in one way or another during their life times). Some fail to teach their kids about sex, some fail to look after their health, some don't notice their kid is short-sighted or hearing-impaired, some more seriously don't keep their kids clean or fed or safe.

I have also always agreed that parents are the first and most important influence in a child's life. I have also always agreed that ideally parents would teach their kids about sex etc etc.

BUT once again none of the above means that schools should not do this AS WELL.

I read with my kids and teach them forward rolls and teach them about numbers and teach them about body parts and digestion but I don't mind them doing this stuff at school. In fact, I welcome it and value the different perspectives that they'll get from both trained professionals and their peers. I do not feel threatened as a parent by what happens in school. I do wonder why you and others do. Nor do I think any of this stuff is time wasted. I think it's as valuable as knowing where to put an apostrophe. Schools are mini communities and part of the wider community. They educate our children in all sorts of ways as rAnts says above.

As I've said your distinctions are arbitrary. You don't mind your kids being taken out of class for a photo but you do for a (potentially life saving vaccination). You don't mind your kids being taught pyhagoras but you do mind them being taught cooking. Presumably you don't mind them being supervised while they eat their lunch and play in the playground but you do mind them being taught PSHE. This is all about your opinion which is not generally shared. There is no evidence for any of this stuff.

At the risk of getting my head bitten off.
It isn't just poor people who need parenting classes.
I know of several middleclass parents who have no idea about how to look after a baby, toddler or teenager.

If we all had an instinctive basic knowledge of how to do all of these things you are arguing about, why are the book shop shelves struggling to cope with the sheer volume of self help books? Books all aimed at parents who are not coping or need a help with their parenting skills.
Why are we all so arrogant to think that we can be good parents without training.
There are not many jobs out there which you can do with out any prior skills!

I agree ronshar and I think it would be helpful if courses such as those available for childminders were also available for parents in general.

I don't feel that when a teacher teaches my child about full stops, or watches her when she plays with her friends or teaches her how to add up or gets her to swim a length that the teacher is 'taking over' my role, or interfering in family life. She is just helping to educate my child.

'Sure Start, for poor people'

And you call me condescending?! OMG. I am not poor and I have been to Sure Start. I went to a coffee morning and a Stay and Play. I would have gone to more sessions but I went back to work. As you say, Sure Start centres are mainly located in deprived areas. i.e. areas where parents are most likely to need the support (therefore money and resources appropriately targeted) and the problem with that is...?

'Health Visitors - dont give out healthy eating advice as routine,'

Yes, they do and this advice is available in reams free in the free NHS packs you get when you have your first child and by midwives.

'social morality lessons, sex education to your children'
No, this happens in school. Through the pastoral system, through PSHE, through assemblies and so on..

Parentline - a free telephone line - a resource for desperate parents rather than a tool
You are misrepresenting this. And what exactly is wrong with a free telephone service for despearte parents?? As I've said there's no pleasing you.

'free parenting classes - not nationwide - in poor areas mostly,'

If you want to go to a free parenting class you can.

'courses offered by FE colleges - becuase you can go to college with three kids and a full time job'

Look, what do you want? You think that parents can somehow go to COMPULSORY parenting classes but then you object to the fact that FE colleges provide courses on healthy eating. Weird.

Many FE colleges have creches. Free nursery places allow parents who are unemployed to study. FE colleges have evening classes.

""free nursery education" - this has nowt to do with the price of eggs

I think you are being deliberately obtuse. Free nursery education has got a huge amount of women off benefits and into work. It also means kids get to socialise and learn skills that they may not if they were at home with a parent who was struggling. Don't you think that is INVESTING IN PARENTS????

, "midwives" - do what? dont they help you with your pregnancy and birth ?- not sure what this has to do with anything either,

Did you not get visited by your midwife after giving birth then like every other mother? Did you not get seen by your midwives routinesly nand regularly before you gave birth. Did she not give you a zillion leaflets about healthy eating and what to avoid etc. BEcause I think you'll find this is quite standard. Midwives and Health Visitors also look out for post-natal depression, domestic violence, advise about smoking, drug abuse etc etc. I actually think this is quite supportive of parents and it does not happen in every country.

"parenting advice and contracetpion and health eating lessons in school, PSHE etc etc "( thats this partic argument then "are inadqueate at supporting parents. "

What? Can't make sense of this.

'as for your "tell me how it would work" rant - no - do i look like a fucking social policy expert?'

No, nobody could mistake you for that. But if you are coming on this thread and saying that there is no investment in parents (wrong!) and what needs to happen to make parents and parenting and education better is a) ban vaccinations and PSHE and so on and b) introduce COMPULSORY PARENTING CLASSEs
then I think you ought to be in a position to say what you mean by the parenting classes and justify your point of view.

'i have an opinion and i've been rather nice with it until now. extolling the virtues of teachers, watching how i phrase things - and i love a debate on mumsnet - but your just a rude person. '

Oh right, I'm just rude. NOthing like attacking your opponent and spitting out your dummy when you can't argue sensibly using rational points and evidence.

No I don't object at all. Most children attend school, so it is the logical place to carry out these things to target the greatest number of children. For their own health and well being.
Working parents would struggle to have time of work for health checks etc if they had private appts.
The HV system would be overstretched.
The way that my brother and I ended up wearing glasses was only picked up through a school eye check, had it not been done then my mother would still have put my brothers slow learning pace down to him being 'slow!'
(He could only read the big 'A' at the top of the chart
Cooking/ healthy eating give the right messages for later life- many working families lack time to prepare fresh food daily so children cannot learn how to cook from that example.

Some links:

On parent classes:
www.parentlineplus.org.uk/index.php?id=11

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4 440250.stm
For Sure Start:
www.surestart.gov.uk/

For Health Visitors:
www.healthvisitors.com/hv/25/508

By the way, I'm not arguing that there shouldn't be more investment in these initatives and ones like them. I'm just saying this doesn't mean schools should stop doing what they're doing.

Bit like saying - oh, well we've got some fantastic libraries and we'll give parents some classes in teaching their kids how to read so we won't bother doing any reading in schools any more.

Actually, sorry, going back to comments from colditz about 'its none of the schools business what my childs weight and height are' issues.
I am certain that I have pointed out that as a CM I insist on knowing roughly what a childs weight/height is. This is not to make comment about under or over weightness, merely to possibly save the life of that child.
When a child is taken to hospital via ambulance/ GP admission etc most drugs such as antibiotics, pain relief, anti sickness, sedatives and IV fluids are calculated on weight. If that is known by the care giver/teacher it could be the difference between life and death. A and E departments tend to use the Broslow system where there are colour co-ordinated tapes and bags which can be laid against the child and are organised by weight. These have all drug doses calculated on them which can save time. This could be an issue in an RTA involving the school bus where a child has a profuse bleed from a fracture, a child goes floppy at school and has a rash ? meningitis, parent at work and too far away from school etc. The teacher would be the intermediary at the hospital until someone arrived.

you keep protesting at the inimal amount of health care there is in school

at the minimal amount of this or that

i have answered already

it all adds up

sure start is govt funded for areas of deprivation - earlier on i said this may inadvertantly cover M/c reas but that isn't its function - my problem is your citing it as the solution to parenting classes across the board.

the reams of free information packs that you have lots of time to read with a new baby

available to all those illiterate mums - you were taking about earlier - perhaps not the best or effective method of mass communication.

if i wanted to go to a free parenting class - the odds are i am aware of some parenting failings - catch 22 - ergo probably good parent.

"Midwives and Health Visitors also look out for post-natal depression, THATS THAT GOT TO DO WITH ANYTHING?domestic violence, AND AGAIN [HMM] advise about smoking, YES BECUASE THATS GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ARGUMENT OF ME TEACHING MY KIDS drug abuse etc etc... AGAIN [HMM] NOWT TO DO WITH THIS ARGUMENT. I actually think this is quite supportive of parents and it does not happen in every country."

i agree they do a good job they look out for lots of things - midwives allelujah - love you all - thank you for existing

but do they help me as a parent - PARENT my children - tell them about sex ed, teach me what a healthy meal is, what interesting food to give to my teenagers?

nurseries - are fab - i like nurseries

what exactly do you think we are agruing about because you are trying to make out like i am some anti establishment - all establishment freakazoid

nurseries have nothing to do with the argument of what is taught in schools and who should chuffin well teach it

that is the argument right?

so no obtuseyness here dear - you have gone off the point entirely.

nurseries are great - i used one

support to working parents fab nothing to do with anything

how are you trying to argue that i am against parental support for work?

when that has nothing to do with anything?

i dont object to FE colleges teaching healthy eating - jesus lady - do you actually read?

no actually i cant attend parenting classes unless i have just had a baby - so you are wrong

and i cant be fucked reading your last post.

you are not even arguing the point at hand you are arguing things that have nothing to do with anything.

asking me for evidence of something that doesn't exist. telling me i cant have a personal opinion without evidence then citing your personal opinion.

and being rude about it you rudey rude rude person from rudesville