Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

Ed Miliband's childcare proposals - is wraparound care really the solution?

132 replies

MumsnetGuestBlogs · 18/11/2013 17:17

Ed Miliband has announced that a Labour government would improve access to affordable childcare by introducing a "legal guarantee" of 8am - 6pm provision for primary-aged children, through breakfast and after-school clubs. On the face of it this sounds great. Access to affordable childcare is a major issue for so many mothers, distorting whatever semblance of choice we have in how we raise our families and pay our bills. Surely by increasing access we're moving one step closer to supporting our families in the way we would all wish?

I'm a little unsure. I like what this proposal would do in practice but the broader message makes me uneasy. According to Miliband:
Parents who want to work should be able to do so. We need to use the talents of everyone if we are to succeed as an economy and keep social security bills down. Seven out of 10 stay at home mums tell surveys that the cost of childcare has deterred them from looking for a job.

There's something about the wording of this - the pro-business rhetoric - that unsettles me. Labour will help you ensure that your family isn't a drain on the state. Is this really what passes for pro-family politics? Are we moving towards a social model which is more supportive of family life or merely more controlling?

I'll be honest: I already benefit from sending my children to a school that has wraparound childcare. I choose my words carefully; I'm not sure how much they benefit, other than by the obvious fact that as our family's main earner I need to pay the mortgage and my children need a home. My kids prefer it when I'm able to pick them up straight from school, expressing excitement if any day is a "home" day. I can torture myself with guilt over this but what is the point? I don't have any extended family nearby and Daddy has a one-hour commute. That's life, eh? But does it really have to be this way?

It often feels to me that between my mother's generation and my own, there's been a cultural shift that hasn't been wholly to our benefit. We've gone from prioritising family values in a way that limited women's ability to earn towards prioritising the needs of employers in a way that diminishes family life. Instead of taking a step back and overhauling our whole understanding of pay, value and reward - something which the Wages For Housework campaign wished to achieve - we've allowed politicians and employers who are not primary carers to make the odd modification to their prized, protected system. "See? You have the right to ask - to ask! - for flexible working! And to pick your children up after ten hours in school! Why aren't you happy yet? What is your problem?"

My problem is this: family life and caring work aren't to be slotted in around the needs of perennially grudging employers. They're central to who we all are and how we shape our future. By this, I don't mean that ideally, all women should be angels of the hearth instead of ball-breaking career women. Such stereotypes have only made us blame ourselves for not having made "better" choices about our lives when really, we can only make do with what's available. Other options - career sabbaticals, job shares, increased wages to allow for more part-time work, decreased wage inequality, the outrageous idea that actually, even those who "don't work" (ha!) deserve a political voice - haven't been on the table. There's been no creativity. We've accepted the lie that this is the only way things can ever be and at times we've even allowed it to make us turn on each other.

I think we are afraid of engaging with this debate fully in case it damages our status as women, casting us either as bad mothers who need to spend more time in the home or unreliable workers who let down their employers and colleagues by doing just that. It's not fair that these feel like our only choices. I'm not against Miliband's proposal; if it gives other families the basic support required to earn a wage, something from which I've benefited myself, how could I be? But I think we need to ask for something even more radical, something that really turns things upside down. The problem isn't that we're failing our families or employers, but that the weak, commercialised concept of work-life balance is still failing us and our kids.

OP posts:
TheArticFunky · 19/11/2013 23:00

Women are vilified whatever they do. If you work you are neglecting your children if you stay at home you are a drain on the tax-payer.

scottishmummy · 19/11/2013 23:13

I'm nonplussed if a precious moments/why have em mutha disapproves of wrapround care
I don't feel vilified I'm aware that fir a minority ft working parents(ESP mother) causes disapproval
We need govt to offer range options,do people access what suits them.there is need for wrapround that's for sure

Scarletbanner · 19/11/2013 23:20

Exactly, Scottishmummy! Really not sure why people who don't want or need wraparound care would object to others having the choice to use it. I don't give a toss if someone is a SAHP or works 100 hours a week.

I don't know why some people are getting so defensive about it. The only people being judgey here are those posters.

morethanpotatoprints · 19/11/2013 23:38

Jassy

The choices men make about working and childcare aren't often scrutinised and judged ime

For the record, I haven't said the idea is bad or wraparound shouldn't exist. I don't think it serves women well to normalise it. I believe that once something is normalised other situations are considered as less important and I don't think that's so good for women.

JassyRadlett · 20/11/2013 07:27

So, then, you think it should be the exception/rare? Doesn't that remove choices from both women and men? Why does it not serve women just as well to say high-quality after school care is just as normal as picking children up after school and ferrying them around to multiple activities?

You sound quite insecure about how others view the choices you've made for your family. Are there examples of when people have been judgey? I've only ever experienced people being judgemental because I don't stay home with my son, but I don't let it get to me because frankly they're spouting ill-informed bullshit.

Meglet · 20/11/2013 07:46

I like the flexibility. But as a single parent I would worry it would then mean I was forced into working full time just because the child care was available. Working part time has damaged my health (I'm a superb drain on the nhs!) and working full time would put me and the dc's wellbeing at risk.

Alanna1 · 20/11/2013 08:16

I think its a good idea. There's no one size fits all solution and it would help me some of the time - on the days I work till midnight its obviously no real use, but even then means my sister or someone can collect my children without an afternoon off work. Its always parental choice whether they use it.

Bonsoir · 20/11/2013 09:03

I don't think group settings, whatever form they take, should be the majority of a child's experience of life. Family should be the bedrock of society and policies should help families not industry.

LCHammer · 20/11/2013 09:06

Bonsoir - you usually spout pro-industry 'wisdom' rather than giving a fig about families. What's changed?

Bramshott · 20/11/2013 09:43

I agree that the availability of wrap-around care for primary children (even IMO for pre-teen secondary children) is crucial. That doesn't mean that all primary kids need to be in before and after school care 5 days a week.

But DOES THIS PROPOSAL COME WITH ANY FUNDING?? Funding is crucial, particularly for small schools. My DDs school have just started a breakfast club, which is fantastic. If they started an after school club I would be over the moon (I work odd, freelance hours, and have to find ad-hoc childcare once every couple of weeks). BUT, it's a small school, and my very rough sums (which I'm sure don't include everything) reckon they need at least 10 children at breakfast club to break even. The most I have ever seen there is 7 children, and some days there's only 1. So at the moment the school is subsidising it, and the leader is applying for grants, but it's very tough, and I can't see it being sustainable in the long run.

Bramshott · 20/11/2013 09:44

I agree that the availability of wrap-around care for primary children (even IMO for pre-teen secondary children) is crucial. That doesn't mean that all primary kids need to be in before and after school care 5 days a week.

But DOES THIS PROPOSAL COME WITH ANY FUNDING?? Funding is crucial, particularly for small schools. My DDs school have just started a breakfast club, which is fantastic. If they started an after school club I would be over the moon (I work odd, freelance hours, and have to find ad-hoc childcare once every couple of weeks). BUT, it's a small school, and my very rough sums (which I'm sure don't include everything) reckon they need at least 10 children at breakfast club to break even. The most I have ever seen there is 7 children, and some days there's only 1. So at the moment the school is subsidising it, and the leader is applying for grants, but it's very tough, and I can't see it being sustainable in the long run.

Bonsoir · 20/11/2013 10:08

Nothing has changed at all - you must be confusing me with another poster.

itsnothingoriginal · 20/11/2013 10:35

Yes indeed Bramshott… funding is crucial for small, rural schools as budgets have been slashed for many of them.

Before my DC started, there was a breakfast club which was run by a group of parents. It made a big loss and we now have nothing - a few as and when craft clubs for older kids that can't be relied on as regular childcare. Working around this is impossible!!

NumptyNameChange · 20/11/2013 10:36

i think it's needed - whether it SHOULD be needed or not is a nice philosophical debate but for those of us who need to keep a roof over our heads and don't have a second adult earning money so we can have 'choices' life is a bit more pragmatic.

it wouldn't just benefit those working full time - it would benefit those looking for part time work by creating more flexibility re: working three days a week for full time hours rather than running around like blue arsed flies having to work and do school run and everything else over five days a week. you could choose to do full three days and have two days at home to keep on top of other stuff. working say 5hrs a day every day within school hours and still having to run around doing everything else on top in such tight hours is a lot harder than working three full days.

if you don't want to use childcare and you can afford not to work then great but why argue against others who aren't in that position having access to childcare?

NumptyNameChange · 20/11/2013 10:37

not to mention how few jobs there are available within school hours only.

annieorangutan · 20/11/2013 11:52

Do all of the above posters live in sahm areas? Here the school breakfast and after school clubs are full with waiting lists and then there are numerous private providers on top and childminders. They make enough money as there is such a strong demand.

NumptyNameChange · 20/11/2013 12:08

same here annie - am wondering if maybe it's different in very wealthy areas with lots of sahms or nannies? maybe also different in areas with very low employment figures hence parents not needing it.

my son is in year 2 and i've never managed to secure him a place in pre or after school club. i'm changing jobs soon and asked just this morning if they had any spaces, they said no but i'm still on the waiting list apparently.

itsnothingoriginal · 20/11/2013 12:38

Traditionally yes, my area is probably a sahm one (although there are lots of families here who rely on grandparents collecting kids after school!) but the calls for after school provision have been getting much louder for the past few years. The school is under no obligation to provide any so parents have had to take their kids to schools in the nearest town where there is provision.

My choice is either to work, or send my children to school away from where we live. I don't want to have to make this choice as its important that we use our community school, but we don't seem to be able to get the school to listen - despite having a falling roll as a result.

Are we alone in this dilemma? Would be interesting to know!

AmandinePoulain · 20/11/2013 13:02

I live in a fairly mixed area, the majority of the parents in our local school work but there are sahms too - it's certainly not an area where everyone has nannies. A lot of grandparents help out though, but the after school club is well used but not oversubscribed. There are plenty of childminders around too, I haven't heard of a 'supply' issue. I'm in Wales though where breakfast clubs are free, and offered by the majority of schools, I'm not sure if that makes a difference?

NumptyNameChange · 20/11/2013 15:46

it would make a huge difference to me amandine. perhaps your area is exceptional also in the fact of so many intergenerational relatives being on the doorstep. obviously in many areas that wouldn't be the case - such as cities with a lot of migrant workers.

AmandinePoulain · 20/11/2013 16:13

I mean I wondered if being in Wales makes a difference to how wraparound care is used, free breakfast club certainly makes a huge difference to me personally!

scottishmummy · 21/11/2013 18:28

I also dispute the premise of the op.ive never felt vilified or afraid
And actually family life does slot in around work and school for most people
Work fills my fridge,gives me a career I chose it,and wraparound care offers choice for other parents too.which is good thing

If you're vehemently opposed to wraparound care,or don't require it,don't use it
It isn't compulsory to use,you'll not have your dc wrenched from manicured hands to be flung in a airless wretched holding pen.

NumptyNameChange · 21/11/2013 21:55

i think people forget that if you're a single mum or the main earner you need to cover a lot of costs and have a slim chance of a future and novel ideas like being able to retire.

if you are happily not working and have the supposed luxury of being financially supported and your future secured (in theory) by another adults earnings what right have you really to pontificate on childcare availability or necessity? it's like a pet cat commenting on how much land lions need tbh. you don't get it, it doesn't effect you so why does it concern you?

Bonsoir · 22/11/2013 13:04

"And actually family life does slot in around work and school for most people."

I dispute this.

NumptyNameChange · 22/11/2013 15:16

what a privilege for you bonsoir. most people have to make it happen - not dispute it from the comfort of not having to do it in order to eat.

Swipe left for the next trending thread