Does coming from a deprived background really seal your fate?

[Pinkjenny]

Just wondering, really, listening to Nick Clegg on R5 live. I come from Anfield in Liverpool, not deprived really, but certainly not affluent. My mum worked in a shop, and my dad was (and still is) an engineer.

I credit all of my success (relatively speaking, of course) to the way in which I was brought up, and the attitude of my parents, who told me I could be whatever I wanted to be, as long as I put my mind to it.

Does giving children money for their first shoes and first suit really help break that poverty cycle?

Or does it depend on the attitude of their parents and their general upbringing?

Oh OK US- sorry.

I absolutely agree that there is no shame in becoming a builder/electrician etc and wish there were more true apprenticeships and training for some children ..the acedemic route does not suit everyone

True, although i'd like to see the apprentice route stretched: many a mature adult in need of a new career criticised for grad level degrees in vocational subjects when there's no other route in.

Sorry, dashing out now to pick up DS but just wanted to say that I agree, a good comprehensive system offers the best opportunities to most children.

I think what I was trying to say is that social deprivation cannot be resolved by the education system alone. Schools cannot be expected to raise our children as well as educate them.

A child who hasn't slept because it's parents have been rowing all night can't be expected to concentrate. A child who hasn't eaten won't be so focused on the lesson in hand and so on.

As a society we need to address the dire circumstances in which some children are raised if we want to ensure that they can truly benefit from an education.

That sounds all a bit clunky, I'll try to explain more clearly when I get back.

In truly deprived enviroments and Im not talking about the working or not working poor. It has a massive impact on every area of that child's and that family's life. Not knowing where the next hot meal or gas bill is coming from impairs the parents ability to encourage and the children's ability to learn. We owe it to society to minimise the effect on the children.

True hubbly but school remains a good environment for addressing these issues; the one aplce a child has (with the exception of home schools children) to attend. It may not be the teacher's remit but that doesn;t eman theyc an't work with other professionals.

For example, a school with extra funding of whatever this amounts to could choose to buy in services of an ed psych (like gol dust here). As well as picking up kids with bigger issues (who do often get missed) she could advise on ways of dealing with lack of confidence, etc. A school might invest in more pastorial support: as an example of your tired child, my ds2 goes in tired every day becuase he has 2 disabled brothers awake a lot and we could really do with help with that but our school has no mechanism for referring to young carers or anyone else whoc an help.

Ok there are some arents whose lives are effed up and barely anything will change that so it sits on the do we intervene with ssd or not fence for ever. Most people nmaking a hash of it (eg the rowing aprents you emntion) would respond to a poke from an appropriate person, either by getting counselling or splitting perhaps, and there are a lot of innocent situations as well.

The educaton system probably os the best environment for this, and there are many p[rofessionals out there who could operate well in that environment without impinging on the role of the educationalists themselves.

I see education as the ONLY way out of poverty for my dc. However, I have DD who has learning dificulties, and was systematically failed by her primary school, despite the work I (poor, feckless teenage mum that I was when she was born) was trying to put in at home. DD left primary school at 11 with a reading age of 6 years old, and her abilities in Maths were even worse, at a 4yo level. I fought hard to get her into the best secondary school in the area, that were willing to offer her (lots) of extra help, that I just wouldn't have the money to pay for outside of school. In one year, her improvements are so marked as to be unbelievable. She is now working on the level she should have been in Y6. SHe has made 4 yrs worth of progress in just one year at a decent school.

Due to my financial situation, I was unable to pay for tutors or outside school clubs that would have helped DD. It wasn't that I was uninterested, just that all the interest in the world means nothing if it's going to cost you almost £10 in bus fares to get to the nearest library...and you don't have that £10!

Now I'm hoping that DD can manage to get some sort of apprenticeship or trade, as she is not highly academic, and never will be, A-levels and Uni will be, frankly, a waste of time and money for her that could be better spent on something she can work in like hairdressing, or childcare, or catering, or whatever she feels is right for her.

DS1 on the other hand, desite our financial limitations, is fully expected to go to university, he has the ability, and if he doesn't make it because he hasn't read the right books, or been tutored for his 11+, that will be purely due to the lack of parental income (poverty) holding him back.

And we are not 'benefits scroungers', DP works very hard, FT, for not much more than minimum wage, because, as someone further back on this thread pointed out, someone has to do these jobs, and for some people, like DP, it's the most their level of 'intelligence' will allow for them. DP cannot change the fact that he himself has learning difficulties, that resulted in him going to an SN school.

Not all teen mums are disinterested in their dc's progress, I had my DD when I was 16yo, made some bad choices in the past, truthfully connected to my own dire upbringing, but I am determined that my own dc will not repeat the mistakes of the previous generations. THey have been brought up to value their schooling and hard work as the most important things, and too see education as a way out of poverty.

Taking money from school-age education and puting it into pre-school education would not have changed outcomes for my dc, because there's no way I would have put them in nursery at 2yo, when they should be at home with me. I would rather that money went to heling bridge the gaps in the frankly abysmal primary school curriculum. What my dc's learn about science at primary could fit on the back of a postage stamp. It's an area I have to try and fill in at home without any money to do so!

Scotland has had free ante-pre school and pre-school sessions for a few years now (don't know when exactly as my oldest is only 4) and I wonder if Primary teachers see any difference in the pupils who previously were at home until 5 who are now in Nursery getting exposed to learning and positive adult role models?

We don't have grammar schools up here, just comp or private and FWIW my eldest sister went to private (clever clogs got a bursery) and my middle sister and me to the local comp and they both got exactly the same Highers (our 'A'levels) all A's. I did not .

I can only nod and nod again at the posters who talk about parents giving their children the best start in life emotionally which happens before anyone sets foot in a classroom. Tive a child the sense that they are loved and cherised and look at them take on the world.

I do think before they start with universal childcare like this they should address where what we have already is not working.

I've just been offered an interview for a grad job that fits around acaring, part time but that's all I could manage anyway. I probably can;t go as it is half term, DH has an important exam (that links to our only secure income- ie more worth protecting than any 'if' chance) and do you think I can get cover for ds4? Nah. And the joke is that whilst there is SN cover in half term, there is none in term time or main holidays so whilst I can cover ds4 then....

I do think there's an argument for sorting out what we already have first; OTOH it's good to see a policy I actually voted for getting by instead of dumped by the wayside in favour of a cheap slot at the last Government.

I agree with Lenin: education has to try, it is the quickest and only way.

Too many of today's parents have been let down by yesterday's education and we can't leave things in their hands.

Loudlass you sound amazing.

LL is amazing.

And there are many amazing young mum sout there: its a shame people forget them.

My sister's best mate has a child who was extremely prem with associated health problems (not LD, he somehow escaped that- was born at 30 weeks), lost her daughter hours after birth (MW refused to beleive she was in labour even with her history- MW now gone, apology received), and a further two living children- all between ages 15 and 22.

She is perhaps one of the most amazing mums I ever met. her marriage didn't survive it (unsyurprisingly- the babies loss did for that) but she is incredible.

Loudlass perhaps ther out to be a government funded scheme where bright children can get access to past 11 plus papers and some group tutoring (over and above what is available in the term preceding 11 plus at school - which doesn't amount to much in comparison the the tutored MC children.) I'm not a fan of grammars schools frankly, but if we must have them then at least let the competition be fair and reflect true ability.

But you have proved that with the right attitude to education you can make a difference to your children's future, in spite of whatever financial disadvantages you might face - not saying it's ever easy, but it can be done.

I know someone who had serious concerns about her son for years and he was failing to thrive at school. She begged the school to acknowledge that he had some sort of problem, but they just kept fobbing her off. the thing was, he wasn't naughty or disruptive so he didn;t demand attention. He just withdrew inot himself, contributed nothing, acheived nothing.

Eventually, just before he started secondary school her mil paid for him to be privately assessed by an Ed. Psych.

He was found to be severely dyslexic, have moderate ADHD (though not hyeractive - just very inattentive with terrible auditory memory) dyspraxic (he's 18 now and he still can't balance on one leg!) and because of all the above, his confidence was so low and his social skills so poor that he had depression. He was 11 years old.

Once he was diagnosed and got the relevant help he was a changed child within a year. He still has ishoos TBH, and will alsways struggle a bit, but he is so much more confident and happy, and enjoying college doing something he's good at, and he has friends at last.

When one of my children was causing me concern and not thriving at state school he was moved, aged 7, to private. He did tons better, but was still giving me a few concerns, and getting frustrated and upset because he couldn't ever remember what he was supposed to be doing, and his writing so so painfully slow he couldn't get the words from his brain to the page!

I paid immediately to have him assessed. £300. Just like that. Again, once we had a clue what was going wrong for him, we were able to give it the attention it deserved and whilst he is still always going to be a bit dylexic, and a bit disorganised and inattentive, he is not behind at all compared to national standards.

But where he really benefits, is that he comes from a family of articulate people with inquisitive minds and a home full of books and resources. I read an essay he wrote last night (he's 11 now) and although it was spelt abysmally, it was worded eloquently and fulfilled the brief beautifully.

A child with his exact same issues from a home with semi-literate inarticulate parents,
and perhaps no laptop with spellcheck in the house would have struggled to get more than a few sentences down on paper, and no-one would have reminded him to hand it in anyway!

Well, Mn loves the grammar (or hates it depending on thread ) but I have yet to live anywhere where there is one, and I;ve lived in 2 countries within the Union.

'I know someone who had serious concerns about her son for years and he was failing to thrive at school. She begged the school to acknowledge that he had some sort of problem, but they just kept fobbing her off. the thing was, he wasn't naughty or disruptive so he didn;t demand attention. He just withdrew inot himself, contributed nothing, acheived nothing.

DS3 was like that; he was also non verbal and incontinent but not a problem: after fighting we got him into an SNU where he ahs a dx of autism and will always need care- but wasn;t a problem, so.....

DS2- scored +++ on dyslexia and dyspraxia scales, does same for ADD (the attention but not hyperactivity variant of adhd that was mentioned)- was discharged from IEP and register after a few weeks, when teh funding changed. Grr.

I've just seen an advert for trainee driving instructors. Obviously the courses are run by private companies, and quite expensive to pay for up front if you are not earning, and people with poor credit ratings will not get good bank loans.

As Sancti said, sometimes people need opprtunities to retrain in later life, or higher education isn't appropriate for them.

Perhaps people should be able to get low cost loans just like student loans but to enable them to train in skilled trades, take these driving instructor courses, or whatever else there is out there, or perhaps buy into franchises etc.

They could be assessed to be sure of their commitment and potential, and it might help get long term benefit dependent people out of a hole, which in turn would encourage their children.

It sounds expensive but it's probably cheaper than funding a mature student at uni, and much cheaper than keeping a whole family on benefits.

Because what the world doesn't necessarily need now is more graduates.

The SMA post about confidence is interesting, getting that balance between tellng children they are great even when they're not trying and doing badly and getting things wrong and never telling them they're great.

What I would like to analyse is the difference. I do something and even if there is a negative comment I tend to feel I did very well. SMA can be getting As and assuming she's failing. What a difference. Do we think the difference is caused by how you're treated by your parents up to say age 7? Is it instead innate (we probably all have children some of whom are confidant and some not and it seems fixed at birth; some are laid back, some are full of confidence and ambition)

I don;t think it is innate in my family; both my sisters are very confident BUT I am the eldest and my aprents went through a very bad time with drink (Dad) and depression (Mum) when I was old enough to know I couldn;t help and my sisters were not.

I think it can be that simple tbh.

As for balance- yes that's important but when things are equal it's not ahrd. DS2 is academically shite, truly he is. But we praise his very real talents at everything conservation related and try to find ways around the other bits.

It takes a loving parent though; I don;t think Mum ever told me she lvoed, ever. Not all her fault: I am baby number five and the first to survive, she went through Hell herself.

(Am not complaining BTW: am far from doing the waaaaaaail my mummy never loved me bit PMSL: as an adult quite aware she did but could nto express it).

WRT to grants etc- yes they should be avialble as an add on to what's there. DH is thriving already and bringing in an income 1 year into his degree course; he is studying a shortage subject as well. But I knew of quite a lot of people when I was doing my college course before uni who dropped out for funding, and for whom university wasn;t suitable. You an tell. Dh was accepted at university in teh 80's but fell ill; I sailed through my Access in half time. Others barely snuck through and could have been excellent at the job they wanted if they'd been able to go at it from a less academic route (thining of someone who wanted to teach rock sports and had to try for a geography degree as almost everyone who applied had one, when he was a great etyacher, excellent at the sport and completely and utterly non academic).

I do think it is somewhat innate, yes. Some of it will be just the way you are, but much of it will be (for example) your birth order in the family, whether or not you were bullied as a child for things outside your down control (like living in a notoriously filthy smelly house for example) but more importantly, and the way your parents treated you, and the expectations they had of you, and whether you were labelled useless, charming, pretty, popular, clever, dumb, clumsy, whatever, without a doubt.

Also, the way (as a child) you see other people treated. If you live with one abusive parent always bullying or criticising another, that will have an effect on you too.

Of course this applies across all classes and levels of intellect. Just look at the number of perfectionist, bright, high-achieving girls with professional parents who self-harm or have eating disorders. They have all the reason in the world to be confident about themselves - affluent, clever, full of promise, and yet they clearly can't deal with the expectation.

I'm eldest too. I'm just interested in how people can be. Mind you some are useless and think they are great and that isn't always that good an attitude either. I think one of the reaosns I'm fairly successful is I think I can do most things and I work harder than most people. I don't think it's because I'm particularly clever or well educated or pretty although I suppose I think I;m those things too. A related topic is many women who think they don't look good, even very pretty women. That's very sad too.

In answer to the thread fate isn't sealed by deprived background (whether a rich or poor deprived one although we mean poor on this thread) but it makes most things then harder. Have we improve feckless people and how they bring up children since the 1800s? We've certainly tried very hard. Most children now get the chance to go to school and the poor have a bigger problem with obesity rather than traditional starvation so that might be an improvement but will they always be with us as the old saying goes?

Most families with difficulties usually have multiple problems which are hard to solve. I think it's better now that we take fewer children away from their parents than used to be the case. Many more babies were adopted in the 1960s than now for example because bastard children brought shame on families etc At least now their mothers can keep them and that is an improvement.

Most children who make it from a bad home find someone who inspires them, a teacher, friend, relative or mentor and schools give them the chance for that.

The confidence is spot on which I referred to earlier was a massive problem with the state schools methods with their teaching of maths, but not just the methods the insistence that if the child couldn't work with those methods then the child was wrong not their methods :(
It made me so cross that we took the DD's into their new school with the knowledge that other children would be left behind thinking they were thick, dim, no good at maths when actually it's the system that's no good.
One size does not fit all, when will they learn ?

Oh the things that DID help as a child: Guides and St John Cadets, where I achieved a lot and an award called the grand prior that was quite well regarded in the small circle of SJAB.

I do wonder if we would be best off looking that way for isnpiration, I send ds2 to Cubs for that reason, yet here at elast they seem increasingly annexed by a confident, well off MC crowd that seems to have an activity a day booked for their kids from birth so nobody else can get on the waiintg lists (and that was the case when I was a Guider certainly).

I'm eldest too. I'm just interested in how people can be. Mind you some are useless and think they are great and that isn't always that good an attitude either. I think one of the reaosns I'm fairly successful is I think I can do most things and I work harder than most people. I don't think it's because I'm particularly clever or well educated or pretty although I suppose I think I;m those things too. A related topic is many women who think they don't look good, even very pretty women. That's very sad too.

In answer to the thread fate isn't sealed by deprived background (whether a rich or poor deprived one although we mean poor on this thread) but it makes most things then harder. Have we improve feckless people and how they bring up children since the 1800s? We've certainly tried very hard. Most children now get the chance to go to school and the poor have a bigger problem with obesity rather than traditional starvation so that might be an improvement but will they always be with us as the old saying goes?

Most families with difficulties usually have multiple problems which are hard to solve. I think it's better now that we take fewer children away from their parents than used to be the case. Many more babies were adopted in the 1960s than now for example because bastard children brought shame on families etc At least now their mothers can keep them and that is an improvement.

Most children who make it from a bad home find someone who inspires them, a teacher, friend, relative or mentor and schools give them the chance for that.