MP's report calls for more pre-school intervention. When is enough enough?

[onimolap]

Here's a link to the BBC report on this.

The government-commissioned report (by Labour MP Graham Allen) recommends regular assessments of all pre-school children, focusing on their social and emotional development.

His report says success or failure in early childhood has "profound economic consequences" and calls for more private money to be channelled into early intervention schemes to help set children on the right path in life.

It also recommends numbering all year groups from birth not just from the start of primary school.

He also calls for regular assessment of pre-school-age children, focusing on social and emotional development "so that they can be put on the path to 'school readiness'".

He recommends setting up an independent early intervention foundation to drive early intervention forward, assess policies and attract investment.

This does sound like a good idea in theory. My dd was premature so we did get extra development checks which meant that many problems were identified and help provided early before she started school e.g. speech therapy.
But it's possible that the parents who most need this help would be the one's who were least likely to access it.

IF any of this can be delivered and implemented without judgement, shame, blame or any authoritarian / ideological slant then I would support it in principal.

However, we seem to have so lost touch with our own inner child(ren) whether free or adapted, and hear critical parent louder over nurturing parent both as individuals and as a state led community that I doubt it could truly happen.

It would take a huge leap of faith and buckets of understanding to focus primarily on the needs of the child while helping parents understand their own true needs.

I do live in hope though - never say never and all that :)

Round of Applause for Solid Gold Brass.

I work in a pre-school with children aged 2-5 in a disadvantaged area - about half have below average speech and language skills, a lot have parents on benefits or have parents working long hours on low incomes and so are passed from relative to friends for cheap childcare. As the most key developments happen before a child's fifth birthday, it makes sense to prioritise this period in their lives. This has already been put in place with the EYFS which has 6 weekly assessment and planning for every child aged 0-5 and requirements that graduates train to work in each setting. However, with pay being extremely low, the quality and improvement in outcomes won't be easily achieved. If the government recognises the important work we do and wants to number each age before school starts the workers in that age range need to be paid in accordance with teachers as the work we do is as important and challenging.

We are lucky enough to have well-paid jobs, but live in one of the more deprived areas of our town / county. Our HV (assigned by practice and hence area) is 'getting around' to doing the 9 month / 1 year check on DS2 and he is now 20 months old. DS1 never had one, although HV was really helpful when we went to her.

So, everything else aside, how the hell is this regular testing and support supposed to work, given current suggested standards of non-urgent support and intervention are not being met?

I don't know how far a government can go to make up for crap parents who have loads of kids because they haven't got anything else to do.
The idea of surestart was reaching out to deprived pre schoolers but it seemed to be mostly more involved parents who attended their classes/playgroups. The people it was aimed at seemed too lazy to come.
I don't know what the answer is-benefit overhaul, or change of housing policy?
I believe in some countries they don't give the long term unemployed extra benefits after child 3...maybe that would be a start?

With all the goodwill in the world, outreach workers and teachers cannot replace a loving and encouraging home life.

I agree with your last commnt mrsruffallo. It seems that the programme of early intervention came about to replace what previously mothers have been doing traditionally at home with their children. However , ever since the post-war period with the drive and trend for mothers with young children to go out and work whether out of personal choice, societal pressure or economic reasons , children have been left relatively unattended so to speak.
The goverment's , even society's view is that stay at home mums are 'unproductive' and make no 'economic contribution'. The challenging , unique job of child rearing to produce a decent human adult who can function responsibly and be an asset to that society has been devalued, if it was ever appreciated in the first place by society and goverment. It has never been given official recognition.
Teaching values , morals , good manners and habits amongst other things is not the job of the school or teachers or goverment hired personnel.That is what The Family(in danger of extinction) is supposed to be for surely? Otherwise we might as well be heading towards a BRAVE NEW WORLD SOCIETY.
Many schools/nurseries now consider themselves THE AUTHORITY and treat parents with a condescending attitude, assuming they are ignorant issuing 'proper guidelines'aka goverment directives, from how to discipline their children to what what they should and shouldn't eat and even in matters of sex. So are parents to be rendered superflous if the school can do the job they are supposed to be doing?
While I agree there are certain parents who do not want to take responsibility for their children and think that its the state's job to 'support' and 'fund' them , I don't think a blanket approach is appropriate. It's these 'parents' who are making a living out of exploiting the benefit system that need to be targeted and 'educated' . Yes parenting advice is welcome and useful if is based on an understanding of unbiased child psychology but it should avoid being too prescriptive.

SGB - interesting that you object to the State's involvement in this area...I thought it could do no wrong???

Well said, pascoe28.