Five-a-day parenting 'checklist'? What do you think?

[HelenMumsnet]

Hello. We've just heard about this proposal to give all parents a five-a-day checklist, detailing how they should bring up their children.

Apparently, it's an idea that's winning the support of many politicians.

Would it win your support?

I don't think it is that the poor are incentivised to have children - I certainly never felt that way. It is more that you have less to lose or take into account. When we were reliant on benefits it was simpler to have children. Now I have to think about childcare - both what would we use and how we would pay for it, my job it would harm my career and to a lesser extent my pension.

the women most in need of advice are the ones who would be most likely to say no-one is going to tell me how to bring my child up. They haven't learnt to work at anything in their life and they don't see any need to learn how to be a good parent. Their own parents were often inadequate so they haven't learnt by example. Incentives can get you to a class but not get you to listen.

A waste of money better targeted at people who need it.

Heathersmall...... What a load if rubbish!!
Single mothers MADE to do A levels?? Eh?

This isn't about single mothers, it's about crap parenting, nothing to do with single mums or parents on benefits.

Why are we focusing on women here??

Have a look on relationships section, it's the DADS who need to learn to engage with their kids!

I read it and think it's fine. It shows people that it really is simple to give children a good start in life. Not all instinctively know to do these things, and to suggest that they shouldn't have children is a little

Needs a different name though.

It could be single fathers just as easily .... if the crap parents have a sense of achievement, some purpose in their life you don't think the child would benefit from that ? Or shall we just throw money at the problem because that's solved everything in the last 10 years hasn't it ?

....and cheap/free. Which is an important message, you don't need a load of money to give children a happy childhood, good start in life.

How on earth has this managed to turn into a bashing-single-mums-on-benefits thread already? Well done

The trouble with well-meaning ideas like this IME is that they never quite reach the parents/families that actually need them. DS2's school have run Parenting Workshops for KS1 parents for a few years now (funded because, technically, school is in a "deprived" area). However, their success depends wholly upon parents/carers/grandparents actually being willing to turn up & take notice. I have never yet seen the people that really need the guidance show any interest in getting it.

The courses cover everything from healthy eating through behaviour, appropriate language, basic childcare (cleanliness even) & then onto how to best help your child educationally.

Oh, and please don't think I am getting at working parents' who can't attend here - the parents I am thinking of who should attend are definitely NOT working.

Heather....... It's not for single mothers/fathers....... It's aimed at ALL parents. Why are you singling out lone parents

It's the crap parenting which is being targeted

Its terrible that this is even an issue. Unfortunately I don't think this will make a lot of difference. You can lead the horse to water...

I am a early years professional.

I am also a parent who would probably be classed 'on paper' as one of those who could do with the check list and possibly paying to attend parenting classes.

I already get my arse patronized off by HVs and other professionals when I attended clinics and playgroups. Its one of the reasons I dont go.

I have been offered stuff like this based on what I look like and what I sound like, what my kids look like and probably what their names are (you only have to look at some of the 'chavvy name threads' on MN).

This isnt aimed at MC, educated parents it is aimed squarely at the percieved underclass who dont give a toss because they swear at their kids sometimes and call them L'andra.

Because MC, educated parents are great and read to their children and therefore could never be bad parents.

Waste of money this is not going to change parenting for those struggling they need more 1-1 interaction. I thought the Tories were into cutting but they can't get away from interfering and meddling in peoples lives.

Heather Small
Did you get all that from your 'I Spy book of the working classes' ?

'at home to cook the old man's tea'

And feed the whippet presumably

All the MC parents I nannies for could take note and learn from it!

Disclaimer - neither are the parents I am thinking of single. Nor do I believe that being a good parent has anything to do with your income source.

Ellisbell I would have been a parent who would have benefitted from this . Just because you are poor and struggling parenting it does not mean you would not accept help. To be honest I would have no shame in saying that it may still welcome help if I were lucky enough to have more children.

Personally it would irritate the hell out of me - as does the 5 a day campaign, but then I suppose as with the healthy eating thing (well versed in nutrition & eat far more healthily that Gov guidelines) we are not the families this will be aimed at & sadly there are too many families that do need guidance, you only have to look at the reception classes at School to know that is true :(

It will irritate me most if they start ramming it down EVERYONES throats, as they do with the 5 a Day etc, I get fed up with DD bringing stuff home from School that IMHO is actually wrong & as always the one size fits all Government attitude leaves a LOT to be desired - my stick thin DD for example thinks eating more than the tiniest amount of fat is bad - never mind whether or not its the right kind of fat & that she needn't worry

so in theory YES, nice idea, but I doubt very much they will get it right, nor do I think they will target the right families, again like the 5 a day any assessments done on its effectiveness, will no doubt use data from families who didn't need help in the first place

"But poorer parents need to be ?incentivised? to attend courses to help them complete the ?five-a-day? essential actions. They could be rewarded for attending classes with higher child benefit payments or annual bonuses, the study suggested. "

What a pompous twat. Is he really trying to say that people with less money are less able to parent?

I'm not sure the government is qualified to judge anyone's parenting skills... based on their inability to run a health service, state education, and a million other things.

This is absolutely nanny state gone mad and I hope to God the tories don't buy it. The story makes a claim that ministers are supportive. But, the only minister who is actually quoted supporting it is Sarah Tether, a Lib Dem. It is veryhard to believe the Tories will want to spend money on such nonsense.

They are linking it to toys. So having fewer toys, as poorer parents have less money etc.

Well that's the toy shop businesses saved then

Also, this reminds me of my MC SIL who had an argument with her DD's Year 1 teacher regarding reading at home. SIL's point of view was "I'm out of the house from 7.30am to 6.00pm every day - education is what I send DD to school for, I'm not doing your job as well as my own". SIL was stunned that not every working parent thinks that way .

Basically, yes, I'm sure there are MC parents needing the guidance too .

Incidentally, not everyone understands the 5 a day campaign. How much is a serving, and is it 5 or 10 in total? Just last night I heard my 8 year old and my nanny have this very discussion.

nanny: 5 a day. Yu are suppose to eat 5 veg and 5 fruit.
DD: no, you are supposed to have 5 of both altogether.
nanny: No. 5 fruit and 5 veg.

me: in support of nanny.

I thought this was a really good idea until some pompous MP came on the Today show this morning and started talking about helping people on 'my estates' to bring up children 'as you and I would'. He repeated it several times. Arrogant, patronising, generalistic tosh if it's come from people like him.

Why has MNHQ linked to a newspaper article instead of the actual paper itself? Here are the full 62 pages.
I suppose, like most things, the devil is in the detail and it all depends upon how it is implemented. The fruit-and-veg 5-a-day message had merit but was ruined by the Lunchbox Police. The same could happen to this eg 'play with your child on the floor' could easily be highjacked by commercial interests and their 'special logo' on the box. It has to be emphasised that this is all about activity and communication (which costs nothing) rather than purchasing yet more tat.