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?

And, I know a few people who are 'poorer' than me and the same applies.

I think it sounds like patronising drivel from up high. They are going to put parenting tips on toys and food? that my child benefit will go towards this.

I would prefer surestart parenting classes when the baby was small i.e. one has an outside chance of attending.

Please note in order to type this I have sat my child in front of Oso.

porcamiseria How about more funding for Homestart for a start? I have been a volunteer and have friends who are volunteers and it does reach parents who are really in need, provides practical one-to-one help and GPs and HVs can make referrals.

I 'specialised' in supporting parents who come from abusive backgrounds who often needed help in knowing what was normal. A friend supports recent immigrant parents (she's an immigrant herself), I know someone who supports motherless mothers.

I think that a lot of parents who need support would benefit from a 'little and often' approach, which is what Homestart provides.

Haven't read the thread yet but just saw it on the news. I think it's a ridiculous waste of time and resources.

I'd really like to ask why, unless government really believes that the majority of parents need this, that they don't just come out and say that a small number of parents aren't doing as well as they should and that this is aimed at them. Why pussyfoot around it? I thought we'd stopped all this crap.

This is just rubbish, the money would be so much better used elsewhere.
On better education including some sort of basic home economics lessons teaching children how to cook, how to budget etc. This would be so much more beneficial than the current 'healthy eating' rubbish which is constantly rammed down primary school childrens throats and never mentioned once they reach secondary school anyway.
On making boys realise if they father a child then they need to be responsible for that child for the rest of their lives.
There seems to be so much blame and emphasis put on mothers and yet I have encountered so many single mothers who's ex's contribute zero in time or money to the lives of their children.
I can't help but think the financial rewards will just mean some parents will sit blankly through these classes and come out the otherside the same but with more money.

I think this will not work because
a) if you don't do what you're told will you get classed as a rubbish parent (ie is it going to get policed and we will all have to show our approved toys once a year to somebody with a clipboard?).

b) most people working and not receiving benefits are fed up with hearing that money is to be thrown at people not working who should therefore be fantastic parents (ie so much more time).

c) those parents who spend the benefits (and they do exist) on tattoos and designer babywear rather than time will just have more cash to waste.

d) the only thing that needs fixing is the education of those who cannot parent and we should remove the ease with which people increase their families (ie stop increasing benefits per child) and educate people who actually need it rather than assuming everyone should be targetted.

e) the crap thing about middle class parents nicking all the good schools (slightly off tangent here) is so irritating - the schools are good because of the parents who care and know how to support education. Diluting those schools will lead to mixed results - what happens in the home is very important.

I've not read everyone's messages on this and might change my opinion once I have done so.

Instinctively I can't believe increased awareness around how to give your child the best start in life can be a bad thing.

I'm not sure that introducing incentives for following the advice is a good idea and neither would penalties for non compliance.

I think people should read the 64 page report which is excellent, yet again, the media have focused on one aspect of the report rather than looked at the whole issue in a sensible way. The media haven't commented at all about the report mentioning breastfeeding have they? The focus on the poor is not because the poor are perceived as not caring for their children but because the children in the group with the lowest incomes are more likely to suffer from poor educational achievement and lack of social mobility in later life. Whilst universal services are great, they still are used mostly by middle classes thus excerbating the lack of social mobility amongst the poorest people.

@porcamiseria. The regular checks done by HVs and doctors should be the starting point. Developmental milestones taken note of and children found to be giving cause for concern get extra help. If parents don't bring children along for standard appointments like vaccinations, same again. If SS are already involved with the family, there's a way to make sure parents know what they're doing. Maybe a child 'MOT' at age 3 as an additional benchmark. I'd hope the number of parents who need reminding to feed and talk to their children are a very small subset.

I think its time we all ate humble pie and just listen to what they have to say on this, and where its all going. A simple message, to spend more time talking to and listening to our kids is not offensive to me, I don't feel nannied, or talked down to. I'm lucky enough to stay at home with my son until he starts school, and we spend lots of time playing, talking, reading and having fun and visiting places/friends as my mom did with me when I was little. Sadly this is not the case for many kids who have grown up without much positive interaction. A gentle reminder to do the things we are supposed to be doing (as with the 5 a day foods campaign) is ok with me. As long as its in the childs best interest, and is an achievable aim for the parent.

So how are they paying for this campaign then? Would they be paying for it with the wages from all the public sector workers who's jobs they've cut?

I also found those stupid bookstart bags patronising. Why send me home with my 4th copy of going on a bear hunt? And another bag for my kids to stuff with junk and leave lying around t he house.
Use the money where it's needed.

Or are they taking the money from all the Surestart centres they're closing and using that? To do exactly the same thing that Surestart centres were put in place for? This government cracks me up, they really do. A whole load of Hooray Henrys helping those poor uneducated thick useless poor people. Twats! [anger]

As someone who could not afford books I was grateful for the book bag.

I agree that it was stupid and short sighted to cut Sure Start, particularly in a time of great pressure and financial hardship.

Yes, and that's absolutely fine. But why give them out universally? The money could be better spent. I have no objection to them being available, just thrust upon me and a note made whether I'd taken it or not.

Yes, cutting surestart is very shortsighted but I think the last government made the mistake of deciding to roll them out everywhere. Though I'm happy to be enlightened about what they would offer in affluent areas.

I'm not being a snob, just thinking that limited resources are surely better concentrated where they're needed.

@li33i.... you sound like you're saying only the children of SAHPs get the positive interaction, which I'm sure you don't mean. Unfortunately, staying at home with children does not protect them from being ignored. And the same person that can sit in the same room as a child and still not interact with it is unlikely to be moved by a poster on a bus.

So let me get this right... the government that's withdrawn a lot of surestart funding is now saying it wants to help people to become better parents. By putting special labels on toys?

@spottyfrock, you've hit the nail on the head. Blanket initiatives are generally taken up by those who are already interested. The ones it would really help are much harder to reach... but they are the ones that need to be identified.

Cogito it must be easier for children of sahp to get quality and quantity attention. I know my dd benefited from me being at home and I really wish we could afford for that to happen again .

Actually, I think they benefit more from a parent being there to pick them up in Reception and Y1 than they do as a baby.
I'm about to have my fourth and have done a mixture of SAHM, work f/t and work p/t since becoming a parent and I think they definitely needed me more at home at 5yrs than they did at 1yr.

I completely agree with that SpottyFrock. I want to be the one around for my DC as babies, but they actually needed and wanted me more in nursery - reception age.