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 do think that older children benefit from having a parent at home more than we realise . We have given the chance to buy our own home so dp can work part time to be there for our dd who us 9. I recognise that we are lucky to be able to do that.

I can't believe that someone up thread has just announced that those who are uneducated and poor shouldn't have children. I have 2 GCSEs, earn just over minimum wage and waited until I was 35 to have my first child. We love her more than anything and she is the single greatest thing I have ever achieved. Does the fact that we get £10 WTC mean that I shouldnt have been allowed to have her? Or is there a qualifying level for your scorn and priviledged myopia?

"Companies that make toys, children?s books and baby food would be encouraged to brand their products with an official logo under the proposed scheme"

urgh.

Fucking tories.

Next there will be labels on clothing stating

'poor, so I am neglected'

'rich, stuck up my own arse'

"the worst parents are the ones receiving the most from society."

what utter offensive bollox.

Its all the more annoying because of the cuts being made to exsiting services.

I am a portage worker. That means I work with young children with delay and or disabilities. I go into the child's home and build a relationship with the family and show them ways of encourageing developement through play.

This a tried and tested model and it is very popular with the families.

Some of the families my team sees on a weekly basis do not engage with any other service. Not HVs, surestart, playgroups or even physios and OTs.

Yet our service is under threat and others have been 'deleted' althogether.

So we have something that works, that gets to 'hard to reach' families (btw that label is perjorative and places the blame firmly on the family), it models affective parenting stratgies and it is cheap.

But lets get rid of it and bring in something patronizing and expensive and assume that poor people will have to be paid before they will do anything for their kids.

Humph

omg, have the 'sah is best' brigade really turned this into a frigging sahp/wohp bunfight already? >banging head on wall smiley>

bizarre think you should jolly well hand over that child of yours to someone who deserves her. You with your 2 gcses! The very idea that you should reproduce

I have not turned it Ito a sahm v wohm fight, I work very long hours myself. I simply said that it must be easier to fit in time for play and reading if you both don't work full time. Hardly controversial.

It's technically 2, MrsDeV, but they're both English so maybe it's really just the one If that's the case, I shall book myself in for an immediate hysterectomy lest I produce more future street urchins.

Not sure if that was aimed at my comment about SAH when they're older???

I was simply commenting that having done the whole spectrum, I have personally concluded that whilst they needed someone between 1-3yrs, they didn't necessarily need me. I have found them more in need of me being at home at age 4,5 and 6 and now at 7.5, DS once again, needs me less. It was just my observation.

Utterly patronising!

Agree this is ridiculous when they have made cuts to sure start. I think more money/less cuts to sure start would have been a lot more useful than "change 4 life" as well. (Why oh why does anything aimed at young/working class people have to have "text speak" on it?)

Sorry as somebody just over the threshold and loosing my CB(which will have a massive impact) I'm hacked off to be frank.

I thought we were loosing CB because there was no money but apparently there is money to give people on benefits more purely because they have kids.

So parents who feed their kids shite(even though the 5 a day has been around for yonks and clearly doesn't work for many),sit on Xboxes all day and don't talk,play or read to their kids are going to get extra money for what- oh attending parenting classes .

I hate to be cynical but if you're that selfishly inclined then surely the money will just go on more XBox games.Oh and families like me who are struggling get to fund it.That's fair-not.

Actually I'd like to go on a parenting course as to be frank most parents find parenting bewildering at times.So do the likes of me just not count then?Clearly not.

what would I have on my list of 5

1. Breastfeed if you can
2. Actively discourage racism and homophobia
3. Teach your chilren that Women and men are equal
4. Their, they're, there, you're, your etc
5. Encourage a work ethic.

I am sure that if you want to go on a parenting class it could be arranged. I arrange then all the time for parents.

Whilst I have reservations about financial incentives, I am pleased that i will no longer be eligible for child benefit and that the money might be directed at the mist vulnerable children.

MilaMae this is quite encouraging. Seems it would be totally impossible to police the child benefit changes anyway.

Honestly, you have to ask MNHQ?

I'll accept a how to parent checklist if politicians will agree to us giving them one too.

Who wants to help produce a '5 a day' checklist for politicians?

Where is the evidence that the government supports this proposal? It sounds very un-Tory to me. Government meddling is not really their thing. Neither is government waste. So can someone please point me to the evidence that suggests this is anything more than a rediculous proposal which is destined to go nowhere?

I would also add that parents should be gentle with their children. Don't get annoyed and yell at your 3yr old because she doesn't understand where to go or how something works. She is not a mini adult. She doesn't understand that you're tired and that you do so much more for her than she does for you. Nor should she; she is 3!

I'd also say, don't tell them to be quiet quite so much. Of course they're talking nonsense and making funny noises, that's what you do when you are 4yrs old. You also run around in circles for no real reason.

..and how much is this patronising bollocks going to cost? I can think of much better ways limited public funds could be spent.

'Seems it would be totally impossible to police the child benefit changes anyway'

why can't it done through tax credit system, i thought that would give all teh information they need?

Dueling that does look encouraging particularly when you consider that their excuse for not means testing the WFA is it would be too costly.If they had to bring something in for CB which cost money then surely they couldn't argue against means testing the WFA. Obviously we all know the feel reason for not touching the WFA is because a lot of wealthy pensioners receiving WFA are Tory voters.

Anyhow I digress.

Twinkly actually I asked my hv(when I had 3 under 18 months) countless times for info on parenting courses as did several friends I know and zilch was offered.

In the end we had to resort to going on a church one and had to sit through sessions focusing on marriage which as dp and I are not religious and 22 year unmarrieds(a fact dp took great glee in highlighting continuously) peeved me off a tad.

In fact the only place I got anything valuable was Surestart and we all know what is happening to that.