Are your children stuck in a "materialistic trap"? Your thoughts on Unicef's report about British children and family time, please!

[HelenMumsnet]

Hello.

We wanted to let you know (if you haven't seen it already) that Unicef have just published a report in which they said that British children are caught in a "materialistic trap".

British children, they say, aren't able to spend enough time with their families (because British parents work such long hours) and their parents, feeling the pressure, "buy them off with branded goods".

"Consumer culture in the UK contrasts starkly with Sweden and Spain," say Unicef in their report, "where family time is prioritised, children and families are under less pressure to own material goods and children have greater access to activities out of the home."

What's your reaction to this? Do you agree with Unicef - or not?

And, if you agree, what could we all do about it?

Completely agree with Unicef.

UK seems obsessed with stuff, getting DC to bed at 7pm and not taking them everywhere so parents can have 'me time'.
Where other countries have the upper hand is that few places are not child freindly. It is unusual to go out without DC in the evening for dinner, exact opposite here.

There are more family friendly working policies in other countries too so parents are not workign such long hours.
See little point in being a family if majority of time is seperate.

I completely agree with Unicef and this also coincides with another post here about children with after school activities. Seems that lots of parents are trying to buy happy memories.

What do I remember about my childhood? Playing card games with my parents, going on picnics with my family, climbing trees, walking through the countryside... lots and lots of happy fun times that didn't cost anything but are so deeply ingrained into my being. No activities - we didn't have money. No school trips either. Would I swap it for a childs' life these days - never.

I'm not sure the issue is just how much time parents spend with their kids. It could be more about how we live such isolated lives. Even in the past when both parents worked (in or out of the home), the children had the company of siblings and grandparents and lots of other kids. They lived more open, socially-shared lives and had more freedom (which is what happens in Spain).

The solution is within our grasp! It's simple, but difficult. It involves prising faces from screens and fingers from keyboards and living much of our lives out of doors.

The other problem, as I see it, is that people (not just children) equate happiness with material goods. It's a good idea to look back to see what made us happy when we were young, as LaBag has done, to help us work out our priorities, imo.

When I look back, I don't remember my parents playing with us, but we played with each other and our friends, and my mother took us on great camping holidays, when we did things together, and so did my grand parents. We had a fantastic childhood, even though my mother was a single parent and worked full-time. It wasn't great for her, though.

LaBag's post reminds me of what i wanted to ask about the report. What age children are we talking about? Young ones? Then yes, they always say that they want more time with parents and they are always in heaven with a walk in the park. Older ones? I don't think so. They prefer time with their friends and ime having a picnic or feeding the ducks with mummy won't be enough for a 10yo.

I've done all the things you are mentioning LaBag (and i'm sure the others have too), i didn't do any baby/toddler classes, i was taking them to the park instead. But now that they are older they want other things.

Apologies if the age has been mentioned and i missed it.

Me & my son 19 months, do so much together from dusk to dawn. We play, draw, build etc. When he has a knap I do my cleaning & washing. I must say if I involve Teddy in for example in the washing he puts the clothes in and presses "go!" I hate washing up but when Ted helps, it may take a while but he makes me laugh covered in fairy bubbles. If I have work to do, I wait until my hubby is home from work, or wait til Teds in bed.
I agree that playing with your child is important but as long as they know you love them, that's all that matters! :)

..and this consumerism (that is consuming parents and children) has got completely out of hand. We have been living beyond our means and this is yet another example.

If children feel they can "get" by simply "wanting something" they are in for a big shock in later life. I know this hasn't been the case up 'till now but I do think things have changed (hurrah).

I remember with absolute joy the xmas presents I got when I was little. We had a limit of £5 for many years which was then upped to £10 (I am 45 btw). I've stopped giving my neices and nephews presents 'cos they don't even bother to thank us nowadays and they are inundated with unwanted gifts.

"well no one needs tv,broadband,internet but many have it"

Have you heard of the Digital Divide? Saying that people don't need broadband and internet is a bit like saying people don't need baths/showers...

No it isn't bonsoir - the word need is misused in my view. I agree the digital divide is there but not relevant to this. The comment was made in terms of how much we spend. Everyone should have access to technology then don't need to pay for extra fast super dooper broadband to get it. As a culture we seem to need all the latest gadgets and spend far beyond what we can afford. If you 'need' to get on the net go to the library/net cafe/community centre.

Have now actually read the report and it wasn't as simplistic as you might be led to believe.The three countries were chosen as

a) an example of a country with relatively low social inequality and high reported child wellbeing (Sweden)

b) a country with relatively high social inequality (but still somewhat lower than the UK) and high reported child wellbeing (Spain)

c) a country with high social inequality and relatively low reported child wellbeing (UK)

A few things stand out:

Children from all 3 countries do prize material goods and do want them.

Otoh children from all 3 countries know that being a spoilt child who gets everything you want is problematic.

Children from all 3 countries also understand the concept of delayed gratification and believe there is a value in it.

There was no evidence that parents in the UK take on longer working hours simply to pay for their children's materialistic demands.

But some evidence that parents in the UK are more tired from working long hours (for whatever reason) and therefore have less energy to resist demands.

And that they felt guilty about not having time and bought them things to compensate.

Swedish and British children both mentioned that you could get bullied for not having the right brands, but among the parents it only seemed to be the British ones that felt they had to buy things for their children to fit in.

(not sure about the conclusion that Swedish families get more stuff from charity shops though: ime it is pretty difficult to find charity shops except in big cities).

There was also a greater tendency for Swedish and Spanish children to look after their toys, and for parents to mend torn clothes etc.

(so maybe mending and making do should be part of the curriculum?)

Swedish and Spanish children seemed more clued up about money and how far it goes (the Swedish ones being particularly monetary); this may reflect a greater tendency amongst parents to involve their children in family discussions.

Plenty of evidence that mothers in the UK feel more isolated in dealing with the housework: in Sweden there was far more involvement from fathers and children- the whole family tended to join in; in Spain there was more support from extended family.

Children from all 3 countries mentioned outdoor activities as something valuable.

Only in the UK was there a strong wealth/poverty divide with poor children having less opportunities for outdoors activities. There was nothing to indicate that this was a parenting question; clearly it is partly about geography, partly about the enormous social divide that means that some places are simply not safe to play out in.

The wealthier UK children who did have access to outdoors activities/sports tended to see them more in terms of competition- winning games, getting better than other children, whereas Spanish and Swedish children thought more about the enjoyment in itself.

There was also far more parental involvement in Sweden and Spain, taking children to matches or on fishing trips, and of outdoors activities being part of a general family routine.

The same tendency was evident in education: Spanish and Swedish children said they wanted to improve/live up to their expectations of themselves, whereas UK children spoke in terms of competition, wanting to be better than other children.

So the UK picture does not appear to be one of parenting inadequacies, but one of social inequality and a competitive society putting pressure on both parents and children.

Interestingly, there was no evidence that keeping children in the dark about such matters as family finances was in any way beneficial, but plenty of evidence that regular pocket money, chores and involvement in family discussions were helpful.

No, we all need broadband in order to participate fully in modern society.

We don't need multiple devices in a single location however - it really isn't necessary for each teenager and adult in a family to have an iPhone and an iPad and a desktop etc.

Bonsoir's right about broadband - similar to the way telephones were a luxury in the 30s but had become pretty much essential decades later.

If your children are at school, they would be seriously disadvantaged by not having broadband access for homework (and given libraries are being closed or run down, they probably can't go there to do it). If you need to contact an organisation, it's much harder without broadband. If you can't pay bills online, you are charged extra in many cases. And so on and so on.

Agree about broadband: once you get to a certain age homework gets very difficult to do without it; the child who can look up things for his report at his leisure is going to have an enormous advantage over the child who has to queue for a computer in the lunch hour.

As for the isolated lives, the Swedish families seem to get over that by getting more participation out of Daddy. Not a bad thing either. I have noticed that comments of the "men are so clueless" type are far less common in Sweden and you do tend to get funny looks if they slip out, unless you are about 80, in which case the looks are tolerant and pitying.

Thanks, Cory!

Re technology. My son says that everyone in his class is on Facebook, except maybe one or two people. He says how he can go out onto the street and he'll see someone he's never met, but he knows which party they went to at the weekend, what football team they support and all sorts of other things about them. He's aware that as he walks the streets, other people he doesn't know have all the same information about him.

What's this leading to? A greater sense of community or a widening of the social divide? Whole generations socialising online rather than meeting up in the park, or a whole new, enhanced way of making contacts and feeling like you live in a village?

It's funny how this report has revived the Working Mothers debate when in fact the report says nothing about mothers in Spain and Sweden not working, in fact makes it quite clear that they do.

People see what they want in reports like this - if you have axe to grind re WM's you will grind regardless. I think there is an overdeveloped sense of responsibilty in UK WM's. Mother's seem to carry a burden, damned if you do/don't - judged either way.

In other European countries they are shocked by the gossipy, judging.

DoMeDon Sat 17-Sep-11 12:26:45
"People see what they want in reports like this - if you have axe to grind re WM's you will grind regardless. I think there is an overdeveloped sense of responsibilty in UK WM's. Mother's seem to carry a burden, damned if you do/don't - judged either way."

That was actually one of the things that came out very clearly in the report: in the UK the burden of parenting is very much about the mother, whereas in Sweden it is more about mother and father (and older children) working together, and in Spain more about the extended family. So it's not one person who has all the responsibility or gets all the blame.

I live with my limited extended family (only DF left ) and I am considered lucky to have his help!? Why? He lives with me, I/DH do things for him, he helps out back - we are a family. It's a very 'English' thing IYSWIM.

Cory, thank you so much for reading and summarising it turre for Us.. I've been meaning to do it all week. But I'm lazy!!!!
Several times I have felt that this discussion, though interesting, has gone off on tangent arguments that reflect more of our own insecurities on these questions than the findings of the report itself.

That should read summarising it there

Bloody ipad

This is nothing new. I grew up in the 80s. My parents couldn't afford to buy me branded stuff and I suffered for it in both primary and secondary school. I will never forget the shame of weearing Nick's trainers and having the ohter girls in PE rip the piss; especially when I (foolishly) tried to cover the brand names with black tape. I was buying stuff from charity shops and cheapie shops way before it was cool

AS a parent, I must admit I'm torn. DS is only 2, so so far too young to have to worry. I would like to bring him up not to care about where his clothes come from/whether he has the latest x/y/z (mainly because it will save him a frtune when he grows up); but a as a secondary school teacher , I can see how kids categorise themselves and each other and I genuinely dont know which way I'll end up swinging when the tiem comes. I'm mainly hoping that we're bringign him up strong enough to be his own person and not to care, but I don't underestimate peer pressure.

Thanks for the summary Cory, that was very interesting and I was never going to read the whole thing

Buying brand names was actually a very small part of the Unicef report and there was no suggestion that UK children are the only ones that get brand names; that didn't seem to be where the big problem lay. It's just something the papers have seized on.

Had a discussion of this report with dd who has been brought up in the UK but spends her holidays in Sweden and has friends of her own age there (she speaks the language fluently). Her points where:

that British people seem less relaxed around children (in particular teenagers)- parents of friends often seem nervous

that in Swedish shops there is no stigma attached to being a child: shopkeepers don't expect worse behaviour from children/teenagers than from other customers

that expectations of respectful attitude cut both ways in Sweden (children should speak respectfully to adults and adults to children) whereas here it is more of a one way system

that Swedish children are generally more independent and have more freedom, but are also expected to be more sensible and competent

that in the previous welfare league it was a little unfair to move Sweden down on the basis of sexual activity at 15, seeing that this is not illegal in Sweden (15 being the age of consent) and teen pregnancies are not common

But other than that, she doesn't feel very unhappy about being brought up in the UK (and fully accepts that this Unicef reports is totally out of bounds as a topic of conversation when my mother is present!!!). She thinks there are plenty of compensations, not least culturally and educationally (comparing her own state school education with that of her Swedish cousins).

That's very interesting Cory thank you.

It's interesting that our children are (comparatively) so competitive when I think public opinion and assumption has been that modern society/schools etc discourage competition.