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?

Can i just say that in Spain the Grandparents do the childcare but it is also very rare for them to go to a care home or to live alone when they are old and their partner dies. Yes, they don't pay much for childcare, it is true but then again there are not 'meals on the wheels' etc thats the responsibility of the children. So in fact they 'pay' for the 'free' childcare few years later.

And in Sweden they pay the good state childcare with high taxes (but i don't know much about life in Sweden)

The problem with these reports is that we compare only bits, usually the bits we like, and not the whole picture. This leaves us to feel that we live in the worst part of europe or we are the worst parents or we have it very hard here.

LOL at the thought of my parents being prepared to do regular childcare! Although they are both in their 70s & were late 60s when my children were born, my dad still runs his own business & my mum is really busy. She volunteers at the charity shop, does all sorts of church things & plays lots of golf & bridge. She has always helped me in emergencies, but there was NEVER any question of her doing more than that! To be honest, I never expected her to do it either & can't imagine myself being a regular unpaid childminder for my grandkids either. Maybe we're just not made like that in my family!

Yy thats true Sansa.

Apart from the fact that when people get to be grandparents they very often have their own aged parents to look after. They are going to be run ragged if they are supposed to work, look after parents and child care! They are also the people who are doing all the voluntary work. I don't think that it is selfish to say that they can't do regular childcare because they have lots of community commitments-if you are a volunteer you can't suddenly let people down.

Finding the right balance will always be a challenge - we in the West, apart from some exceptions, do not have the family support much needed when the children are growing up as most people have to work in order to feed and look after the family.

Even with family living just 12 miles away we have not had one second of their help with anything, yet when an emergecy crops up (usually medical) then we have to step up to the plate and help out with all the kids in tow!

Not surprisingly we have had one night out to celebrate our wedding anniversary five years ago, that too was intrrupted when a call came in saying the kids were unsettled for the night!

Going back to the script, the sample size of 250 is downright insulting. Front page news? Come back with a proper sample size.........then I might listen to what is said.

I am an older parent. My DD (7 1/2) is the about the only one without a DS/Wii/Playstation in her class. So bloody what? When her friends come to tea/play they use their imaginations and I love talking/interacting with them. And not one has ever said that they don't want to come back because we don't have any of those things.

Advertising has a lot to answer for as well - I remember it at Christmas when I was a child. And it was a given that my mother couldn't afford any of that for us, we knew this so it wasn't an issue. Parent's now are so scared of saying no, even when they know they should. With the credit crunch, parents will have to start saying NO now!

Another thing is that a lot of parents want to be friends with their kids - it's a though they are failing them if they aren't their friends. They need to stop it now - they are their parents not friends!

Sorry if I'm repeating what has been already said - I don't have time to read whole thread.

I'd love to spend a lot more time with ds. Sadly a full time job and 90 minute commute each way (and that's IF the trains are on time) mean I barely see him in the week. It's shit and not the way I want to live. But I have to try to pay the bills somehow - and I was very lucky to find a job after being freelance for six years while ds was little. Btw, full time job does not = comfortably off, current dh is out of work (again) and we are barely scraping by what with the cost of living racing ahead. Shit all round. Same as many other people, I expect.

I think the problem is that we now live in a world where we are moving at a rate of 100m sprint instead of a marathon. Ads on TV's, music videos, Internet and magazines.

I'll be damned if I put myself in debt to please any child and I do have 3 aged 16, 13 and 5. They have to undersstand NO and if not have always told the older ones to get a part time job as they are not born into the Bill Gate's family.

Exactly, edam! We have 5% inflation, folks, with wages stagnant for years, record unemployment/under-employment and more job cuts to come. This idea we can all just upsticks for the country life is a joke. Or that if we just cut back and not spend so much on gadgets we'd have more time to spend with youngsters. What world is UNICEF living in?

Incidentally, I recently read a biography of Thomas More, who grew up in an upper-middle class family in London in the 1400 and 1500s. The school day for boys that age was incredibly long even by our standards. The father had to work all hours and later, when Thomas became a solicitor, he was expected to literally live at work, also at court, live at work and be on call 24-hours/day.

'Childhood' was an entirely different concept.

This isn't a new thing, folks, even for Britain.

'I think the problem is that we now live in a world where we are moving at a rate of 100m sprint instead of a marathon. Ads on TV's, music videos, Internet and magazines.'

I think the problem is record house prices (which also mean high rents), high taxes for the lowest paid, high inflation and rocketing costs of essentials like food and power and wage stagnation/under and unemployment.

I think there is a lot of truth in the unicef report, but is really hard for British parents, as some posters have said a lot of families need both parents to spend a great deal of time working just to afford a reasonable place to live due to house prices being so out of line with average salaries. I feel really lucky to be able to spend a lot of time with my DCs as do most mothers where I live, because one income is enough for most families to have a good quality of life. However, people are much more bombarded with marketing in the UK and you can see it does make them buy a lot more stuff for their kids.

I believe the idea that many people seem to have at the moment that the 40s, 50s and 60s were decades in which most women stayed at home with the children are a bit wrong. Perhaps they did stay at home when they were little, but once they were in school I think most women went to work. My great aunts, who were teachers and nurses once asked me what was wrong with all these misbehaving children these days. When I suggested it was perhaps because of less parental attention because both the parents now had full time jobs they laughed at me (and I was very young!). According to them, women worked just as much when they were bringing up their young families. They would have come into contact with lots of parents and the general public too in their jobs.

A relative of mine works all hours as does his wife because they feel under pressure to keep up with friends, he said this to me himself. I think for some people there is this pressure to keep up with everyone else, holidays abroad, own house etc etc.

My grandmothers were both SAHMs their whole lives. My mother was a SAHM until we were around 10 and then worked mostly school hours and then fulltime when we were teenagers. Most of my friends mums followed a simelar pattern of staying home for a while and then getting a part time job.

My grnadmothers were also both SAHM forever after having children, and when I was a child in the 80s none of my friends had a mother like mine who worked full time and had a career. I felt very different from the other kids in that respect. Some of them got part time jobs when their children were around 10, but by no means all of them

unicef are in lala land on this.house prices,cost of living many demands require a 2 waged home

But all that stuff kids are bought, especially at Christmas, isn't needed

'But all that stuff kids are bought, especially at Christmas, isn't needed'

Yes, because the money spent on a family's kids' gifts really adds up to a living wage and if we just didn't buy them any stuff they don't need, we could all give up work, afford to live on one wage in a place where it's safe for the wee ones to play out all the time in between riding and caring for ponies and chickens, growing our own food and singing Kumbayah.

La la land, indeed, SM!

well no one needs tv,broadband,internet but many have it
im not sure that the fact one could eke out and get by with less proves anything and can become a giving things up competition. no i dont need many things i have but i want them,and they make family life easier. ordering groceries on pc online means we dont have to drive to supermarket and schlepp about= more family time

amazon for books is easy
online tesco for clothes less time sclepp about busy shop = more family time

Unicef are talking about children's happiness and why.....I don't think they really care how people do it.

Staying in an unhappy marriage with a twonk for a spouse probably isn't a good way to ensure childhood happiness, for example . . .

pragmatically happiness is the ability to be solvent not worries about bills,mortgage/rent.its a nonsense to say happy glowing faced family is enough.realistically we all feel about happier when we are able to get by. and its a bit lala to ignore the practical demands financial responsibility put on us

It's not about ignoring our financial responsibilities, of course bills have to be paid and yes computers and the internet for adults and children of a certain age, but it's the nintendo stuff for 3 or 6 yr old that they really would be a lot betteroff without

God yes, of course you need to make sure you can pay your bills. But I do know people who over stretch with the bigger house than they need.....

unicef needs to look at malnourised,disadvantaged children and opine on that
not whether wee maximus has a telly in his room
and naturally thee is a women should be at home inference