Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

Child guru says nurseries harm small children

779 replies

flashingnose · 12/02/2006 10:15

oh dear

OP posts:
Jackstini · 12/02/2006 17:38

FIT - the scheme coming in Germany sounds fantastic! I really wish the govt could come up up with a way to support parents wanting to stay at home with their children more. (& I think extending the 104 quid a week from 6 onths to 9 is no use really - would rather extend the 90% from 6 weeks to 12 at least). We are so behind the rest of Europe in this area and it makes me really angry. (I looked some up to write to my MP about this - e.g. Algeria 14 wks 100%, Austria & Spain 16 wks 100%, France 16-26 wks 100%, Hungary 26 wks 100%, Italy 5 months 80%)
Am probably emotional about this at the moment as am 35 wks pregnant and my biggest fear is going back to work so soon after my baby is born - I can afford 10 weeks maternity leave. I earn more than double my dh and work from home 60% of the time so this is the best way we can figure round it at the moment. DH is dropping to 3 days a week but that still means childcare for about 8 hours a day, 3 days a week. Have no idea which option I will go for but I will not be 100% happy with any of them

SenoraPostrophe · 12/02/2006 18:22

Don't know where you got those figures from, jackstini, but the one for spain is incorrect. It's 16 weeks at 4 times your NI contributions - for low earners that would be 50-60%, more for high earners and about 100 pounds a week for the self employed (but if you're self employed you have to keep paying in your 225 Euros a month even while you're on leave, so net benefit is approx 65 pounds a week.). and that is it - nothing after the 16 weeks. how I wish i had UK mat benefits.

But anyway - I have to say I think I agree as far as 8am-6pm nursery care from 6 months goes. I always wondered why people did that. Maybe I should cut ds's hours.

Greensleeves · 12/02/2006 18:26

The example of the baby going to nursery from 6am to 8pm every day is appalling. That child might as well be in care.

mousiemousie · 12/02/2006 18:26

The government will never present an unbiased view of nursery care as they need as many women working as possible to contribute to the economy, whatever the consequences may be

drosophila · 12/02/2006 19:01

Why is it appalling to work and contribute to the economy to provide food and a roof over a childs head?

hercules · 12/02/2006 19:02

Sorry but I am all for working parents but I agree that 6am to 8pm is bloody appalling and dont believe for one moment it is of any benefit to any child.

bosscat · 12/02/2006 19:03

I agree with him about small babies but can't see how he can declare they are okay for 3 year olds with seemingly no evidence to back it up. In my experience 3 year olds vary widely in what they can and can't cope with. My 18 month old has just started 3 days a week and is running to get in the door. He is loving it and was totally bored at home with me despite my best efforts at finger painting. I don't think this study is at all helpful. If you want to go back to work and you don't have your parents on the doorstep you have to make a choice of childcare. nursery, childminder of nanny. I personally didn't want one person looking after my kids, I wanted the security of a well checked nursery and other staff. If all he is saying is that 8 hours a day, 5 days a week doesn't suit a 6 month old baby, well tell something we didn't already know.

nulnulcat · 12/02/2006 19:16

im a single parent with my own business so had no choice but to go back to work when dd was 5 months old she does 5 days a week in nursery 930 to 4 i have no family within 200 miles to help if i was to stay at home i would be on benefits and would be slagged of for being a single parent on benefits so looks like i cant win!

ruty · 12/02/2006 19:18

don't feel slagged of nulnulcat - you are doing your very best.

drosophila · 12/02/2006 19:18

8pm is a tad late but why use the word apalling. It's as if you think the parent always has a choice. I think career hungry parents who view their children as an anoyance are rare. I suspect most are just trying to get by. Picking up a child at 8pm is probably something to do with the long hours the workers in this country endure.

drosophila · 12/02/2006 19:20

We are all doing our best and we are probably all making mistakes even SAHP's. Nobody is the perfect parent!!!

paolosgirl · 12/02/2006 19:21

As someone who had to use a nursery for both of ours when they were babies, I agree with him. Part-time nursery for older kids is fine - but 8am-6pm is not good for either parent or young child/baby. But when needs must.....

Perhaps the next Govt. will give parents a real choice, and provide proper tax incentives, so that we can decide whether or not we want to return to work.

hercules · 12/02/2006 19:27

I dont believe that any parent has to send their child to nursery 5 days a week between 6am and 8pm has no choice in the matter. Something is seriously wrong with their priorities.

ruty · 12/02/2006 19:28

ofcourse drosophilia everyone's doing their best. Ofcourse SAHP make mistakes! None of us have to defend out positions so fiercely, we are all trying to do the right thing for our families. But the govt does not help.

colditz · 12/02/2006 19:38

But what precisely is the government supposed to do about it? If they increase maternity leave, employers will become even more reluctant to employ women. It is very hard to prove sex discrimination in an interview situation.

If they increase benefits for women who want to stay at home to raise their children themselves, they will end up bankrupted.

Everyone is saying the government should be supprting women in their choices, but what exactly are they supposed to do?

ruty · 12/02/2006 19:40

how do France do it?

majormoo · 12/02/2006 19:42

well I don't think anything he has said is a massive shock. It just makes me feel a bit miserable that I went back to work 3 days a week when DD was 10 months old. She did start at nursery, although we moved her to a childminder in the end which we are much happier with. I used to hate dropping her off at 8ish and picking her up at 5.30ish, but there wasn't much I could do. In the end I reduced my hours by 30 mins a day which means she spends less time in childcare. Now she is 2.5 I don't really worry about her being in childcare 3 days a week, but is was hard when she was smaller.

I don't think parents do just dump , like many others, had to work to help pay our mortgage (on our vast mansion that is a 2 bedroomed maisonette) and other bills. And it was REALLY hard to find a part-time job that wasn't really poorly paid.

colditz · 12/02/2006 19:45

I don't think France have a public health service.

We can't have the best of everything, is what I mean. In this country, it doesn't matter how ill we are, we can have the treatment without being landed with a bill. It doesn't matter how little we put away throughout our lives, we will still be cared for when we are old. If we become unemployed, we will be basically fed until we manage to get another job. Our children will never starve. We don't have 7 year olds on the streets begging.

I know that some of this is true for most of the countries in the EU, and also that sometimes i this country people slip throught the net, but I still think we have a very good, and very costly, welfare system. If the government want to increase parental leave and pay, the money has to come from somewhere.

beartime · 12/02/2006 19:46

I really believe it is best for our husbands and children if we stay home whenever it is remotely possible (tho I know for some it might be impossible)

I would rather live in a mobile home and use a bike for transport than go to work, especially with children. Not that I don't want to work - in fact it was a struggle giving it up. I think a lot of us are so fond of work because it gives us 1) identity - we're not a nothing 2) money - which leads to more comfort etc.

ruty · 12/02/2006 19:47

it could come from the money we spend on arms. Mad I know!

foundintranslation · 12/02/2006 19:50

why is it best for our husbands beartime?

colditz · 12/02/2006 19:51

It could ruty, we could spend our National Defence money on Maternity pay - but I don't see the rest of the country going for that idea.

ruty · 12/02/2006 19:53

well seeing as we are planning to go ahead with the development of a whole new generation of nuclear weapons [don't we have enough already?] I kind of think maternity leave is more of a priority.

beartime · 12/02/2006 19:55

Best for our husbands -because we are not tired and stressed out when we finish, and also have more time. So that means we then have more time to help them out (as I believe we are supposed to). I just gave up working because of the baby and its already helped our marriage (though the baby hasn't!) because I am more relaxed and have time to make him lots of vegetables to help him lose weight easily, look up his favourite meals, go to the store more often - and also just be an easier person to get along with!

colditz · 12/02/2006 19:56

Yes, I'm not disagreeing with you, but the majority of the country will, or they will want it spending on something else. Maternity pay isn't a priority for anyone who isn't having a baby, or planning to have a baby soon.