Children's Society report that nearly 2/3rds of us aren't able to spend enough time with children because of pressure of life and work - what are your thoughts?

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all,
We've been asked for the Mumsnet take on a new report by the Children's Society which say that family life is under threat because of the pressures of work.

From the Children?s Society:

FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS STRUGGLING REVEALS NEW SURVEY
Date: 17 July 2007

Family relationships appear to be under threat as parents across the UK struggle with the demands of work, raising concerns over how much time they can spend with their children, a new poll commissioned by The Children's Society highlights today.

From this survey of UK adults, 61% said that parents nowadays don't get enough time to spend with their children while almost half of those questioned (48%) said that they had to put their career first even if this affected their family life. These results reflect the growing dilemmas over childcare British parents can feel when trying to juggle the many demands of modern life in a country that already puts in some of the longest working hours in Western Europe.

The survey, conducted by GfK NOP, is the second in a series called reflections on childhood commissioned by The Children's Society as part of its Good Childhood Inquiry - the UK's first independent national inquiry into childhood.

When adults were asked if a pre-school child was likely to suffer if his or her mother worked, almost half of all participants (48%) disagreed, but a significant number (37%) agreed. Two thirds (67%) of respondents said they didn't believe that parents should stay together when they didn't get along, even when there are children in the family.

Children contributing to The Good Childhood Inquiry* however, saw a happy home life as one in which they spent time together as a family. Although several submissions from children spoke of parents being too busy to spend time with them, saying:

'When your parents are always arguing or have full time jobs they don't spend any time with you. You feel lonely with nobody to talk to and all you can do is play on the computer or watch TV.'

Overwhelmingly, both the GfK NOP survey and the submissions to the inquiry identified love as the most important component for a happy childhood - 67% of adults polled and 70% of children's submissions.

Bob Reitemeier, chief executive of The Children's Society said: 'Family is hugely important in the lives of all children yet modern society appears to be pulling them apart. Only by taking a closer look at how a child's need for family can be met in the context of the 21st century, can we ensure a good childhood for all children. Without this fresh perspective and a better understanding of how to support families, we risk damaging the successful growth and development of future generations.'

(Daily Mail report here)

Would love to know what you think?

So true Expat. I remember once some nutter ringing up on our phone, finding we had a fax machine and screaming at us about being rich enough to afford a fax.

expat why do you always think your opinion is the only one that counts. im not blaming homemama's parents for anything.

lets take my parents for example if it makes you feel better. There were 3 children, plus parents. my dad worked full time and had an evening job, my mum (a nurse) stayed at home. |we had no car, no phone, no bloody fridge for ages, no holidays, no handouts, no benefits, but we were brought up in a happy environment. They spent time with us and were generally around for us. When we were older my mum took a part time job to ease the burden of looking after 3 teenage girls.

NO Jammy,this is not a SAHM Vs WOHM debate. FFS!

This is clearly a debate between stupid, head in the clouds people and the rest of us!

I would be depressed and unhappy without my car. Really I would. I live in the most depressing, horrible area and one of the great joys is to be able to bundle the kids into the car and take them to a lovely country park or the seaside when it's hot. I woudln't be able to do that on public transport without military planning, carrying lots of stuff and a lot of whingeing. Our quality of life would be so much worse.

If I had to buy beans to fund it, then beans and farts it is.

And just so you know, I've never used FFS before!

Excuse me, Jam, but nowhere did I say my opinion is the only one that counts.

Why would it make me feel better to hear about your childhood?

That was YEARS AGO. We're talking about NOW.

And right NOW there really are millions of people in the UK who are living in poverty.

I've gone back to work part time because with all of the outgoings we have, if I stayed at home, living on just DH's wages would have meant seriously budget watching and watching every penny and then not having any left over for any emergencies i.e if boiler broke or something or DH could have taken loads of extra shifts, which would have meant he hardly saw DS - which he didn't want.

The cost of basic living is just so high, that we are left without any choice but to work - our council tax is over £100 a month alone, we have all the other bills coming in and although I try to be careful when I'm shopping and don't buy ready meals etc, the food bills still rack up.

Also, I would have preferred to only work two days a week but I've had a massive fight to get flexible working with my job and have had to agree to 2.5 days a week just to keep my job and get the union involved. The government need to ensure that companies stop paying lip service to flexible working and ensure that its implemented.

As it is, its a panting rush from work to the nursery and then DS has to be bathed, fed etc. So, on the days I work, I barely see him and he's whingy as tired from nursery. Its awful, but leaving at an earlier time to spend more time with him wasn't an option as work wouldn't allow it. I think when it comes to school time and he finishes at 3pm, I will have to ensure I'm in a more child friendly job because as it stands, I can't see them letting me leave to get him from school - again, its down to companies putting pressures on their workers...

I think kids these days have a great time - regardless of whether they have sahm/wohm.

I'm wohm who fantasizes about being at home with ds, but knows in my heart I'd go nuts and end up going back to work.

I digress.

When I was growing up in the 70s, smacking was the norm, women smoked in pregnancy, no one really ate out, museums were dusty and drab parks were dog shit filled hell holes and the Victorian "seen and not heard" values prevailed amongst all but the uber liberal.

Clothes were hideous, food was revolting and technology was in the stone age. Very few of my mother's generation appeared happy - this was the era of rocketing divorce rates - and this surely impacted on children.

Nowadays there are so many fantastic things on offer for kids and men in particular seem to enjoy their children so much more than they did when I was a child.

I would like to see an article looking about what's good about modern life rather than this tired old drivel from reactionary idiots looking back to some non existent golden age.

'I would like to see an article looking about what's good about modern life rather than this tired old drivel from reactionary idiots looking back to some non existent golden age. '

Here, here, lucy!

Bravo!

well it would make a change

Work or live in poverty

Those seem to me to be the alternatives. So erm, I work. Sorry bout that.

For most people, it's work and live in poverty.

There's a lot of slagging off of the report, but honestly I think if we're relying on the Daily Mail to interpret it, then we're not going to get a very accurate picture of what it is saying.

The Children's Society is not a reactionary right-wing organisation. It doesn't have an agenda to push women back to the kitchen. I suspect if you read the report, the slant the Daily Mail has taken would look, as usual, barking.

I'm fortunate to be able to do a compressed week and Grandma has the kids on one day too - so they only go to nursery for 3 days, but they are happy when they are there.

I have to say I wish I could be at home more, as I feel guilty not being with them when I'm at work, but if I was at home more I'd probably go up the wall and want to be at work....

Welcome to motherhood & guilt!

And I agree beans are healthy and low fat but they do make you fart....

Excellent post, Lucy!

Now I'm off before I'm led into swearing again.

Well, in the Unicef study of children's well-being Holland, Sweden and Denmark came top. It is completely normal in these countries that mothers work FT. IN fact, I would think much more common that mums work PT or not at all in the UK which is really low down in terms of happiness. Interesting.

Sorry I'm too impatient to read the whole thread before posting so apologies if I repeat somebody else's comment.

My take on this is that the Government itself is making the situation worse by putting the onus on all parents to work. Perhaps instead of providing subsidised childcare to a select group of parents who meet the right criteria on income and working hours, the Government should give all families this extra money up to a certain threshold (which I hope would include my own). It would then be up to the family whether they wanted to spend that money on childcare, thus enabling both parents to maintain a career, or use it to enable one parent to stay at home for some or all of the time.

So what I'm saying is that if the Government were to stop holding families to ransom though the tax and benefit system then perhaps fewer families would need to have both parents work full time. And those of us who don't want our under ones in full time childcare wouldn't have to live on the breadline to achieve this.

i agree twinkle - less emphasis on getting parents into work and more on parents being able to care for their own.

Thanks for all the input - it was very helpful. I wrote this for today's telegraph on the subject.

Hope you think it's fair representation.

Nice job, Justine. I think you captured a lot of viewpoints.

great article justine

I refuse to let the government dictate to me what to do regarding my childcare, and we chose to live on one income, we started with nothing and worked our way up. We are not 'well off' but manage, I could probably not afford childcare anyway if I wanted to work, having 4 children. I am studying a degree at home instead. I do think that people are not really better off if they are depending on both incomes, what if one cannot work anymore. At least if one stays home, they can work if need be. With more dual income households, prices rise accordingly and we are really no better off. Alot of people work long hours to put food on the table, but also many do due to the allure of material things or to keep up their lifestyle before children. That is their choice but it is not for me. Time is ver precious and if you do not need to work then the government should leave you alone. Time with kids is very important, more so than luxuries, but down valued by this government.

The questions are so vague though that no wonder they got these results.

Of those 61% they don't say that all of them are parents of children under 18, could be all demographics, even those who don't know what the reality of modern day family life is like, but have picked their opinions up from the Daily Mail.

Also its different asking someone "if" they would put their career first, rather than have they done so and what constitutes affecting your family life, working late once per week, every night, all weekends, its not defined so its totally personal.

Then the one about pre-school children with mothers working. Do they mean full time, full time with extra hours, part time, or evenings because a mother working one day a week is a completely different scenario from a f/t 11 hour a day one.

I just feel its a load of meaningless statistics, muddled together to make an ill thought out result that suits their bias.

Hear, hear for the poster who wanted us to celebrate modern family life.I work as does my DH but we love our DS he has a fab time at the CMs and seems happy as larry meanwhile I keep my sanity by going to work 4 days a week and yes we have enough money for some of lifes luxuries.

Oh and waking time with son is 3.5-4 hours per day on the days I work and all the time for the other three days, its not like I never see my DS