tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post8221876269196753335..comments2024-02-23T10:53:19.705+00:00Comments on Dare to Know: Anti-Social Children?Carlottahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-90268292678664338822007-04-07T12:32:00.000+01:002007-04-07T12:32:00.000+01:00"I doubt many would agree that people should be on..."I doubt many would agree that people should be on welfare if they just feel like not earning their own living. "<BR/><BR/>Right, so I am a stay-at-home mum because I 'don't feel like' earning my own living.<BR/><BR/>What utter tosh!<BR/><BR/>I am at home because my husband and I made a concious decision upon the birth of our 3rd child that our youngest children would be cared for at home rather than going out to nursery (which was the case for my eldest two when I worked full time).<BR/><BR/>This point illustrates my earlier point perfectly, that caring for children - some of most vulnerable members of our society and surely something that is most precious to families - is not valued by many members in society.<BR/><BR/>To have one parent (whether they be part of a partnership, or single) staying at home to care for children is not avoiding work.<BR/><BR/>I do have some *issues* over individuals who do not appear to want to contribute in anyway (and to illustrate with a stereotype, sit at home or down the pub smoking and drinking their benefits away), but a single parent who chooses to stay at home because they believe that that is the best thing for their children is an entirely different matter.<BR/><BR/>It's not naivety, I live in the real world, in an area classed as 'deprived' with the unemployment rate way above the national average, so I'm under no illusions here, but comments that suggest that a parent who chooses to stay at home "just feel like not earning their own living" makes me shake my head in sorrow at the lack of consideration given to the importance of having a constant and reliable care-giver in the early years (and throughout life really).dottyspotshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15089059543050330193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-52830414477779452652007-04-06T23:45:00.000+01:002007-04-06T23:45:00.000+01:00I said:"A state education costs the public purse £...I said:<BR/>"A state education costs the public purse £6,000 per child, so a home edder with three children saves the public purse £18,000."<BR/><BR/>I meant to say "per year". I think that's obvious enough anyway, but I always whinge on about "clarity" so I thought I ought to add some! :D33, 452https://www.blogger.com/profile/05211879747055010173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-51001762883639858072007-04-06T23:29:00.000+01:002007-04-06T23:29:00.000+01:00"I doubt many would agree that people should be on..."I doubt many would agree that people should be on welfare if they just feel like not earning their own living."<BR/><BR/>No one mentioned welfare. I was actually thinking more in terms of how couples are not given equal status if one is the breadwinner and the other stays home with the kids. Hence, even in two parent families, children are rarely fortunate enough to have a parent prepared to sacrifice that "staus" to stay home with them.:(<BR/><BR/>I think that those who *do* prioritise their children over their careers should be applauded for doing so. If those people are single parents (or even couples) on welfare, so what? Are we, as a society, so economically obsessed that we can value someone who gets paid to care for the children of others above someone who cuts out the middleman and cares for their own children? <BR/><BR/>If so, why? Because the former scenario generates two lots of taxes and the latter may draw on public funds? Is that reasonable? Let's look at it this way...<BR/><BR/>A state education costs the public purse £6,000 per child, so a home edder with three children saves the public purse £18,000. If they claimed benefits they would probably still cost the goverment less than they would if they worked an average job, paid taxes, yet sent their kids to school. So why is their status less than that of someone who takes the latter path? It can't be to do with cost to the taxpayer, so it's clearly unfounded prejudice.<BR/><BR/>And our economy is not so fragile that we need to do such ridiculous sums anyway - even if someone contributes nothing to the public purse ever, yet they draw on it greatly, so what? That's what it's there for. Because we, as a society, value the safety, health, and lives of individuals over and above their economic worth - and I, for one, am very proud to live in such a compassionate and civilised society. <BR/><BR/>I think we are far more civilised here than in America where poor families can't even access medical treatment, and those on welfare are treated with so little dignity as to be left to subsist on food stamps!<BR/><BR/>Our amazing "welfare state" is what makes me proud to be English.<BR/><BR/>Oh, the tempatation to stand up and start singing "Land of Hope and Glory" or something now! LOL! Most of our patriotic songs are about the empire though, aren't they? So I don't think I'll bother. Maybe I'll write an up-dated version someday... "Land of hope and glory, And the NHS, Thou offerth money, To the sick and the depressed" Something like that? :D<BR/><BR/>Yeah. Anyway...<BR/><BR/>It's not all bad - we are sufficiently evolved as a society to support those who (for whatever reason) need it - so now we just need to change our ideas about "status"...<BR/><BR/>And don't worry about anyone who assumes that someone on welfare "just feels like not earning their own living" as such people are usually too narrow-minded to be worth giving a second thought to. Nothing is ever that simple, is it?33, 452https://www.blogger.com/profile/05211879747055010173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-40306138215858830582007-04-06T20:49:00.000+01:002007-04-06T20:49:00.000+01:00I doubt many would agree that people should be on ...I doubt many would agree that people should be on welfare if they just feel like not earning their own living.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-56849395254262666182007-04-05T21:59:00.000+01:002007-04-05T21:59:00.000+01:00Yes, hence I believe that there is not truly a cho...Yes, hence I believe that there is not truly a choice for women with regards to working either in the home or outside of it, paid or otherwise.<BR/><BR/>Not that I want to exclude such a choice for men either, but as a woman and as someone who works within the childcare profession, my experience is that it is predominantly mothers who appear to have this dilemna. That is not to say that men do not feel torn over the home/outside work balance, but that societal expectations appear to be weighted more towards women dealing with this.dottyspotshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15089059543050330193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-16588628982313238612007-04-05T21:21:00.000+01:002007-04-05T21:21:00.000+01:00Hi Dottyspots,That's exactly what I meant - this i...Hi Dottyspots,<BR/><BR/>That's exactly what I meant - this is something that needs to change.<BR/>I really hope that someday society manages to move past this insane and inhuman "productivity = economic activity" mentality.33, 452https://www.blogger.com/profile/05211879747055010173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-6736347423776019872007-04-05T20:31:00.000+01:002007-04-05T20:31:00.000+01:00Unfortunately, caring for children isn't something...Unfortunately, caring for children isn't something held particularly highly in this society - it is seen in some quarters as somehow 'less' than working outside the home.<BR/><BR/>Productivity is seen merely in terms of monetary value :-(dottyspotshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15089059543050330193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-35315736563910585262007-04-05T19:43:00.000+01:002007-04-05T19:43:00.000+01:00Hi Carlotta"and yes, to your other suggestion...th...Hi Carlotta<BR/><BR/>"and yes, to your other suggestion...though whether that means one should be stressing the importance of the paternal role, or stressing the importance of community, I am not sure."<BR/><BR/>Personally, I would say it means society should change its attitudes and ideas about the importance of careers. That we should stop making people feel as though their actions are only worth something if they get paid for them. That we should stop pressuring people into the workplace if they don't want to take that path. <BR/><BR/>That we, as a society, should recognise that there are myriad ways that people can be "productive" members of society, and that a great many of these *don't* involve earning a wage!<BR/><BR/>Raising children contributes greatly to society and this needs to be recognised/aknowledged. We need to start holding in high esteem those who willingly and commitedly undertake this vital and currently greatly under-estimated and unappreciated role. Especially those who walk off the career path in order to do so.33, 452https://www.blogger.com/profile/05211879747055010173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-61194773117998926042007-04-05T16:51:00.000+01:002007-04-05T16:51:00.000+01:00"I'm a registered childminder and children certain..."I'm a registered childminder and children certainly don't come unloved to me "<BR/><BR/>Hi Dottyspots,<BR/><BR/>Yes, I do completely think it is possible to manage this. In fact Dd was very happy from a very young age (despite bfing) to spend time away from me, but it was always with other people she adored and had known for a long time. <BR/><BR/>I don't think nurseries usually manage this at all, and many childminders also don't give two hoots, so it is great to hear that you do manage it so well and are giving clear consideration to such issues.Carlottahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-7308494152458874102007-04-05T16:47:00.000+01:002007-04-05T16:47:00.000+01:0033,452...yes..assertiveness is definitely closer, ...33,452...yes..assertiveness is definitely closer, I think. <BR/><BR/>You have just reminded me of one of the most confident people I have ever met in my entire life, who had sufficient faith in himself to be completely unassertive or even retiring in social situations, (whilst at the same time being incredibly observant and shrewd) so I can see a huge and important distinction here.<BR/><BR/>and yes, to your other suggestion...though whether that means one should be stressing the importance of the paternal role, or stressing the importance of community, I am not sure.Carlottahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12686469871331093679noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-21817342762100810792007-04-05T15:53:00.000+01:002007-04-05T15:53:00.000+01:00Erm, just to pick up - I'm a registered childminde...Erm, just to pick up - I'm a registered childminder and children certainly don't come unloved to me :0)<BR/><BR/>That said, I've only ever looked after children (including HE-ed children) p/t (a maximum of 2 days for littlies) and won't look after babies, because at the end of the day I'm a tad prejudiced in my view of what little children need. I also don't accept disposable nappies - so I do rather cut down on the available options work-wise as really I fulfill a very particular niche in the childcare market that there isn't much call for around here :0)<BR/><BR/>The whole issue of parents of very young children going out to work is something I do think about quite a bit, often re-evaluating my place (as a registered childminder) in the childcare set-up. It's a hard one because part of me supports women having the choice work etc., but another part thinks, well, but then children, then the next bit asks whether it really is always a choice - but then there's the argument that perhaps a rejig of family life or a change in priorities might make a difference. Argh! Who am I to enforce my own beliefs (etc) upon someone else? And so it goes on.<BR/><BR/>Sometimes I hate my need to minutely take things to pieces, it doesn't lend itself to peaceful nights.<BR/><BR/>So, at the end of the day, my registration is handy 'cos I get to go on interesting little courses and conferences for free :0) and I like to throw in an alternative viewpoint at meetings - keeps people on their toes :0D and every once in a while someone turns up wanting a minimum of childcare in a home environment and doesn't think we're a bit wierd and is scared off by the prospect of HE (or the dog or the cats) and that's great.<BR/><BR/>I also think that mixed-age groupings are a positive thing because I think we all have much to learn from all ages (young and old) and believe that the society we live in segregates by age far too readily.<BR/><BR/>I also query 'confidence' and 'socialbility'. As 33,452 says, really it isn't 'confidence' as I would think of it, rather an enforced independence?<BR/><BR/>I'm rambling now and really should go and open the back door as my youngest is thumping it to go out.dottyspotshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15089059543050330193noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11652148.post-14166402111886077142007-04-05T11:22:00.000+01:002007-04-05T11:22:00.000+01:00"It grows as a defensive reaction to the stress of..."It grows as a defensive reaction to the stress of separation and does not emerge from a genuine sense of rightness and wholeness."<BR/><BR/>Then it *isn't* confidence at all. I guess what you're refering to would be a particular type of "assertiveness"... Even that term doesn't quite fit though.<BR/><BR/>"Second, so what should we do about enabling the child's attachment figures to get back in the workplace?"<BR/><BR/>Or, even better, what can we do to support the child's attachment figures in staying home and being with their children? ;)33, 452https://www.blogger.com/profile/05211879747055010173noreply@blogger.com