Sure Start

I totally agree with you luckygirl3 and keeping quiet

There is an economic thought I came across when studying Business and Economics, don’t ask me where, but I do remember it as being quite a strong view. If more parents stayed at home to look after children, there would be less people in the job market therefore those who were available for work would command higher wages helping to make up the loss of the second wage. There would need to be a huge incentive to reduce the workforce to cause wages to rise. Suppose that is how so many mothers stayed home with children until about the 1960s.

Having led a Sure Start Children’s Centre as part of a maintained nursery school in London, I can say that these local centres were an asset to all local families. Advice & support on all aspects of child development, care, parenting, health, employment etc was available without judgement to all. Father’s & mothers plus other carers all came. We also hosted training places for MA student social workers & other professionals. Having the local paediatrician, other medics available plus speech and language therapy etc was a real bonus especially if a child had SEND or was being assessed. Such a wicked waste of crucial provision which is needed more than ever post pandemic.

Luckygirl, thank you for your post. I taught in an area of high need and agree absolutely that for some parents, their own experience of being parented gave them poor role models to follow. SureStart offered support, in a co- operative and welcoming atmosphere. Some of these people were wary/ hostile around other professionals. Peer support worked, too and the children gained, and are, hopefully, going to be better parents in time, breaking the cycle of deprivation.

Not being involved in any way with education I have the impression that there is time given to gender recognition, contraception and secual health. Is there any time afforded to parenting skills? Wouldn't go amiss.

I think that why sure start nurseries worked so well was that all types of parents and children used them and this increased the language experience and opportunities for all . It is a big mistake to put all children with poor language skills etc together,

I was involved in setting up and running a playgroup (remember them?) which served a very mixed community and was a training place for NNEB students. We all learned to be better parents and for some families I know that what the mums learned meant that children were not taken into care. This model of early childhood support vanished as the need for the mothers of young children to earn got greater but it was a valuable source of companionship and learning for mothers and children.

I’m another social worker who remembers sure start with admiration and affection. They did great work, often/ usually in the areas I worked , with so called hard to reach families. Baby massage, parenting groups, cookery, budgeting , support with domestic abuse etc etc
Posters suggesting children do better with mum at home till age 5 aren’t aware of the research on early years, or on the fact sure start wasn’t ‘just’ providing nursery care

I suspect there's a balance, Iam64. Children do need to socialise, learn to play alongside others and prepare for school. However, I do wonder how long the optimum time is to be away from their parents and how early it should start. I know my DGS went to nursery but the reality was that he barely saw his parents by the time they had done a working day. They literally saw him first thing in the morning in the hour's drive to work and in the evening for an even longer drive. Weekends were taken up with getting the shopping and washing done ready for work on Monday. I just don't know that it is particularly good for a child to be in full time nursery from the age of 2 or even younger.

I used Sure Start centres and they were amazing, ours had coffee mornings for new mum's and they even had meetings for breastfeeding with qualified support and things like that... It is devastating that they are gone

This is such a fundamental issue, thank you for your post Luckygirl. I think life is very tough for young families today, supporting parents is essential and as a society we need to be doing all we can to nurture and protect our children. In the long run it benefits us all.

Sure Start also saved the NHS money as parents could talk to a health visitor or nurse there about their child’s problems - if they had a temperature when the should seek help, for example. Now many parents end up in A and E with minor issues because they haven’t got the basic knowledge about child health.

Govts invariably don't think "long term" -- quite a few don't "think" at all. Our system produces politicos who lurch from one instant 'fix' (which likely hasn't been properly considered) to the next. It's been so for many decades.

icanhandthemback

I suspect there's a balance, Iam64. Children do need to socialise, learn to play alongside others and prepare for school. However, I do wonder how long the optimum time is to be away from their parents and how early it should start. I know my DGS went to nursery but the reality was that he barely saw his parents by the time they had done a working day. They literally saw him first thing in the morning in the hour's drive to work and in the evening for an even longer drive. Weekends were taken up with getting the shopping and washing done ready for work on Monday. I just don't know that it is particularly good for a child to be in full time nursery from the age of 2 or even younger.

Both my children were in full-time nursery from the age of six months. I'm only one person, but I honestly don't think my children suffered at all. They made life-long friends, whom they would never otherwise have met, had extra adults in their lives, learnt skills which made the transition to primary school a breeze and so much more.

I was a single full-time working parent by the time my son was three. I had no choice but to work, but I always made as much time for my children as I could. Bedtime story time lasted for years. The children helped with cooking and even choosing what we were going to eat. They came shopping with me and learnt not to touch fresh food unnecessarily and how to pick the freshest items. They helped with housework and how to budget their pocket money. Given that so much "family time" is spent on household chores, I wonder what those against nurseries think they missed out on.

Incidentally, my father came from a relatively wealthy family, which had a nanny and various other domestic helpers. My grandfather had quite a long commute and worked very long hours. I know that my father and his brother didn't see much of their parents. From observation, most modern working parents try to spend more quality time with their children (even if they are in nursery) than my grandparents did.

Albangirl14

I think that why sure start nurseries worked so well was that all types of parents and children used them and this increased the language experience and opportunities for all . It is a big mistake to put all children with poor language skills etc together,

I agree totally. My area has a voluntary organisation, which receives a large grant from the council and runs all sorts of activities for all sorts of people - cheap breakfasts and teas, a surplus food bank, yoga and exercise classes (some for less fit (including older) people, Christmas presents for poorer families, gardening clubs, teas for single/older/lonely people, etc etc etc. They work closely with the local foodbanks and Homestart, which supports vulnerable families.

The charity isn't "labelled" specifically for poor people and attracts a whole range of people, including those who are lonely. I use their surplus food bank and stay for a cup of coffee, where I've met many people I would never otherwise have met. There are often toddlers with their parents/carers and older children during the school holidays. There are some toys and plenty of paper and colouring pencils available.

I'm always impressed how non-judgmental the whole organisation is and really brings the community together. I expect other areas have similar - those areas which don't should be supported to have organisations like this. SureStart filled a hole in charity provision.

4allweknow

There is an economic thought I came across when studying Business and Economics, don’t ask me where, but I do remember it as being quite a strong view. If more parents stayed at home to look after children, there would be less people in the job market therefore those who were available for work would command higher wages helping to make up the loss of the second wage. There would need to be a huge incentive to reduce the workforce to cause wages to rise. Suppose that is how so many mothers stayed home with children until about the 1960s.

It would also cause a shortage of key workers.

Icanhandthemback - sure start was about so much more than nursery places.
The issues of working parents or as most mean, working mothers, is a separate one

Iam64

Icanhandthemback - sure start was about so much more than nursery places.
The issues of working parents or as most mean, working mothers, is a separate one

I do realise that and posted earlier about the merits of the scheme. I was responding to your comment about the research you mentioned about children staying with Mum until they are 5 years old.
If and when we get another Government, I hope we get something like SureStart again because it certainly looks as if we need it with the prevalence of anxiety disorders in society today.

Growstuff, I am glad it worked out for you and your children. I had to access childcare which included nurseries as a single working parent. I had to return to work after 12 weeks and it was one of the most difficult things I had to do with him especially as his early weeks were spent in SCBU. He survived without me but was left with a fear of being separated from me which lasted until his teens. However, that does not colour my thinking. I just think there is a balance to be had and I wonder what the purpose is to have children if they are going to be in Nursery school most of their waking hours. Of course, I realise that people have no choice and there is no judgement on my part about for those who choose this path but there should be a way for them to have a more balanced work/child caring role.

I agree we have a very good community centre near us that we support .

icanhandthemback

*Growstuff*, I am glad it worked out for you and your children. I had to access childcare which included nurseries as a single working parent. I had to return to work after 12 weeks and it was one of the most difficult things I had to do with him especially as his early weeks were spent in SCBU. He survived without me but was left with a fear of being separated from me which lasted until his teens. However, that does not colour my thinking. I just think there is a balance to be had and I wonder what the purpose is to have children if they are going to be in Nursery school most of their waking hours. Of course, I realise that people have no choice and there is no judgement on my part about for those who choose this path but there should be a way for them to have a more balanced work/child caring role.

I'm not sure what the "purpose" of children is either - I've certainly never seen them as a way of giving parents (or grandparents) pleasure - to my mind, it's the other way round. I really don't think that children in a good nursery (and that's where mine were) places them at any disadvantage. I was fortunate, I suppose, because I was a teacher and spent 13 weeks a year at home with the children. I suspect they had more of my attention averaged over the year than many children, especially those in large families.

Albangirl14

I agree we have a very good community centre near us that we support .

I have a theory that the country should concentrate on building strong communities and local identities rather than waving national flags.

Sure start in my opinion was an absolute life changer. Luckygirl13 and others have put it well.
Of course this vile shortsighted Tory regime don't appreciate it.
I hope the LP fund it again

I think Labour will support it, we have the equivalent in Wales, it’s called Flying Start here, and it is funded directly by Welsh Government, who have continued to prioritise it.

When SureStart was in its infancy I was involved in the research side of what they should be like. It came down, I think, to 13 basic offerings and childcare was only one of them.

I was deeply skeptical initially but over the years I was turned right around into being a big fan.

Really, unless you have worked in the area, you have no idea how scared, lonely and struggling some parents are.

I was working in family support and worked with one mum who didn't understand why her daughter didn't talk at 3 - but she never spoke to her because saying "spoon", "egg", "duck" or whatever was "stupid" and "not a conversation". She learned, in a friendly environment how babies and toddlers develop and saw other mums doing this "naming of things". SureStart was not rocket science but it helped encourage good parenting and parents grew in confidence.

My daughter worked at a SureStart for a while and hers had a thriving young dad's group which had to be a good thing!

The research shows that preschool years are the critical time. Get that right and the rest will be so much easier.