JSA once the kid hits 7

[llcoolphil]

I don't pay anyone to look after the kiddy. The grandmother helps out. We have the kid the majority of the time. She is only at the grandmothers Tuesday, half of Wednesday and Thursday as things stand. Its a compromise and trade off until the kid goes to school. By both parents working we are able to expose the kid to other things.

[sifi]

Am I alone in thinking posting four times consecutively in a thread is a little obsessive?

[lost]

I cant decide whether you're actually trolling or not here about what's involved in childcare

[eFestivals]

One person, singular. Not a couple and a baby. Both he and I agreed a few pages back that it was doable for one person. But you said he should cut his household food bill to £10.

No, I said it was doable on £80 a month - and it is. It would be healthy eating, but not necessarily tasty or interesting eating.

[Steve P]

Christ that's a bit harsh isn't it?

but yes I've managed to make it to 31 without even holding any babies let alone looking after one or a kid.. that's why I was asking...

[oafc0000]

Something that has occured to me Oafish, you say that your little one is looked after by her Grandparents quite a bit whilst you both work. You were also advicating moving away to find work. This takes away the option of grandparents and family for a lot of people.

Edited October 27, 2010 by oafc0000

[lost]

There are a lot of very strict rules in place about places that can offer childcare, there's far more to it than having a room with some toys. For a start there are maximum child to carer ratios set out, which until they're 3 is not more than 3 kids to any carer (I think). It means they have to over staff in case anyone gets ill etc. You have to get inspected by Ofsted, who make sure you have proper activities planned. The insurances that you need in place are huge. This is part of why the costs are so high, the other part is there no state based alternative to keep the private sector costs down.

The nursery our little one is going to seems fine, and Beth's now got properly used to going there and seems happy when we drop her off. It's good to know that she's being well cared for and is enjoying herself, but it still breaks our hearts that we see her for about 2 hours a day during the week.

[eFestivals]

thanks , I remember being left at the salvation army nursery when I was little and it did seem to be 10-15 kids in a big room with loads of donated toys and a couple of volenteers, I suppose things have changed a lot since then

Unless you're exceeding old, very little aside from tweaks here and there has actually changed with child care regulation for decades.

Both nurseries and child minders have to be registered (and have had to have been for decades), and have to fulfil a set of tight regulations.

[eFestivals]

True to an extent but the Ofsted requirements which where brought in about ten years ago (?) caused a large number of the old styled "Play Schools" to close. Now these places have to have at least one qualified career and have to be inspected and pass certain requirements etc. This put off a lot of the people running the old play schools to call it a day. The rules have got tougher over the years.

I don't know the exact details but this happened. My mother in law used to run one until about four years ago when she had to give up because the costs of just were just not realistic any more and they would of had to become a full on nursery, charging silly fees to make it work. Which she wouldn't do as she is very anti towards the increasing regulation.

Oh, I know. My mother has been involved with the regulation of playgroups/nurseries and childminders for 40 years or so - to the extent that she was brought out of retirement to help manage the changes to ofstead.

But all in all it's really only been incremental changes as the years have gone by, with those willing to embrace the changes able to do so and those too attached to how they've done things previously giving it up.

The reality is that there's often quite a gulf between what nurseries etc are known to be doing (they shouldn't be - but it can't be proven) and what the regs says they should be doing. I've got a very long list of horror stories I could reel off.

[eFestivals]

I find it interesting the way people wrongly think that by regulating something you actually make a difference. All you really do is force someone to make sure it looks better during an inspection and on the check list.

while that's true to an extent, the changes in regulation DO change things, if not immediately.

As an example ... a nursery I know of used to handcuff 'naughty' children to the stairs for a while, and had done for years. There came a point within the regulations where doing that was clearly unacceptable, but they carried on doing so. But as time passes so do attitudes as well as staff changing, and eventually one of the staff grassed the nursery to Social Services.

While Social Services never actually got to prove that kids were sometimes being handcuffed (and so the nursery was able to continue to operate, and still is now), their intervention caused that nursery to stop handcuffing those kids on occasions, as was confirmed back to Social Services by the staff member that had originally grassed up that nursery.

(That story is fairly old, but not as old as you might be thinking - from memory I'd say it's defo less than 15 years old).

Actually, that isn't fair... I am sure it makes some people double check things and think deeper about some things. But I don't buy there is a massive difference.

ooooh, there is.

It's still a very widely held belief amongst the public at large that it's fine to smack kids.

Yet it's something you won't find happening in any nurseries nowadays, aside from the occasional isolated incident (as opposed to policy).

I haven't seen many nurseries that are doing anything more than the old style play schools where doing. Playing, painting, singing, dancing, light education like counting etc... The difference is you now pay £400+ a week for it.

yep - to my mind (and just about everyone within the child care industry) it was a stupid idea to class pre-school child care as 'schools' and put them under ofstead - it's contrary to all research of what serves children the best on an individual basis.

But at the same time, what serves individual kids the best leaves some kids not served at all. It was a Blair pet-project to try and make child-care fully inclusive, so that the kids who get the least out of the education system aren't abandoned to that fate by both their parents and the state. So from that side, of not having a nursery system that confirms the abandonment of that sub-class to a life of failure, it should be applauded. Nothing changes if we don't try to change it.

[llcoolphil]

Can someone teach Phil there are seven days in a week...

Edited October 27, 2010 by llcoolphil

[eFestivals]

Its actually funny how WAY OFF you are

when it comes to getting truth from what you say, being way off is what everyone achieves.

According to you in the last few days:

1. the grandparents look after the kid.

2. your wife looks after the kid full time and always will.

3. your wife is returning to full time work

4. your wife is giving up her full time work

5. you look after the kid

6. you work too long hours to even see the kid.

I've probably missed some too.

Edited October 27, 2010 by eFestivals

[RABun]

[RABun]

If the wife is giving up full time work then Oafish will be able to still claim child benefit because he takes out less than 40k of salary from his company.

Lucky boy.

[eFestivals]

If the wife is giving up full time work then Oafish will be able to still claim child benefit because he takes out less than 40k of salary from his company.

Lucky boy.

not 100% sure that's actually the case.

Gre who posts here and is an accountant (or trainee, I forget) says that company dividends are taxed as income tax, tho at a lower rate (I'd assumed they weren't classed under income tax, because of that different & lower tax rate). So if he's also taking a divi that takes his income over £44k, then I'd guess he'd still lose the child benefit.

But he'd probably be better off doing that than leaving the money in the company and taking the CB, cos the taxation on higher earners always has fiddles to make it work in their favour, while making those on lower tax rates believe the rich are getting taxed at a higher rate than they are.

[feral chile]

while that's true to an extent, the changes in regulation DO change things, if not immediately.

As an example ... a nursery I know of used to handcuff 'naughty' children to the stairs for a while, and had done for years. There came a point within the regulations where doing that was clearly unacceptable, but they carried on doing so. But as time passes so do attitudes as well as staff changing, and eventually one of the staff grassed the nursery to Social Services.

While Social Services never actually got to prove that kids were sometimes being handcuffed (and so the nursery was able to continue to operate, and still is now), their intervention caused that nursery to stop handcuffing those kids on occasions, as was confirmed back to Social Services by the staff member that had originally grassed up that nursery.

(That story is fairly old, but not as old as you might be thinking - from memory I'd say it's defo less than 15 years old).

ooooh, there is.

It's still a very widely held belief amongst the public at large that it's fine to smack kids.

Yet it's something you won't find happening in any nurseries nowadays, aside from the occasional isolated incident (as opposed to policy).

yep - to my mind (and just about everyone within the child care industry) it was a stupid idea to class pre-school child care as 'schools' and put them under ofstead - it's contrary to all research of what serves children the best on an individual basis.

But at the same time, what serves individual kids the best leaves some kids not served at all. It was a Blair pet-project to try and make child-care fully inclusive, so that the kids who get the least out of the education system aren't abandoned to that fate by both their parents and the state. So from that side, of not having a nursery system that confirms the abandonment of that sub-class to a life of failure, it should be applauded. Nothing changes if we don't try to change it.

Edited October 27, 2010 by feral chile

[dakyras]

You seem to think Phil that it isn't raising your child to put food on the table and roof over there heads... To get them clothes and something to sleep in... To buy them educational toys so they learn and develop

[dakyras]

Read some of the stuff being said at me!! dear lord... Pictures of a child in a cage was being posted to me the other day and someone posting lude humour about my daughter after that. Not a peep from you then.

If you going to call people on there comments please do it with a even hand... :angry:

[dakyras]

If you do read a few quotes you will see Phil is all over my arse spouting total inaccuracies and asking searching questions about my behaviour as a parent. I ask him one back and you give me the third degree ?

Happy to turn the other cheek in general... I actually do it a lot given some of the vile people post towards me. I tend to say my feelings on a random political issue and then I have people posting pictures of children in cages and blowing my comments massively out of proportion and context. Like your comment about me apparently not talking to my kid.

Edited October 27, 2010 by dakyras

[dakyras]

The suggestive bollocks you post is yours... Clean your own house up before you have ago at someone else...

[dakyras]

So buy saying I by my kid educational toys I am inferring I don't speak to my kid ?

[dakyras]

Also, I think you should look up the difference between "infer" and "imply".

[Pogues Mcgogues]

I think I got a key to my house at 13-14ish. Went to my gran when my mum got a job when I was 10ish I think after school til my dad finished work. Some folk don't have grans tho!

That's why 7's too young in my personal opinion!

[gratedenini]

I haven't seen many nurseries that are doing anything more than the old style play schools where doing. Playing, painting, singing, dancing, light education like counting etc... The difference is you now pay £400+ a week for it.

[llcoolphil]

I spend the majority of the week with her... I never mentioned a "working week"... You do take an unhealthy interest