Not toilet-trained at 4 or 5

[Ian H]

The destruction of Sure Start & its consequences.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...rry-effects-tech-education-inequality-schools

 

[AuroraSaab]

The pandemic will have had an effect too. The kids who most needed to be in school inevitably missed out hugely. Cutting back Sure Start is such a mistake though. It was relatively inexpensive for what it provided and indeed for what it saved in later costs by early intervention.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

This is definitely not a result of Sure Start cuts!

"Worst of all, a child who has spent so much time sitting in front of a TV that he or she was unable to walk properly."

 

[Ian H]

This is definitely not a result of Sure Start cuts!

"Worst of all, a child who has spent so much time sitting in front of a TV that he or she was unable to walk properly."

Your evidence?
The principle behind New Labour’s Sure Start programme was to intervene as early as possible with support for poor children and their families.

 

[Bromptonaut]

This is definitely not a result of Sure Start cuts!

"Worst of all, a child who has spent so much time sitting in front of a TV that he or she was unable to walk properly."

Have you actually read the article linked in the OP?

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Your evidence?
The principle behind New Labour’s Sure Start programme was to intervene as early as possible with support for poor children and their families.

Sure Start, at no point, told anyone that they shouldn't put their children in front a tv for such long periods that they would become functionally disabled.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

Have you actually read the article linked in the OP?

Yes, it is where the quote is from.

 

[Ian H]

Sure Start, at no point, told anyone that they shouldn't put their children in front a tv for such long periods that they would become functionally disabled.

I'm sure they also didn't tell them exactly what kind of breakfast they should provide for their children either, though they doubtless gave general advice and guidance.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Sure Start, at no point, told anyone that they shouldn't put their children in front a tv for such long periods that they would become functionally disabled.

But if a Sure Start centre were aware of a child with such a problem then they'd take action to address the situation.

 

[Craig the cyclist]

But if a Sure Start centre were aware of a child with such a problem then they'd take action to address the situation.

Only if the parents had taken them along.

If they are that lazy, I can't imagine they would have taken them.

 

[BoldonLad]

Your evidence?
The principle behind New Labour’s Sure Start programme was to intervene as early as possible with support for poor children and their families.

If a child is poor, are the family and/or parents also poor? I am not sure I see the link between being financially poor and failing to teach your children basic daily activities of living?, I am sure many (financial) poor manage to toilet train their children, I know my parents managed it.

 

[Ian H]

If a child is poor, are the family and/or parents also poor? I am not sure I see the link between being financially poor and failing to teach your children basic daily activities of living?, I am sure many (financial) poor manage to toilet train their children, I know my parents managed it.

Perhaps if I substituted 'disadvantaged children & families', though I suspect you knew what I meant.

 

[BoldonLad]

Perhaps if I substituted 'disadvantaged children & families', though I suspect you knew what I meant.

No, I didn't know what you meant.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Only if the parents had taken them along.

If they are that lazy, I can't imagine they would have taken them.

You've either not read or not absorbed the full import of the NS article in the OP. That makes quite clear that Sure Start recognised all sorts of reasons why children might be falling behind. I'd bet a pound to a pinch of pig sh*t that there is more to the case highlighted then the, err lazy, trope of laziness.

My two were a few years to old for sure start but I'm pretty sure that whatever provision, like funded Nursery or Playgroup, there was available was advised to parents and if not followed up further inquiries would be made.

 

[BoldonLad]

This is definitely not a result of Sure Start cuts!

"Worst of all, a child who has spent so much time sitting in front of a TV that he or she was unable to walk properly."

"But this isn’t just about a lack of material resources. There are other destructive forces at work in the households that cannot so much as toilet-train their four-year-olds. Addiction to drugs, alcohol or gambling is one, severe mental illness another, as well as learning disabilities that make basic tasks almost impossible. Even in a wealthy country such as ours, there are people at the bottom of society who can barely care for themselves, let alone their children. "

From my life experience, I would agree with the bolded part above. Not totally convinced that throwing more moment at it will fix it, but, I don't have an "oven ready" solution.