Am I missing something?

I have lived ...

... here all my life, paid tax for 30+ years but still naively believe benefits should be there only for those who genuinely need it and I have no thoughts of "entitlement".

To me it is insurance, not an endowment plan, I do not expect anything back financially from my "investment", but would hope if, God forbid, it all went pear shaped I would get some sort of help picking up the pieces - but only after I had cut my cloth as much as I could for my impoverished circumstances.

I struggle with this ...

... it is right that help is given to protect children, but that leaves it open for people to have childern to get financial reward and thus starts a spiral of benefit dependancy! I don't believe this is a majority trait, but the minority is significant, and if you throw benefit payments for immigrant children into the mix, whose parents have no history of paying in to the pot things get exacerbated.

My personal belief is that childcare is best given by the childs family, its mother in particular, and would rather help was given to enable them to be there for their own children, rather than to have the children "parked" out the way elsewhere.

I read an interesting article recently putting the view that although children in third party care have every need adequately (and often more than adequately) met it is done dispassionately and without the loving care a parent would give and that is vital in the early years.

I do agree Shirley ...

... additional alowances for dependants (not necessarily minors) is good, especially if clawback a la age allowance when incomes exceed "sensible" thresholds.

I think the spoiled brats are more down to the absence of "No" from the parents vocabulary than familiarity of faces. I think worse behavioural problems come from those with rarely seen parents (who over compensate when they do get time with the children). It can also lead to relationship issues in adult life. Most of the spoilt brats I have come accross have had nannies/nursury(esp montessori) etc from a very early age.

Nursery hours

A slight change of tack but what are peoples' views on sending little kids (2-3yrs) to nursery for full days (and I'm talking 8am to 6pm here)? I know someone who's little 'un has just started doing those sort of hours and to me it's just wrong! I'm all for kids getting some socialisation but even teenagers at secondary school aren't at school for those hours! Am I so far removed from reality these days or do others agree that little ones should be spending quality time with a parent as well, rather than being treated as an accessory to be played with when parents can be bothered?

Personally ...

... playgroups are good, if the mums are there too. As the mother and child get to know others then you can help each other out. This is why two parents are important, so they can share what at times can be a burden.

I think most of my generation and earlier ones weren't looked after by other than family or close friends until we started school, which was at five. Most of us could read, write, spell, add up and knew most of our tables by that age too!

I appreciate that often both parents have to work, but often it is choice not necessity, the net gain after childcare costs being minimal!

One of my friends works days, his wife evening to make ends meet so they could afford to have two children. Not easy, lots of sacrifices, but they wanted to make sure one or other were around. Another couple I know the husband is a postie and his wife a mobile hairdresser so again one or other is always around. Funnily enough, both have well adjusted, confident but well mannered children!