Mine are, apparently.

1. Lone parent families
2. Non-working families (no parents in paid employment)
3. Families with an annual household income of under £20,000 (or, for families where
income is unknown, being in receipt of Job Seeker’s Allowance, Income Support,
Housing Benefit or Council Tax Benefit)
4. Families including three or more children aged 0-143
5. Families living in one of the 20% most disadvantaged areas of the country (as defined
by the Index of Multiple Deprivation)
6. Families where all parents have no or low qualifications (no GCSE/ O Levels at grade
A-C)
7. Families where at least one parent has a long-standing illness or disability
8. Families living in rented accommodation (as a proxy for social housing)
9. Families where at least one child in the household has a special educational need, or
long-standing illness or disability.

http://publications.dcsf.gov.uk/eOrderingDownload/DCSF-RR191.pdf

Oh I am scared, very scared, by the assumptions in this document.  Children who are not at nursery are disadvantaged, apparently.  By both missing out, and by their parents being out of work to care for them.  Oh and pretty heavy leanings towards poor families being unfit to care for their own children…

Not to mention nursery = advantage and not giving your child that advantage MUST be due to lack of education.

Not to mention daycare = THE solution to child poverty.
Not to mention “Every Child Matters” being used as a yard stick to parental competence.

Not to mention,

Only 15% of children aged 0-2 who
experienced the highest level of disadvantage received some formal childcare or early years
education compared with 38% of all children in this age group.

um, so that wouldn’t be a leap to “therefore higher earners are more likely to put earning before child welfare since we already know that this age group are almost certainly better off with one-to-one care or near as possible” it is a leap to “because disadvantaged people don’t know that their tiny babies NEED formal childcare”.  Gobsmacked.

Not to mention the insistence on linking perceptions of poor quality in formal care settings to parental ignorance.

Not to mention the report dismissing questions of better childcare being available primarily in better-off areas as unimportant.

Not to mention, oh no wait, I already did, heavy leanings towards the attitude that poor people are unfit to care for their own children…

*Bangs head against brick wall.*

<sigh, sigh>

According to this my children are disadvantaged on many points :-(  To say that many of those points *equals* disadvantage is just preposterous!

Mind you, I *am* feeling poor and disadvantaged at the moment so I’m not as vociferous as I normally would be.  <sigh sigh sigh sigh siiiiiiiiiggggghhh>

Becky
xx

I do know what you mean!  But your *children* certainly aren’t, no matter what is statistically likely to be the case according to the government.  And what kind of twisted logic does it take to assume that all children with factors that “may” indicate disadvantage would be better off in nursery/school/childcare??!  Either way, how much research do they have to say that parental involvement is the most important factor?  Your children have you.  xx

Lets see eh…

1. Lone parent families
2. Non-working families (no parents in paid employment)
3. Families with an annual household income of under £20,000 (or, for families where
income is unknown, being in receipt of Job Seeker’s Allowance, Income Support,
Housing Benefit or Council Tax Benefit)
4. Families including three or more children aged 0-143
5. Families living in one of the 20% most disadvantaged areas of the country (as defined
by the Index of Multiple Deprivation)
6. Families where all parents have no or low qualifications (no GCSE/ O Levels at grade
A-C)
7. Families where at least one parent has a long-standing illness or disability
8. Families living in rented accommodation (as a proxy for social housing)
9. Families where at least one child in the household has a special educational need, or
long-standing illness or disability.

Ahhh but then I’m one those types.  You know the type who puts family and happiness before earning, the economy and being a good citizen and doing as she’s told.

So instead lets make everyone else believe that such ideals are really, really bad!  Because shit, imagine if everyone realised that consumerism doens’t equal choice & happiness.. no indeed it’s the new slavery.

Joxy.

Joxy - 08 February 2010 07:24 PM

Because shit, imagine if everyone realised that consumerism doesn’t equal choice & happiness…

  ROFL

Nothing that comes out of the DCSF has the power to surprise me anymore, unfortunately annoy and infuriate - yes, surprise - no.

Apparently the Tories are intending to disband it and the word about Westminster is that the DCSF is rotten within.

Nelly x

JOXY FOR PM!!

Oye, you can put that idea right back in your mind young lady!

**shudder**

Ours aren’t disadvantaged according to that list - unless of course DH loses his job or we split up, because then they will obviously become disadvantaged. Although they’ve never been to any form of daycare and are home educated so I guess they are disadvantaged anyway. *sigh* - you’d better all get out to work and put your kids in daycare so they’re better off. How ridiculous. Words fail me to say what I really think. I kind of wish I hadn’t downloaded and read that now!!!! lol

Beck x

It does kind of make me wonder… how long before lack of daycare, in and of itself, is considered a factor in “disadvantage”?  :(  Sobering and just a little sickening.

I want to live off the grid. Or planet. Either, or.

Oh, my poor children…so disadvantaged!  But then so was I and just look at how I turned out, haha

sarie

Yep, grace is disadvantaged on counts 2,3 & 8! Poor child - she seems completely oblivious

arwen_tiw - 08 February 2010 08:13 PM

how long before lack of daycare, in and of itself, is considered a factor in “disadvantage”?

It seems quite endemic that unless you have paid money for something it has no value, and ‘amateurs’ cannot hope to be as good as ‘professionals’.

Nelly x

Dear me how stupid and simplistic….gobsmacked!  All my children were/are disadvantaged in some way according to that!

20 GRAND A YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If our household earned anywhere near that, it would feel like winning the flaming lottery!!!!!!!!!

Disadvantaged my ar*e… What a negative label to give a child!

Grrrrrrrrrrrrr….

Helen xxx