Archived Forums

Thanks everyone for your replies...I've found it very interesting to read all your different perspectives. At the moment I am reading 'Too much, too soon' which criticises the governments early years foundation stage objectives and the push for parents to go back to work and younger and younger children going into childcare and the effects on attachment and emotional development (and that's talking about birth children). I suppose I found the letter that I received from the Government Minister quite patronising in that she assumed that my son would be better off in nursery age two than he would be at home with me, and that I would be holding his education back by keeping him at home!! There was no consideration to his emotional needs, let alone acknowledgment that I might read him stories and do 'educational' things with him at home..I'm finding that my decision to stay at home with him is quite rare! It's a big struggle financially for us, and it would be nice to get some encouragement from government regarding our parenting and the contribution it makes. I feel that if the money is there for my son to go to nursery 15 hours week now, can't I use it to parent him at home!? I realise from your posts that as a single parent you also don't have a choice! I am considering sending LO to nursery maybe for 2 sessions a week when he's 3 if it's something that benefits him and he enjoys....otherwise will stay at home with him as long as possible. It is quite isolating at times, but am very grateful for volunteers who run playgroups!

OOOH, I feel SOOO strongly about this!!I won't go into my (well rehearsed for anyone at the school gates who disagrees with me! ) speech but I truly, truly believe that children are so much better off at home with their parent/s. I am sure some children can cope, but having a little girl who has to start reception in Sep when she is literally just 4, and has really, really struggled to cope with just 2 mornings of pre-school (built up VERRRY slowly since Sep) I think it is crazy that they think that any 2 year old (not just adopted!) would benefit from this. Don't get me started on the people who farm their children (just 3) off to pre-school/nursery 3 full days a week when they DON'T WORK!!! Sorry, rant over xxxx

Afraid I'm one of those non working parents who farmed my children off to pre school, full time, at 3!! That's the way it works where I live. The pre school is part of the school they went to and if they hadn't taken up their space then it as likely they wouldn't have got a space in reception.Anyway. My three did do part time nursery from the time they were 2 and a half and went for five mornings a week. They'd been with me for between 18 months and 2 years by then, had attended mother and toddler in the same place with the same leader and so were familiar with it all.But that was my choice. What I disagree strongly with is this govt pushing women to go back to work and provide tax incentives for them to do so and to leave their kids in day care. Why not give them that money to enable them to stay at home, if that's what they want to do? It the subtle bullying I object to rather than anything else.

Don, they think we'll spend it on fags and beer!

Wine and chocolate here! !

Hi Rutinha'too much too soon' is an excellent book..a must read! I was shouting 'yes yes' all the way through it!I'm of the 'keep at them at home as long as possible' school of thought..so much so I decided to home educate my 2 (7 and 5 now, adopted at 19 and 9 months)having said that I did send both of mine 2 mornings a week to a pre school when they reached the term after their 3rd birthday..for many reasons..firstly to give me 1 to 1 with each child (they each got a turn at being home with mummy while the other was away) secondly to give me a little breather (the children were placed very close together and are 18 months apart in age so it was intense hard work) and thirdly because i wanted them to make some local playmates..i knew they werent going to school but wanted them to have a little network of people close by (the home ed community is more spread out)DD enjoyed pre school to a point..she was quite shy and i hoped it would bring her out of it a bit..(it didnt, she naturally gained confience aged 5ish), DS enjoyed it more and made more mates..they were both ready to be away from me when they went, at 2 they would have been distressed at being left (as most 2 years probably would be) and i would never have left them distressed..I would never in a million squillion years have sent them at 2 years old. It beggars belief that it would be 'recommended' for adopted children. Considering most adopted children would be emotionally behind their peers it would be like sending them at 18 months..or less!gah! makes me cross!rappit

How they cope with nursery will depend on the child themselves. You have to know the child's pre (AND post) adoption experiences in order to use attachment theory as a tool for understanding their behaviour. Some children placed for adoption will be more sensitive to rejection than others, dependant on their experiences, therefore it can't ever be as simple as saying they are x age thus nursery must be ruled out, and this is the attachment based 'treatment/parental approach' they will need. It's also impossible to say how long it will take for a child to feel secure around you, again this will depend on individual factors. I trust the assertion that children who have already experienced secure attachment will be less fearful of rejection, and thus are 'easier' to consistently provide care for. My daughter grieved for the loss of her foster carers, which is normal for a child who has lost the primary care giver (to whom they're securely attached). I didn't get any sense that she needed a therapeutic approach though, certainly in the very beginning her emotional needs were pretty much coming second to her survival needs. Given that she'd been with the same foster carers since birth (which isn't always the case, our daughter was fortunate in that sense) we'd've had to be extremely irresponsible for her NOT to realise that we were giving primary care, she got that rather early on.Our daughter started at nursery 8 months post placement (on her 2nd birthday). She has been home with us for over 2 years now and has recently started in the ante pre school group – nursery has been of benefit to her. I paid for her first year of nursery, from the moment she arrived home with us the duty of care was no different to that of a birth parent, therefore I wouldn't have felt 'entitled' to additional funding. I can't help but think this funding is actually another 'perk' designed to make adoption more appealing (for that reason, it'd be good to see this 'evidence' that shows early education benefited children who have been in the care system. Certainly I've read quite compelling evidence which suggests that children who attend nursery tend to have more positive interactions with their peers, I can't recall ever seeing anything which relates exclusively to children who have been in care though).