All children should learn parenting skills at school
John Freeman
Tuesday, January 19, 2016
A few weeks ago, I had the sad duty of sitting on a permanent exclusion appeal hearing for a secondary school. Gary is just 12 years old, and his behaviour is uncontainable by the school.
Several years ago, his father was imprisoned for the domestic abuse of Gary's mother, and the father has no family contact. Gary's mother misuses drugs and alcohol, and provides little, if any, effective parenting - he gets himself up in the mornings (or not), makes his own breakfast (or buys crisps and an energy drink), self-medicates (or not) for his ADHD, goes to school (or not) by himself and at the end of the day, goes to bed when he chooses. He has no boundaries, self-imposed or otherwise, and is in constant trouble in and out of school for antisocial and violent behaviour.
Teachers suspect he smokes cannabis at home, although the smell on his clothes could be "second hand". Gary has been a cause of serious concern for at least five years, during which time he has attended two primary and three secondary schools. There have been endless multi-agency discussions about his future, with which his mother does not engage. Gary does not have specific learning difficulties - on the rare occasions he has been engaged, he learns well. Sadly, I can't see any positive long-term future for Gary without his being taken into care - and by now even that would be a real challenge, although I think it should and will eventually happen.
From time to time, the most ideological of politicians make sensible decisions, and I have even been known to agree with Michael Gove. The news that David Cameron is supporting universal parenting education is welcome, though of course political positioning is part of his logic, with four select committees calling for compulsory sex and relationships education. Even so, it's not a natural position for the Conservative Party, with the "nanny state" rhetoric always playing out in the background. Let's not start the new year by carping, though - the universal delivery of sex, relationships and parenting education seems such an obviously good thing that perhaps even the Department for Education will go along with it. It's early intervention in practice. Beyond the "nanny state" nay-sayers, the only argument is that schools should focus on the knowledge that children will need to get a job - logic that falls apart as soon as you start to think it through.
To me, it seems obvious that childhood is a good time to learn about parenting, and that school is a good place, without the immediate pressures of nappies and sleepless nights. Some people argue that most children get effective parenting education from their own family. Others believe that parenting education should be provided only to those who need it most, perhaps in children's centres. These arguments are flawed - targeted provision would then become associated with families in need. The key advantage of universal provision is that no stigma attaches to any particular group.
All children and all new parents would benefit from a basic understanding of child care and child development. However, care needs to be taken in the design and delivery of universal parenting education. An effective curriculum needs to be designed, and teachers trained, before implementation. The usual traps need to be avoided and designing a scheme that does not promote just one model of parenting - perhaps the middle class model - is never going to be easy. But the whole exercise is well worth doing, and should have a positive impact on the future wellbeing of whole generations of children as they become adults, and parents.
At the most disadvantaged end of the spectrum, the two per cent of children in such need that the state is already involved would have benefitted greatly from their parents having had some active parenting education. While parenting and relationships education are not magic bullets, we could significantly improve the life chances of children in need of support, and the benefits to society would be huge - reduced burdens on the care and health systems, fewer children ending up unqualified and unable to get a job, fewer children likely to offend and go to prison, and a disruption of the cycle of deprivation.
It's impossible to know whether parenting education would have helped Gary's parents, and Gary himself, but all children should be taught to be better parents. For some children, this could make a critical difference.
John Freeman CBE is a former director of children's services and is now a freelance consultant
Read his blog at cypnow.co.uk/freemansthinking