Kiwi Kids Books

Thank goodness I don’t live in England. Firstly, the weather is rotten and their cricket team is worse than ours. Secondly, and most importantly, it looks as if the government is about to crackdown on bad parenting and family breakdown in the UK. While this sounds great on the outside I do have some reservations regarding the actual implementation of this lofty goal.

According to the Guardian Newspaper Gordon Brown, the current Prime Minister, is about to make a speech at the Labour convention where he will announce that parents of errant children will lose access to benefits unless they agree to accept support to improve their parenting skills. The article actually states he will go further and say that parents with children charged with antisocial behaviour will be automatically subject to a parenting contract. He will also promise that all 50,000 of Britain’s most chaotic families will be required by 2015 to attend family intervention projects.

Where do I start with this one?

Firstly, I am glad this rule was not in force in New Zealand when I was a youngster. My parents would have been constantly on monthly government parenting contracts. Not for any fault of their own. I once threw a dart in my brother’s leg from 15m, often fought with my two brothers and most Friday’s in my 7^th form year were spent missing class for whatever reason I could find. While not the epitimony of a delinquent child, in a court of law my parents still had plenty to answer for.

Secondly, I find the rule just a little discriminating. The underlying precept basically assumes those people who get welfare can’t raise children while those who are wealthy are good parents. Imagine if the following rule was enforced in New Zealand;

“Parents of students who have high truancy rates will not be able to purchase Warrior season tickets.”

There would be a national outrage due to the assumption of the statement.

Thirdly, on an issue like this by the time a child gets to an age where they can exhibit anti-social behaviour, the horse has already bolted Mr Gordon Brown. Real, lasting benefits must be when children are under the age of 5.

Therefore one can assume that this is just a giant election stunt by Gordon Brown to get the vote from the middle and upper class of Britain. Apparently, a few people think it might actually work but I suppose we will have to wait until the general election to find out if it is successful.

Despite this being an election bribe, there is no harm in me putting my own ideas forward on this matter. I think these would be much more beneficial at curbing anti social behaviour and restoring the family.

Firstly, rather than focusing on the bad behaviour offer positives and give monetary rewards for children that behave. A cool $100 for every 5 hours of community service, with a registered charity, would see our youth putting back into the community.  Parents could receive a $1000 bonus for every high school year their child avoided contact with a police officer. This idea is limitless when you think about it. Every visit to a public library with your kid would earn a little cash while not having a TV in your child’s room would give the parents an extra $500 a year. With National likely to bring in standardised testing, a parent bursary of $500 for children passing each test would ensure parents spent time helping their children with their education.

If monetary rewards are not your thing the government could go really hardline. By law parents would have to have a minimum of 2 years between children. During those two years would be required to pass a number of ‘parenting competencies’ to prove their ability to raise children. This would be kind of like a ‘parenting warrant of fitness’. In future years different categories could be added such as a ‘grandparent’ test and even and ‘aunts and uncles’ test, just to guarantee the safety of our children. Basic tests could include budgeting, nappy changing in less than 2 minutes, talking to your child and a test which measures your ability to read Hairy Maclary with different voices and enthusiasm. If parents failed to pass the test they would be unable to have any more children. This would ensure useless parents only had one child and better parents could have the luxury of a large Catholic sized family.

Another idea is to enforce compulsory ‘parenting courses’ for expectant mothers and fathers. I personally found the anti-natal classes a little boring, except when my wife farted when practicing breathing techniques on the floor, and could see this as a time when we teach parenting skills. Despite this good idea people probably wouldn’t go and we would have the same problem we have now.

Therefore the best idea is one I got off a friend of mine in Scotland. We were watching a rugby game and I was abusing some Scottish player for being utterly useless, due to dropping a ball. My mate stood up for him and explained it isn’t easy being a professional sportsperson, with your every move on TV. He then questioned me and asked how I would like having a camera in my classroom with every lesson broadcast to millions of people. I took his point.

But I think he was onto something and it is something we should do with parenting to weed out the bad ones and use the best ones as role models. For the first two years parents must wear a special helmet with a live TV camera directly linked to a local TV station. Parents could watch other parents in action, vote parents out of houses, and Super Nanny could be nearby to offer suggestions via text to help with those struggling. I think this would encourage good parenting, cost very little and ultimately bring families and communities closer together.

Altogether I admire Gordon Brown for trying to do something about bad parents. After all children are the leaders of tomorrow and more importantly the  parents of tomorrow. Sadly though, unless he adopts some of the more reasonable ideas offered on this site I feel in 2 years time we will be having the same argument.