Bad parenting has been blamed for the recent riots in the UK. Journalist Jane Gordon, in the Mail on Sunday last week, looked at one of the solutions that aims to help people become better parents, Parent Gym.

OU student Samantha Mullen, 26, a mother of three, is studying for a degree in psychology and says that her daughters are not only performing better at school since she attended the Parent Gym, but that family life has become calmer and easier too.

Once Samantha has completed her degree and her youngest son (Deacon, one) is at school, she hopes to volunteer as a coach for Parent Gym.

Do you think initiatives like Parent Gym can help people be better parents?

To read the full story click here.
 

Claudia Megele, associate lecturer in applied social work practice at the Open University recently contributed a chapter to a book entitled "Motherhood Online".

Below is the introduction to the chapter. Claudia's discussion and interpretation of the piece can be read at www.academia.edu.

The pupils of the first grade were discussing a photo of a family. In the picture, the hair of the youngest boy was of a different color than that of the rest of family. One of the boys in the class thought that the boy was adopted, to which a girl from the class said: „I know everything about adoption because I am adopted.. „What does adoption mean then?. the boy asked. „It means., the girl answered, „that a child does not grow in the mother.s belly but in her heart..” (translation from an online guestbook of a Finnish adoption website)

Extract from chapter 14, Cyber-Communities and motherhood online: a reflection on transnational adoption. Peter Buzzi and Claudia Megele.
 

The Bailey Review on the sexualisation of children is concerned with reinforcing cultural norms, not challenging them, says Meg Barker.

On Monday 6 June the UK government published Letting Children be Children,  an 'independent review of the commercialisation and sexualisation of childhood' put together by Reg Bailey, the Chief Executive of the Christian charity, the Mother's Union.

The review aimed to bring together previous reports on this topic (notably: Buckingham et al., 2009;  Papadopolous, 2010 and Byron, 2008 and 2010) to come up with a set of recommendations. These recommendations include, for example, making sure that magazine covers with sexualised images are not easily seen by children, bringing in an age rating for music videos, and making it easier for parents to block internet material.

The review definitely falls down on the 'anti' side of sexualisation debates (see my previous blog here  for more about the different positions on this subject). It is not possible in such a brief post to point to all that is problematic about the Bailey review. For example, it does not define what it means by sexualisation (despite acknowledging that it is highly subjective), it prioritises 'common sense' over long-term research findings, and it is quite misleading in its use of statistics (if 40 per cent of parents have seen something 'inappropriate' that means that the majority have not, and why recommend changes in relation to the watershed if 72 per cent of parents feel that the current regulation of television is about right?)

Here I want to focus on something which jumped out at me from the review: namely the different treatment of parental concerns about the sexualisation of clothes aimed at children, and about the gender stereotyping in such products.

The review states that 'sexualised and gender-stereotyped clothing, products and services for children are the biggest areas of concern for parents'. Parents were concerned about sexualisation, particularly in relation to clothes sold to children which were felt to be inappropriate for their age – like 'bras (padded or not), bikinis, short skirts, high-heeled shoes, garments with suggestive slogans, or the use of fabrics and designs that have connotations of adult sexuality' such as lace and animal prints. Parents were also concerned about gender-stereotyped clothes (division into pink or blue clothing, ultra-feminine clothes for girls and army or sports clothes for boys, and make-up and accessories just aimed at girls).

'there is clearer evidence for the negative impact of gender stereotyping than for sexualisation'

What is very telling is the response which the review makes to these two issues. The concern about the sexualisation of clothes results in on of the key recommendations of the review: that retailers should come up with a code of good practice regarding retailing to children which they all adhere to, which – Bailey suggests – should involve avoiding selling 'scaled down' sexualised adult clothing and clothing with sexual slogans. One of the main themes at the start of the review argues that retail needs to be 'explicitly and systematically family friendly, from design and buying through to display and marketing'.

However, in relation to gender stereotyping, the review concludes that there is 'no strong evidence that gender stereotyping in marketing or products influences children’s behaviour'. It argues 'that the relationship between gender and consumer culture is more complex' and that the marketing of pink products for girls could have a positive impact (e.g. getting them interested in science if it was marketed in pink packaging and related to beauty/pampering). The review states that gender preferences are strongly biologically driven and part of 'normal, healthy development of gender identity'. There are no recommendations made regarding gender stereotyping of products, rather it is accepted that this will continue as long as there is consumer demand.

I think that this example reveals serious problems which run through this review. First, given that the review claims to prioritise the 'common sense' of parents over research, why does it take parent's 'common sense' about sexualisation seriously, whilst dismissing their 'common sense' about gender stereotyping?

Secondly, when I look at the research in these areas, I would conclude that there is – if anything – clearer evidence for the negative impact of gender stereotyping than there is for the negative impact of sexualisation. Cordelia Fine's recent book, Delusions of Gender, for example, summarises a wealth of evidence that gender stereotyping (suggesting that one gender is less good a particularly activity, for example, or that they are more likely to be interested in a certain field) impacts on our cognitive abilities, confidence and many other aspects, and that neurological differences between the genders often result from exposure to such stereotypes.

Beyond that, there can be little question that the narrow definitions of femininity and masculinity expressed in stereotyped clothes and other products make life a misery for the many children who do not neatly fit in these boxes, who often suffer from bullying and alienation.  On the other hand, much of the research on sexualisation of children has failed to find many of the kind of products  which Bailey's review refers to, and there is no clear evidence yet that such products have a negative impact. In fact recent studies of suggest responsible and thoughtful sexual behaviour  amongst young people. Particularly there is a dearth of evidence so far on how young people themselves make sense of these products.

This suggests, to me, that the Bailey review is more concerned with bolstering current cultural norms than it is with either what the evidence has to say, or even what parents and young people think themselves. The current norms are that sexual behaviour amongst young people is inherently problematic (hence the desire to clamp down on anything that might encourage it), and that people should adhere to rigid gender roles (hence the lack of any problem with gender stereotyped products). I think that we need to think critically about both of these conclusions.

Find out more:

• The Bailey review itself can be found here
• Clips of Bailey summarising the review can be found here  and here
• The Radio 4 report on the topic is towards the end of this news segment http://"htt
• A very helpful overview here
• There are other articles on these issues here,  here and here
• For more on these topics in general see the Onscenity Network website which includes a collection of blog posts on sexualisation

In an expert panel response to a question on how to gain parental responsibility, Claudia Megele, associate lecturer in applied social work practice at the Open University, gives her views below. Read the full article and responses: Children & Young People now.

THE SITUATION

Twelve-year-old Chris and 10-year-old Karen are currently living with their maternal uncle Martin after their birth parents divorced.

Although there are no restrictions in place, the children's birth father has not attempted contact for almost four years.

The children's birth mother has mental health issues and has been unable to look after them for nearly two years. Martin has been the sole carer for the children during this time.

Martin is now keen to take on parental responsibility for the children and believes they are happy living with him and that it would be best to give them stability both at school and for their general wellbeing.

Martin says he wants the children to have a positive relationship with their mother but both the mother and he believe the children would be better off remaining with their maternal uncle for the foreseeable future.

What would you do?

Claudia Megele says:

"Martin may seek a residency order, a special guardianship or an adoption order. However, an assessment should be carried out to determine the best interest of the children and the way forward.

The children must be the focus of this process, to ensure their preferences and best interest are met. Hence, when seeking their opinions, the social worker should explore the meaning of adoption or special guardianship, as need be, in an age appropriate manner with them.

Assuming the mother does not lack mental capacity, her consent and opinions should be sought and considered. The social worker must ensure that the mother is fully aware of the possible outcomes of this process and their consequences. The mother is particularly vulnerable and may need an advocate.

"The court will seek a social work assessment and in this process the children’s birth father will be contacted. If the father has parental responsibility and disagrees with Martin’s intentions, it can complicate the situation. This can lead to friction and problems between the parents which can affect the children quite negatively. Therefore, it is important to exercise caution and ensure that there is appropriate emotional support in place for both the children and their family.
The father may also decide to re-establish contact with the children and this can raise new positive or negative risks and emotional elements."

Claudia Megele is an author, social worker and psychotherapist. She is also an Associate Lecturer at the Open University.
 

A free app to help parents teach their children to read has been developed by child psychologists and education specialists at the Open University.

The Our Story app takes advantage of the functionality available on the iPhone, iPad or iPod. It lets parents create their own personalised story books for their children, incorporating pictures, sound, text and speech.

The app incorporates research findings and theory to provide the experiences known to develop the abilities and motivation for reading.

“Research has indicated that building a story based on a child’s own life has been proven to increase their confidence and social skills," says Professor David Messer, head of the team which created the app. "What Our Story does is build on this to produce an app that provides an easy-to-use means for parents to take their own photos and ideas and create personalised story books and games for their children.

"This use of familiar pictures and scenarios helps children to relate to the content and thus become more engaged in learning. Not only does this provide a foundation in reading for children, but it means parents can really take part in creative storytelling activities.

"In fact, some of the most famous children’s books were initially written by authors for their own children.”

The app is suitable for children from one year upwards and is free to download from Apple's App store. If you have positive comments – please add a review on the App Store.

Click here to see a video of Our Story.

The app was developed by David Messer, Professor of Education in the Centre for Childhood, Development and Learning ,  Natalia Kucirkova, research student in  CREET, (Centre for Research in Education and Technology) and Dr. Denise Whitelock, senior lecturer in IET (the Institute of Educational Technology), with KMi (Knowledge Media Institute).

 

Useful Links

Full news story

 

A consultation has been launched to look into plans to increase the amount of leave for new parents in England, Scotland and Wales.

Business Secretary Vincent Cable has proposed to extend parental leave by four weeks and to enable both the mother and father to split the leave between them in a number of blocks. Currently mothers may take 52 weeks, some of which can be shared by fathers, who can take two weeks themselves.

The scheme - if successful - could begin in 2015.

To read the full story click here. 

Mothers from across England have handed Downing Street a 50,000-name petition against the proposed cuts to Sure Start Children's Centres. 

See the full story here.

As a parent are you concerned about these proposed cuts? I used the Sure Start Centres an awful lot during my maternity leave after the birth of my first child and found the support and friendship there invaluable. Have you used them and will you miss it if your local centre goes?

Maxine (member of the Platform team)

A simpler and less bureaucratic method of assessing young children's development is to be introduced.

The Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) currently has 69 learning goals - or benchmarks - for young children to be measured against but this will be reduced to 17 basics under the new system. The EYFS has been in place since 2008 and sets out learning and welfare targets for childcare providers. 

For more on this story click here.