Giving children a voice
It's a shocking headline: British children have, apparently, a worse childhood than those in 20 other developed countries, .
And, though you can nitpick about certain details, the detailed findings seem to support the headline. Unicef studied at , and at every stage - whether objective statistics or children's subjective views - Britain came out poorly.
Why? That's got to be the main question occupying policy-makers, journalists and analysts. Many people will be suggesting solutions, but one thing is sure: many of those doing the commentating (myself included) will be writing and speaking from comfortable middle class homes and well-paid secure jobs.
In my spare time I am involved in a voluntary group which has given me some insight into these difficult lives. But I'm still not really exposed to the true scale of poverty, conflict, break-up, abuse, deprivation, lack of expectation, lack of education, lack of support, peer pressure, parental pressure, educational pressure, discontent and dissatisfaction that affects millions of children in Britain.
We got a taste of that last year on Newsround when we talked to children living in deep poverty and made a series of animations about their lives. It's been a privilege to see reappear this week - they tell a powerful story.
But more than that, we believe that on Newsround we have a crucial role in giving children aged six to 12 a voice. One of the problems with today's report is that it will prompt yet more hand-wringing by parents, legislators, journalists and educators. This is definitely part of the problem: the pressure being put on children today. They feel miserable about their lives because they think they aren't wanted, valued and or doing anything right. There's an amazing good-news story about improving exam results, for instance, and yet every summer it's knocked down as "exams getting easier" and woolly coursework. What do children have to do to be liked and respected by adults?
We are working on more ways to allow children to give their side of the story. You can read our to get an insight into what some of our children think. We are supporting the Children's Society, which has launched a to allow children to feed their thoughts into the Good Childhood inquiry. We are thinking of child-friendly ways to allow children to contribute, on their terms, and not just as punchbags in an adult arena.
This is something I care about deeply. Your take on this would be fascinating.
Comments
Its becuase in the UK we have become so politically correct we put the 'rights' on individuals over the rights of children.
Through our legislation we ecourage the breakdown of the family unit and single mothers to never make anything of themselves and we allow homosexuals to adopt.
What do you expect?
On the website link provided in the main story the kids' talk about bullying and fear campaigns - those awful things that have dominated our lives since 2001. It should come as no surprise that families are suffering - I think it's an unnatural way for us to live. I believe things might be starting to turn around though - I think people are starting to see through the smoke - fingers crossed.
Does everything that goes wrong over here get blamed on political correctness?
As for the survey - there was a lot of rubbish. How about the number of parents from the ages of 16-19. Why can't a girl have a kid at 19? If she's in a relationship?
We came in at 21, but the US was ranked 20th, below Poland and Austria.
Where would you rather have your kids grow up - Austria or the US?
I am English but have been living in The Netherlands for 5 years. I can say that the children in Holland that I have come across are rude, disrespectful of their elders and allowed too much free range in pubs, restaurants etc. Of course they are probably much happier - but they are treated as little gods - from what I have been able to observe and get away with everything. One glaring example is when my 65 year old mother came to visit we went to a cafe. 2 kids barged her out of the way on their way to the toilet - literally pushing her aside and off balance and they did not even look back. Likewise there was no apology from the parents who were standing nearby - mnuch to our disgust. So - kids may well have a better quality of life - but they seem to have no boundaries and that will not necessarily make them better people as they grow up - (Dutch adults are also rather selfish - people rarely let you in in traffic and being pushed aside in supermarkets without a by your leave is a common occurence! I am now pregnant myself and would rather bring my child up in the UK and hope to move back within a couple of years in order to do this.
Sam, I am a homosexual and quite capable of bringing up a child just as well - if not better - than you.
To quote Catherine Tate: "|Me dear?How very, very dare you!"
I feel sorry for your kids if you bring them up to be prejudiced and bigoted like you.
Click on my name to read an Oxford/Cambridge University study that absolute proves that gays make just as good - and usually better -parents than heterosexuals.
I'm very glad that I'm not a kid today.
Although the last nasty experience I had of a rude child was when I was at school 20 yrs ago, I've somehow become wary of even walking past a group of teens that are simply larking about.
My attitude has been entirely shaped by the media reports, and the general undisciplined behaviour I see in many youngsters.
I can only assume that their parents don't know what to do, have no one to ask who does either and we've created a generation who are being set up to fail. Such a waste.
Four children were asked their views on the news at 1pm today - not one was white, was this deliberate,does the problem only occur in the ethnic minorities , or could you not find any indigenous offspring?
With the release of the UNICEF-based table - something more concrete has quantified the rift between expectation of UK generations. It appears that our Next Generation is as alien as anything Star Trek ever dreamt up!
But is part of the problem the IT revolution? Kids can see everything - in as much detail - as the most news-hungry adult. But what can they do with the news? They have no executive or electoral rights. Surely, if the reasoning is that our children should experience all there is in the world, then maybe the age of consent and every other age-ist restriction should be similarly abandoned! That would be ridiculous and very damaging, but encouragement of unrestricted access to everything that shows the world to be a hostile and illegal and unregulated environment will do nothing to foster positive humanitarian values in our next generation.
Educating our kids in the ills of the world will not empower them to bring about change! 'No Action without Responsibility: No Responsibility without Authority' as the 80s management tutorials expounded.
Should children have a Voice? Only if they have an Audience! - an audience that will assume responsibility to bring about improvement to a damning state of affairs in the international scheme! If there is no mechanism in the offing to include kids in the decision-making, then what would the point of them having a greater 'voice' be?
It's an interesting report but if you look into the details it's clearly biased in favor of socialist countries. For example one of the main measures of material well-being is children living in relative poverty - defined as below 50% of the median *national* income. Clearly this is a measure that favors poor socialist countries and gives little insight into the absolute level of material well-being. Using this measure India is most likely better off than the USA - how ridiculous!!
Other areas that are (IMO) not covered well are education that only looks at children up to the age of 19 and ignores higher education.
One more ´óÏó´«Ã½ invented issue to bash the UK and US societies and governments. During the week of the farce ´óÏó´«Ã½ dedicated to children, someone suggested that children be allowed to vote. Guess what they'd vote for? Everything for themselves and nothing for anyone else and this rubbish report would be perfect fodder for their cause. Perhaps if they could also apply for emigration visas on their own, they'd all prefer to move to the Netherlands. Now there's a pleasant thought. Many of their parent's would probably be only to happy to buy them a ticket...one way.
It's fascinating to see a debate on this issue however despite watching Newsnight, reading the newspapers, reading websites like this and columns from Newsround editors, I am yet to hear a single child's or teenager's voice. Maybe that's part of the problem.
I agree with PeeVeeAh. Children are subjected to the bad news they see every day (in the media mainly) but feel powerless to do anything about it. The stress that this must create in children can only be addressed by either i) shielding them from bad news, or ii) giving them the power (a voice is the ´óÏó´«Ã½â€™s answer) to attempt to put it right.
This is a hard one to deal with. What I am certain about is that it is not the ´óÏó´«Ã½â€™s job to solve this by dealing with the children directly. What they should concentrate on is putting right the reasons why children are so scared in the first place. Much (but not all) of the responsibility for this bounces straight back to them.
The trouble with news is that it generally reports exceptional events. This gives us an upside view on the world. Thus fatal car accidents – all too common – are given little coverage, yet aeroplane crashes – very rare – are extensively covered. This results in people being more scared in an aeroplane than they are in a car which is statistically illogical.
The same goes for serious crime. It is very rare and so the media reports extensively about it. In effect, the safer our society becomes, the more afraid of crime we will be. I could go further (and I know many won’t agree with this): I contend that our politicians on the whole are honest, good people. It is because of this fact that there is an opposite perception.
So, back to children.
The internet is a problem with no easy solution. The difference here though is (generally) children can choose what they consume. At least here distressing pictures and distressing news stories don’t just appear in front of them from nowhere as they do on tv (although I know this can’t be guaranteed). At least some things can be done e.g. (i) the tv companies could be subject to similar controls on the news before the watershed as they are with other tv shows; (ii) there could be an attempt by journalists to put disasters and crimes into some statistical context. I know the ´óÏó´«Ã½ and others have tried to do this in recent times, but perhaps they should try different formulas; (iii) there should be more good news: well I mean, it’s all around us. For example, when crime figures are issued, why not feature the region with the lowest crime figures? How did they do it? Surely people would find this interesting? What about the region with the lowest unemployment? etc
The irony, especially with regards to children, is that the vast majority rarely experience serious crime happening to them. If we had no media, then they would be none the wiser. Most of the bad things happen on the telly. By bringing it into the homes of innocent children, they are being burdened with something that, by rights, they should not be made to deal with. Bullying is another matter, of course. Bullies are particularly nasty and they have always been with us. If someone could find a way around that one then please let us all know.
I fear that the more the ´óÏó´«Ã½ and others draw children into a dialogue, where they are expected to contribute their thoughts and ideas presumably, the further away they are from their homes, their locale, the real world they occupy. I mean, what are they doing in the world of bad news stories in the first place? What happens outside of their home, their street and their immediate neighbourhood is perhaps best left to the future, when they are old enough (and, as PeeVeeAh suggests) powerful enough, to deal with it. For now, although it is impossible to seal them off completely from every nasty thing out there, the media, and the ´óÏó´«Ã½ in particular - with its 50% share in mainstream broadcasting and its public service obligations – should do as much as possible to accentuate the positive and stop trying to layer more responsibilities onto children.
We spent too many years under a Tory government that thought that "there is no such thing as society".
It takes a long time to buy back the children's playing fields: still longer to recover from that kind of mindset.
Trevor #5
That entirely depends on your point of view. If you think its ok to bring a child up with no heterosexual father figure then thats all well and good but who the hell do you think you are making that decision on a childs behalf who is afterall the product of a heterosexual relationship.
Of course it is true to say a single parent family is also harmful.
But as a homosexual you made the decision to not have children by engaging in a activity where it is impossible to conceive. You made your bed lie in it and stop trying to impose your deviant behaviour on children.
As for my children i have none but i work in a school and have seen the harm such 'families' create. You can do all the so called 'studies' you like it doesn't make them true.
With people like you forcing your agenda in innocent children its no wonder so many boys have no sense of identity or masculinity.
If you think that Newsnight should give children between 6 and 12 a voice may I ask how many children of this age are actually going to watch Newsnight, and also how many children of this age actually are still awake at the time you broadcast?.
Also, and to my mind more important, how are you going to ensure unbiased reporting?, you fail to manage it for the rest of the ´óÏó´«Ã½ programmes, I for one would not want my child being exposed to your left wing, PC, anti-marriage and anti-Catholic views.
"Everything for themselves and nothing for anyone else"
No different from adults then
The media is fuelling a lot of the problems for today's children. If they are in a single parent family for instance, they read and hear that they are disadvantaged, can't be brought up correctly and must have all sorts of problems. Children from 2 parent families can use this to bully them and see them as "different". This very negative message to them can have devastating effects. They can start to believe it and can completely alter their views on their lives. All we (including the children) hear all the negative things. The news is filled with distressing stories. Young people are getting such a bad name. We all need more positive happy stories in the media. Not having a great deal of money does not mean the children suffer. I am a single parent of 4 and have been for 15 years. It has been very hard work and very rewarding, the best time of my life. What has happened to the good old fashioned picnics, walks in the country, through the woods, playing with a ball in the park etc., getting in touch with nature. Good quality time with young people. Forget the expensive outings and get back to having good old fashioned fun! You don't need lots of money to raise well balanced educated young people, nor do they have to have 2 parents. One of my daughters is studying science and has had lots of school prizes and has been deputy head girl. The other 3 are doing very well also. Reading children from single parent families suffer as a single parent can cause all sorts of unnecessary worries, fears and a great deal of stress and anxiety. Relax, love them and care for them it can all work out really well. Unfortunately today's world has become so materialistic and everybody must be placed in some sort of pigeon hole!
"But more than that, we believe that on Newsround we have a crucial role in giving children aged six to 12 a voice."
That's part of the problem. Everyone ignores those between 13 and 17. For example they get no leisure centres while the little children get everything handed to them on a plate. It's blatant ageism. And no, little children are NOT cute.
john ( post 7 ), could you look up the meaning of 'indigenous' in a dictionary please?
I am 15 years of age and think that people in the UK are very stereotypical of us teenagers. I think we do not get the respect we deserve and the bad behaviour of the British youth is shown all over the media. We get a bad name and the elderly think we lack respect, class and manners. Me and my friends don't go looking for trouble and are well behaved on streets but I don't think some of us get the respect we deserve. The elderly walk past ready as if we're going to pull a knife out on them. That isn't true, even the "chavs" wouldn't do that sort of stuff unless their after money (very rare you will be a target) or simply provoked.
As with any report, let's consider the source and see is there likely to be any bias - however respected Unicef is, did anyone expect any other conclusion to such a report from them?
And ´óÏó´«Ã½, please stop sensationalising headlines with a comment to draw attention, then the disclaimer "...so says such and such a report." Give us the facts of the report and some analysis "A report issued today by so and so has concluded that..."
I think far too much of Auntie than that sort of rascal behaviour.
I am 19 - I work with childen and am at uni. Young people know that the people controlling their lives have no idea what those lives are like.
Children have no freedom and few outlets for the frustration this causes.
Ask British children if they think that they are poor, they do not. If they were listened to more then maybe things would improve
Two problems are the ultra-sensationalism and the lack of realism kids see on TV. If they honestly believe there's a murderer or some other kind of criminal on every street (which there is not, even in the roughest neighbourhoods), they're going to assume their lives are in constant danger. If they believe other children are living in far, far better circumstances than they are (which is a reasonable assumption given the bizarrely and ridiculously over-the-top view of family life shown on most situation comedies), they're going to feel left out and poor even if they aren't.
It also doesn't help when the right-wingers (whose view of the past is obscured by the rose-coloured glasses they always wear when looking back) tell kids they're disadvantaged or even inferior because they're not white, middle-class, and living in a home with precisely one father and one mother. Conservatives do so much harm by not acknowledging that for the overwhelming majority of people, the past was far worse - less to eat, worse housing, less to do, even more crime.
I live in Wales since 4 years ago and in my own opinion british children are the most well-behaved children in Europe. In the Netherlands or Spain, children get everything they want and that's not good (not good for the parents and terrible for the children). I attended a baptism in Rotherdam and children were screaming, jumping and making fun of others the whole ceremony... it was very disturbing. Their parents looked at them and laughed. I don't think these children can be happy. Children who don't have self-control are children who dont get much attention in home and who need to scream to get it.
British children are the only well raised children in europe!