These boxes were first used in Finland 82 years ago as part of a major focus on reducing mortality among very young children. It's not the content that matters (probably smaller sample sizes of commercial baby products) so much as the box itself: it gives families a safe, small sleeping place for new babies. In the olden days, of course, new babies slept in a large drawer when they first came home. Same idea. And it is offered, as I've said, as part of a major focus on child welfare. Pregnancy checks, midwife support, baby clinics - all these will continue.
So you might think this baby box ideasounds generous, not terribly expensive and worth a try.
But the idea of baby boxes has caused some amazing reactions: it has been dismissed as a 'stunt' by opposition politicians and by the press and social media. A professor says 80% of new babies don't need this support. I personally am 97.75% sure the professor's figure is bogus - he just came up with it too fast for it to be based on research - or fact, as I like to call it. But it doesn't matter if the figure is 80% or 90% or 40% or 60%. Unless the professor has a way to identify the 20% of babies who will benefit, it will cost a helluva lot more to distribute than the £6m a year currently estimated.
Anyway, the prof has missed the essential point. If baby boxes are a universal benefit, they will reach all new mothers, not just the ones who can afford to buy a box (£35 online, by the way). It's also an extra, so it won't replace current antenatal or postnatal care in any way. I know we're out of the way of getting extras these days from government. We seem to be better at taking things off people. In the grand scheme of the Scottish budget, the £6m cost is chickenfeed. It costs more than that to send out MPs to Westminster. And that is fact - check it with the expenses pages of the UK parliament.
Just, in passing and on this very theme of taking things off people: my nephew tells me Glasgow University no longer has student course advisers. They have a generic advisory team. In his experience, that means the person you're talking to about your course knows nothing about it and can't answer your questions, but they promise they'll find out and get back to you. And then they don't. Funnily enough, that has been my experience with the NHS's generic teams: discussing your depression with an occupational therapist may not have the best outcome for you, although it will let the generic team tick a wee box on a form.
Anyhow, I digress. I am not an SNP supporter (and I am getting pissed off with SNP supporters telling me how to vote next month). One of the big claims about the SNP is that they don't have policies. Well, here's a policy they do have: making sure all children have a good start in life. So far they have proposed the 'named person' scheme, given free school lunches to all P1 and P2 pupils and now baby boxes. All worth exploring, in my opinion, and all totally rubbished by other political parties (though not the Greens) and by the media. The 'named person' is derided as a 'state guardian' and a snoopers' charter, mostly by people who haven't bothered to read the documentation. You would think free school meals for very young children would be a good idea but no, according to some experts 'most' parents don't need a free meal for their kids. They can afford to pay.
There is a wider philosophical point to the SNP government's measures to promote the well-being of young children: anyone who has worked in education will tell you that the most important years are those before the child is 10. That's when the foundations for a good education are laid. Mastery of reading, writing and maths is won or lost in these years. Socialisation takes place in those years - or not at all. It's also the time when parents are most enthusiastic and hopeful about their children's life chances and most likely to be supportive of their education and most willing to be involved.
Maybe £6m a year in baby boxes is an investment worth making.
No comments:
Post a Comment