Does having kids affect the option of commuting

Stuey01

DDD, is this your round about way of telling us that you are expecting the pitter patter of tiny feet?

lost_in_thought

Stuey01 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

Yep, Wandsworth is pretty famous for its low rates/council tax.

However, they can be pretty militant on parking fines etc, keep the £ coming in taking advantage of people's inability to park legally.

To be fair it is pretty easy to avoid getting parking fines, just park legally. I'll take the lower council tax and just park where/when I'm allowed to.

That was rather my point...

cjcp

@DDD - if you're thinking of Kingston, it's a lovely area, but you should know that council tax is either the highest or one of the highest in London. Also, competition for school places from 2-3yrs onwards is fierce - the local council (Cappuccino Liberals, some would say) has royally ballsed-up their strategy for ensuring that there would be enough places for kids. Somehow, they also forgot that kids need to continue going to school from 11 yrs, so they are now desperately working on a plan to get a Comp in place. I know a lot of people who attend church to get their kids into taxpayer-funded (grrrr...) faith schools, and who find out that they've wasted all those Sunday mornings because they don't get in anyway.

lost_in_thought

cjcp wrote:

... competition for school places from 2-3yrs onwards is fierce ...

:shock:

This has just come to my attention in another thread - school? At 2-3? Is this normal? Do you mean daycare or a creche or something?

Headhuunter

Another vote for SE London, there are very few CPZs. In Brockley anyone can park wherever they want whenever they want, no resident only passes, vicitor passes, yearly fees etc. You just pull up and park and leave when you want...

cjcp

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

... competition for school places from 2-3yrs onwards is fierce ...

:shock:

This has just come to my attention in another thread - school? At 2-3? Is this normal? Do you mean daycare or a creche or something?

Nope, I mean nursery, then reception, then school. Kingston's densely populated. Mostly by kids, it seems. People seem to breed like rabbits around my way.

bigmat

Do they have decent schools in S E London? We're moving out that way, but a bit further out to Beckenham. Had to take school catchment areas into account for the first time, makes things a lot more complicated but we seem to be getting there at long last.

(OT if anybody has a good commute route from Beckenham to the City, I'd be interested to hear about it!)

lost_in_thought

cjcp wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

... competition for school places from 2-3yrs onwards is fierce ...

:shock:

This has just come to my attention in another thread - school? At 2-3? Is this normal? Do you mean daycare or a creche or something?

Nope, I mean nursery, then reception, then school. Kingston's densely populated. Mostly by kids, it seems. People seem to breed like rabbits around my way.

Must be something in the water!

I'm amazed by that, it's so young! Massively OT, I know, but why do they start at such a young age? Is it because of parents having to go back to work? My brother started at age 5, and I started at very-nearly-7, hence my surprise. I kind of thought 5 was normal...

prawny

cjcp wrote:

JonGinge wrote:

Going OT. Prawny, 2nd place at MSR on saturday was not a bad result. Congrats.

Bingo!

You reckon? I'd have won if I hadn't been daydreaming about schoogirls and ching :x

blu3cat

DDD

Having kids hasn't affected my commuting, although it can be harder after a disturbed nights to get yourself on the bike and go in the mornings. It does change everything else as has been said before (including option of getting on bike forums as you are looking after the little one(s) at home, and work takes longer due to the lack of sleep). if you wait till you're completely ready, you may wait forever, hell with blu3kitten it feels like a rollercoaster and that's part of the fun.


Cheaper places then Wimbledon in SW London, Morden, Colliers Wood, Southfields??

Stuey01

lost_in_thought wrote:

I started at very-nearly-7, hence my surprise.

:shock:

I kind of thought 5 was normal...

This is what I thought also 4-5y/o.

tomb353

I guess key bits of advice for someone at your stage would be to get somewhere where you are certain to get the kid(s) into a decent primary school. This seems years away now but in practice you will regret it if you have to move again in 2/3 years time because you discover that you are 200 yards too far away from the school gates (not joking here, it can come down to less than that). Secondly assume that you will be the only breadwinner for the next 6/7 years (or that you will househusband or you will both work parttime, financially same difference); I know that the current fasion is to farm your kids off from the age of 3 months into institutions but do not arrange your life so that you "have" to do this; bringing your kids up yourself involves big financial sacrifices, odds are your own parents did this so don't pretend that its not the right thing to do. Even when your kids are primary school age it can still involve a lot of juggling to run life with more than one parent working, helps to live near extended family.

The big impact on cycle commmuting that kids can have is that your routines can come to involve far more than just get up, go to work. This year I have a couple of days when I cycle to work at 7:30am, then tube to my wife's work, collect my son and drive him to school in our car (!!). Now the weather is picking up I will see if I can talk him into trying an 8 mile tagalong ride again, but this is a lot for a 6 year old B4 school. From next year thank gad both the kids will be at the same school again near home and i'll be able to cycle with them to breakfast club and then cycle straight to work getting there on time (there will be days when the eldest temper tantrums and dumps her bike by the side of the road, but ho hum life is never easy). To be able to be part of your kids daily routine and drop them at school or pick them up, and manage to cycle to work as well is the dream scenario but it isn't always easy to achieve a setup like this.

greg66_tri_v2.0

cjcp wrote:

who find out that they've wasted all those Sunday mornings because they don't get in anyway.

I'm not hearing much Ned Flanders in that!

lost_in_thought

Stuey01 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

I started at very-nearly-7, hence my surprise.

:shock:

I kind of thought 5 was normal...

This is what I thought also 4-5y/o.

Glad it's not just me!

And yes, I know I started late, but it didn't hold me back at all. There were a few good reasons for it.

greg66_tri_v2.0

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

... competition for school places from 2-3yrs onwards is fierce ...

:shock:

This has just come to my attention in another thread - school? At 2-3? Is this normal? Do you mean daycare or a creche or something?

Nope, I mean nursery, then reception, then school. Kingston's densely populated. Mostly by kids, it seems. People seem to breed like rabbits around my way.

Must be something in the water!

I'm amazed by that, it's so young! Massively OT, I know, but why do they start at such a young age? Is it because of parents having to go back to work? My brother started at age 5, and I started at very-nearly-7, hence my surprise. I kind of thought 5 was normal...

It's a result of the pressure to get where you want to be at 5. Schools recognise that there is a big push to get kids in at 5. So they offer a smaller reception class at 4. Get into reception, and your chances of staying on at five increase [sic; not "are certain"].

Then reception becomes the "must get into" year. So schools open a nursery year at 3. And so it goes on...

What I find interesting is the recent change in demographic of the parents at the junior end of our kids local state primary. In the last year the reception class intake has been of kids who I would have said in better economic times would have been sent to fee paying prep & pre-prep schools. The new influx of parents is already barraging the PTA with demands for music classes, and French classes, and Latin classes, without really appreciating that the money for these things just isn't there in a state school unless the parents (who in this case are asking and not digging) dig deep into their own pockets.

And, of course, these same parents will pull their kids out in a heartbeat when the economic good times return, and they can afford school fees again. State school teachers *love* that. Not.

cjcp

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

... competition for school places from 2-3yrs onwards is fierce ...

:shock:

This has just come to my attention in another thread - school? At 2-3? Is this normal? Do you mean daycare or a creche or something?

Nope, I mean nursery, then reception, then school. Kingston's densely populated. Mostly by kids, it seems. People seem to breed like rabbits around my way.

Must be something in the water!

I'm amazed by that, it's so young! Massively OT, I know, but why do they start at such a young age? Is it because of parents having to go back to work? My brother started at age 5, and I started at very-nearly-7, hence my surprise. I kind of thought 5 was normal...

It's a result of the pressure to get where you want to be at 5. Schools recognise that there is a big push to get kids in at 5. So they offer a smaller reception class at 4. Get into reception, and your chances of staying on at five increase [sic; not "are certain"].

Then reception becomes the "must get into" year. So schools open a nursery year at 3. And so it goes on...

+1.

Yours,

Not Ned.

cuthbertrogergaylord

pastryboy wrote:

You won't necessarily be sleep deprived. A lot of babies sleep right through the night from birth - my little girl has done for the most part.

:x :x :x

blu3cat

cuthbertrogergaylord wrote:

pastryboy wrote:

You won't necessarily be sleep deprived. A lot of babies sleep right through the night from birth - my little girl has done for the most part.

:x :x :x

Ah, but I bet that there is something else that spices up the whole parenting thing. Blu3kitten sleeps a lot of the night in large chunks (not all the way through mind), but she is very vomitous, swings and roundabouts (and plenty of muslin squares).

Why do they always wait till you are just giving them that goodbye hug, and dressed in black from head to foot before trying to recreate the vomitting scene from the Exorcist for you?

Cafewanda

Regard it as a 'goodbye Daddy' kiss

secretsam

Headhuunter wrote:

The only thing I would say is that if you like to live on the doorstep of fab bars and restaurants you won't find this.

As a parent, I found that to be a major consideration in where I chose to raise my children. Way more important than decent schools, safe streets and affordable, good quality housing.

DonDaddyD

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

... competition for school places from 2-3yrs onwards is fierce ...

:shock:

This has just come to my attention in another thread - school? At 2-3? Is this normal? Do you mean daycare or a creche or something?

Nope, I mean nursery, then reception, then school. Kingston's densely populated. Mostly by kids, it seems. People seem to breed like rabbits around my way.

Must be something in the water!

I'm amazed by that, it's so young! Massively OT, I know, but why do they start at such a young age? Is it because of parents having to go back to work? My brother started at age 5, and I started at very-nearly-7, hence my surprise. I kind of thought 5 was normal...

It's a result of the pressure to get where you want to be at 5. Schools recognise that there is a big push to get kids in at 5. So they offer a smaller reception class at 4. Get into reception, and your chances of staying on at five increase [sic; not "are certain"].

Then reception becomes the "must get into" year. So schools open a nursery year at 3. And so it goes on...

What I find interesting is the recent change in demographic of the parents at the junior end of our kids local state primary. In the last year the reception class intake has been of kids who I would have said in better economic times would have been sent to fee paying prep & pre-prep schools. The new influx of parents is already barraging the PTA with demands for music classes, and French classes, and Latin classes, without really appreciating that the money for these things just isn't there in a state school unless the parents (who in this case are asking and not digging) dig deep into their own pockets.

And, of course, these same parents will pull their kids out in a heartbeat when the economic good times return, and they can afford school fees again. State school teachers *love* that. Not.

I would have thought that the miniGreg66's would have gone to private school. Next you'll be telling me they get public transport, heavens...

Schools is another thing I have to factor. I need to sit Ms DDD down and explain to her my reservations about sending our kids to state schools (specifically in London, I don't want gangsters who listen to and live "grime"). But then I wouldn't want them feeling isolated by going to a posh school (or one in the sticks and somewhat detatched from culture, diversity and my real world stuff)...

Its a fine balance.

greg66_tri_v2.0

DonDaddyD wrote:

I would have thought that the miniGreg66's would have gone to private school.

For primary, if you can get them into a good state primary (of which there are quite a few), why bother? For secondary, it's a whole different story, and and they will be leeching cash out of me.

DonDaddyD wrote:

Next you'll be telling me they get public transport, heavens...

Feck off! They're not bloody pensioners or unemployed, y'know! :evil:

Agent57

My daughter got offered our 3rd choice secondary school. Will probably appeal. Grrr, the school thing is highly annoying.

blu3cat

Am dreading the secondary school thing as well, and obviously want the best for my child. But am in a quandry, by putting your child into a private school are you not "ghetto-ising" London state schools further and underlining the class divide as well. :?

londonlivvy

MatHammond wrote:

Do they have decent schools in S E London? We're moving out that way, but a bit further out to Beckenham. Had to take school catchment areas into account for the first time, makes things a lot more complicated but we seem to be getting there at long last.

(OT if anybody has a good commute route from Beckenham to the City, I'd be interested to hear about it!)

I live in Crystal Palace and that area is pretty much split between Lambeth, Lewisham and Kent. I discovered that the flats on the Kent side of Crystal Palace hill were much more expensive and asked why. I was told that if you live in Kent, your kids can go (I assume they mean your kids can apply to go, but anyway) to Bromley Grammar School, which is far better than the average Lambeth Comp.

This route isn't exactly what you want - it's CP to Soho - but I'd hang a right to go other Southwark bridge and you're nearly there.
http://www.mapmyride.com/ride/united-ki ... 5565277589

bigmat

Cheers Livvy, is that a nice route in then? Ideally want to avoid anywhere too dodgy and have as quick a route in as possible. Would be great if I could be there in time for summer, so I could stop off for racing at Crystal Palace on the way home!

greg66_tri_v2.0

blu3cat wrote:

Am dreading the secondary school thing as well, and obviously want the best for my child. But am in a quandry, by putting your child into a private school are you not "ghetto-ising" London state schools further and underlining the class divide as well. :?

It was often said when we lived in Islington that if all the parents in Islington sent their children to the state schools in Islington, they'd be great.

Underlying this idea seems to be the notion that the children then-currently at those schools would someone be removed altogether from the school system in order to make the necessary space. Never did see how that end of it held up.

blu3cat

Greg66 wrote:

blu3cat wrote:

Am dreading the secondary school thing as well, and obviously want the best for my child. But am in a quandry, by putting your child into a private school are you not "ghetto-ising" London state schools further and underlining the class divide as well. :?

It was often said when we lived in Islington that if all the parents in Islington sent their children to the state schools in Islington, they'd be great.

Underlying this idea seems to be the notion that the children then-currently at those schools would someone be removed altogether from the school system in order to make the necessary space. Never did see how that end of it held up.

But are private schools actually better, or is it that a larger proportion people who send their children to private school have an intrinsic interest in doing the best for their children (that's why they send them), and are more likely to take a choice in the childs devlopment. This will lead to better parenting as they care.

I have known little sh*ts from private schools and well balanced kids from failing London schools which have since been closed.

lost_in_thought

cjcp wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

cjcp wrote:

... competition for school places from 2-3yrs onwards is fierce ...

:shock:

This has just come to my attention in another thread - school? At 2-3? Is this normal? Do you mean daycare or a creche or something?

Nope, I mean nursery, then reception, then school. Kingston's densely populated. Mostly by kids, it seems. People seem to breed like rabbits around my way.

Must be something in the water!

I'm amazed by that, it's so young! Massively OT, I know, but why do they start at such a young age? Is it because of parents having to go back to work? My brother started at age 5, and I started at very-nearly-7, hence my surprise. I kind of thought 5 was normal...

It's a result of the pressure to get where you want to be at 5. Schools recognise that there is a big push to get kids in at 5. So they offer a smaller reception class at 4. Get into reception, and your chances of staying on at five increase [sic; not "are certain"].

Then reception becomes the "must get into" year. So schools open a nursery year at 3. And so it goes on...

+1.

Yours,

Not Ned.

But... but... that's nuts! Complete insanity!

Blimey.

:shock:

I can't believe so much has changed in schools that this is the case outside London,or am I wrong? Makes me doubly sure I need to make good my escape before even contemplating obtaining some children. Is it that bad with independent schools? I hope not.

Also, if we're talking the state system, is it not the case that by everyone trying to get their kids into school #1, schools #2, #3 and #4 suffer, thereby reinforcing the divide? I have to add that I don't know much about state education, so that could be rubbish.

I was surprised to find out that the not-exceptionally-selective boarding school I went to had stopped their 'if you have an older sibling here, you're in' policy...

EDIT: And 'where you want to be at 5'? I wanted to be halfway up a tree or chasing a goat... not under pressure at school. I'm really rather shocked by this!

londonlivvy

MatHammond wrote:

Cheers Livvy, is that a nice route in then? Ideally want to avoid anywhere too dodgy and have as quick a route in as possible. Would be great if I could be there in time for summer, so I could stop off for racing at Crystal Palace on the way home!

I liked it because it was mostly bus free / pretty quiet traffic wise but there are some fiddly bits (particularly round Elephant and Castle) which you might be able to get avoid in order to go faster, especially if you don't mind large roads.

The only dodgy bit is Portland street (but I am a wimp and even I wasn't unduly intimidated).

Racing at Palace eh? Brave man. I felt tired just watching it.