Anonymous wrote:Op, enough already. As a pp posted, even if K started an hour or two earlier, it still wouldn't solve the child care needs of working parents (and I'm one fwiw.) most of us work 8 hours a day at minimum, plus commutes.... The point is that no one is ever going to design a 10-12 hour per day public school system, much less pay for one. So even if the county moved bus schedules around, you'd still be stuck paying for additional care.

I suspect some of the OP's outrage derives from the fact thatlike a lot of us, the OP may have bought into the myth that these things get easier and cheaper once kids hit elementary school. Wrong! (okay, maybe it's a bit easier but there are all kinds of new costs .) Just wait till the OP figures out that summer camps can run into the thousands of dollars for a full summer and that many fill up by the end of January! Another conspiracy!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So apparently every public elementary school in my vicinity begins at 09:15.. I'm actually shocked that this is even allowed considering that 99% of normal jobs begin no later than 9:00. I mean my job is flexible but come one... Its like a scam to get EVERYONE to pay before care. Has anyone made a fuss about this?

I don't see the problem here. Just take your kids to school and DVR the shows you eat bon bons in front of.

????

OP - don't listen to these hate-monger trolls.

I work. I start at 8AM like everybody else in my office, nobody comes in past 9AM, so yes, I totally understand and I really hope I do not live in your school district.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here-

The fact that this has been going on for years is besides the point when A) I'm not from the area and B) This is my first child and C) I know of other school in the county that do not start this late.

Saying its a scam was part of the whole rant but don't take that seriously but it seems to me that it would be easier if the younger kids went earlier since they need supervision and the older kids went later since they don't. Having a five year old got at 915 forces almost every parent to do before and after care whereas a start an hour earlier would not.

Bonbons... I'm the father not at all a housewife. But the whole point of the thread is that if you don't work you can take your kids at anytime. If both parents do you are screwed.

Both myself and my wife work far and start work around 7AM. Either of us could adjust to later hours but not after 0915! School is only 5 minutes away so bus will not help.

That is a choice you make, to both work.

As others have noted, if you're just encountering the schools for the first time, you're going to be in for a shock at just how much they expect from parents during the school day. The schools rightly expect that one parents is home during the day, because that is common.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So apparently every public elementary school in my vicinity begins at 09:15.. I'm actually shocked that this is even allowed considering that 99% of normal jobs begin no later than 9:00. I mean my job is flexible but come one... Its like a scam to get EVERYONE to pay before care. Has anyone made a fuss about this?

I don't see the problem here. Just take your kids to school and DVR the shows you eat bon bons in front of.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here-

The fact that this has been going on for years is besides the point when A) I'm not from the area and B) This is my first child and C) I know of other school in the county that do not start this late.

Saying its a scam was part of the whole rant but don't take that seriously but it seems to me that it would be easier if the younger kids went earlier since they need supervision and the older kids went later since they don't. Having a five year old got at 915 forces almost every parent to do before and after care whereas a start an hour earlier would not.

Bonbons... I'm the father not at all a housewife. But the whole point of the thread is that if you don't work you can take your kids at anytime. If both parents do you are screwed.

Both myself and my wife work far and start work around 7AM. Either of us could adjust to later hours but not after 0915! School is only 5 minutes away so bus will not help.

That is a choice you make, to both work.

As others have noted, if you're just encountering the schools for the first time, you're going to be in for a shock at just how much they expect from parents during the school day. The schools rightly expect that one parents is home during the day, because that is common.

Troll.

I'm not trolling. Most families have a parent home. This is the normal order of things.

Anonymous wrote:Op, enough already. As a pp posted, even if K started an hour or two earlier, it still wouldn't solve the child care needs of working parents (and I'm one fwiw.) most of us work 8 hours a day at minimum, plus commutes.... The point is that no one is ever going to design a 10-12 hour per day public school system, much less pay for one. So even if the county moved bus schedules around, you'd still be stuck paying for additional care.

I suspect some of the OP's outrage derives from the fact thatlike a lot of us, the OP may have bought into the myth that these things get easier and cheaper once kids hit elementary school. Wrong! (okay, maybe it's a bit easier but there are all kinds of new costs .) Just wait till the OP figures out that summer camps can run into the thousands of dollars for a full summer and that many fill up by the end of January! Another conspiracy!!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its cool for those that can afford before and after care, have a nanny, shift hours around, even leave a parent at home.

But realize, there are at least half of the parents out there perhaps not posting on this board who... live paycheck to paycheck, have no wiggle room in their schedule at all, have to work overtime on call, cannot afford any additional care and one parent not working is a funny joke.

While you may not be in that situation, I find it hard to believe no sympathy at all are felt for that large portion of the population.

I am a single parent who falls into the paycheck to paycheck category and I'm not even complaining about this issue. It is what it is. My son's school starts at 9:15 b/c of the bus schedule. I take him to the before school program at 7:45am and pick him up between 5:30-6:00pm from the after school program. School isn't free daycare. I don't expect the school system to cater to the needs of working parents. Is it costly? Yes. Some months I have to charge the before/aftercare on my credit card. It is still more affordable than other options- babysitter, au pair, etc. It works out to approximately $7.50/hr. The problem comes in when certain schools have no space in their before/aftercare programs. It is those parents I feel sorry for. But the school always has info about other options for before/aftercare like in-home daycares in the neighborhood, karate places, etc.

Who said school is free day care? School not being daycare is precisely why I wouldn't want my child stuck in before/after care all day long. I unlike you think that school should "cater" to the parents whose taxes are paying for it. Not that they MUST get their way but there has to be some consideration.

I think you are correct in that the schools before/aftercare is more reasonable than other options but thats besides the point. Preferably I don't want them in "in-school care" at all. The current hours forces the issue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This schedule exists because buses are shared between the levels of school. The same bus takes kids to middle and high school first. It would make so much more sense to send the little kids to school first, then the high schoolers later, but that is too much upheaval for the schools to implement.

I've never seen a convincing argument of why this makes sense that didn't amount to "my kid is too spoiled to get up that early".

Getting out early allows high schoolers to have jobs, play sports, and do other productive things, and still eat dinner with their families.

The PP mentioned nothing about being spoiled. Where did THAT come from?

Little kids are up early. And there have been tons of articles discussing the benefits of starting high school earlier - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704535004575349182901006438.html

But b/c of this need to squeeze in sports (b/c all high school kids will earn sports scholarships to college or they'll end up at the Olympics ) and work, the start time is 7:25 am for most high schools - at least in Mo Co.

It's ridiculous.

The research says that it's harder for teens to fall asleep early, and to get up later. Some people argue that because it's hard we can't ask them to do it. I disagree. I think that handling challenges and taking responsibility for meeting a schedule is an important skill to learn, not something I want to protect my child from.

Kids benefit from sports and other responsibilities, regardless of whether they need the money or will get a scholarship. There are plenty of studies that show that kids who are busy and involved in activities do well, particularly the most vulnerable kids such as those from low income homes.

This is b/c their parents are not around. bottom line

Sports is a controlled way to monitor behavior. It's a place to go.

There are kids who prefer academics to sport - who go straight home - where there's a parent present, and they do just fine. Furthermore, you should see grades slip when Season X is over and the after-school study hall sessions are done. Kids are great when coaches are on them, but once that season ends, many do not have the self-discipline to do the work on their own.

Let's face it. There is very little parenting going on these days, as parents rely on after care (b/c they have to work - I get that) and sports to keep their kids in line.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This schedule exists because buses are shared between the levels of school. The same bus takes kids to middle and high school first. It would make so much more sense to send the little kids to school first, then the high schoolers later, but that is too much upheaval for the schools to implement.

I've never seen a convincing argument of why this makes sense that didn't amount to "my kid is too spoiled to get up that early".

Getting out early allows high schoolers to have jobs, play sports, and do other productive things, and still eat dinner with their families.

The PP mentioned nothing about being spoiled. Where did THAT come from?

Little kids are up early. And there have been tons of articles discussing the benefits of starting high school earlier - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704535004575349182901006438.html

But b/c of this need to squeeze in sports (b/c all high school kids will earn sports scholarships to college or they'll end up at the Olympics ) and work, the start time is 7:25 am for most high schools - at least in Mo Co.

It's ridiculous.

The research says that it's harder for teens to fall asleep early, and to get up later. Some people argue that because it's hard we can't ask them to do it. I disagree. I think that handling challenges and taking responsibility for meeting a schedule is an important skill to learn, not something I want to protect my child from.

Kids benefit from sports and other responsibilities, regardless of whether they need the money or will get a scholarship. There are plenty of studies that show that kids who are busy and involved in activities do well, particularly the most vulnerable kids such as those from low income homes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This schedule exists because buses are shared between the levels of school. The same bus takes kids to middle and high school first. It would make so much more sense to send the little kids to school first, then the high schoolers later, but that is too much upheaval for the schools to implement.

I've never seen a convincing argument of why this makes sense that didn't amount to "my kid is too spoiled to get up that early".

Getting out early allows high schoolers to have jobs, play sports, and do other productive things, and still eat dinner with their families.

The PP mentioned nothing about being spoiled. Where did THAT come from?

Little kids are up early. And there have been tons of articles discussing the benefits of starting high school earlier - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704535004575349182901006438.html

But b/c of this need to squeeze in sports (b/c all high school kids will earn sports scholarships to college or they'll end up at the Olympics ) and work, the start time is 7:25 am for most high schools - at least in Mo Co.

It's ridiculous.