Showing posts with label abdication to authority. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abdication to authority. Show all posts

Friday, February 13, 2015

What are pre-schools' guidelines on naps?

FEB 12, 2015

ARE there recommendations or guidelines on sleeping for pre-schoolers who are in full-day class ("Many parents 'not alert to children's lack of sleep'"; last Friday).

Some pre-schools do not allow afternoon naps from Kindergarten 1 onwards. One reason could be that there are enrichment classes on some afternoons. But these do not take place every afternoon, and not all children are involved.

Another reason could be that some parents feel that they are paying school fees not for their children to nap.

Some people say that not having a nap in school means children will sleep earlier at night.

But the key consideration is whether a child's overall development and health benefit from a nap.

My children benefit from a nap: They are less cranky and have better appetites at dinner time.

My questions for the childcare and kindergarten authorities are: Are there guidelines on napping for pre-schoolers? Is there no benefit to a child napping, say up to an hour, in addition to sleeping nine to 10 hours straight at night?

Yah Jun Yang

[I am an evil person who relish dumb letters to the ST Forum Page so I have material for this vicious blog. If you are reading this you are probably a evil person as well.

OK. enough self-flagellation. 

Let's flagellate the more deserving. 

Like this letter-writer who in his inspired wisdom decided that the best way to ensure that his children gets enough sleep in pre-school is to ensure that ALL pre-schools have nap time.

This despite noting that some pre-schools do not schedule nap times because:
"One reason could be that there are enrichment classes on some afternoons. But these do not take place every afternoon, and not all children are involved.
Another reason could be that some parents feel that they are paying school fees not for their children to nap.
Some people say that not having a nap in school means children will sleep earlier at night."
So despite these reasons, this parent decides that since 
My children benefit from a nap: They are less cranky and have better appetites at dinner time.
Therefore, he "reasons", EVERY Pre-school should have nap times. 

Why?

I dunno why people act selfishly. I dunno why people think that what works for them MUST apply to everyone. Oh wait, I do know. It's because they are self-centred, self-absorbed, and thinks the world revolves around them, their needs, their priorities, their interests.

The reasonable, rational approach would have been to ask the the pre-school you are considering enrolling your children in, about their programme, or if you want to be specific about it, ask them straight out if they schedule afternoon naps.  And if they do, and everything else is fine and meets your needs or your children's needs, you can enrol them in that pre-school.

Instead you choose to ask the AUTHORITIES if they have guidelines on napping? Because they know your children better? Or they know that ALL children need afternoon naps? That all children are the same? Or that this need supercedes all other needs? Or your need has precedence over other parents' needs and priorities? 

While you are at it, can you ask MOM about scheduling afternoon naps in the workplace?



Thank you.]

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Regulate parking in private estates

Oct 14, 2010

PARKING illegally and causing traffic obstruction is rampant in private residential estates. This scenario is, however, uncommon in HDB estates and almost non-existent along major roads.

Time and again, we read in the news that neighbours come into conflict and even end up in court over disputes of traffic obstruction.

When the authorities ignore indiscriminate parking in private estates, they are sending a message that such offences are tolerated. Thus the line between running afoul of and compliance with the law becomes obscure. The consequence of this is that more disorderly behaviour may be condoned.

Richard Goh


[This is not a silly letter. But it speaks to our love-hate relationship with the authorities/government, and it reveals our desire to abdicate our independence to the government. The writer does not make a distinction between private space and public space, government matters and private matters. The distinction is not between compliance or non-compliance of laws but applicability of laws, situational needs, government intervention or over-intervention. Or it speaks to boorish behaviour of the nouveau riche. or the pseudo-riche. or the materially wealthy, but morally bankrupt.]