The Best Country In The World To Have Children: Norway, Says Save The Children

https://shine.yahoo.com/team-mom/best-country-raising-kids-report-says-not-united-050400422.html?fb_action_ids=354616264599184&fb_action_types=news.reads&fb_ref=type%3Aread%2Cuser%3AXUwPVR461a-UMBmPxk_7kETOIQQ&fb_source=other_multiline&fb_upsell=1


The Save The Children's 13th State of the World's Mother's Report concludes that Norway is the best country to have and raise children.

Interesting food for thought there. The figures show a remarkably high rate of performance for European countries overall. For instance, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Belgium, Holland, Ireland and the UK figure in the top ten of the women's index.

A woman in the US is seven times more likely to lose a child in birthing than in Ireland. In the US, a mother has a one in 2'100 chance of losing her baby in childbirth, the highest rate in the developed world, although the Obama administration's Affordable Care Act has given many poor women obtain prenatal care, the mortality rate for children under 5, of 8 per 1000 is phenomenally high. The US ranks 41st on this indicator, but at least it appears that the Obama Administration recognises this and is attempting to do something about it and that has to be a good thing.

The worst performers in all indicators are, not surprisingly, the poor African nations which to my way of thinking suggests the richer nations should do more to help alleviate this problem. More aid is clearly needed there.

There are some heartbreaking statistics in this report, but Norway is showing the way ahead. This is the model the rest should follow.

.

Having grown up in Sweden, I'd say this sounds pretty fair. Every country in Scandinavia (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Iceland) are all in the top 10. Lucky me!! The reason for this is probably the rather safe environment we have up here. Blame it on free education or free healthcare (which means high taxes...) or whatever

Thanks for that contribution, Chrill. I wouldn't mind higher taxes if it meant better care and health provision.

It seems that Scandanavia has got its act together and kudos to your government and society for that.

Unfortunately, the mere mention of the words "higher taxes" here sends politicians here into a cold sweat. Oh, they have no objection to taxing us to death by stealth. They'll put duty on everything they can get away with on the sly, but that's to cover their backsides for all the daft situations they have got themselves into that need propping up with massive amounts of money that has to come from somewhere.

But to actually come out and say to the people... "Look, we want to make better provision for child health and care and we propose, say, 2p on the basic rate of income tax to pay for it".... that would be a sure fire vote loser.

Britain comes out of the survey fairly well, which is something to be grateful for, I guess, but I think we could.... and should... do better.

.

None of this is surprising.

Care to expand on that..?

Scandanavia has been at the top of these types of lists for some time now - happiest place, best place to live, etc. So best place to raise children in? Sure.

And it also stands to reason that countries that provide universal health care, among other greater social provisions for the general welfare, will result in more positive statistics for stability's sake - and we know stability is important for children.

Fair comment. So... if this model is so successful at producing a happy, well ordered society with good childcare provision and a populace that is generally content with its lot, then why is this not emulated elsewhere..?

A glaringly obvious question for sure, but it seems to have been pretty much missed, to date.

.

I think its Canada. A woman went into labor at Tim Hortons. Two workers, one male and one female, delivered the baby with 911 on the phone, in the womans washroom. Tim Hortons CEO has sent the mom many gift baskets and the baby is getting free Tim Bits for life and the CEO is gonna meet with the mom and set up a whole bunch of free things for the kid for the rest of its life. Now that is awesome. So I guess its not about the best country to have a baby but the best place and if you love coffee and donuts, you can't beat having a baby at Tim Hortons.

Because countries don't govern solely based on how conducive the country is to raising children.

I'd hazard a guess that extremely densely populated cities, established millenia ago, are more likely to stumble across poverty on a daily basis and therefore feel the need to do something about it too.

Far harder for it to be a constant tug on the concience of government if it's spread out over a missable area...

Ahhhh, no.. of course they don't. Some countries organise themselves on the principle of how many other countries children they can kill.

OK, so what was the point of that comment..?

Of course, you're quite right in what you say above, but as you well know, governments will prioritise their budgets to spend the greater proportion of their wealth on the issues that are of the most importance to them.

Now, it seems to me that, if the smaller industrialised nations like the Scandanavian countries (no offence intended with my use of the word "smaller" ), with their fewer financial resources and access to global markets, can still find the means to provide the best childcare provision in the world, then it can only be because they consider this a priority and allocate their resources accordingly.

What I admire, is the importance that they attach to this, and I am quite sure that in doing so, their exchequer must surely have to make savings or reductions elsewhere. This does not seem to be resented by the Scandanavian people, indeed, they seem quite happy with it. It doesn't seem to affect their standard of living or their national security, either. When was the last time anybody attacked Sweden..? *

The point is, that here is a model that should be taken as an example to be followed by other developed nations. I for one would be perfectly happy to see greater priority placed on health care for all in general, but particularly in the area of childcare, in my country.

As well as an increase in the basic rate of taxation, I can think of several government departments that I reckon could have their budgets reduced to pay for it.




*
PS... Sweden was last at war in 1814. Their war with Norway lasted 16 days. Just thought I'd qualify that point.