« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report uses data from the Growing up in Scotland ( GUS) study to explore what is distinctive about growing up in rural, remote and small-town Scotland in comparison with urban Scotland. Findings are based on the first sweep of GUS, which involved interviews with the main carers of 5,217 children aged 0-1 years old and 2,859 children aged 2-3 years old, carried out between April 2005 and March 2006.
Family circumstances of urban and rural babies and toddlers
The overview report on sweep 1 of GUS highlighted many significant differences in the lives and experiences of young children and their families depending on their socio-demographic circumstances. Analysis of the circumstances of families in urban and rural areas highlights that, although there is variety in each kind of area, children in rural areas are somewhat more likely to be born into relatively more advantaged situations. In particular, babies and toddlers in rural areas are:
- more likely than those in urban areas to be born to older mothers (in the birth cohort, 11% of mothers in remote rural areas were teenagers when their first child was born compared with 18% of mothers in large urban areas)
- less likely to live in lone parent households (just 7% of babies living in accessible and remote rural areas live in lone parent households, compared with 23% in large urban and 24% in other urban areas)
- more likely to be born to mothers with degree-level qualifications and less likely to be born to mothers with no qualifications (15% of mothers of toddlers in large urban areas have no qualifications compared with just 4% in remote rural areas)
- less likely to live in households where neither parent/carer works (fewer than 10% of rural children live in households with nobody in employment in comparison to nearly a quarter in large urban areas in both cohorts and around a fifth in other urban areas and accessible small towns)
- less likely to live in low income households (around a third of children in large or other urban areas live in households with incomes less than £15,000 a year in comparison to around one in five in accessible and remote rural areas)
- more likely to live in households with access to a car, home internet and a garden.
Rural children are also:
- less likely to have been born as a result of an unplanned pregnancy (16% of babies in remote rural areas compared with 26% in large urban areas), and
- less likely to be their mothers' first child (52% of mothers of babies in large urban areas were becoming a parent for the first time, compared with just 43% of mothers in remote rural areas).
Health and wellbeing of rural babies and toddlers
GUS data suggests there are few significant differences in child health and well-being across urban and rural areas across a range of objective ( e.g. birth weight) and subjective ( e.g. reported use of NHS services) measures. Rural babies and toddlers are no more likely than their urban counterparts to have a low birthweight, have a long-term health problem or disability (as reported by their main carer), or have contacted the NHS about general problems or because of an accident. There were also few differences in the extent to which parents engage in activities with their child (like drawing, painting, playing games, etc.) which may improve their child's educational development and/or well-being by area.
However, concerns about toddlers' development were somewhat lower in remote rural areas - 90% have no concerns, compared with between 78% in small accessible towns and 84% in small remote towns. At the same time, parental reporting of positive health influencing behaviours like breast feeding was somewhat higher in rural areas - for example, 75% of mothers in remote rural areas breastfed their child, compared with 60% in large urban areas. Mothers in rural areas were less likely to smoke than their urban counterparts (17% of mothers of babies in remote rural compared with 28% in large urban areas), while babies (but not toddlers) in rural areas were less likely to watch any television than their urban counterparts. Many of these differences in parental health influencing behaviour by area are attributable to differences in the characteristics of parents between areas - in particular, the fact that mothers in rural areas tend to be older and better educated.
Child friendly areas?
The GUS data so far does not suggest dramatic differences in the child friendliness of urban versus rural environments in terms of the social networks and informal support available to young children and their families. While fewer children in rural areas have a grandparent living nearby (74% of babies in remote rural areas, compared with 84% of babies in large urban areas), a majority of parents across all areas say their child has a close relationship with at least one grandparent (albeit slightly lower in remote rural areas). In terms of other support, mothers in rural areas were somewhat more likely than mothers in urban areas to say they would turn to friends and neighbours if they needed help with childcare at short notice (13% in accessible and 18% in remote rural areas, compared with 9% in large urban areas). However, there was little difference in how easy or difficult mothers in different areas said they would find it to arrange such help. Moreover, there is some evidence that children in rural areas may have more 'child rich' social lives, with 70% of toddlers in remote rural areas compared with just 60% of children in large urban areas taken to visit friends with other young children at least weekly and mothers in remote rural areas almost twice as likely to regularly take their toddlers to mother and toddler groups as their counterparts in large urban areas (67% compared with 36%).
Service use
Many of the differences in service use by family type, household income and maternal age noted in the overview report on GUS sweep 1 (Anderson, Bradshaw et al, 2007) persist within urban and rural areas. However, we did find some potentially important differences in service use between areas. First, although there was no consistent variation in the proportion of first-time mothers attending ante-natal classes between urban and rural areas, mothers in remote small towns stand out as particularly unlikely to have attended such classes. Further, when asked about reasons for non-attendance, access problems - including lack of knowledge/awareness of classes, no classes available, or travel problems - stood out as a particular problem for mothers in rural areas (32% in remote and accessible rural areas (combined) mentioned at least one of these reasons, compared with just 18% in large urban areas).
In terms of other sources of advice during pregnancy, mothers in remote rural areas were the most likely to use books, magazines or newspapers and to use the Ready, Steady, Baby booklet. Urban/rural differences were more marked among mothers who already had children than among first-time mothers, which may suggest that rural mothers are more likely than their urban counterparts to continue consulting such print-based sources after their first child.
In respect of childcare services, families in remote rural areas and small remote towns are less likely than families in urban areas to make regular use of any help looking after their babies (48% in remote rural areas compared with 61% in large urban areas). However, this difference was not apparent for toddlers. Rural mothers were no less likely to be in paid employment, but they were less likely to be lone parents. Thus it is possible this difference is partly explained by the fact that the option of sharing child care between two parents may be more feasible for rural families.
Rural families also used different types of childcare, reflecting established differences in the childcare mix available in different areas. In particular, parents in rural areas and remote small towns were more likely than parents in large urban areas to use childminders (16% in remote rural areas, compared with 7% in large urban areas), and less likely to use nursery or crèche provision (20% in remote rural areas and just 10% in small remote towns, compared with 35% in large urban areas).
Conclusion
Sweep 1 of GUS provides some evidence that children in rural areas may be more likely to live in favourable socio-economic circumstances than their urban counterparts. This is associated with greater exposure to positive parental behaviours, such as breastfeeding, among rural babies. However, in many other respects the early experiences of children in urban and rural areas in terms of service use, health problems and contact with significant others are not very different. Moreover, other evidence suggests that families in rural areas may be relatively disadvantaged in respect of easy access to ante-natal classes and having grandparents living nearby, for example.
As future sweeps of GUS become available, we will be able to track the experiences of children living in different areas of Scotland, exploring in more detail differences in their development and well-being to help tailor services and policies for children living across the whole of Scotland.
« Previous | Contents | Next »