Woman's Hour - Nursery fees, Linda Bassett, Maria Semple

Episode Date: May 26, 2026

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson has urged the competition watchdog to look into hidden extra charges some parents have encountered when trying to access Government-funded childcare. The Department for Education said 'too many' parents have reported being asked to pay extra to secure a place – including waiting list deposits, compulsory add-ons or additional hours to access what they are entitled to. So what impact is this having on parents? Joeli Brearley, founder of Growth Spurt and a campaigner for working parents, explains to Nuala McGovern.Young people want more age-specific protections for online spaces, according to new research from the Ada Lovelace Institute. Aged between 14 and 24, those who took part in the Nuffield Foundation’s Grown up? Journeys into adulthood programme – say they want to make sure future generations are not exposed to the same online harms they have experienced. Octavia Field Reid, Associate Director of Public Participation at the Ada Lovelace Institute, joins Nuala to discuss their findings.Care for the elderly, whether in hospital, a specialised residential setting, or a person’s own home, is one of our most pressing social issues. Not regularly looked at by the entertainment industry, a new play is addressing this topic. Most familiar in her role as Phyllis Crane in Call the Midwife, Linda Bassett is as an unwilling new arrival in a decidedly unglamorous care home in CARE, now on stage at the Young Vic in London. She speaks to Nuala.Maria Semple is the bestselling author of books including Where’d You Go, Bernadette, which was shortlisted for the Women’s Prize. Her latest novel, Go Gentle, focuses on Adora Hazzard - a Stoic philosopher and divorcee living on New York City’s Upper West Side. She has a job as a moral tutor for an old money family. She is assembling a ‘coven’ of like-minded single women living on the 6th floor of the legendary Ansonia building. But then a chance encounter with a charming stranger threatens her joyfully curated life. She joins Nuala to discuss the idea of ‘invisible’ women who are just getting started. Presenter: Nuala McGovern Producer: Kirsty Starkey

Hello, this is Neu La McGovern and you're listening to The Woman's Hour podcast. Hello and welcome to the program. Hidden extra charges in nurseries in just a moment, but also today. Single women living on the same floor of an apartment block in New York, sharing groceries, TV subscriptions, a hairdresser, even a dog walker. It is the setting of Maria Semple's new novel, Go Gentle. And we have more than groceries to unpack with Maria. That interview is coming up. But I wondered, does living with other women sound like utopia to you? Or is that your idea of hell? I'd love to hear if you've lived in any sort of communal way,

sharing the day-to-day responsibilities of life, particularly if it was with other women, not a romantic partner. What was it like? What is it like? You can text the programme. The number is 84844. On social media, we're at BBC Women's Hour, or you can email us through our website.

For a WhatsApp message or voice note, the number is 0-3-700-100-400-444. Also this hour, you will hear what young people would recommend for the generation that is coming after them when it comes to navigating online space is really interesting to hear the thoughts of 14 to 24-year-olds. Plus, we have the actor Linda Bassett. Linda is phenomenal in the play care.

It's set in a dementia ward of a care home. It is beautiful and heartbreaking. an equal measure. I'm really looking forward to speaking to her about all of the issues that it raises. But let me begin with nurseries. Education Secretary Bridget Philipson has urged the competition watchdog to look

into hidden extra charges that parents have encountered when trying to access government-funded childcare. Eligible working parents in England are able to get 30 hours a week of funded childcare for children aged between nine months and four years. The Department for Education said,

Too many parents have reported been asked to pay extras to secure a place, including waiting list deposits, compulsory add-ons, or additional hours to access what they are entitled to. So what impact is this having on parents? Jolie Brearley is Director of Growthsbert and a campaigner for Working Parents. Good to have you back with us, Jolie. What are you hearing from parents about their experiences? Well, they are being charged these shock fees that are completely unexpected,

and of course they've often just finished maternity leave where they've barely survived financially. But they're also being told that they can't access the funding without paying full price for additional child care hours or they're being told that they can only access, say, 15 hours of the funding, they're being asked to pay deposits, they're then non-refundable, or they're being charged in some cases these very excessive top-up fees. So we know that a quarter of parents have,

have to pay a minimum of £15 a day on top of the funding. And of course, this was set up so that parents could access a free childcare place. And in many cases, that just isn't happening. So when it comes to some of these particular add-ons, do the parents have a choice? I mentioned some aspects seem to be compulsory. What are you hearing? Well, the rules are that you are meant to be able to access a free place.

and the bills that you are sent are meant to be itemized. And just to be really clear, the government funding only covers the cost of delivering the care itself. It covers the cost of the staffing. It covers the cost of the rent. It doesn't cover food, nappies, cream, other sundry items. But what we are seeing is in some cases, certainly not in all cases.

Providers are saying, okay, well, you have to pay for these sundry items, but the costs are extortionate. And even though they're meant to itemise them, sometimes they don't, even when they do, the costs still feel really unfair to parents. Can you give me an example? Yeah, so we know that a quarter of parents are paying more than £15 a day, and all that they are getting from the nursery is one meal, which seems a lot for a baby.

You will know, though, nursery owners have been saying for years that add-on costs are vital, as the rate of amount paid for funded hours does not meet their costs. They say they have no choice, it's charge more or close, which could be a worse predicament for parents. Yeah, I mean, let me be really clear. Most providers are doing a brilliant job here, and they really are providing quality care with very little resource. And yes, there are certainly some providers that need to charge

additional amounts of money in order to keep their business going, but that's not true of all providers. And we know that private equity in the child care sector has grown. So there are huge conglomerate companies that are often based outside of the UK that are buying up smaller providers and using it to create profit for shareholders rather than putting the children and the quality of care first. And that also leaves our childcare market very vulnerable to collapse because often these companies are debt piling.

So what they need to do is part of this investment. investigation is flush out those organisations that are charging these excessive fees simply for profit and those who are charging them because they need it in order to survive. I mean, is that something that you expect to happen? I mentioned at the top, the Education Secretary, is urging the competition watchdog to look into these charges? Yes, absolutely. We do expect as part of this investigation for that to say certain providers have to charge these additional fees in order. to stay afloat where others are charging it simply for profit. And you think there can be a distinction made between that? I absolutely do think. And there needs to be as well.

That has to be part of this investigation. But what about those that are literally just keeping their head above water? They're not making a profit, but they're trying to provide a service and feel they cannot without this £15, for example, that you mention. I mean, what would your advice be to them or to, the government or indeed the parents that need to use it? I know that many providers will be really worried about this investigation and what it means for their businesses.

And let's remember, these are private businesses. So it's very complicated how this funding is distributed because different providers have different costs. And so I would say to the providers that if you absolutely have to charge these fees in order to deliver childcare, that that will be made clear to the CMA, which will then be made clear to the government. So I think this investigation is really positive because not only does it ensure that there's more consistency for parents,

but it ensures that this funding has been used correctly and that any issues with the funding will be flushed out as part of this investigation. And the CMA you mentioned is the competitions and markets, authority, the regulator. Providers will have had to deal with a rise in energy costs, staff costs because of a hike in contributions, employers, for national insurance. I'm just wondering if you saw things like that as the add-ons instead of chicken nuggets,

would that make a difference? You know what I'm saying? That there's a transparency in where the money is actually going and seeing that it doesn't add up. Yeah, completely. And I would implore providers to be really transparent with the parents

to explain why these costs need to exist because parents are really understanding. They get it. and they want to ensure that their child has access to childcare and they will do what they can. The problem is, though, Nula, that we do have lots of parents who are now locked out of being able to work because they still can't afford childcare,

despite the government spending £5.2 billion on childcare. We do not want to end up in a situation where taxpayers are paying money into a system and lots of that money has been taken out for personal profit. That's not why this was set up. And sadly, that is what is happening. In some cases, absolutely not in all cases. Most child care providers are doing an absolutely brilliant job.

And do you see, just as we talk about hopeful aspects of this, with that injection, as I'm sure the government would say of cash with these funded hours, for example, improvements for some parents? Absolutely. Some parents are having a brilliant time. They're absolutely elated with this funding. It's made a huge difference to them. Whereas for other parents, we are actually hearing in some cases

that when the funding started, their costs increased rather than decreased, which is absolute madness. And we know that, you know, this funding model is really complicated. I think, you know, mostly it is very sound. But within that, there are these anomalies where the providers are not getting enough funding some are getting more than they need. And so this is what the investigation needs to do. Here's a message, Jolie.

I'm a mother of a 20-month-old boy. We send our son to nursery using the 30 hours for three days a week, one of which is Monday bank holidays, which we still need to pay for. We didn't see this on the terms and conditions. It seems excessive. Our bill for May was £520 pound extra. I mean, exactly. And not many parents can afford that, can they?

Particularly at the moment. when we have a cost of living crisis. We really need to have a system that is affordable to all families. And at the moment, low-income families are really locked out of using our childcare system, which means they are unable to dig themselves out of poverty. We really need a system that works for all parents. Before I let you go, your thoughts on what the government should do next? You heard the announcement?

Well, our view has always been we should scrap all of these systems and start again because none of it is really working. Start again? provider start again. We've bolted on all these mad benefits onto an unwieldly system. And actually we would like to see all of those benefits scrap. They're very complicated. They cost a lot to deliver and to have a system where it costs no more than 5% of household income to access quality childcare. We think that is doable. They do it in Sweden. They do it in other countries. But it just needs lots of great heads around a table and lots of really,

investment in time and thinking to make this work properly for everybody. Cholie Burley, Director of Grotspurte, which is an online program for parents and she is, as you've been hearing, a campaigner for working parents too. Thanks so much for joining us. Lots of messages coming in,

talking about communal living. I was asking your idea of living with other women that are not your romantic partner, for example. Your idea of Utopia or your idea of hell, 844, if you'd like to get in, in touch. A couple have already. It's fun when the flatmate is mature and takes responsibility for when it's their turn to clean

or pay the bills. Communicating this at the very beginning and setting up expectations is key. So says Alicia. Another, this is Katie. In my early 20s, I shared a house with four guys. Their untidiness was relentless and I was forever cleaning the kitchen. But emotionally, they were very easy to live

with and uncomplicated. At the age of 30, I shared a house with three women. I found that far harder, though they were good friends. Tears and some tantrums, alongside girly nights in. More complex to navigate, but that's just my experience. Thanks to Katie.

Thanks to Alicia, if you'd like to get in touch, 84844. Now, I want to turn to theatre next. One reviewer called Care, the most devastating play you will see all year. I would heartily agree. It's at the Young Vic in London.

The central character is Joan, with an astonishing performance by Linda Bassett. Joan is the grandmother in a family. She has started living in a care home, specifically a dementia ward after a fall. She does not want to be there, which may resonate with those of you who have had to make that decision for a loved one.

I'm so happy to welcome, Linda. Women's Hour. Hello, I'm happy to be here. Now, we don't often look at end-of-life care directly in the eye until we have to. No. Why were you ready to do that? Well, I mean, I'm aging myself and a lot of my friends are old.

I've experienced a lot of loss of family members, and so I'm very aware that dying is part of living, and it's better to look at it. And I think particularly with various types of dementia, it shouldn't be a hidden subject because so many families are trying to cope with it and they feel so alone. I mean, I do know that people who are looking after either a parent or a partner with great dedication and love

and yet it's so hard and often then comes a time when they can't do it and they have to make the decision to let them go into care and it's very difficult for the person. Some people go into it. care and have a great time, but other people resist it with every strength. Muscle in their body. And I think what struck me with the play as well, which I'm sure

will also resonate, is that when her daughter does bring Joan to the care home, she's at the end of her tether. She's already burnt out, emotionally spent, use whatever term you want. So even you're in a depleted state when you're transitioning into this whole other world and probably something that you may feel guilty about

even if it's irrational. Absolutely. And she's dealing with a teenage son, a young son, the loss of her husband, she's got an awful lot on her plate, as many people do have. And her relationship with her mother

is not easy. No. Because Joan's quite a critical woman and has been critical of her daughter and has taken away a lot of her confidence over the years. But also Joan, as are many people, is completely in denial about her dementia. She acknowledges that she's hurt her hip, that she's had to have that mended. But she's not contemplating. And with dementia, as many will know, there are moments of lucidity, of varying lengths.

Yep. And which makes it in some ways, which is a blessing, but in other ways can make it harder as well. As I watched it, and it was a real diverse group as well that went to the young Vic to watch it. Of all ages, at different backgrounds. All of us gobsmacked, I have to say.

And I say it's two hours, lots of tears as well. But how did you research it and rehearsed to get there. Just to give people an idea, it's immersive. When we walk in, we're already in the ward, so to speak, particularly the way that young Vic is set up. It's two hours straight through with no interval. You're with your people of your own age,

your contemporaries are also there. Also, I think, unusual to see in theatre. To have many people, I mean, I'm one of the young ones and I'm 76. Gotcha. So yes. But our youngest, member of cast is 11 and our oldest member of cast is 92.

That's diverse. It's brilliant to be in a company and an ensemble like this because there's so much life experience and I think that's what we've all brought to it. I mean, Alexander researched the play very thoroughly and has brought his own life experience to it as a writer and director. but we've also brought our life experience to it as actors. So it is quite rich, I think, with that amount of life knowledge. You know, there's people in the care home that you, I think you feel like you've met them.

Yes. And maybe even one facet of their personality. And that you, and I should say actually Alexander Zeldin for those, a director who's done wonderful work, although many saying this is his best yet. You know, I know, which is exciting. which is also high praise indeed. But I think when we look at those people and we see some of the scenes of dementia,

which can be heartbreaking and funny at the same time, but we also realize each of those people had a life. And, you know, I'm sitting there in my 50s probably identifying with their previous life. Yes, yes. I'm wondering what's in my future. Because it's richly written, you get all those lives and you can feel them.

And yet still, you know, in the general consciousness, old people are old people and are dismissed. Because we're afraid of it, I think, and we don't want to go there. No. And imagine ourselves in those bodies. And losing your, what nowadays people call their agency, losing your independence, your control over your life if we have whatever control we do. Whatever control we do have, you've lost it. you lose the power to control your money, your home, just all the thing.

And to uproot yourself, which Joan has already done in order to move in with her daughter. And then she's uprooted from her daughter's house. So she's been doubly uprooted. And she feels betrayed by her family. Because she's not acknowledging her dementia, she thinks they're cheating her by putting her in a home. Well, you have to find somebody to blame in such a horrendous, Because growing old and dementia can be very unfair, I think, even though it is part of life. Some of the scenes are so intense.

And there is one, you'll probably know where I'm going to go here, with it, is where Joan and John, played by Richard Durdon, want to embrace. To feel less alone, because isolation is this theme. He removes his clothes and moves towards her in his incontinence pants, which, I think I stopped breathing at that point while I was watching it. It's a play that doesn't hold back. And we as the audience, I think, want them to feel less isolated, to find a companion. But as you talk about agency, the rules of the care home

would not allow that embrace. No. It is a very moving moment, and I love playing it with Richard because he's so good. And I'm very glad if the audience get that we actually do achieve a sort of momentary love, just human, plain old, simple human love. Yeah.

And then, of course, when the carers come in, they see it as mucky and... Against the rules. And these are good carers. I mean, you know, they're decent women, they're nice people, very compassionate, as you see in other scenes. But in that instance,

They're shocked by what we're doing. And because John is beyond knowing what he's doing really. But he does get something out of John and Joan's contact. And I, so as Joan, I don't feel ashamed of what I've done. Yes, that you want to be embraced by this person. He was showing. I see no harm in it. companionship and warmth and love, I suppose, as well.

That is one scene and there is another that I'd like to also talk about because I feel it's something that maybe others have gone through. There's a very slow scene where the nurse Hazel that's played Luella Gideon washes Joan, Linda, who is naked from the waist up and she washes her, I think, with the care of a mother almost. And I thought, Joan looks so beautiful. You haven't been able to see this

unless you've seen it on film that the body, the face of this woman, you, it's incredible that and you kind of realise the humanity that is there in taking care of another who is not able to

carry out that personal care for themselves any longer. It shows the best side of care doesn't it? Love, the love in it. Again, love. You know, there's a lot of love in the play. There is. And that scene particularly,

and as I say, Hazel is a, played Ballywelle. It's a brilliant carer. And I do believe, just to be a little bit, tub-thumping for a minute, that care workers are not regarded well enough. They're not given enough money, training, and just respect.

When they take care of a sort of, are absolutely the most vulnerable when we really need to be looked after or our relatives do and we depend on them and you can have a situation like that whereas you say she treats her with such love

and such delicacy and I also think that for Lynn who plays the daughter she's missing that because she's not nursing her mother, she's losing that opportunity for closeness that is there. I mean, a lot of people do talk about that, you know, the privilege, if you have it, of caring for an older loved one, that that's what it is.

That's not to say that it's not exhausting, draining, can put you to the end of your Heather when it comes to some of those responsibilities, but that we kind of see sometimes where carers step in in place of family, for example, within some of these settings. So beautiful. You talk about each play being an education. Yes. And I'm wondering the lessons from this one for you. Oh, that's interesting.

Yes. I mean, I do find that every play you learn something from your fellow actors, from your director from the play itself from the soul of the piece. I'm not quite sure if I know while I'm doing what I'm learning. Yeah, sure, I can understand that. But I don't know. Hopefully I don't have any relatives left who are in this situation. But if I do have contact with someone,

I hope it'll give me more compassion, more understanding, more patience, more or if I have to face it myself, perhaps more courage to go where I have to go. Because I'm independent myself and I want to be in my own home and look after myself. And I think I would find loss of that very difficult. Sure. And I think courage is a really interesting word. My mother, who's 91, often says growing old is not for the meek. No, it's no, it's not, yes, it really isn't.

Because you lose so many friends, you lose so many bits of ability that you have. No, you need to. But then you have your life experience to back you up to help you get through each new buffet. You know, as I was walking down, I walked by the old Vic and then down to the Young Vic to you. And I read that you spent a couple of years as a teenager ushering at the Old Vic. During Lawrence Olivier's days. Yeah. It was wonderful.

That was an education. That was an education. It really was because I didn't go to drama school. So that was my equivalent. Yes, that was your master's in. Yes, it was because I used to sneak into the dress circle in the afternoons and watch them getting a play in. And of course I'd see every play over and over and over and over again

and watch which actors did their performance the same rigidly. and which changed and altered and made it live. It was wonderful. They were wonderful actors. Ronald Pickup was my favourite, playing Rosalind in As You Like, and the All May Alas You Like it that they did there. But I saw so much. Peter Brooks, Oedipus, with John Gielgud and Irene Worth.

And it was where people fainted every night. They weren't far off it, I'll tell you. We care. And I think I might have some advice to young actors. Go down and usher for the young Vic. And watch Linda Bassett. And Haley, who plays Simone, who's different every night. Yeah, I mean, so many.

I mean, the talent was astonishing as a word I come back to. And I should say as well, we've been talking about very serious. But there's also so many laughs. There's a lot of humour as comes with all of life. I suppose, that at dark times there can also be dark humour and a lot of laughs within this play as well. I want to, though, before I go, just talk about Call the Midwife, because I know so many people are not just beloved series and you within it. The 15 series has been broadcast.

15 series. I did 12. So I was a bit of a new girl. Not treated like that, but felt in myself. Just a blow in. there is to be a 16th series, not for a while, and then I heard there was going to be a film. What's going on?

Well, I don't know because actors were always the last to know. Oh, okay. But they have talked about both those things. And when they come, you know, I'll be ready for them, maybe. Who knows? You don't know what's down the road, do you? With anything, that's something life's taught me completely. So, yes, it would be exciting to do a film,

and it would be lovely to do a 16th series, but I don't know if that'll happen. I know they're doing the prequel at the moment, and that sounds great. I guess it's mostly, I mean, whether Heidi, Annie and Pippa, it's in their power. If they make it happen,

and they do make extraordinary things happen, then it will happen. Why do you think people love it so much? Well, I think because it's got a lot of heart that people find is missing in the modern world, maybe? I mean, it's not missing, but the systems that we've developed, like with caring, with maternity care, has been dehumanised a bit.

And the midwives in, called the midwife, are still giving personal care, consistent care. that you know who your midwife is and you see her through and you see a mother through the whole process. I mean, that's rare now and precious for... There is overlap with the play care actually because you do want that continuity of something. You want a human relationship, right?

You want... Wherever, yes. When you're vulnerable again, you know. Even more so. Lots to think about. A message just came in. And you see, this is Rhian, who said, I saw Care last week. At the end, when the lights came up, so many people were hugging each other and crying.

Including me and my friend who had both lost our dads in the same week, it was so moving and real. Oh, well, that's lovely. I'll leave you with that review. Thank you. And I want to thank you for coming in. And I need to let people know that Care is on at the Young Vic in London until the 11th of July. see it if you can and I want to thank Linda Balsett for

because I know you're back in again tonight for your two hours straight through thanks so much for coming in to join us thank you very much thank you bye bye bye a little earlier we were talking about hidden extra hidden extra charges in

nurseries I was mentioning the Education Secretary Bridget Philipson I just want to read a little of what she said in response to this story she said too many parents are still not feeling the full benefit of the government-funded childcare hours. She said the vast majority of nurseries and childminders are doing a brilliant job, but we have to ask hard questions every time we hear stories of families hit with hidden charges,

restricted hours or excessive deposits that bear no relation to what parents are actually paying. That is not what this investment was meant to deliver. In September last year, the government delivered its pledge to fund childcare for 30 hours a week when said they were saving parents £7,500 a year per child. and putting more money in their pockets. That's one story we will continue to cover. Thanks very much of those of you getting in touch in relation to it. Now, maybe you were out in the sunshine yesterday.

Maybe you missed woman's hour. I will forgive you, but you can go back and listen again. Because we put our head in the clouds and we went in search of wonder, which is a wonderful thing to do. We wanted to know how can we hold onto that feeling when life gets in the way. We do know that women still hold the lion's share of caring responsibilities. They often carry the mental load for home, often on top of work.

So how do we make space for the perspective that wonder gives us, instead of being distracted by the perpetual to-do list? And can a sense of wonder with its built-in inspiration and aspiration help us see beyond the day today? We had lots of wonderful guests, Catherine Rundle, probably familiar with her books, children's author and academic. We also had Ella al-Shimahi, who's this environment, she's a biologist and an explorer extraordinaire.

We had the environmentalist turned musician, Natalie Fay, and Dr. Amarie Imaphidon, who's a computer scientist and former Wonderkind. Also, Dr. Jean Bennett, who restored the sight of a six-year-old girl with her gene therapy. And not to forget, Jeanette Cannes, the first female boss of the Wonder Woman

comics, DC comics, who featured Wonder Woman, as I should say, and she was the first female boss, 50 years ago, so quite a feat. Do listen in. I thought it was wonderful. Maybe you will too. Thanks for all your messages that are coming in.

We're going to talk a little bit about communal living and what that's like, the ups and the downs. A little later, we've Maria Semple coming in about her book, Go Gentle. But before all that, let us. talk about social media and children. There is a lot of talk about it today again. According to the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, social media use ranks with smoking as a threat to the health of young people. These are the UK's most senior doctors who've made a submission to a

government consultation on social media use for under 16s. The consultation is looking at how to prepare children for the future in an age of rapid technological change. It closes just before midnight tonight. But what are young people saying themselves about online spaces? The Nuffield Foundation spoke to young people and found they want more age-specific protection to ensure future generations are not exposed

to the same online harms that they experienced. Well, here to tell us more about this research is Octavia Field-Reed, Associate Director of Public Participation at the Ada Lovelace Institute who commissioned the study. Grown-up, journeys into adulthood. Good to have you with us. this, Octavia. It's great to be here. So tell me about the study. Why did you commission this

research? Who did you speak to? Yeah, thank you. So what we're seeing is a really rare moment where radical regulatory change is being considered with a rising number of countries considering social media bans for children. We've seen West Streeting this morning coming out in his campaign saying that we should be considering social media as equivalent to the harms for smoking. This isn't new news, of course. We've known about this for a long time. And Peter Kyle, when he was Secretary of State of Science, Innovation and Technology actually apologised to a generation of children for the government's failure to protect them from toxic online content. But what we decided to do was to really centre the voices of young people. So young people's voices tend to be underheard in this kind of research.

And we really wanted to bring those forward. So we're surfacing the experience of the sort of first generation to grow up with digital technology. So they're 14 to 24. They're 14 to 24 year olds, exactly. So the oldest was born in 2001, the youngest was born in 2011. And so the oldest, they were about five or six when smartphones came into being. Exactly that. So think about smartphones in about 2007,

thinking about the sort of social media, first generation social media in the early 2000s, and then TikTok maybe in 2017. And you use the peer research method. Explain that. Yeah, that's exactly right. So my job is really to do research in a participatory way. Doing research in a participatory way means empowering people to have agency in their own lives and also over the decisions that are made by other people that affect them.

When we come to think about young people, obviously we need to build an environment where those people feel comfortable talking about the things that really matter to them where they're not in an environment where they feel constrained by what adults might think about them or what adults. other people might think about them. So peer research enables them to talk to people their own age. So it's young people speaking to one another getting this information.

That's exactly right. And we train young people to be researchers so that they can be the interlocutor with other young people. And I saw 49 people were in this study? 49 young people based in Dundee, Shetland, Sandwell in Birmingham and Islington in London. Why those places? We wanted a mix. We wanted a mix of rural...

and suburban. We wanted to see if there were differences in between those different locations, but actually the finding shows a real consistency in young people's experiences. So the discussions take place and we find out that people feel very conflicted about the relationship with technology,

particularly the phone. I want to play a clip from someone who says she's a social media influencer talking about her mental health online. Knowing that I got paid from views and not likes, definitely had an input on how much I shared about myself online. I noticed that sharing more about myself that people didn't typically talk about, I, like, share.

And I'm fine with that. I don't have any regrets about that. It is what it is. But that heavily influenced my motivation to post that. I went from having 4,000 followers to having 20,000 overnight. That was intense. the reality of like because I wanted to be an influencer and I wanted to help people and if I made money off of it, awesome. So the reality of me being able to make money off of it

and the fact that so many people are following me with my social anxiety is like, I love this but I hate it. So that young woman is one example of what she has gone through with social media, obviously monetising in certain ways. But what did you find more broadly from the study when it came to young people's relationship with technology? So really their experience is very contradictory. It can't be broken down into binary benefits and harms. This technology is embedded in every aspect of their lives.

They do see positives. They're also huge negatives. And the young people described this is a widespread exposure to really harmful content, to abuse and behaviours, normalised. of these kinds of harms. They reported being left to navigate the online world in isolation, so having to take responsibility for their own safety

and that of younger people, including siblings. And really they want to ensure that future generations aren't exposed to the same kind of online harms they've experienced, and that's in spite of recognising the positive role of digital connection for community and support. Lots of them talked about positives. There are positives. They're very articulate about the kinds of opportunities for creativity.

that these sorts of technologies bring to them. But I think what's really interesting about that is they are thinking about the children that come after them because they have been the trailblazers, the first people that probably know more than their parents about this technology and continue moving at a faster clip. We heard a little from that young woman

persuaded to share more about herself because of monetisation, for example, on certain platforms and other kids mightn't be monetising but they may share more of themselves in their groups than they want to. I mean, do the young people have any thoughts on how to stop that

or what should be put in place? Yeah, so firstly, they do see the dynamics of the ecosystem. So they see the way that the big companies are designing these systems to encourage you to share more, to take away your agency. and they're very savvy about that. And what they want to put in place are more controls.

And you mentioned the... More controls, how? More controls. They want the government to bring in controls on these kinds of technologies. I just wanted to go back to what you were saying about the older young people because it's actually really heartbreaking

to hear them talk about it. So they talk about their own experiences. And they say, well, that happened to me and there are positives and negatives. and actually it happened and it's fine. And then when you ask them to think about younger people, they switch mode almost and they say absolutely not. Younger people should not be experiencing these things.

It's not appropriate. It's harmful. It's not beneficial. And they should be allowed to have an inverted commas normal childhood. They should be given the agency to make their own decisions about what they want to engage with and technology should take a step back in their lives. And so it would be looking for harmful content.

I mean, do they agree on what is harmful content? A lot of the harms they describe are, you know, really things that nobody would want a child to see. You know, so they do describe this very distressing content that they're exposed to either because it pops up in their social media feed or sometimes they're shown it by another child. And again, you know, a heartbreaking aspect of this research was people sort of realising. as they were talking, the older people realizing as they were talking, that some of the things that happened to them were not only not okay or less okay than they thought they were at the time. So this sort of realization that, you know, on reflection.

On reflection with the maturity that actually these things were not okay. But actually in some cases realizing that they were actually legal and that they'd been subjected to sexual abuse or other things. And they just, because it was so ubiquitous, because it was happening to everybody, They just assimilated it as an experience that was in inverted commas normal. So they were desensitized, right? It was normalized. Desensitized and it was normalized, exactly.

Did they have, and this may not have come up, but did they have any thoughts on what age somebody should have access to social media or a smartphone? They weren't able to reach a consensus about age, but they were really clear about what they talked about as younger children. So younger children not being exposed to these things. And they did have very interesting conversations about the difference between having what they called a dumb phone. So a dumb phone is not connected to the internet. And then a smartphone.

And really the smartphone changed their lives when they got a smartphone. That was connection to the internet. It was exposure to huge benefits of connectivity, but also the exposure to harms came at that point. The government's consultation on children's digital well-being in the UK, as I mentioned, closes today. What do you think your research could add to that? So there are four things I think that we want government to act on. One is on centering young people's voices. And I hope we've heard today that when you actually hear from young people,

it's very clear that something needs to change. Another is to recognise that these online harms don't actually stop at 16 or 18. So while it's really important to make the changes for young people, it's also important to bring in a more sort of safety by design code of practice that makes these technologies safer for everybody. We suggest that government should be moving beyond content regulation and thinking more about regulating AI model developers. And again, for the young people,

they had real concerns about these systemic impacts of AI. And then lastly, to invest in alternative spaces for young people. So we talked a bit about online and offline. And actually, if you are thinking about changing people's online worlds, then really you need to think about the offline spaces as well. So an alternative space, like? Well, you know, lots of the young people talked about the value of offline communities for their own spaces for their, for their commitments. A lot of the research was done at an

organisation called Hot Chocolate Trust, which is a youth work centre in Dundee. And these spaces are fantastic for children. Really interesting. Lovely to hear from some of the young people and how they're reflecting on it, Octavia Field-Reed from the Ada Lovelace Institute. Thank you so much. The technology secretary, Liz Kendall, has said new measures on social news. media for under 16th will be brought in by the end of the year. Last week, the actor Natalie Cassidy spoke to Anita on this program, sharing her advice for anyone going through grief. And Natalie had lost her mum at 19 and supported her dad through end-of-life care at home.

She's known for playing Sonia Fowler in EastEnders. Natalie is now studying health and social care with the aim of becoming a professional carer, some of the themes we've been talking about today. Her caring journey has been documented in her new BBC series, Natalie Cassidy, caring together. I've been through every end of the scale with grief, because as I say, I lost my mum at 19, which was a complete shock, and you're very selfish at that age. You're out, you're living your life, your friends are the most important thing. So I carried a lot of guilt about that for a long time, probably still do, if not anger, which I'm dealing with, and I talk to people about, and it's okay. And then grief where you're losing someone, but you've been with them, and you've done everything you can, and you're taking it.

them out of the world. So not saying I'm a season professional, but I've had a little bit of unfortunately, it's not a great club to be in, but, you know, I've had that experience. And whatever you're going through, you've just got to go with it, whatever you're feeling. It doesn't matter. If you want to laugh, that's okay. If you don't want to get out of bed, that's okay. You've just got to go with every feeling. And you can hear the full interview with Natalie. If you go to BBC Sounds, look for Women's Hour. That's for Friday, the 22nd of May. In relation to caring, Susie got in touch. She says, I had to move my father

to a nursing home last week after many years caring for, my mother, excuse me, to a nursing home last week after many years caring for her at home. Through dementia, hospital admissions, delirium, it is heartbreaking, but I'm so glad to hear this play is raising awareness of the devastating care needs that are growing and the empathy

needed to provide good care. So many people are struggling. Thanks for your message. 844. Now, let us move to New York with my next guest, Maria Semple. She is the best-selling author of books including Where'd You Go, Bernadette, which was shortlisted for the women's prize. Her latest brilliant novel, Go Gentle, focuses on Adora Hazard, a stoic philosopher and divorcee,

living on New York City's Upper West Side. She has a job as a moral tutor for an old money family and is assembling a coven of like-minded single women living on the sixth floor of the legendary Ansonia building. But there is a chance encounter that tries to threaten her job. joyfully created life. You're very welcome, Maria. Thank you very much. I'm thrilled to be here. This book crosses a lot of genres. I loved it. It's moving from romance, comedy, mystery with a twist. And the plot line goes all over the place. I want to know what's happening in that mind of yours as your writing. I'll tell you what's going on in my face is I have a fiendish smile and kind of devilishly

lit up eyes. I love a plot. I love a complicated plot. I love taking my characters and throwing them into a lot of trouble. And I get enormous enjoyment out of that. The main protagonist is Adora. She is a stoic philosopher, which perhaps is an unexpected twist. Tell me a little bit more about her. So Adora is, as you said, a stoic philosopher. She translates the original texts into a more kind of relatable English. And she is, become a stoic herself, and her entire character is really based on all of the wisdom that she's gathered from this ancient Greek philosophy. And the idea is that you only concern yourself with what's within your control, and that's your virtue. And everything else, you throw over

to fate, and you just let the fate take care of what it's going to take care of. And so, as good as this sounds for all of us, I saw you sigh and as a must be nice, right? A type of which I think I'm with you. That it's like, yeah, sounds good. But Adora actually is living this. And so when we meet her, she is extremely contented and has a lot of inner freedom and is joyful because she is just really, is curated the life she wants to live. And anything that doesn't go her way, she's amused by it.

More fatty, is that what she has on her arm? Like, kind of to love fate or let fate decide your future. I mean, are you into stoic philosophy? I'm very into stoic philosophy. And I have been studying it. So you do believe it all. Yes, I do. Well, I believe it.

Whether I fully live it, that's always, that's a different question. But I believe it and I strive to be a stoic sage. I'm an amateur stoic, I would say. Because in the book, there's one part between our protagonist Adora and Ravi, for example. Ravi thinks anger is helpful emotion, can get things done, for example, and paraphrasing in shorthand here,

whereas Adora instead would be no temperance, etc. The event happens. It's your reaction to it. Can't anger be something useful at times? I think sometimes women aren't able to or allowed to express the anger that perhaps they should. Yes, absolutely. And I think that

that when we find Adora as admirable as an aspirational as perhaps her life is when we first meet her, I think through the course of the book we realize that it's maybe an overcorrection, that she is maybe felt too deeply and been burned too strongly by her emotions. And so she is almost overcorrected into this life of pure reason. And so to me, the journey of the book, which is Adora's journey is to let the heart in. And with the heart, it's not just love, but it's the chaos of love and the chaos of emotions. Because as much as I think stoicism is really about helping us flourish as humans, I also think that it doesn't really account for just the joy of chaos. The book is chaotic, and I mean that as a compliment. Thank you. I loved it. Like, I kept going back to it. But when, like,

dying to pick it up and go back to it again. But I did find when I picked it up, sometimes I went to a completely different place. So, for example, she looks back on her life. She wrote comedy for TV, as did you, has a traumatic experience, which I found so crushing and shocking, heartbreaking, I would use that word again.

And at other times, it is raucous and fun. And like, I feel probably like speaking to you, I need to keep all my wits about me because there will be a joke or a pun put in that I haven't realized until five minutes later. And that's what the book is like as well, fast and furious and an awful lot of width within it. What does it like to write like that? It's fun for me because I really love writing. I will say that I really love sitting down and with the world that I've created and the characters I've created. I love all of my characters.

and they're, to me, kind of hilariously flawed in all their ways, and they don't get to be in my book. They don't earn a place in the novel if there's nothing, if there's something about them that doesn't kind of delight me. And so therefore, I'm really spending time with a bunch of characters that delight me. But some of the characters, which happen within a comedy writer's room,

which we always think, oh, that must be so much fun to hang out in. Instead, it's horrific. And I know a lot of it. I lived in New York in the 90s as well. So there's all these little, what would I call them, little momentas of the time, whether it's the Howard Stern show or whether it's certain things that were taking place in the news, for example, at that time.

We see them throughout the book as well. And that instead, I suppose, crystallized a misogyny that was in within certain quarters of the entertainment industry. Do you feel you lived through that? Not only did I live through it, but I in terms. internalized it, which I think that women of a certain age, my age in the 90s when I was going through that in the comedy writing rooms, I really believe that comedy was misogyny. I did not question that and that it was only after me too that I understood that, wait, I was almost part of the problem, that I was maybe the only woman in these writers rooms. And to stay in those rooms, I was really

part of this very toxic, misogynistic culture that I didn't really understand that there was something different. And in fact, with Go Gentle, I am a comedy writer. I want to write delightful books that are funny. And I set this challenge for myself that I wanted to write a comedy about a woman where she had total dignity and we did not make, I did not make fun of her. The reader does not laugh at her. We laugh with her because she's funny. And so, to me, it was trying to forge this new type of comic heroine where we're not laughing at her expense, ever. And she has created this life despite the obstacles that were put in her way at an earlier time.

Being around like-minded women, which sounds like Utopia, the Ansonia, real building, for example, also fabled in New York. Lots of people got in touch when we threw that out, talking about the communal living. Here's one. I moved in with my sister after divorce, both in our 60s retired, and it's absolutely joyful, easy, funny, sociable, six daughters between us and grandchildren. And we share care, our 95-year-old dad with dementia. We're able to support each other and laugh about incidents instead of crying. Here's another good morning.

45 years ago, a group of female friends spent a year in France, age 19. We lived across three flats, offered complete support to navigate the experience, which was challenging at times. We often talk now that living together as widows in old age would be perfect. The French experience created very strong bonds between us six women. That's Beverly. I mean, is this something you aspire to? Oh, I love hearing this, first of all. I do.

I'm single. I live in New York. I have a lot of single women friends. I would say maybe my favorite people in the world are my single women friends. And there are a lot of us. And we're quite contented. You know, we're not all on these man hunts or anything. We live extremely full lives.

And so while I do not have this set up right now, I could see it happening. I live in New York. A lot of my friends live in the neighborhood, I would say. And so we're coming close to it, if not living on the exact same floor. You came to writing novels at 40. I loved Where Do You Go, Bernadette, and the film as well with Cape Blanchett. I was thinking back on. Then I saw this morning, and I'd be curious for your thoughts on this.

Box Office hit films are four times. more likely to star a talking animal, or I think a guy called Chris, than a woman over 60, according to a new survey, by age without limits. Oh, gee, that's depressing and believable. I really like writing, to me, women of a certain age, and I have a line in my book where she's describing herself and the other women who live on the floor, who she calls the coven, is she says we all we share a dirty little secret. We're just getting started. And that's really what I feel about women.

I'd say 60-year-old women, I think that there's a vitality to them. There's a sexuality. There's intelligence. There's wisdom. All of these things that I feel like, why can't they be the stars of their own movies? I could speak to you longer, but I've only got a minute left. Where'd You Go, Maria, was one of the headlines. Ten years to this book.

going on in 30 seconds. Yes, well, I was writing for TV a bunch of shows that didn't get made and was very frustrated and that was probably why I started my stoic philosophy practice just to deal with that. But now I'm back. I'm writing novels and I'm so thrilled. And I like saying, go gentle, Maria Semple, which I love on the cover. Really great book. Thank you so much for coming in to join us on Woman's Hour. I do want to let people know tomorrow the England's superstar be player Ellie Kildan will join me. Fresh after her latest Six Nations win. We're going to discuss her glittering career

and her new autobiography. That's game changer. Also, the woman who has written six UK number ones, the name Camille. Do you know it? You'll know more about her by this time tomorrow. I do hope you'll join me at 10. That's all for today's woman's hour.

Join us again next time. Hello, I'm David Badele. And from Radio 4 and the History Podcast, I'm hosting 60 years of Hurt, a series about football and Englishness, in which we try and define what Englishness actually is via the roller coaster history of the England men's football team. It includes contributions from various English gentlemen and women,

Stephen Fry, David Seaman, England sports psychologist Pippa Grange and many others. England may or may not win the World Cup in 2026, but maybe you'll find out why it means so much to us as a country that they might do. Listen to 60 Years of Hurt on BBC Sounds.