"Another insult to stay at home mothers"

[kit10grl]

Im a SAHM and I don't find the idea that they are helping working families with childcare insulting at all.

Some of the quotes they have are a bit insulting tho. It says it will help 'strivers' back to work thus implying SAHM's are not striving to be anything. And it goes on a bit about the whole cutting of child benefit for families on 50,000 so I could see that if they felt the child benefit that was taken away was being used to subsidise this they could be annoyed maybe .

The only thing I that would really bother me (and it wouldn't affect me cos im married) is the fact the scheme is only for families with two incomes. Surely single SAHM's need as much help if not more help with childcare to get back into work but a single mum wouldn't qualify for this scheme. That isn't right.

Of what i read which does sound abit confusing is that the new universal credit which is going to replce ctc and wtc will cover 85% (at the moment is 70%) of childcare for single working part time/full time low income mothers.
This article explains it at the bottom in a table.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23565469

This new part may then apply to us in some form as I am a SAHM for the foreseeable future as a carer for my youngest child. Will have to investigate futher thanks for the link

 

[Foogirl]

I find it Ironic that the woman from the pressure group is accusing Cameron of using "stigmatising language" whilst at the same time labelling SAHMs as "those of us who look after our children". As if working parents don't look after theirs.

 

[hayz_baby]

I find it Ironic that the woman from the pressure group is accusing Cameron of using "stigmatising language" whilst at the same time labelling SAHMs as "those of us who look after our children". As if working parents don't look after theirs.

i hate it when some sah parents assume u do less work/its easier for you becuase you work...

 

[Foogirl]

I find it Ironic that the woman from the pressure group is accusing Cameron of using "stigmatising language" whilst at the same time labelling SAHMs as "those of us who look after our children". As if working parents don't look after theirs.

i hate it when some sah parents assume u do less work/its easier for you becuase you work...

Yep. But I think it works both ways too, people on either side of the fence will throw various comments about, making assumptions and accusations when the reality is we are all just mothers trying to do the best for our families.

I have often wondered why the government is happy to give working families a great deal of money to give to childcare organisations to provide child care but won't give the same amount of money to families to decide how they want to spend it. Some families might want granny to look after their children, but granny needs some financial help to do it. Or some might want to have mum stay at home but can't afford to lose the whole of their salary. Allowing all families to claim a childcare allowance and use how they wished, would help all parents no matter how they choose to arrange their lives.

However, I get the arguments about why paying for childcare to get women back into the workplace helps the economy and for each pound out, an amount comes back in tax. Then there is the fact if the government is paying for childcare, they need to ensure it is regulated properly so paying families isn't always possible as the system could be open to fraud.

It is a tough question for sure, but I think for SAHM's to be insulted that the government chooses to pay for childcare for parents in employment is ridiculous. It's not like they used to pay SAHMs and now they won't.

 

[hayz_baby]

Personally I think that's why sah parents should have their NI contributions paid for. The really issue with staying at home is not having ur ni paid for for when u need to claim your pension in yrs to come if U haven't paid Enough ni you won't get it.
The way it will work is can one person stay at home? Yes? We can afford it or no we can't but we will get help with childcare

 

[lindseymw]

Personally I think that's why sah parents should have their NI contributions paid for. The really issue with staying at home is not having ur ni paid for for when u need to claim your pension in yrs to come if U haven't paid Enough ni you won't get it.
The way it will work is can one person stay at home? Yes? We can afford it or no we can't but we will get help with childcare

If you claim child benefit, your NI contributions are paid for and go towards your claim for pension. This covers SAHMs & low income mothers as well.

https://www.hmrc.gov.uk/childbenefit/start/claiming/protect-pension.htm

 

[Tiff]

I wish there was help for working parents here. We desperately need me to be working, we're barely holding our heads above water. However, there isn't any childcare help here. Oh wait, they do give the "Universal Childcare Benefit" which is $100 a month... but fulltime childcare runs about $800 a month so it doesn't really help that much.

Right now, if I were to work I'd basically be working to have her in daycare. So, we've been waiting for her to start school fulltime then I can start working. We're really getting to the end of our tether, if there was an incentive like this then I could go out NOW and find fulltime work and help my hubby with the bills.

So yeah, I'm another SAHM who doesn't view this as an insult.

 

[Tasha]

I don't think it is an insult either.

Tiff, that universal childcare benefit sounds similar to this really as £1200 is about C$1900, so that is around £100/$158 a month help but in London where I live it costs around £70 a day for childcare which is £1500/$2400 a month, so doesn't even scratch the surface.

 

[special_kala]

I am a SAHM therefor dont need childcare, why would i find it insulting that their not willing to give me a tax break towards childcare?

 

[bubbles123]

I can see why people are annoyed. It's not necessarily about paying for childcare rather that stay at home parents have lost a lot in income in the cuts and as one person doesn't work this has made us poorer. We have lost over £100 a month in tax credits alone and OH has had no pay rise. It annoys me people on large double salaries get £1200 a year when they can afford childcare but SAHM mothers have been made poorer by these changes with no help to replace this lost income. No one has thought what we do is worthwhile enough to help us live on fixed incomes.

For it to be fair you shouldn't reward one over the other.

 

[chell5544]

I can see why people are annoyed. It's not necessarily about paying for childcare rather that stay at home parents have lost a lot in income in the cuts and as one person doesn't work this has made us poorer. We have lost over £100 a month in tax credits alone and OH has had no pay rise. It annoys me people on large double salaries get £1200 a year when they can afford childcare but SAHM mothers have been made poorer by these changes with no help to replace this lost income. No one has thought what we do is worthwhile enough to help us live on fixed incomes.

For it to be fair you shouldn't reward one over the other.

I can see where your coming from and I think the cut off threshold of £150000 a year is a bit ridiculous.
But on the other hand this is where the view in the benefit system has gone all wrong tax credits should not be classed as an income to live on it is there to boost and help low income families.
Working mothers were also affected when they dropped the threshold of tax credits and many have lost money each month as well.
I don't think it's fair for working mothers to pay for SAHM if the family can't survive on just one income then both parents should work.
That's just my two cents on the matter

 

[bubbles123]

I can see why people are annoyed. It's not necessarily about paying for childcare rather that stay at home parents have lost a lot in income in the cuts and as one person doesn't work this has made us poorer. We have lost over £100 a month in tax credits alone and OH has had no pay rise. It annoys me people on large double salaries get £1200 a year when they can afford childcare but SAHM mothers have been made poorer by these changes with no help to replace this lost income. No one has thought what we do is worthwhile enough to help us live on fixed incomes.

For it to be fair you shouldn't reward one over the other.

I can see where your coming from and I think the cut off threshold of £150000 a year is a bit ridiculous.
But on the other hand this is where the view in the benefit system has gone all wrong tax credits should not be classed as an income to live on it is there to boost and help low income families.
Working mothers were also affected when they dropped the threshold of tax credits and many have lost money each month as well.
I don't think it's fair for working mothers to pay for SAHM if the family can't survive on just one income then both parents should work.
That's just my two cents on the matter

I can see where you are coming from too but unfortunately the UK wages are so low that many people do need tax credits/child benefit just to get by even on an average wage. I have a friend who works full time but needs to claim housing benefit to pay the rent. It's mad. We can live on OH's income alone but tax credits were a great help. Me working would make no difference. Despite working full time, my salary wouldn't cover childcare and travel for 1 child, let alone two. Which is why I stay at home. £1200, whilst better than nothing wouldn't touch the side.

What we need is a living wage but no chance of that with the Tories.

 

[hayz_baby]

I can see why people are annoyed. It's not necessarily about paying for childcare rather that stay at home parents have lost a lot in income in the cuts and as one person doesn't work this has made us poorer. We have lost over £100 a month in tax credits alone and OH has had no pay rise. It annoys me people on large double salaries get £1200 a year when they can afford childcare but SAHM mothers have been made poorer by these changes with no help to replace this lost income. No one has thought what we do is worthwhile enough to help us live on fixed incomes.

For it to be fair you shouldn't reward one over the other.

I can see where your coming from and I think the cut off threshold of £150000 a year is a bit ridiculous.
But on the other hand this is where the view in the benefit system has gone all wrong tax credits should not be classed as an income to live on it is there to boost and help low income families.
Working mothers were also affected when they dropped the threshold of tax credits and many have lost money each month as well.
I don't think it's fair for working mothers to pay for SAHM if the family can't survive on just one income then both parents should work.
That's just my two cents on the matter

I can see where you are coming from too but unfortunately the UK wages are so low that many people do need tax credits/child benefit just to get by even on an average wage. I have a friend who works full time but needs to claim housing benefit to pay the rent. It's mad. We can live on OH's income alone but tax credits were a great help. Me working would make no difference. Despite working full time, my salary wouldn't cover childcare and travel for 1 child, let alone two. Which is why I stay at home. £1200, whilst better than nothing wouldn't touch the side.

What we need is a living wage but no chance of that with the Tories.

Defo need a living wage, labour have said that's what they will bring in.

We have to claim housing benefit too despite me working ft just to pay the rent. Rent is so high and there's no sign of it going backwards. Without hb we couldn't afford to live. I'm not on minimum wage but I'm defo below average wage, but some people say my wage is ok in comparison but still here I am relying on the help just to live. Fact is without it we couldn't live. We don't even pay out for a car or cc either.... (Oh is a sahd)

 

[Foogirl]

I don't think it's fair for working mothers to pay for SAHM if the family can't survive on just one income then both parents should work.
That's just my two cents on the matter

I kind of agree with that, but why not make it so all parents are given the same amount of money (adjusted for tax contributions) and let each family decide whether it is used to stay at home, or go to childcare? That way it's a much fairer system and people can make more of a choice.

Although, given that I pay way more than the contribution in tax, it may well be that SAHMs still end up with nowt! Or, the other way to do it is like a student loan type thing. Money is paid to SAHM and they then pay an increased contribution when they return to work to pay it off. And if they never pay it off, it gets knocked off their pension.

 

[kit10grl]

its hard to set up a fair for everyone set of rules though. I honestly grudge the fact that People look at me as a SAHM now and assume that we should both be working as we cant really afford to live without help if only one of us is working.

We often get judged for that till I point out that with the job I was in for the last 13 years I paid in more in tax in one year for just me and not including hubbys tax payments than we are taking out together jointly over the course of a year now. I dont know if or when I will be able to return to work but if all goes well once both children are in school I will be able to get something.

I don't expect childcare to be paid for as we don't need it but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be entitled to other help because I stay home. And other people who tell me they pay for me to live are talking rubbish. We paid in more than enough to cover what we are taking out and then some.

Im not meaning anyone in this thread btw just its a bit of a pet peeve right now that all SAHM's who are claiming benefits get written off sometimes.

 

[AngelofTroy]

I can sort of see why people are annoyed. I work part-time but I do one overnight shift a week when OH is home with LO, so we luckily can manage without childcare. But I still feel judged, in particular by this government, for choosing to stay home and look after my child while he is little. They've cultivated this stigma against anyone not working, people on benefits (even ill or disabled people), the unemployed, SAHMs. They paint a picture of everyone not working in full time paid work as a chav sitting around on their asses watching Jeremy Kyle all day!
It's very clever, because people are then so busy pointing the finger at those who are struggling to live on one income or benefits, that they conveniently forget about the tax breaks being given to the very rich, and the huge salaries being paid to bankers who messed up our economy

 

[overcomer79]

I'm a working mom (not getting into a debate) but that wouldn't even scratch the surface of childcare. I'm sure that is why a lot choose the SAH route.

 

[tinkerbelle93]

I'm a SAHM and not insulted by this

So basically the DM find it insulting unless mothers are just better off at home and won't gain anything financially from going to work? And if working mothers are the same or poorer than SAHM's? Ughh. xx

 

[Foogirl]

I'm a SAHM and not insulted by this

So basically the DM find it insulting unless mothers are just better off at home and won't gain anything financially from going to work? And if working mothers are the same or poorer than SAHM's? Ughh. xx

And if that were the case (as they keep telling us it is for those on benefits who choose not to work) then they'd attack the government for making it so work doesn't pay.

Anything for a cheap headline.

Angeloftroy, I'm not sure why you think SAHM's are lumped in with those who could but choose not to work. From what I see in the media, generally SAHMs are not considered to be workshy. The only time I see them being down on SAHMs is when you've got those mothers who have children very young, have no partner and have multiple children who the Government is expected to look after and have no other means to pay for them. Especially when they will insist they have the absolute right to not work because they are raising those children - a luxury most people work hard for. I suspect that group of people is actually very small in number but you only need a dozen of them for the daily mail to write a shock piece once a month to keep "outraged from Croydon" in rants.

Apart from the stereotypical crap that raises its head from time to time, I do think most people have no issue with SAHMs who have other income but need a little help in topping that up. That's what welfare is for!