To be slightly annoyed by the phase 'work hard and get on'(169 Posts)
on the budget speech.
Apparently in reference to SAHM.
The newspapers were slating PM's use of this phrase all today. That SAHM would be excluded from receiving child care support because they do not want to work hard and get on.
I was mostly surprised that the chancellor used this exact same phrase at the budget speech today. I thought they would just erase it after the papers raised concerns from parents about it.
I just find it insulting that people generally think SAHM don't do anything, but just lounge around at home.
Not overtly forced and nothing in writing....just a lot of pressure verbally so I think it would be hard to prove
No policy on minimum time off though
I think the benefit should be for both as it would allow families to decide how to bring up their children. It should assist dual-income families with the cost of childcare and ease the financial burden of one-income families who prioritize having a parent stay at home.
Yes, the wording was annoying though . I don't even live in the UK, so am not affected, but it still irritated me.
Not everyone works because they have to. Not everyone stays at home because they want to (talking specifically about parents here).
Painting one choice as morally superior when there are always so many factors at play is just cynical and divisive.
If one income is sufficient to provide for your needs then why should both parents work? Unless they want to.
I have been a SAHM with all my kids in school. My husband worked very long hours at a well paid job he loved, so me picking up the domestic slack worked very well for all of us.
2 parents don't necessarily get 10 weeks leave. Many will have to share 8 weeks. Once you add in the odd day off for car / domestic troubles and maybe medical appointments (lots of employers aren't happy about time off for those things) then you've well and truly chipped into your annual leave. Then you need time off when kids are sick if you don't have any relatives to help.
I've always worked hard and had more than glowing work reviews but I'm still suck where I am. No bonuses, no riches just plodding away.
I just don't understand why you would want to stay home Moomin that's all. Don't get me wrong I love being a SAHM and I can see the benefots of being around whilst children are at infant school but I still think I'd feel a bit redundant. I think it might be one of those what you are used to things, as my mum went back to work my expectation is that I willgo back, MIL never did DHs expectation is that I am effectivly retired.
LOL cockyfox 'And don't cite school holidays as there are 13 weeks of them and a couple get 10 weeks leave between them and 3 weeks (or 4 if you take a week as a family) really isn't that much to cover.'
So by that reckoning it is okay with you if the family only gets one week all together on holiday per year...?
If a SAHP has a partner who earns enough, it is entirely up to them as a couple if he/she wishes to remain a SAHP even after the kids have started school. Often he/she will opt to do some voluntary work.
There are all sorts of reasons why it might be desirable for the family unit for one person to SAH. Some examples: special needs kids, partners who go away on business a lot, deserving a break from 24/7 care now they are finally at school, realising that few people on their deathbeds wish they'd spent more time at the office'....fine if you want to resume your career or need to earn some more dosh but it is not a given that every SAHP will want or need to do this.
I'm pretty sure the wives of most Tory ministers don't need to do this...lol.
I hate the phrase because it implies that people who are poor/unsuccessful are lazy.
It's also a complete joke in respect to childcare costs because it will actually make many worse off.
Well I was perfectly happy Fox. I did some OU studying I'd always wanted to do and quite a bit of volunteering. Plus I am a bit of a saddo who enjoys baking and gardening and stuff anyway.
These days me and DH have our own business so work from home anyway. I suppose I'm just not very outgoing.
..and another thing...the fact that I don't feel the need to rush back out to work leaves a job open for someone else whose family needs the income much more than mine does....see there is some virtue in it.
maybe he really did think it was gone with the wind and lobster bisque day?
But I agree with what you said about family expectations. Me and DH both had SAHMs who had control of the family budget and were equal partners etc. I always felt that being a SAHM was a valid contribution.
cockyfox - I am one of those you dont understand then. I have 2 school age children 1 dd in year 4 1 ds in year 2. I gave up work when dd was born. Went on maternity leave and never went back. Also have no intention of going back either. We are lucky dh earns enough that we can afford for me not to have to work. It means that I am there to take the kids to school every day and pick up every day. I sit with them and do homework, reading and anything else school related as well as play with them if they want me too (not so much now they are older). I am available if they are ill and can be at school in 10 minutes if needed. Last week ds had a nasty accident at school which resulted in a massive nose bleed and concerns he had broken his nose. I was there within 10 minutes to access the damage and bring him home. How easy would that have been if I had been at work. At times I have had other mums call me frantic that they need someone to pick up dc because either child care has let them down or child is ill and they need to come home. This just confirms to me that I am lucky that I dont have to work and can be there when needed at a moments notice. I manage to fill my days easy enough. Currently redecorating the house.
My dh works hard and earns a good salary which enables us to do the above but how has he been repaid. We have had child benefit removed.
you should be more than a bit annoyed with this government.
'Work hard' implies that there are jobs available, which there aren't. Repeat a lie often enough...
I don't think SAHM's should get childcare support but at a time when they can't work out why birthrates across the developed world have collapsed to well below replacement levels, you'd think they would be a bit more appreciative of SAHM's on an ideological level. They want an endless supply of low-pay workers and they want the 'little' people to breed - so they can have enough foot soldiers for the perpetuation of the type of generational wealth that puts them in the position of being able to tell everyone else they are feckless tossers ;)
Well said, Mimi. How have we let them get away with it?
I've ended up being a sahm but its not through choice. I graduated from uni in 2005 with a degree in law.
My ds was born 6 Wks later. In 2005 there were plenty of jobs but ds was a very difficult baby, 3cm & a nursery later i realised i was going to have to stay at home until he settled down & stopped crying.
He did stop crying at8 months but continued to be very difficult to care for. He was diagnosed at 6 with ASD & ADHD.
He was excluded from mainstream school by 5& didn't go to school fulltime until he was 7. He attends an independent special school. He gets 18 Wks holiday per annum. Childcare dosn't exist for ds. I would need to employ a carer at about£12 An hour.
Since my youngest Dc4 started school last October I've been looking for a job. I've applied for hundreds. I don't chose to be sahm. Im bored, isolated & resent the implication of this government that i don't want to work & get on.
Am I missing something or don't you need childcare to go to interviews, volunteer work that could lead to,emploŷment, to,study etc?
I am a sahm with a 9 month old dd and a nearly 3 year old ds. Childcare vouchers benefitted my ds as they helped toward the cost of his preschool.
So my dh works hard, lost child benefit and now childcare vouchers.
I am aware that I am lucky that financially i am able to do this and that the choice is mine but surely any new child benefitting policies should be fair to all children.
Preschool has helped my ds in so many ways and I am sure will benefit my dd too, but this time without the help of childcare vouchers .
YABU and over-sensitive. Helping those who go out to work in paid employment doesn't mean discriminating against those that opt to stay home or are economically inactive. It's like saying that helping disabled people is discriminating against the able-bodied. Of course we should support people who want to work hard and get on..... what's the alternative?
I didn't hear the comments, so I don't know how they were said.
But I think women should be encouraged to work as much as possible. Paying more for childcare now means paying less welfare later for women who fell behind and didn't earn enough because it didn't make sense to go to work due to child care.
I think child care should be heavily subsidised and made more available so that women have every financial incentive to work.
I'm sick of reading posts on here by mothers who can't leave their abusive cock because she has no job and hasn't worked in X number of years. She's been stuck in the house, financially dependent on someone who makes her feel like shit instead of being an autonomous adult.
Maybe some families are fortunate enough for the mum to stay home, but she's still depending on the benevolence of her husband.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.