Mumsnet has not checked the qualifications, experience, or professional insurance of anyone posting on Mumsnet and cannot be held responsible for any advice given on the site. Free legal advice is available from a Citizen's Advice Bureau, and the Law Society can supply a list of local solicitors.

Universal Credit implications for long-term SAHMs??? Help please!

(803 Posts)
CSLewis Fri 01-Feb-13 09:39:21

Hi, I've just read the Mumsnet summary about Universal Credit, and read that parents of children aged 5-13 will be required to seek work during school hours, though I think those with a baby under one may be exempt.

Does anyone have any further details about this? It feels to me that a parent of young (primary-aged) children is being forced to return to the job market, regardless of whether they judge it to be in the best interests of their family hmm

thesnootyfox Thu 07-Feb-13 20:06:02

Say not see.

ineedaspartame I bf my DD until 19mo and went back to work full time when she was 7mo. Two of my full time colleagues also continued with bf after returning to work. One of them is getting close to 2yo now! Not sure why you assume working mums can't bf. In fact studies say older and better educated mums are more likely to bf. They are the ones more likely to return to work presumably.

MummytoKatie Sat 09-Feb-13 00:09:39

Yep - I went back when dd was 11 months and carried on breastfeeding until 27 months.

aftermay Sat 09-Feb-13 00:21:05

Full time work and breast feeding are not incompatible.

Rummaging through wheelie bins?

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 00:31:57

So many posters seem, inexplicably, to see children as a luxury add on to go with the Sky box and the second car rather than an integral part of society. What the hell is wrong with a child being cared for by a parent? Not everyone has their own parents nearby to provide free childcare and there is nothing at all to be gained in one parent spending all their earnings on farming their kids out to a nursery.
Yes when the kids are school age a theoretical argument can be made, but ROFL at the idea of all these school hours, term time only jobs that exist just waiting to be filled by lazy SAHPs.
Some people really don't live in the real world.

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 00:37:55

I propose that those two income households where the second income pays for childcare with money to spare for holidays etc give up one of the jobs to free it up for someone who is being forced to find one or starve. Sounds fair?

aftermay Sat 09-Feb-13 00:38:42

Gaelicsheep - so many posters? Really? I can't see a single one on this thread who is 'farming out' their child so they can have Sky.

aftermay Sat 09-Feb-13 00:42:36

I'd rather not give up my job for someone else. It can't be filled in just by anyone, I like my job, I'd get bored at home while the kids are at school and I love my holidays. I can expand on the reasons but I'm guessing we'd both be wasting our time.

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 00:43:34

What I mean is that children are discussed in the same vein as Sky and other non essential luxuries. Can't afford to live on one income in order to bring up children? Tough, don't have them then. That attitude is prevalent and wrong.

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 00:48:00

Even if someone else needs it more than you Aftermay? If that person then can't find a suitable job do you agree their universal credit should be cut, to allow your two income lifestyle to continue? You being meant here in the broadest sense, not personal to you specifically of course.

aftermay Sat 09-Feb-13 00:57:55

Don't be silly. I've worked for years for my 'lifestyle'. I've made the most of my brains. Why would I give it up? Choose to subsidise a stranger over giving me & mine a holiday? I already pay taxes, give to charity etc.

I wouldn't like to live in your world where women would be forced to stay at home.

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 01:04:14

Who said anything about women being forced to stay at home? Simply that when there aren't enough jobs to go round it seems unfair that some families keep hold of two well paying ones whilst others are lucky to get one at minimum wage through no fault of their own, then get berated for it by the double earners? Don't you think?

Let's ALL have one, two, or even may be three kids and all the mums AND dads stay at home to look after them. After all who's to say Mum or Dad could do the better job? And who's to say which class could do the better job?

Ooooo....hang on...wheres all the money coming from....oh yes that big pot in the sky that just refills itself.

You have babies, you stay at home, you go to work, whatever, you just cut your cloth to support your need. The benefits system exists to support those in dire straits, not to support lifestyle choices. I don't get why that is such a difficult concept to grasp.

aftermay Sat 09-Feb-13 01:11:02

I don't see anyone being berated by double earners. If anything, I see double earners being berated for 'farming out' their children do they can go out and earn that double income. Or maybe that's just your worldview?

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 01:13:31

Currently the benefits system is required to prop up incomes of normal families because of rises in the cost of living fuelled by two income families. Where are the jobs to allow every family to have two earners? I foresee a flurry of new childminders - just swap kids in the morning. Job done grin

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 01:27:23

" Why would I give it up? Choose to subsidise a stranger over giving me & mine a holiday?"

I'm not picking a fight honestly, but don't you see how someone in the reverse position might feel they shouldn't have to find a crappy job that only just covers the childcare costs just to save you some tax?

aftermay Sat 09-Feb-13 01:31:24

Gaelicsheep - the swapping childminders would in effect be paying the govt. to be able to do their jobs. Income would be straightforward 'swap' but they'd still need to pay taxes on their income and everything else.

I don't buy your logic about the cost of living rising because educated people - including women! Some of them even mothers! - choosing to work. It's not the 1950s.

You may be on to something there Gaelic. However a lot of "propping up" in my experience (people who I know who get TC) means they get a holiday abroad every year, which is lovely and not too outlandish, but not really necessity is it. And something I have to work 45 hours a week for. Its quite soul destroying when people are in the middle of ticking off the back of their prescription as "Income Support" then answering their iPhone.

aftermay Sat 09-Feb-13 01:34:34

'just to save you some tax'? Err, you mean some more tax. I'm already paying quite a bit, rest assured.

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 01:47:07

Are you sure saladcreamwitheverything? I think I see the same thing, but it depends on which end of the spectrum you're at. If the TC in question is a few hundred quid of CTC that really doesn't make up for not having a second salary coming in with its second tax free allowance. But I think this proposal is about the WTC end of things and I think the odd perverse outcome shouldn't colour the argument about the potential hardships faced by the majority.

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 01:52:27

House price inflation really took off when double incomes could be counted for mortgages. Which came first I don't know, I'm not an economist, but they are surely linked. That also had a knock on effect on rents of course, making any kind of decent housing unaffordable for many normal working people, hence an increased reliance on benefits.

Sure about what?

gaelicsheep Sat 09-Feb-13 02:06:33

Are you sure that the anecdotes you mentioned are really that common? Because it's bloody hard running a household on a single income, even a notionally good one.

I'm not at the end of any spectrum. Actually we are probably the VERY squeezed middle! I have a good job, but I have a divorce behind me. No legal aid. My DH has a ex-p who is the worst woman in the world, has come up with all kinds of untrue bollocks so we have spent in excess of £20k through courts sorting that out so he can access to gain access to his DS again. Again no Legal Aid. I gave birth to my DS in Jan 2012, i was back at work doing a 45 hour week two weeks later. I am very bitter towards people who get something for nothing.

"anecdotes" Yep that's all they are, I wish!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now