Advanced search

To think this misses the point about costs of childcare?

(1000 Posts)
adsy Wed 03-Sep-14 07:41:04

"Critics have complained that homes where one parent stays at home to look after children will not benefit."

This is in response to the new scheme where parents will get 20% of childcare costs paid for by the government.
I'm a CM and all for subsidies of any sort to help out parents, but other than the odd day when you might need to go for an interview etc. I can't see why a stay at home parent needs to get childcare subsidies or am I missing a major point here?!

aprilanne Wed 03-Sep-14 07:50:56

i was a sahm .when my sons were little .and no i dont understand people complaining .if your at home you don,t need it .but i do think the policy is a bit of a waste of money .i read you can still make something ridicoulous like 80k and still claim childcare costs ..i feel this government wants everyone working and panning there children of to childcare providers.surely they should be encouraging people to care for there own children .through tax breaks and such like .not having a generation being brought up by strangers .and before i get flamed i realise this is an old fashioned view . but i do feel children do better with mum at home .obviously not if you cant afford it .

jamespurefoygf Wed 03-Sep-14 07:52:16

It isn't a waste of money at all; lack of affordable childcare is the singular biggest issue in this country impacting on working parents.

SeagullsAndSand Wed 03-Sep-14 07:54:15

Because families with a sahp take a financial hit too.Parents doing the childcare are just as valid a choice as childminders and nurseries doing the childcare.For some families it is the better choice and best for the dc involved.

When you choose to have children you know somebody will have to care for them and you will have to fund it either by losing an income or using childcare.Both choices can be planned for and are equally worthy of support.

Sahp also may be carers or studying for their return to work.

Hasn't this been covered several times over.hmm

adsy Wed 03-Sep-14 07:55:01

james I totally agree that childcare subsidies are a great help to many people with low income jobs; what I don't understand is a complaint that stay at home parents won't benefit. They surely don't need childcare?

jamespurefoygf Wed 03-Sep-14 07:55:37

In all honesty, I don't see why a parent studying for their return to work does not do that study prior to having children.

Carers are a different matter if the child(ren) have additional needs of some kind.

adsy Wed 03-Sep-14 07:57:38

Carers do get additional allowances though which is meant to compensate for the fact they are effectively forced to stay at home ( I know there will be the sound of hollow laughter that carers allowance makes up for a wage, but in theory)

WooWooOwl Wed 03-Sep-14 07:58:04

I don't understand the complaint that SAHPs won't benefit either. If they're staying at home, they don't need help with childcare costs, so those particular parents are as irrelevant to this as pensioners are.

jamespurefoygf Wed 03-Sep-14 07:58:21

No, I agree with you adsy. Stay at home parents do not need childcare; this money is for childcare, ergo they do not need it.

Obviously some are going to feel their role of staying at home is devalued, but it isn't that (in my view.) If a family has decided the model that works best is one parent staying at home I wouldn't dream of arguing. However, for every family in that position there are, I would guess, another three where a parent would like to work but the cost of childcare is crippling.

Then single parents either need to be earning a high salary (and still take a huge hit) or not work at all.

SeagullsAndSand Wed 03-Sep-14 08:00:07

We'll I don't understand why families who want both parents to return to work don't plan ahead more.All this wringing of hands at the nursery gates is a tad late.Plan.Save.Have the family you can afford.

I've seen mothers of 3 or 4 kids whining about the cost of childcare or those with 2 in nursery at once.Spread your kids out more or have less.Society isn't responsible for your child planning.

I had 3 children in a year,I didn't expect society to fund my choices I became a sahp and took the huge financial hit having planned ahead for it.

tittifilarious Wed 03-Sep-14 08:01:10

I think it'd be similar to non-students complaining they can't get a student loan, or non-farmers complaining they don't get the duty free diesel.

aprilanne Wed 03-Sep-14 08:02:37

i think sometimes people feel they are not valued because they are a SAHP.all the money seems to go working parents .loads of people think oh you do nothing .well actually i do loads you think .god even now they are teenagers its hard work .i always feel i have to say well i have an autistic child .then people think oh its ok for you to be home then .otherwise they think i life the life of rielly .various lunches/coffee mornings .god i wish .

tittifilarious Wed 03-Sep-14 08:04:35

seagulls has it occurred to you that society benefits from people going back to work and that is why society makes a contribution to (as opposed to funding) childcare? My friends are dentists, nurses, teachers.

SeagullsAndSand Wed 03-Sep-14 08:04:57

I also don't think families on pretty comfortable incomes need help with Childcare.We're supposed to be short of cash,chucking it away on those who don't need it during what is after all a temporary time is ludicrous.

And re studying sahp. Getting back into the workplace is crucial.Studying during your time off can be very beneficial.If it helps more parents whose children would benefit from a sahp to have a sahp it is extremely valuable.

Little bit selfish those who don't need help with childcare gobbling up free handouts then berating poorer families who could use support equal support.There seem to be some very entitled parents.hmm

aprilanne Wed 03-Sep-14 08:05:20

the carers allowance is £55 a week .oh and a 10 pound christmas bonus .

jamespurefoygf Wed 03-Sep-14 08:05:30

I can understand those feelings April, but somebody's injured pride should not mean they are granted large amounts of money for a situation irrelevant to them.

polkadotsrock Wed 03-Sep-14 08:06:23

I'm not bothered personally but I am a sahp and my 2 year old goes to nursery 3 afternoons. Just because I'm at home doesn't mean I can make up for the things I personally feel he would miss if he didn't attend nursery. Just trying to show that being at home doesn't mean no childcare at all. I also have a baby girl, though by the time I feel she needs more than I can give her my eldest will be in a funded place anyway. Hope I'm not missing the point...

ArsenicFaceCream Wed 03-Sep-14 08:06:46

We'll I don't understand why families who want both parents to return to work don't plan ahead more.All this wringing of hands at the nursery gates is a tad late.Plan.Save.Have the family you can afford.

Heh. It's a valid point.

Kimaroo Wed 03-Sep-14 08:07:15

I'm in for it as long as they cough up the same amount for season ticket loans. There's no point in saving 20% in childcare if it's immediately swallowed up by yet another rise in rail costs! <bitter>

adsy Wed 03-Sep-14 08:08:31

The new scheme is up to £2000 a year so £38.46 a week.

hallamoo Wed 03-Sep-14 08:09:37

Seagulls and sand has hit the nail on the head.

This, on top of the removal of CB for families with one HRT tax payer (when families where both parents work, potentially with a combined income of up to 98k are still eligible), is another slap in the face from the government for families with a SAHP.

For every family who is crippled by the cost of childcare, there will be another who; has willing grandparents, or has older children, or works school hours, meaning that their childcare bill is vastly reduced or non-existant.

girlwithgreeneyes11 Wed 03-Sep-14 08:12:03

No problem with sahp not benefitting. Even though I would have welcomed some support to enable me to study. I think the problem is that the govt have devalued the sahm role. All this talk of hard working families and loss of child benefit for individual high earners who often support a sahm.
My concern is that part timers on a low wage may not get help either and tbey need it more than people earning 100k or 200k even as a couple. Another unfair govt policy. Fsm for ks1 etc.

Bolshybookworm Wed 03-Sep-14 08:16:11


Society IS responsible for keeping lots of people on short term contracts in unstable careers. Planning carefully is great if you have a cushy permanent job. Lots of us don't, sadly. I'm a responsible person, worked hard all through my twenties but then was screwed over by the housing market and the sector I work in moving largely abroad. If I waited until my career was sorted to have kids, I would be in my forties. Would you take that risk?

Now we have 2 kids and are skint but happy! Extra help with childcare would make a HUGE difference to us (eg I could take a lower paid position in a more stable job).

aprilanne Wed 03-Sep-14 08:18:18

james your right if you are at home .you dont need childcare .but surely if you earn 98k between you you dont need help .but then i live in scotland where housing costs are cheap compared to england .someone told me for my mortgage for 3 bed semi a month .you would be paying that a week for a bedsit in london .

WooWooOwl Wed 03-Sep-14 08:38:29

I don't agree with the removal of child benefit for anyone because I think certain universal benefits are a good thing, but families with one high earner and one SAHP have made a luxury choice, so I can't muster much sympathy for their loss of CB. They have only one set of working costs, they have a parent available to shop cheaply, they don't have to pay for expensive commutes to work for two people and they don't have to pay for childcare.

So what if families don't get help with childcare costs? Society isn't there to make everyone feel valued as some kind of human right. It doesn't benefit society that much to be a SAHP, it benefits your children and your family, but the the difference it makes to society is practically non existent. Of course, some SAHPs make the most of their time and do voluntary or community work, and that has a definite benefit to society, but that is a separate thing to looking after your own child.

This thread is not accepting new messages.