To be quite angry about proposed changes to 3-4yo childcare- only for ALL working parents?

I just feel like this govt really hates me. When I had my 1st child and wanted to return to work no support with childcare was available as dh earned too much yet my colleague who lived with her parents got 80% paid. So I decided to pretty much sah. Than we lost child benefit. Fair enough but still a hit with 3 dc. Than fsm brought in but surprise surprise our dc are too old or too young to benefit. Now the 30 hours free comes in. Great I can go back to work and finally benefit from a policy but it comes in just as youngest starts school.

This study is looking at the children as adults, I think now most mums end up working but that wasn't always the case, many in my mum's generation didn't, maybe that is the difference - most SAHPs see it as a career break not a career ending these days.

I imagine the term time thing is because they don't want to set up a system that gets worse at school age, this way parents are used to it only being for some of the year.

*3 hours each session (so 6 hrs/w)

you made me worried for a minute Owl

of course 15hrs will not be scrapped. they are not free childcare hours but first step to introduce kids to the ed system and preparing them for school.
They are for the kids.
And round here you still pay a top up fee (3.00 - 10.20 per session!)

DD is 3 and starting playgroup next Thu because she needs it and up until now I wouldn't have been able to manage extra journey at lunchtime to pick her up.
she will go Thu & Fri only, 3 hours each week until end of summer term. it will be a PITA for me to do it, but she desperately needs it for various reasons. with baby at home i will not be child free.

I'm a SAHM and as we have 7 kids, who collectively exhaust me, it would be wonderful to have 6 child-free hours every weekday to catch up on endless tasks and lost sleep and perhaps go for a swim or do a bit of exercise (I have no energy or time to look after me atm) and have a little breathing space.
Trust me, if anyone, I really would appreciate a little break.
but why on Earth should it be free, beyond the 15 hrs that are set up to benefit the children??

Term time only is ridiculous-
And I say that as a teacher!
Mind you- there were no free hours at all when mine were small, and we paid fully for nursery 51 weeks of the year (only Christmas week when the nursery shut was there no charge) so tbh I'd be bloody grateful for any subsidies at all. It's all a lot better than it used to be (old gimmer emoticon!)

The thing I don't get is that it's termtime only - how is that useful for working parents who aren't school/academic staff?

The extra 15 hours if you divide them by 52 weeks rather than term time are only worth £35 a week in my LA.

But Odd surely most mums end up working.

Having a period as a sahp doesn't mean you never work.

f I don't get the hours of free childcare getting someone to watch dd whilst I go to interviews is going to be a nightmare

Why would you assume preschool hours would fit in with an interview anyway? they most likely wouldn't.

You cannot seriously expect how ever many hours free child care a week on the off chance that you might get one or two interviews, which most likely would be at different hours anyway.

If you get work, you then find child care that fits with it. You can't do it the other way around, that just wouldn't work!

I don't understand your post at all.

I realise that this is similar to a situation when my children were young. I could have used childcare vouchers for an after school club, but I preferred nanny type care which isn't covered. I quite see why the benefit isn't available for private arrangements. I might have pad my mother after all, Or some psychopath. But that was an example of a benefit I didn't get because the access wasn't widened to suit my choices. Never occurred to me to moan about it.

Yanbu.
I planned to get dd settled into preschool and then begin the job hunt.
If I don't get the hours of free childcare getting someone to watch dd whilst I go to interviews is going to be a nightmare. And im not overjoyed at having a mad dash to find a preshool before I start work.
I'm not sure how this will affect me if I'm self employed either as that is an option. But I can't work at home whilst caring for a three year old.

I realise this is a bit of a first world problem but I am narked. My plans are going to be laid to waste.

There is no specific mention of it being pre school but there was an American report recently that found that daughters of working mothers (no mention of dads) get better qualifications and had higher earnings than daughters of non-working mothers and that sons grew up to do more in the home if their mothers worked so it was presented as a positive for equality in society. There are way too many other issues for it to be seen as universally preferable though.

Not really interested in quoting 'surveys' back and forth,'which can prove or disprove any argument you choose.
At the end of the day, the govt Is widening access to work for parents who want it.
It won't make any difference to parents who don't

I don't know why people talk about begrudging. You pay your tax, the money is gone. The government decides what to spent it on. You don't like the government's decisions, vote for another party. They don't get in. Better luck next time.

I think it's wrong to see pay outs as personal. I pay tax so I get to feel cross about what other people get. Apart from landlords getting HB. They're my pet hate.

32% is confusing her argument I think... The outcomes for children from working families is better than from workless. As in, homes with A parent working...not both. To my knowledge, there are no stats showing kids with both parents working are better off, in fact many theories would prob state the opposite. There is nothing beneficial for a child to be in a form of childcare more than with their parents, unless the parents do nothing with them.

I don't begrudge it. But I don't begrudge financial support for SAHP either. Particularly single parents with young children. And I can't understand how some people find that idea so distasteful yet are happy for two parents who earn a lot of money either separately or combined (where the free hours will not make a difference to their decision to work, and who do not need it) get it.

But some people it seems do begrudge it, jellybeans, even though they don't want it themselves.

Well I am in scotland so it won't apply to us. Bairns not bombs my arse, Nicola sturgeon.
But if it did, I would be pissed off about it only applying when both parents work. There are massive job cuts coming where I work and if I lose my job I won't be able to afford to keep ds in nursery. But the waiting lists for nurseries here are a year plus long. For example, My son's current nursery has 42 places and over 300 kids on the waiting list. So if I lost my job how am I meant to look for another one? I can't exactly say to a prospective employer, 'thank you for offering me a job, can I start in a year's time so I can find a nursery place for my son?' Being able to have free childcare whilst I looked for a job would mean I wouldn't have to lose the current nursery. Losing my current place effectively means I won't be able to look for work till ds starts school. That sucks.

I am a sahm and wouldn't have wanted that much childcare even if it was free. Doesn't bother me if others want it though.

I think when you start arguing about who benefits emotionally, you stray into very personal waters. And claiming that one's own personal choices are right for society as a whole or even for other individuals is also a bit dodgy. Who's to say that your family is better off by you working/not walking/doing volunteer work/etc. We make our choices based on what we value and what we can afford. And we evaluate and judge them ourselves. The quibble is about money. If we can't afford what we find desirable, what can we reasonably expect the state to provide?

It's workless families.Most families with a sahp have a parent in work.They aren't workless.

Also it depends what you read.Joseph Rowntree did a study that said pre- schoolers with a sahp did better long term.

So there you go,stats come and go.Families should do what is best for them.

oddboots

That makes more sense then and seems fair to me.
I'm a long term sahm but I do think there should be temporary free 30 hours, maybe linked to job centre for parents looking for work.
It must be hard to meet job centre rules when you only have those 15 hours to attend meetings, job interviews etc. Not everyone has alternate childcare arrangements.

It is not replacing the present provision morethan. It is additional.

Are outcomes for children with two working parents better littlemonsters? At preschool age in particular?