To wonder at what point does the cost of childcare become not worth it?

I was just going to say this. Compress your hours into four days but don't take a pay cut. I did and spent about 5 years getting my salary up to market level again and feeling insanely frustrated.

I remember going back to after my second child and I only worked 2.5 days a week. This was before the free childcare funding and despite being in a‘professional’ job about 90% of my take home pay went straight to the nursery. It was so hard! But I’m glad I did it as I don’t think I could have been a SAHM (just not for me) and now my career life has paid off. I’m very grateful that I had the choice though as I know not everyone has….

Our view was it depended on your job as well.
When we TTC ( sadly never happened) there was no way I was going to work my full time teaching job and give the equivalent of nearly 60% of my wage(probably much worse now) to someone to care for the baby. The stress of the job is what would have swung it for me.

It’s not about the £200. It’s about whether you get other long term benefits from maintaining your employment.

If you have a “career” and can expect promotions and a good pension then you might stay at work even if you’re not making a profit. Whereas if you have a “job” and won’t get those long term benefits then you probably think what’s the point?

As a teacher my situation was the latter. The job is increasingly poorly paid and overworked, no promotions available unless you take on masses of extra hours - and you aren’t even building a long term career because older teachers often get sacked for being more expensive, they aren’t valued for their expertise. There was really no benefit to maintaining my job. So it came down to money, and I wasn’t earning enough after paying childcare to make it worthwhile.

So I took a couple of years out and maintained my CV by taking on a voluntary role and a couple of hobbies. I was a trustee for a public sector organisation, I exhibited my artwork and self published a kids book, so there wasn’t a gap in my CV.

Absolutely @Comtesse .

BTW my DH and I did some absolutely crazy shit to manage work and childcare over the course of about 10 years, much of which I wouldn't recommend. We winged it, we were cash, sanity and time poor a lot of the time but it was a joint endeavour. Vastly different earning potential between us too.

No, you never get the early years back, but I found maternity leave mind-numbingly dull, cripplingly lonely and incredibly draining and didn't fancy 4 more years of solo childcare. By contrast I love having a 5 year old.

You get the tax free childcare allowance and you also get free hours from age 2 which means discount not free but a reduction all the same. Even without this your bill is only £900 because you'll be splitting it with your partner surely?

Wolfpa is correct the calculation should be against two incomes/ family money. If you pool all money then the outcome will be the same, but it's still a healthier family dynamic to view nursery fees as coming out of both your incomes. Then for you to continue earning makes more sense for long term. If you don't pool money and fees are seen as majority mothers cost then that is a red flag and you should definitely keep earning, however little at the moment. If as a couple you pool all money and decide you are an equal team and future earnings will be shared and respected with acknowledgement that you have had a career break then it may make sense for you to be a SAHM for a few years, especially if that's what you want to do. That's often influenced by emotions as much as a monetary decision and as long as you're both on the same page, there is absolutely nothing wrong with making a positive decision to be a SAHM.

I’m afraid this is correct.

I took 2.5 years out - thankfully not too much of a gap on my cv due to two 2 back to back maternity leaves.

It is difficult to go back. I ended up taking a job with shit pay and t&c just to get back into things. It’s also tough juggling those early childcare issues when you don’t have the goodwill built up from pre-baby service.

I don’t regret it, but I’m not ignorant to the fact the extended time at home had a negative impact on my long term earning potential.

I never saw it like this, I saw child care as a joint expense and short term. I never counted it against just my salary.

i see you’re not counting it against your husbands.

I think both going part time is the best idea. Both have more quality time with the kids, clear that the household responsibilities are shared and you save money on childcare but neither has to shoulder the whole cost of a career break alone. This needs to be much more normal.
as PP have said unless you have a career where it’s going to destroy it then surely time is more important

Yes the early years do not last long. But blowing up your career for 2-3 years at home could be a big problem in the long run. Some sahps can restart their careers easily but many cannot. Need to think about the lifetime impacts, not just the short term nursery costs. It could mean you swap a temporary problem for a permanent problem.

if looking after young children full time unpaid was so much fun, surely more men would be doing it, instead of expecting women to pick up the slack?

Preach.

Have a look at a childminder often considerably cheaper and willing to have the kids with minor illnesses.

Stay at home with your baby.

Some things are more important than money.

I'm fortunate to have a career which means I still take home a surplus even deducting the costs of two at full-time nursery. But even if I didn't, I would still do it because I want to have my own career and separate adult life, but also because I do not enjoy looking after kids full time. I love my children, we have a lot of fun together at the weekends, but at 4yo and 21 months, looking after them both on my own is bloody hard work (my eldest especially is very clingy, never wants to colour or play on her own, etc).

I know this makes me some horrible heretical woman to admit this (cue people saying, "Why have kids if you don't want to look after them?"), but if looking after young children full time unpaid was so much fun, surely more men would be doing it, instead of expecting women to pick up the slack?

My husband freely admits he would never want to be a full time caregiver, and equally doesn't expect me to want to, either.

There is a middle ground though.

Ie, I went back three days a week and DH compressed his hours, so did five days over four. Therefore we only needed two days of childcare. And DC was with one or both parents 5 days out of 7.

Admittedly a few years ago, but childcare therefore was around £500 (actually less as this was the gross figure before we'd deducted childcare vouchers) and my part-time wage was £1500. (Albeit I had commuting costs).

Have you factored in tax-free childcare savings?

Depends what way you look at it.

When our childcare bill was £1200 per month, DH paid £800 and I paid £400 into the joint account to cover it. This was proportional to our incomes.

It meant work was still “worth it” to me, I resumed my pension contributions and had a bit of money to call my own each month.

I don’t agree about the whole household being unwell; DC definitely were ill quite a bit after starting childcare but that will happen at whatever stage they start and I only get the old cold from them.
Also you haven’t considered that you can get 20% of that back through tax free childcare so it’s actually £1440 however in answer to your question I wouldn’t work if I was only earning £200 after childcare. We partly used a childminder for cheaper childcare and other plus sides.

Oh and also beware of compressed hours.... you have to work long, inflexible days... it's absolutely exhausting and your 'day off' is a long day of solo childcare.

Like all things, there is balance, and juggling.

You never get those years back indeed. When my DC were tiny there weren't in nursery full time, but they were there a lot. I don't really feel I missed out? I managed some baby groups, park trips, swimming etc. We had lovely weekends. I hated the hours between 4 and 6pm whether it was a working day for me or not.

My DC are older now, and have different needs. I also love spending time with them now... they're funny, they know stuff, they can pretty much look after themselves. I'm glad I maintained my career at least when they were tiny as it's paying off now too.

Every family is different. But as a woman, be careful of the financial and professional toll that having young children can take if all of the costs and/or time of childcare sit with you.

Children are a joint endeavour and the childcare stage is just one of many in their lives.

Can you both compress hours to save on at least one day a week? if you both stayed full time but worked 10 days in 9, and alternately have the same day off each week. personally think it’s worth it for the other benefits like pension contributions, career progression, financial protection if relationship breaks down. I do it for my sanity as well 😃

Agree with @QforCucumber btw - we both work Monday-Friday and the DC have been in nursery five days since ten months. It's fine. Not easy, but fine. Don't worry about not seeing them etc.

I had a job, not a career, so totally wasn’t worth it for me. I took three years off and only started back once DS got funded hours.