To feel sad some women are forced to go back to work

My DM went back to work in the 60s. So did MIL.

By "the government" you mean the taxpayer.

The government definitely. We have such a low birthrate and rising child mental health conditions, some of which I'm sure is due to too early childcare.

If it helps kids be happier/less mental health resources needed, it'll probably cost the taxpayer less overall

I wish it was like the olden days where a man’s wage was enough to suport the whole family

This is a totally rose-tinted and naive view of the “olden days”.

In reality it was only ever middle class and wealthy women who could choose not to work and its only for a relatively short period of history. Working class women have had to work for most of history.

Oh and when a man’s wage supports the whole family the whole family is entirely dependent on one person for their income and therefore their wellbeing completely depends on his character.

So no thanks. I am a single mother anyway so that was never an option for me but even if I wasn’t I would have been happy to trade a couple of years of going to mother and baby groups for peace of mind, financial security and agency.

I think given the situation with the birth rate, we need to be a bit more creative in incentivising people to have more kids.

And - assuming it’s a tax break, the other parent still needs to be working. Given on an average salary you only pay around £4k of tax - the absolute sum of a tax break for this purpose could never be that big anyway.

I’m not sure to what extent UC etc do this at present (if at all?)

Who is supposed to finance that as a universal benefit?

What really bothers me is in the US where women have to go back to work after like 12 weeks. Your body often isn't even recovered by then, it's barbaric!

Personally I think we should get 18 months parental leave for each child - a year is soo young for nursery. My babies went at 1 and only started loving childcare and being excited to see their friends there etc by 18 months. Before then they didn't cry on drop off, but I could tell they preferred days at home

When mine were at primary in the 90s most mums were SAHM

Goady title alert

Totally agree. There are lots of women realising this after being heartbroken leaving their children at home. If you look at social media platforms alot of women are talking about this and trying to live on one wage by being frugal, smaller house, older car etc

Sadly, some people think that would be an improvement because women are taking up spaces that would be better filled by cleverer, more capable men.

I often wonder whether anyone ever considers the societal impact of no professional women in the workplace. Do you really want to return to the days when there were no female doctors, police officers, judges, politicians? Do you think that would lead to a better world for your children??

Well I think moving backwards is wrong

moving forwards where men and women can spend more time with their children - if both work 3 or 4 days then the toddler has lots of family and social time

requires people to spend less on housing though

and working class women almost always worked - 1950s perhaps not

Women should be able to stay at home if they would like to without it harming their future pay prospects and careers. Woman should also be able to go out to work if that’s what they choose to do. Why do we have to be angry about one side of the argument or the other. I’m angry that both options are a bit shit and there isn’t an end in sight.

Also, I resent the pp that said that it’s ‘just staying home with the baby’. As a sahm (by choice - my career was shit and I am fortunate enough to be in a position to do so) I can honestly say this is some of the most relentless work I’ve ever done!

I think being a SAHP should be valued by society and recognised and considered by divorce courts.
Unfortunately bringing up children isn't really valued by society and SAHP are criticised and no financial protection. Unless a SAHP has significant assets they are in a very vulnerable financial position if their relationship breaks down.
The financial vulnerability carries on way beyond the point early childhood years, gap in pension contributions , career stalled and so on.
Nb many poorer women did work when having small children years ago , but usually fitted around childcare - cleaning jobs in evening or school dinner ladies bit still weren't financially independent and often stayed in abusive relationships.
But I do agree that parents should have a real choice about whether or not to stay at home and look after young DC, it's a bit sad they so many very young children do such long days in childcare and parents just see them for a couple of hours Mon-Fri and at weekends, so basically they spend more time in childcare than with mum or dad.
But I don't know what the answer is, the cost of being a SAHP, was historically women's independence.

I don't think the OP is wishing for a world where it's not socially acceptable for both parents to work, but one where it's not economically necessary for both parents to work.

Obviously in an an ideal world it'd be brilliant if a family could have a decent standard of living on one average salary. This would then mean that where there were two salaries coming in the family would basically be able to afford to live in luxury.

It's obviously never going to be like that, but it'd be nice if it was 😆

yep my mum did this in the 80s! Then when we were older worked fulltime. We still didn’t have much money.

I went back after my first was five months and was quite relieved to! I wasn’t in a high powered role or anything but was happy to talk about anything other than babies (no one else on the office had kids). But after my second I would have been paying to work. My DH was very high earner so I did give it up. Kept my kid going to daycare twice a week though and younger one went after a year. Kept me sane. But I also had my kids in my 40s so had been working for 20 years. I eventually started my own business with the knowledge I didn’t need to rely on the income to feed us.

But when was it ever an option for average working families? My mum worked. My grandma worked. My great Grandma worked. When was this magical time when all the women were SAHPs?

When i was nursery nursing back in the mid 90s i was looking after babies from 3 months. Going to work isn’t a new thing. The baby room was full and had a waiting list.

I mean at least most parents have a longer mat leave now.

Absolutely.

As a taxpayer I'm more than happy to support childcare so that women can work. I'm not happy to finance tax breaks to enable women to stay at home. If they want to do that they should finance it themselves in my opinion.

Another one post thread starter, I try to avoid these, but fell for this one..

Oh, the OP is probably crying into a baby’s bib or something, such is her ‘heartbreak’ at the need for everyone, male or female, to be able to support themselves and their children.

Don't worry, OP. You'll get your wish if Reform get in next time. Wages won't improve but women's employment rights will go down the toilet.