To think statutory maternity pay should be the same amount as the state pension?

This is such a mean opinion that seems so common amongst certain groups of people 'we didn't get anything so I can't bear to see anyone else get something'. I honestly don't understand the motivation behind such closed minded thinking.

That's just not true.

Failing to make provision for your old age is most definitely a choice.

The OPs point is a good one. Statutory maternity provision is abysmal in this country. As is support for parents generally.

Do you see SMP as a hand out?

You do realise that NICs are for more than State Pension?

Why is it that some groups will scream bloody murder about their entitlements within the social contract while dismissing the needs of everyone else?

I think maternity pay should be minimum wage. That is what is needed to live on. Anything less than that is not enough to live on, so why and how do we expect new families to live on it? It doesn't matter if you have a partner or not - if both parents normally work then that household relies on dual income anyway, so losing one income makes that year almost impossible. People saying why don't you just save for that time off - that's an incredibly privileged position to be in - many people don't have extra income to save away for months of unpaid leave. And there's not much to cut back on if you're already shopping smart, forgoing holidays, etc. And in the case of Scotland where childcare is not funded until the baby is 3, any savings are needed for nursery when the parents go back to work (my nursery bill is currently 1000 a month for 4 days).

For people saying the government doesn't have unlimited money... They find money to fund wars just fine. They find money to bail out banks just fine. They find money to hold onto the triple lock just fine. They find money to keep raising MP wages year in year. That argument about them not having money only seems to rear its head when socialist issues such as parental leave, child benefit, better wages for teachers/nurses/doctors are being discussed

We never used to get anything and nor did we expect it. If you can’t afford your children don’t have them or don’t have months and months off work. Sorry not sorry . Pensioners have worked and paid in for very many years , it’s not a hand out and I get so sick of hearing (falsely) of how well off pensioners are as opposed to everyone else . If pensioners are rich why do so many continue to have to work well into their 70’s and even 80’s and beyond?

I think as others have said you really need to save some money beforehand to help to fund the time off work. I received occupational pay in addition to stat but still saved prior to this to ensure we could cover the year off work.

This isn't a race to the bottom. Why compare with pensioners, many of whom are on the old state pension of £175.00. Our provisions and benefits are all terrible compared with the rest of Europe. Of course make the payments a sensible amount, for everyone. Please do not advocate robbing Peter to pay Paul. The lack of funds is not due to any particular generation or need. I think we all know where the problem is. So lets not fight and/or blame each other.

Having a child is a choice. Growing old is not.

On the contrary, that responder was answering the clear statement you were making to pit generations against each other. Frankly, pensioners deserve the little most of them get, which has to be stretched out for years. Maternity pay is a short period by comparison. I do hope you remember this thread you started when you get to pension age!

This 100%. Very eloquently put.

Why does the OP feel the need to contrast ML with SP? I do not have children but would not mind if parents got more financial help. However,why make it sounds as if somehow pensioners do not deserve what they get? Why is it always one group versus another group?

In Scotland, adult to child ratios for child care is 1:1 for children under a year.

Single parents will also get benefits if f only on a low wage.

The hatred for pensioners is awful. I worked for fifty years, paying tax to fund other people’s pensions. There was no subsidised childcare and we needed two salaries to pay our mortgage - which at times had interest rates of 15%. I’m sure people would happily see us starve now.

might be an idea to remember we ALL get old - even those of you who complain about us now. And don’t tell me there won’t be a pension available for you - no-one knows that. I’m 66 and still working because I was widowed before my mortgage was repaid. I’ve brought up two sons without claiming benefits and get more than a little tired of younger people who want everything handed to them on a plate.

If you can’t afford to look after a child save up until you can. It must be easy to save money as people on here think it’s what today’s pensioners should have done.

Many of us can also chose when to retire. There is no longer a mandatory retirement age.

I always ramped into a private pension in my 20s because I knew I moght have some time off in my 30s due to having children.

We had our first when I was 34 and saved up and worked on the basis that me giving up work woukd not be a dealbreaker. Unusually for the mid 90s my employer was flexible and suggested I could return part-time which I did at the start of the next sales quaeter when DS was 4 months old and all maternity pay entitlement had expired. 6 months then; 90% for 6 weeks, stat mat for 12 thereafter. Sadly, DS1 was poorly and I gave up work after a year, for 7 years. NI contrubutions were made, linked to child benefit. (Very important for their pensions that women with partners above the threshold claim the CB and their partner repays it)

I returned to work, local and public sector in 2003 and am contemplating retiring in the next 18 month. In September I'll have enough contributions excluding the contracted out years, to receive the full state pension. Overall, my occupational pension will be about three quarters of a full pension due to years not working. My employer didn't contribute to the company pension scheme until I was 24 - in those days they didn't have to.

It's really important to plan financially, saving x amount from day one so it is never noticed.

It's not toxic to disagree with someone's opinion. And it's not toxic to not back up your comments purely because someone is the same sex as you.

Trying to help here but if you think you are getting a reduced pension as you are a married women, please get your pension entitlement checked. I am assuming you have never paid married womens reduced rates. I hope that if you were a SAHM you have checked you got credits for your National Insurance Contributions because I don't get why you are saying you get less money as you are married?

Your pension is based ONLY on your own National Insurance record.

• Marriage does not reduce it
• Your husband’s pension does not affect it
• You cannot claim a percentage of his pension
• You cannot be “downgraded” because you are married

This is confirmed in the government’s State Pension guidance, which states that under the new system, entitlement is based on your own NI record only .
So if you are getting less than her husband, it is because of differences in NI history, not marital status. Check your NI record, maybe you only worked part time so did not pay enough NI Conts.

You may have fewer pre‑2016 qualifying years but even though the new State Pension started in 2016, the system still looks at your pre‑2016 NI record to calculate your “starting amount”. If you had:

• Part‑time work
• Career breaks
• Lower earnings
• Gaps before childcare credits existed

Or did you perhaps works for a local authority, Civil service etc and contracted out of the state pension scheme for some period which meant you would have got a better work pension?

I'm just saying that being married alone does not have the effect you have stated on your pension so get it check out!

Exactly this…..you can choose to have a baby or not….mat pay should not equal state pension

Well this is timely. I’ve had a letter today informing me of an increase in my state pension. I have a tiny work pension so there’ll also be a tax increase. I’ll probably get tuppence extra.

But lets not forget all the youth that got killed in the wars that would have continued to work and contribute to the system or people that died in the bombing but didn't get to live to claim a pension.

We can all come out with tales like this. The two points i,e maternity pay and pensions are just not comparable from a policy or practicality point of view. Do we really need to morally take one section of society down to raise another?

Make a stand alone case, on ground of affordability why those on maternity leave on lower incomes should get more help and I think most people would wholeheartedly support you!

There have always been families with one high earner so they can afford to have a stay at home parent and then there have always been those on the breadline that struggle to provide the basics and its the same for pensioners.

The official Pensioners’ Incomes report shows that pensioner income varies widely and is shaped by decades of policy changes, work patterns, and regional inequality. It does not support the idea of a uniformly wealthy older generation.
Averages can be misleading — a small minority with high private pensions or property wealth pulls the numbers up, while many others live on modest fixed incomes.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/pensioners-incomes-financial-years-ending-1995-to-2024/pensioners-incomes-financial-years-ending-1995-to-2024?utm_source=copilot.com

The report emphasises that year‑to‑year changes are often not statistically significant, meaning the “big jumps” in pension people imagine simply aren’t there!

I'm not going to lie as wealth does tend to peak about retirement age for those that have had a mortgage and private pensions etc as you have been working towards it all your life. But most pensioners are asset rich not cash rich - yes there are exceptions but the statistics show its not the norm and these pension assets start to diminish as soon as you start drawing on them and its OK having a nice mortgage free house if your pension allows you to heat it and cover any repairs etc as there will be no other money coming in, you won't get a pay review/bonus etc.

Regional inequality is huge: median wealth in the South East is £157,000 higher than in the North East. It may be harder to get on the housing ladder down there but the long term rewards and options are way more significant.

I will also accept that younger people today face:

• Higher housing costs
• Higher student debt
• Lower job security
• Stagnant wages
• Higher private pension expectations
• Higher lifestyle expectations.

Meanwhile, many Boomers:

• Bought homes when prices were lower relative to income but society didn't expect lower income families to own homes - there ahs been a societal change
• Some lucky ones benefited from final‑salary pensions (now rare)
• Had more stable employment conditions

But this doesn’t mean all Boomers benefited equally — far from it.

A more balanced way to see it

The data supports a much more nuanced truth: Some older people accumulated wealth due to historical economic conditions but it is not universal — and many pensioners live modestly or in poverty.

Younger generations face structural disadvantages that fuel frustration but blaming individuals or entire generations doesn’t reflect the actual evidence.

State your case for improvements in financial support for people on maternity leave and I will support you but try compare to pensioners - no - its an entirely different problem set.

I so agree, I'm absolutely sick to death of hearing younger generations whine all the time about how hard they think they have it, when in fact they're the most spoilt, privilaged generations with the most oppotunities at their finger tips, to ever exist. Do they face struggls, yes, just like every other generation that went before them.

Not all young people in the UK need to pay Uni fees.

I do get where you’re coming from and I would rather that the money used for free nursery for babies was used to help parents to enable one of them to stay at home for longer.

I had to go back to work when my youngest was 18 weeks, breast fed and wouldn’t take a bottle under any circumstance. It was so stressful.

Long story short, I found a cup he would tolerate (still have it and he’s now 30).

BUT, I worked 2.5 days a week for 10 years and my children were looked after by my parents and my husband’s parents on those days.

So I think the money used to pay for 9 month old babies to be in nursery, should just be given to a parent who wants to do their own “child care”.

Leave pensioners out of it.