Does everyone think childcare should be paid for?

I have 2 toddlers under 3

I think that children are essentially the next generation of working adults and society. To me it makes sense that the government should invest in them from the start. Low income children are at higher risk of not having facilities/nutrition/development opportunities from a young age through no fault of their own and families are more likely to be low income and struggle if childcare isn’t affordable.

I think it’s a bit hypocritical for the government to fund so much for elderly but so little for children. Before anyone starts wielding their pitchfork screaming ‘well people shouldn’t have kids they can’t afford’ at what age exactly does the child become a person in their own right and not simply the ‘fault’ of their parents? I mean 95yo Doris is costing the country £500k+ a year in care and NHS costs (never had a job because that’s how it was in her day she stayed home) and that’s fine…but someone suggests 2yo Margot’s daycare should be subsidised and ‘shouldn’t have had kids you couldn’t afford’ is thrown around like Margot isn’t actually a person who deserves anything and is simply her mums ‘fault’.
I mean Doris had parents too, maybe they shouldn’t have had her if they couldn’t afford to leave enough in their will for her future care to be paid for.

Scandinavian countries have a much more holistic approach to young families which produces a much happier and healthier society. It feels like the U.K. get very cross at the thought of kids being given anything other than by parents

Do you honestly honestly believe this? @ouch321 you specifically mentioned you pay for other peoples’ children to go to school: when you find yourself in a position to go to a&e I presume you’ll choose not to, as you didn’t want to pay for the doctors and nurses education?

and @Winterpetal a slippery slope - yes people choose to have children (rapidly declining birth rate so thank god they choose to) but people also choose to smoke, drive over the speed limit, ignore lumps, go paintballing. Would you deny them help your taxes?

nurseries differ - some are very nice, and some not so nice. I’m happy to pay a lot for my child to go to the nursery I want them to go to - if it wasn’t subsided when he reaches 3 I’d have to quit work and pay thousands and thousands less in tax each year. It makes sense to subsidise.

Childcare should be free paid for by taxation. This allows both parents to work and thereby pay tax. If both parents would prefer to work then society gets the benefit of their labour. Childcare professionals look after multiple children so there is a benefit of economies of scale. Raising a child is a benefit for the whole of society and the burden of this should not fall solely on the lowest earner parent, usually the mother.

Plus how is it illogical when an enormous amount of research suggests it works?

There is plenty of money to fund this.
It isn't done because the government doesn't want to.

They'd have to cut back on the money grabs and pet projects, which they'll never do.

How os it unfair if that child can grow up to be an educated, fully functioning member of society?

That’s why I said in most cases…🙄 far too many what ifs and maybes on that one.

People can have a percentage tax free costs and parents get free hours at certain ages. So in fact my taxes are already going towards under 5s education/development. Also I worked as a nursery nurse for £3 a hour many years ago so I do value their care and development.

I actually said in my post that I’m not sure why I don’t agree. Just a gut feeling. I think maybe I’m against a blanket of covering childcare costs for all that I disagree with when some people can actually afford it.

Unlike many on this thread I do absolutely agree with the policy of deprived children getting free childcare at an early age. It’s not for the parents it’s for the child’s development

I wondered why the car industry was having difficulty recruiting. 😂

That may be so but it is still very unfair and illogical

Care industry not car industry

I don't think it's entitlement to help. If it was possible for people on zero hours contracts earning the minimum wage to afford ft childcare the they would. Nursery fees are over £50 per day. You need to be a professional to afford that. Are we saying that only highly educated people are allowed children? We are reasonably
well off, two professional salaries but the nursery years we're very expensive and we relied on top ups from the inlaws....and we waited till we were 30 + owned a home, established at work. If we all just stop having kids who is going to top up the pensions?

Also, providing heavily subsidised childcare in industries where they're struggling to recruit (NHS and car industry principally) and that actually covers the hours people need to work would go a long way to solving recruitment and retention problems there.

I'm not talking about totally free, but getting 30 genuinely free hours a week which could be used for 3 x 10 hour days (which was what I needed) or 5 x 6 hours if someone wanted school hours all year round would help a lot more people stay in work. And that starts at the point when paid maternity/paternity leave ends. If someone wanted more than that (eg if I'd worked full time rather than part time) then they can pay for it.

I think it should be more heavily subsidised, I also think there could be a student loan type system so that parents can borrow money for childcare at a low rate and pay it back later provided they earn over a certain amount. That would help families cope with the massive hit before 30 hours kicks in.

I also think there should be a right to work part time or flexible hours, like in Australia, so that more parents can work within school/nursery hours.

This.

Hit send too soon -

Me paying for her childcare means she can shove that money aside in an account her “D”H doesn’t know about, so that she can eventually leave him. She’s not entitled to any subsidies because of his wage. He controls everything. But he’s also thick, and doesn’t actually realise that I’m paying for half of it. He thinks 100% of her wage goes on childcare. That’s the only reason he “allowed” her to work.

I’m with you. I took 4 months ShPL as I get full pay for up to 6 months through work, so it made financial sense - but it also made family sense. Funnily enough I actually want to be a father.

It should be a choice - it’s not for all. I agree with it being disconnected from the mothers leave - 8 months for the mother and 8 months for the father seems about right for me. Don’t have to take it all! That would soon balance things out!

@Daydreamer22 So you believe in paying taxes to support education, but not the early - arguably most important - years of a child's life? What happens if the parents lose their jobs - how are they supposed to contribute to the economy again if they can't afford childcare?

@mackthepony Agree.

Not supporting more childcare funding comes from a place of huge privilege.

Not everyone can have a high paid job. I do - my sister isn’t capable of getting a degree let alone a PhD. I pay half of her childcare fees so she can continue to work, rather than be reliant on her arsehole husband. And I’m a single parent of 3. The thought of her being at his mercy with money is terrifying.

What about women who find themselves pregnant but then are considering a termination based purely in affordability?
We already have massive problems around reducing birth rates - our populations are increasing but it’s because people are living longer, not because more babies are being born than people dying.

Heavily subsidised daycare is offered in various forward thinking countries such as Canada and Northern Europe.

There's a reason why these countries are more appealing than those who charge extortionate amounts for childcare.

Two things need to happen.

1. the threshold for not being able to claim Child Benefit should be a COMBINED household net income of over £60k.
2. the free 15 / 30 hours funding should be overhauled. It should be year round, not term time only. Parents should be able to have, for example, two full 7.5 hour days funded, 5 x 3 hours funded, 4 x 7.5 hour days funded. Instead it’s a mishmash of some free hours and some parental contribution which means that for some parents it’s just not viable.

I don’t have children. I’m happy to pay taxes towards society which of course includes children’s education/ healthcare/child benefit, parents mat leave and so on etc even though I’ll never benefit. But for some reason I disagree with the childcare. Not sure why though.

People in most cases choose to have children surely it’s up to them to fund the childcare?

Who owns these nurseries?

No it shouldn't be free. It's already heavily funded. If people can't afford kids then don't have them the world does not owe them a favour

likewise you could argue that state pensions and carers/fully/partly funded care homes for the elderly should be declined because they've had 50 odd years to save to provide for their old age

Sadly, i know lots of people who have more than enough to keep themselves in a care home for as long as they need one
They do their best to move finances so they don't have to pay for it, because others get it for free 🤷‍♀️