Govt stealth policy to eradicate SAH parenting

[JRHartley72]

The Guardian is reporting this morning that buried deep in Jeremy Hunt's budget last week is a new policy which will force parents on UC to return to work when their children turn three. As charities and campaigners say, it's like they just don't want us to raise our own children any more!

www.theguardian.com/society/2023/mar/22/jeremy-hunt-universal-credit-benefits-mothers-30-hour-weeks

Working parents don’t raise their own children?

Is there a law saying you won't be allowed to, or just that you won't get state benefits to do so?

Oh and this! Wonder who's going to get dc up and ready for school if me and dh aren't raising them!

I hate the Tories but if this funded childcare does materialise then parents should work. I'm a single parent and have always worked at least 30 hours, it sets an important example to my children of not being reliant on others.

No of course they do! Sorry, clumsy wording on my part. Blame the early hour! Apologies for offence caused.

I just meant the Govt doesn't want anyone to stay at home to look after their children.

You still to raise them, even if you go to work.

I thought it was clear that they were doing it so people could go back to work. It's not stealthy.

Working parents raise their own dc and you can sah just not with the benefit. It won’t be eradicated

Sorry, clumsy wording on my part. Blame the early hour! Apologies for offence caused.

I just meant the Govt doesn't want anyone to stay at home to look after their children.

No, we pay nurseries and childminders. They do all the raising, the children just live with us!

But in all seriousness, why should it pay better to be unemployed than in work?

A quick look on Google suggests that if you're child is 3, you must apply for part time work already?

I think it's reasonable.

There was always a trade off for 30 hours free childcare. We can't have all the cake and eat it.
I also think UC should not be a lifestyle choice to enable some parents to be SAH, while others have no choice but to work FT.

Oh. I didn't realise me and DH weren't raising our children.

The childcare reforms allow more people to be at work. In turn they will have more money to contribute to other industries and pay into pensions for their own futures.

Of course the Tories don't want us to stay at home and care for our children. They want them in state-run, state-controlled childcare settings from as early as possible so they can learn to be good little wage slaves - just like their parents.

And if these settings are so good for children, as is always insisted on here, ask yourself how many wealthy Tory MPs, donors and voters use them, as opposed to having either a SAHP or full-time nanny.

No of course they do! Sorry, clumsy wording on my part. Blame the early hour! Apologies for offence caused.

I just meant the Govt doesn't want anyone to stay at home to look after their child.

It's taking away parental choice, no?

Nurseries can't cope with any more "funded" hours. It won't work. Will be interesting to see if sanctions are handed out because Mum (and 90% + of the time it is Mum) won't work - when she can't access the hours because of a lack of places.

Might be moot if the tories are out before the hours start.

Precisely.

Im afraid I’m all for it. You can’t be economically unproductive on the basis you have school aged children. Fine if that’s a decision you can afford to make but don’t expect the state to support you in your choices.

The key is good quality, affordable, accessible childcare so woman who want to work can work.

Claiming money to stay at home when childcare is free shouldn't be a choice, unless you are very ill or your child needs one on one care. Why wouldn't you want to work to give your child a better life?

Having parents who are working is the most effective way to reduce child poverty, and working age poverty more broadly.

Whether there is the good quality childcare available in local areas at the times local employers need people is the massive red flag people should be worried about.

I think there's absolutely no excuse for anyone to be a SAH parent once their children have reached school age.

I also think that opting out of work "to raise the children" is a very foolish thing for women to do, given the divorce rates are currently over 50% and the amount of threads on here from women up shit creek without a paddle because they've done just this is mind-blowing.

Encouraging women back into the workplace, giving then equal opportunity to continue their careers and not being reliant on a man is a massive, and long overdue step forward. Shame its taken this long IMHO.

But you can, just don't expect the taxpayer to fund it??

But they aren't taking away choice. They are saying you can't claim UC if you SAH with children 3+

You can still be a SAHP. But you fund it yourself.

Thats never going to work for all the ND or disabled children. Can't imagine there'll be anything of sufficient quality to cope with them. We know the schools already can't.

I thought parents had to.start looking for work once their child reached three anyway ?

Research has shown that children develop better when they attend some sort of pre school setting. It’s better for their socialisation for a start! Why would a parent want to isolate their child from spending quality time with other children being supported by professional staff? I think the government should go q step further and make it a legal requirement for all children from 12 months old to attend some sort of childcare setting for a minimum 15 hours a week.

If you want to stay at home, fine. Just don’t expect other people to fund your lifestyle choice.

Ofcourse parents can chose to stay at home with their children, but you just have to be able to afford it without government help.

Cutting the universal credit at 3 is probably what's helping to pay for the funded childcare.

Much better option as it gets rid of the stress causes to parents on benefits that lose them when their kids grow up.