Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Original poster

Govt stealth policy to eradicate SAH parenting

309 replies

JRHartley72 · 22/03/2023 06:59

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

OP posts:
Soontobe60 · 22/03/2023 07:13

MadameSzyszkoBohusz · 22/03/2023 07:07

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.

The point is, the wealthy Tories you’re talking about don’t claim UC 😂😂

chosenone · 22/03/2023 07:13

You can self fund. If you can’t afford to SAH you work. The mindset regarding parenting needs to change IMO. The state shouldn’t be funding SAH parents, If parents want to they need to do some sound financial planning before having children.

coffeecookie · 22/03/2023 07:13

Why should you stay at home on UC and cost the tax payer?

If you want to stay at home fund it yourself,

I'm not a Tory btw just someone who thinks people should pay their way unless they have a disability or disabled child.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about this subject:

Benefits
Boomboom22 · 22/03/2023 07:13

Not really, if you save / plan you can be a sahm but why should working parents taxes pay for others to be a sahm? Childcare is different, the free hours are education to try and reduce problems of those who are culturally and materially deprived which is good for society.

QuillBill · 22/03/2023 07:13

It's taking away parental choice, no?

I'm not sure staying at home when you can't afford it should be a choice. There are loads of things in life that people might like but they can't afford them so they can't have them.

BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 22/03/2023 07:14

yomellamoHelly · 22/03/2023 07:10

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.

But in this instance it wouldn't necessarily be UC claimed. Pip and Carers allowance etc would be the claim, and it's possible within the same report is the plan to increase these to make up for any UC drops.

x2boys · 22/03/2023 07:14

yomellamoHelly · 22/03/2023 07:10

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.

Have they said they expect parents disabled children to.work?
because currently i.claim carers allowance for my severely autistic 13,year old who gets full DLA,children with disabilities are usually an exception.

hamstersarse · 22/03/2023 07:14

I don’t think the strategy is to eliminate SAHP it is just to get economic growth. Women are just the most obvious target to achieve this

I do agree though that the consequences for families of this push are not good, we are stigmatising SAHPs and that really is a bad bad thing for children in general.

j worked when mine were small, I wish with every bone I hadn’t.

TrombonesAreNotBones · 22/03/2023 07:15

I honestly thought this was already the case, years ago income support used to be stay at home til kiddo was 5 (school age) then onto job seekers, then it changed to age 3 to coincide with the free 30 hours early years ed?

Kokeshi123 · 22/03/2023 07:16

For those who want SAHPs to be supported: just a hint, but you'd be better off framing this in terms of "supporting parents' choice," rather than using inflammatory language such as suggesting that working parents don't raise their own kids, using terms like "wage slaves," "state-controlled" etc.

QuillBill · 22/03/2023 07:17

yomellamoHelly · 22/03/2023 07:10

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 don't think you can go into something thinking that it won't work for some people.

What about all the children who aren't neuro-diverse or disabled?

BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 22/03/2023 07:17

There was a thread on here in the last couple of weeks and the OP said she was a sahp to school age kids but that they could afford it as they get some UC and dip into savings. No sen in the children.

It seems absurd to me that the govt would pay benefits over to a family where one parent is opting out of work completely. As a top up to their wages - fine. (Well, wages should pay enough but you know what I mean). And when they have savings too.

JustStudying · 22/03/2023 07:18

I think it's a bit of a piss take to not work out of choice, claim benefits and get tax funded free hours. I'm not a Tory, I vote Labour every time, and I think they're being sensible. I doubt they're saying you have to be in work 9-5, 5 days a week.

ArcticSkewer · 22/03/2023 07:19

There's already plenty of evidence that nursery is better for kids with poor parents, stay at home parenting better for kids with rich parents. Poor and rich being proxies for uneducated/educated.

Labour knew that, hence massive investment in under 5s, sure starts and funded nursery places.

HamstersAreMyLife · 22/03/2023 07:19

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

I don't agree with this. We have older primary children with a SAHP and no one can force one of us back to work, it's a lifestyle choice we have made but to do it we sacrifice a salary and have to manage on just 1.

It's only an issue if claiming benefits and I agree if that's the case then it's a luxury that family can't afford. The big issue surely is how many jobs allow people to work only 30hrs a week during school times, the only jobs round here that allow that are school work like being a TA at the school your kids go to. For 2 parent households there are more options (I have 2 sets of friends who alternate shift patterns with partners) but harder if a single parent.

hamstersarse · 22/03/2023 07:19

It seems absurd to me that the govt would pay benefits over to a family where one parent is opting out of work completely.

Thats because you place no value on motherhood and don’t think about the long-term consequences of very young children being away from their mothers

hoophoophooray · 22/03/2023 07:20

Why are they removing your choice? Stay at home if you want to, but don't expect people other than you and your family to fund it

TheChoiceIsYours · 22/03/2023 07:20

JRHartley72 · 22/03/2023 06:59

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

You’re absolutely welcome to stay at home full time and ‘raise your own children’ 🙄 if you can afford to pay for it yourself as a household. Expecting the taxpayer to fund it via benefits after your child is nearly school aged is something else.

Treacletoots · 22/03/2023 07:20

Not going quite the way you expected is it OP?

megletthesecond · 22/03/2023 07:20

It's inhuman forcing lone parent of young children to work that many hours.

I've worked 3 days a week since my youngest was 1 and it's been awful. My health is damaged (cost the NHS a few quid to fix my bowels) and I have anxiety though the roof. I have teens now and still work 3 days as my youngest has MH issues.

MichelleScarn · 22/03/2023 07:21

MadameSzyszkoBohusz · 22/03/2023 07:07

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.

But you're happy for all these other "wage slaves" as you nicely put it to be the ones funding your life choices?

SouthCountryGirl · 22/03/2023 07:22

megletthesecond · 22/03/2023 07:20

It's inhuman forcing lone parent of young children to work that many hours.

I've worked 3 days a week since my youngest was 1 and it's been awful. My health is damaged (cost the NHS a few quid to fix my bowels) and I have anxiety though the roof. I have teens now and still work 3 days as my youngest has MH issues.

But the child will be at nursery / school?

BernadetteRostankowskiWolowitz · 22/03/2023 07:22

HamstersAreMyLife · 22/03/2023 07:19

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

I don't agree with this. We have older primary children with a SAHP and no one can force one of us back to work, it's a lifestyle choice we have made but to do it we sacrifice a salary and have to manage on just 1.

It's only an issue if claiming benefits and I agree if that's the case then it's a luxury that family can't afford. The big issue surely is how many jobs allow people to work only 30hrs a week during school times, the only jobs round here that allow that are school work like being a TA at the school your kids go to. For 2 parent households there are more options (I have 2 sets of friends who alternate shift patterns with partners) but harder if a single parent.

Wrap around care in available, and if you are eligible for UC, then you can get help towards the cost of this too.

hattie43 · 22/03/2023 07:23

Of course you can be a SAHP but you just have to pay for it yourself .

LittleBrenda · 22/03/2023 07:23

Thats because you place no value on motherhood and don’t think about the long-term consequences of very young children being away from their mothers

That's a leap. It's childcare.

What about the long term consequences of poverty?