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

I read something the other day about how populations are on a downward trend. Previous generations had more children who are now aging, the fear is there won't be enough young people to generate enough tax/ni to sustain the elderly. Eliminating sahp is probably not a good idea from that perspective.

Yeah surely you can still stay at home, you're just not going to be funded by the state to stay at home?

You can’t be serious. 3 days is a lovely balance and the childcare good for the kids.

For clarity, I am not a SAHP and never have I been. I have teen DC now, so my childcare days are behind me. I shared the story because I thought it would be of interest.

OP the government doesn’t care if anyone wants to stay home to “raise” their child. They simply don’t want to fund it anymore… and why should they?

No. You can still choose to be a stay at home parent. The choice is there.

I too have a flexible job too a point but most jobs in our area aren't sadly. We also have very limited wrap around care, only 2 childminders service our local primary, both very full and school has started wrap around care this year (8am to 4pm) which is great but not if like us you have children now in years 5 and 6 so haven't had it before! I don't think people should be able to claim benefits and have the free hours I just think we need to look realistically at what provision there really is to support people returning to work. Our local workplaces are predominantly warehouse or retail shift work and they offer very little flexibility particularly when wrap around doesn't exist. I have a civil service job but my office is the next city so to be home for a 4pm pick up I need to leave work at 2pm having arrived there at 10, flexible as it is until our kids are able to get themselves home there just isn't a childcare option other than a nanny or a SAHP.

I could see this working if:

There is sufficient good quality affordable childcare.

Absent parents are actually required to financially support their children properly and this is enforced.

There is proper consideration of ND and disabled children.

So I won't hold my breath.

Inhumane?! I'm a lone parent of 3. I have been since my youngest was 6 months old (I had 3 under 5). Worked full time since he walked out. If anything, its given me more confidence and allowed me to be something other then 'Mum'. I think single parents should be encouraged amd helped to work.

Exactly.

Whats outrageous is that anyone sees an issue with that principle. I understand the fears about available childcare but the principle of not paying for people to parent is sensible.

I think lifestyle choices should be self funded. I was a SAHM for 6 years, then very part time after... did not claim benefits. Relied in some part on husbands income, not popular on here... we also lived in a smaller house than we would have, had an older, smaller car etc.

For us it was worth it. For the government I was economically much less active. We are not taking benefits, but, also not contributing... tax, VAT, etc

Can see the point, but would choose the same again if "permitted"

You can be a SAHP, you just can't expect the taxpayer to fund you indefinitely. Pay for your own lifestyle choices.

Yeah there's no way the childcare and jobs are going to be available

Plus employers are required by law to take on people who only want 30 hours

I don't often comment, but I feel strongly about this. UC is not there so that you can take the government's money (or actually the money from the working people who pay tax) and be a stay at home parents by choice. It's there to help those who work but on a low wage, or who genuinely can't work and need help.

If you are capable of being a sahm because your family finances without UC allows you too, then good for you. If not then unfortunately like millions of other parents still raising their children, you need to work. That is what the new nursery hours are there to support you doing. There is not an unlimited UC fund for those who purposely choose not to work.

Yeah there's no way the childcare and jobs are going to be available

Maybe women will be more inclined to return to the jobs they had before maternity then. Those jobs exist. And maybe childcare providers will increase due to increased demand.

Good, people might have to give it more than 5 seconds of thought whether they can afford one before they bring a child into the world.

You are still welcome to stay at home and raise your little precious until 18 if you wish, but it won’t be on the taxpayers dime, fine by me!

@HamstersAreMyLife

That's terrible! 8-4 is not wrap around care. Our local primary schools ALL offer 730-6 wrap around provision.

I honestly believe nothing changes if nothing changes and until its absolutely necessary, I.e. a shift change in people choosing to work rather than not, then there will still be a lack of childcare in some areas.

I'd hope that when introducing these changes the government will also consider what else is required to make the policy work, and hopefully that means improving availability of childcare.

Other countries seem to manage it, we just need a reason to push forward this change, and this could just be that change needed.

Yeah there's no way the childcare and jobs are going to be available

There are four admin my immediate family and we all work in different industries where they are short staffed and can't fill roles. (NHS, teaching, finance and restaurant)

Two of my family members have had to employ people from out of the UK.

No.

Have you seen the current birthdate?

its not pretty

And policies like this will do absolutely nothing to improve the birth rate

• birth rate

If you have the luxury of being a sahp then you should have to find it yourself. Many of us didn’t have that luxury, benefits or not, why should we work our backsides off and pay tax to fund other peoples life choices. I’m all for the benefits system but it should be about getting people on their feet and supporting those who can’t work due to disability or being carers. Why should we pay taxes to fund people who just don’t want to work

People on UC credit will be pretty fucked around here then, there simply aren't enough nursery places. The only way to guarantee one is to put your name down while ttc, most places waiting lists are at least 18 months long. It will only get worse when the "funding" (inverted commas as it will likely cripple the nurseries) becomes available. Another well thought out plan from the tories, excellent.

@Soontobe60 what? At least 15 hours from 12 months for the socialisation are you joking? Never met a 12 month old that socialises with other kids, they are only just walking and talking. Getting close to 2 they might start playing alongside each other but not with each other! Earliest really 2.5 some kids benefit from and start playing with and not just alongside other kids but it's mainly from 3, which is why all 3 year olds get free hours regardless because it's good for them! Before that age it's purely childcare, which is completely fine and I'm sure they have a good time with the staff and play alongside other kids but let's not pretend it's essential for their socialisation when it's not.