I cost the taxpayer less but that’s not good enough ?!

[ImNotdrainingsociety]

Had a family event descend into an argument today because nobody liked my facts.

SIL has a dc the same age as mine (3)

She works and gets 85% of her nursery fees paid (it’s really expensive)

I am a sahm and get some UC as I’m a carer but my UC is less than her 85% nursery cost help …..MIL had been moaning about me not working how ‘it won’t help dc problems you know ‘ (SEN) and how ‘you’re not contributing’ but as soon as I pointed out the amounts after asking SIL what her nursery cost is and working out 85% I was apparently’acting like a bitch ’!!!

As far as I’m concerned neither of us is doing anything wrong but when attacked I simply started the facts as to what each of us ‘costs the taxpayer’ as they kept going on at me !

@SeulementUneFois Well we're having to disagree on this as tending to one's young is very definitely a contribution of society. When one does this one cannot know the outcome. Putin's mother did not know, any more than any of us could, how her child would turn out.

@caringcarer it doesn't matter if sil's tax offsets some of the nursery fees - it's unlikely she pays tax to cover all of what she uses. And since the OP isn't using nursery, then she has no need to offset some of the cost via taxation.
In the end, if a person is going to be measured solely on contributions versus cost, there's no guarantee the sil is paying more and taking less.

It comes down to capitalism - we all have a social economic duty to earn money and spend money. Anyone who can’t, eg the disabled, aren’t really welcome in a consumerist society therefore caring roles for the vulnerable, elderly or sn are not valued.

The opposition standpoint of environmentalism that we all have a duty to reduce what we consume is equally abhorrent in its attitudes towards the disabled.

Just by having a dc with sen, and valuing that dc equally, you’ve placed yourself at odds with two dominant thought streams of the 21st century.

Firstly all Mothers work .Some outsource their DC to a Nursery or CM whatever.Some dont and take the child caring on themselves ,therefore still contributing to Society in a different way.Sounds like they ganged up on you when your DH wasnt there . Its a perfectly acceptable choice OP,and your LO has SEN as well.I wouldnt see them on their own again .Your DH is speaking to them which is good

@MerryBeard

Yes I accept that we'll have to disagree...
I suppose that I've inherited the maybe stricter definition of contributing to society from the communism perspective.
Where it was only things over and above the mammalian experience (those mammals without a society:).
And didn't include things that all animals do (here tending to one's young) that just by a society existing were theoretically enabling that ....

To put it another way, as to where the boundary would be - if humans didn't have a society, the OP would still tend to her young. (Like mammals do, due to one's own impulses towards one's young.)

Like in some apocalyptic scenario, I would still brush my teeth if I could, had the headspace etc. - for my own health benefit.
That doesn't mean me brushing my teeth happens to be a contribution to society when there is a society, just because there is a society - because when there is a society, it happens to benefit other people who sit next to me on the bus (and are hence not grossed out:).

I agree but I also acknowledge society runs on hard cash and no amount of ‘soft value’ will make up for that. There does seem to be a bit of a fantasy on here that we as a country don’t really need money, or that the only money that matters is abstract non existent money like ‘tax dodging by the corporations’, or the money ‘saved by people being SAHMs’.

Essentially without tax being paid, there would be no hospitals, no police, no maintained roads, no schools, no society really. That’s actual money being paid, not abstract money I’m saving by not putting my kid in nursery. And of course OP’s child will rightly be receiving NHS care, SALT, therapy and other appointments.

Theres also the train of thought (which I’m on the fence about) that looking after your own child that you decided to have isn’t a ‘contribution’ in the same way as working with disabled people is, or being a professional carer.

Ultimately though the MIL is a nosy Parker who has a bee in her bonnet about this and is best avoided. We would all do the right thing for our child rather than what’s good for the country, of course we would.

@Charrington
The difference is not economic vs not economic - it's 'to society' vs not.
As I said in my earlier posts on how this is regarded under communism:

A SAHM is not regarded as contributing to society under communism, because what she's doing is tending to her young, which is self contained to the offspring/herself. And indeed is what generally mammals do, who have no society.

Society and working outside one's own self-contained 'me and my offspring' unit is what differentiates us from (most) animals.

Dh has spoken to them both (separately)

MIL insists that things are not fair on SIL/that she always had to work (part time)/that SIL was upset after seeing another persons FB posts about their holiday and that although it wasn’t me it’s no different that I’m part of the problem/that dd has issues because I’ve ‘kept her too close and made her that way’

SIL hasn’t said much apparently other than she’s ‘allowed an opinion’

Hes explained that had they bothered to get to know me/dd then they’d know she is ‘socialised’ and he won’t accept it ever being mentioned again that somehow I’m to blame for her ASD.
He told them if they can’t be kind and treat me with respect then we just won’t be seeing them at all - that we come as ‘a package’ and he will not have me bullied because of the actions of someone else who doesn’t work as their frustration about a holiday and SIL jealousy over that is nothing at all to do with us

I'm glad your dh has had a word. I don't see why your sil is being portrayed as a poor, put upon victim in all this - she's made her life choices, the same as everyone else does. She might need a reminder that if she's not a net contributor, that most of the country's money (including that which funds her nursery cost ) does come from the very rich and from corporations (which is why it's so important they don't dodge taxation). She seems to labouring under the assumption her taxes are supporting you and they aren't.

On a wider note, while people have children because it's a biological urge and we want them for ourselves, having children is of benefit to society as a whole. If no one had kids, who would be farming, nursing, working in shops etc?

There's also the issue of there not being enough good childcare for everyone who wants it, childcare being very expensive and not very flexible for people who work outside of normal business hours. Lots of families can't just put their child in nursery, especially if the child has additional needs - that provision just might not be available where OP lives.

So they have doubled down on personally blaming you because of some perceived unfairness in the whole of society. And if you were to work, then what? It would be the tipping point and all would be well in the world?

You won't fix this chip on their shoulder, it's a lost cause. I'd take a step back from their company and their opinions, op.

Haha good point.

I used to contribute a shed load in tax back when I was a very high earner. Never did I think of myself as better for this and I was always quite conscious that this contribution also funded our illegal wars and other questionable government policies.

You have no idea what the op’s child’s needs are, what their educational plans or situation are, or anything about them.

How does that qualify you to tell the op what is best for her child?!

Also, as has been pointed out multiple times, just because the sil pays income tax that doesn’t make her a net contributor. Most people aren’t.

The mil, sil, and you, ought to keep out of other peoples business.

@ImNotdrainingsociety

And my contribution to society is doing my best for my child with SEN till reception age

But you're not really contributing to society - rather you are looking after your own family unit. Noting wrong with that - but you're not paying any tax or NI.

Do you plan to work in the future?

I think they do sound quite petty & I would not expect a comment like that from MIL. I assume SIL has been complaining.

So the FB post to make people jealous of the holiday totally worked then. Basically.

Surely no one else's holiday is worth a family fallout?

I would be tempted to book an even better holiday next summer OP. If they are going to be jealous and pissed off best to get hung for a sheep than a lamb!

Being a carer is work and carer's allowance is paid accordingly (though it is a very low wage) in recognition of that and yes, tax and N.I. contributions are deducted from it.

And erm society is actually made of individuals and families and communities: the whole point in fact is their wellbeing, so yes, caring for a member of society is contributing to society.

So if everyone swapped children and looked after someone else's, as long as no one looks after their own, that's ok? Weird.

It's not about 'society', whatever that actually means. It's about people doing what they believe is best for them and their families.

Yes. It's odd how many posters don't seem to get this.

Now that sounds very Thatcher like 😁