To ask if people judge single mums for not working?

[PigsCanSoar]

I have a 11 m/o, and am a 22 year old single mum. I have handed in my notice to work now, as I don't feel he is ready to be left yet. He has always been very clingy, he will happily go off and play with anyone if I am there, but as soon as I leave the room he will just cry and cry.
He is also still breastfeeding every 2-3 hours, and ideally I would like to let him self wean up until 2.

I have no doubts about this being best for DS, and am planning to stay with him until 2 then look for a job again, but I just feel a bit anxious about actually telling people this, as since he was born it seems to have been constant "so when are you going back to work then" off everyone.

I am very lucky to be back living with my mum, so money isn't much of an issue as this will just postpone moving out for a bit.
So there's no necessity to leave him before he's ready, but I just feel like I'll look "lazy" for not going back yet.

I'd love to read the whole thread but havent got time right now. However I feel compelled to say, I really don't understand posters who are saying that its the right thing to do to sah and not put under twos in childcare. It makes me feel like the worlds worst mum but actually, I was brought up knowing that you WORK to earn your keep. I can't get my head round it being ok to jack in your job because your poor pfb is clingy.

PS I mean of course, jack it in to rely on benefits

When the benefit pipeline is shut down having a job will mean the difference between living and existing in extreme real poverty. I really believe that this will happen in my lifetime. It's foolish to voluntarily make yourself more vulnerable than you need.

I'm a single parent with a 1 1/2 year old. I was made redundant while on maternity leave, but it no way crossed my mind to just think 'oh well, I'll just live off benefits'. I threw everything in to finding another job to support myself and my dd. In my opinion, you should be setting a good example to your child that mummy (and/or daddy) has to work to have a roof over their heads and food on the table etc. it shouldn't be a case of 'well I plan to bf every 2-3 hrs till 2yo and they are clingy, therefor I won't even think about returning to work till they are older'. That to me is just the wrong attitude!
It's about balance. Yes I hate leaving my dd but I have lovely parents who look after her while I work 20 hrs a week. This usually is 2 x 10 hr shifts so we still have 5 days together that I cherish. I feel proud that as a single mum I am working to earn my way in society and house/clothe/feed my dd.

As many people have said, being a sahm is lovely if you are able to fully support yourself, but it shouldn't be considered if your planning just to leave work and claim as it will work out the same money wise. Benefits should be a safety net, not a choice. So if this was to be the case, then yes I would judge you

The attitude on here that if you decide to be a SAHP for a couple of years you will become destitute forever more, is a bit hysterical. I suspect that's just helping people to validate their own choices.

I believe the OP will be absolutely fine. She will be living with her mother so has security; she will still be young when she returns to work; she is trained in a particular field with qualifications; she comes across as intelligent and articulate certainly more so than some of the semi-literate right-wingers on here

eaves the benefit trap is not called that for nothing.

How many people do you think entered it thinking they wouldn't get trapped? That it was just for a short period? That they were different somehow?

The vast majority!

In my opinion, you should be setting a good example to your child that mummy (and/or daddy) has to work to have a roof over their heads and food on the table etc.

Does a 2 year old understand those kind of concepts? I don't think so.

This argument might hold weight if applied to an entire childhood - but those kind of values are not going to be formed in the first 2 or even 5 years of life.

Oh that old chestnut: "helping people to validate their own choices". I do not need anyone to validate my choices. I work to earn money to live. This is the attitude I will raise my children to have. That is all.

mummyduck, you work part-time - and have the luxury of free? childcare - so I'm
assuming you are in receipt of tax credits, income support or at least
child benefit? Or on a very high wage indeed.

eaves do you really believe that after five years at home on benefits, that the job market will just be waiting?

Have you any idea how difficult it is to get a job when you've been unemployed for a long period?

Eaves there are not many young mums that come out the job market that go back in to it. They usually plan to and then struggle so just have more childrrn. Its very true of my area, even more so now its the recession.

YANBU to ask if people judge. But they will judge you for having a baby at a relatively young age, for breast feeding, for being single. The list is endless. I am also judged for working FT and when mine were babies for not breast feeding long. People judge.

As for my judgement of your decision; I can see why you are doing it but I would suck it and see. You won't know until you try working whether it could be worked out. He may surprise you. To give up a job in todays market is at best naïve and I don't think you will find it so easy to walk back into a job.
Also I don't think it is right that if you are financing this decision by living off benefits. Imagine if we all did this? The benefits system should be there for a time of need not because you have made a choice which is a luxury not a necessity.

I have been a WOHM and a SAHM and TBH think there is lot of navel gazing going on about whether you should or shouldn't leave a baby in childcare. My DD was in childcare at 9 months for 3 days a week and my son didn't have any formal childcare until he was 4. DD doesn't even remember her nursery when she was a baby and there is no difference between the two now. My own view is there is nothing wrong with good childcare.

chesty all the evidence shows that getting back into the job market after a long period is extremely difficult. More so when you have been in receipt of benefits,

It is a trap.

Why posters want that for the OP and her child is beyond me.

I have no problem with anyone who stays at home and is self supporting. This notion that SAHPs aren't unemployed is amusing to say the least if they are depending upon the welfare state to support their choices. If being a SAHP was a job in the eyes of the government it would be paying min wage at least on 40 hour week, thus facilitating that choice for everyone who decided to jack their job in. Children are a lifestyle choice, and I object to funding other peoples choices. I make the distinction between choice and circumstance.

My guess is if the OP had a mortgage to cover, the clingy baby would be shoved in childcare quicker than a flash of lightening because she would have to work.

And for anyone who is trying to tell themseves and anyone else who will listen that my views are based on the fact that I had to work...wrong, wrong, diddly wrong. Or that I'm jealous...wrong, wrong, diddly wrong.

My views are based on the evidence in front of me, in terms of long term unemployment, the benefits trap, the recession and this bloody government!

Depending upon the welfare state doesn't make you unemployed

If you get free prescriptions because you are diabetic it doesn't follow that you're unemployed

If you get working tax credits to survive you are not unemployed

A SAHP to an under 5 claiming income support is not unemployed

Word -1000% agree.

Eaves. Not meaning to be condescending but we already know you have no idea what's happening in the economy fom earlier posts. So it's wrong for you to tell people they may not suffer if they stay and/or go on benefits.... It's simply wrong.

eaves technically, a single mother at home for five years may not be unemployed...but that is how she willbe viewed by every prospective employer!

It really doesn't matter to them what you've been doing...

The eyfs is changing so fast if you are 5 years out the workforce in this economic climate it will be extremely difficult to find work.

Isn't thw reality though that nobody truly knows another person's circumstances?

For example I voluntarily gave up work last year to live on benefits instead. It was a horrendous decision to make but I was literally on my knees with exhaustion trying to maintain work and caring for my autistic son. It was a decision which took me 18 months to make and even then it was a leap of faith.

So on here people might say "Ah but the benefits system was set up to support people in your position" because you know my child is autistic.

Fact is yhat until you spend time with DS you might not kbow....he looks normal, is chatty, loud, active and can be a handful when out The kund of child sometimes at whom people point and tut

In addition there are other parents with autistic chilsren who DO manage to combine it all with work.
What makes me an exception? Why cant I do the same?

Answer is that I just don't know. All I do kbow is that I was making errors of judgement in work and couldnt continue.

When I hand over my free prescriptions card at the chemist though, the assistant just sees a benefits claimant. She doesnt see an experienced nurse and midwife with 30 years of employment. Nor does anyone else in the queue looking on and tutting while I try to keep DS with me.

We judge at our peril....nobody truly knows what its like unless they live it.

Yes I believe that if a person CAN work then they should.

Yes I have free childcare and I'm extremely grateful for that. Yes I claim child benefit and tax credits but I also work. I don't claim benefits as a lifestyle choice so I can be at home with my pfb..

And yes, I remember at 3 years old my mum and dad going to work and me going to nursery. So it's foolish to say that young children have no concept of this

mummy all the evidence shows that the outcoems for DC who claim in work benefits are much better than for DC in workless homes.

This is why it isn't a question of saying the later costs the state less so is more acceptable. In the long run it is better for the family and ergo the state if the family has work (even if it needs to be supported).

Mummy you may remember your parents going to work and you going to nursery, but I very much doubt that at 3 years old you understood why. A child of that age doesn't have a real concept of money and earning a wage to cover outgoings vs being on benefits - so therefore no example can be set until much older.

LittleChickpea Whether I am an economist or not bears no relevance on my thoughts on somebody returning to the workplace. (and just because my opinions on how money could be spent differ to yours doesn't mean I have no idea - you're right, that was condescending)

If it's wrong for me to tell people that they may not suffer by being a SAHP for a couple of years - equally it's wrong for you to tell them that they will.

Neither of us know for sure. Success in returning to the workplace isn't solely down to how long you've been away - there are so many other factors. What line of work is the individual returning to...how qualified are they...what was their previous experience...have they been doing anything else such as voluntary work...the list goes on.