Angry another attack on sahm mum!

[mam29]

I was worried about new childcare arrangements and its got high limit earn up to 150k but both parents have to be working.

Im guessing from this article the current childcare voucher scheme being phased out

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21833929

where exactly are these term time jobs and cheap flexible childcare.

where are all these jobs that dont seem to require person to be fully flexible.

had 1st in 2006 went back full time when she was one in 2007.
fulltime place 52weeks nursery was 9000 a year you can claim relief up to 6k.

used vouchers

quit work after no 2 used vouchers for preschool education who had reduced to 1day a week doing nursery.

child no 2 started 1day a week from 18months and nursery been really good for her development. its £40 a day so 160 on 4week month.

husband used couchers as he works fulltime saves us a little.

child 2 now gets 15hour funding which helps.

was hoping to start child no 3 and use childcare vouchers now looks like cant do that and might have to wait until fnding term after 3rd birthday which think is bit late.

To make matters worse child no 2 has september birthday so missed this sept school year by 16days so have year extra paying childcare.

we lucky we dident lose child benefit as at moment we below 50k
we lost £10 a week childcare tax credits last april.

feel sorry for sahm mum whos husnand earns over 50k loses cb and now childcare vouchers yet they say preschool education is important and good for educational outcomes.

we very much feeling squeezed middle tonight as we just about get by each month as we privatly rent too.

I'm a SAHM. I don't need childcare. However when I had breast cancer and had the op, followed by chemotherapy and radiotherapy I could have blooming well done with it!!!

They should have built something in to say if a SAHM has certain medical conditions then the family can get help for as long as the family needs it. DH had to reduce his working day and took hours of unpaid leave just to keep us going.

Sorry, not much sympathy from here either. If you are a SAHM you don't actually need childcare. Then the 15 free hours kick in before school to give all kids experience of nursery and then free school place kicks in. Seems fair to me.

Isnt this a bit of a non issue. I am getting tired of SAMP's in the midst of a turblent ecomony putting their hands out for what they consider to be their share.

Most people believe in reducing our debt (as long as it doesnt affect them!).

Why on earth would a gov pay someone to be at home. And all this nonsense about going to the supermarket on your own etc etc. Supermarkets have never been open so long. Some are open 24 hours, of course someone will come on saying:

'yes, but I have no partner, I have no family, I have no friends that I can leave with kids with for a hour whilst I do my shopping and then I can do the same for them'. I never believe these people and what about online shopping if it is really that difficult.

On another post I got into a fairly heated discussion about a mother who insisted on taking her child to her sisters play at school and saying she wouldnt leave the hall when her baby started crying. She claimed she had NO ONE that she could have left the baby with so she was 'entitled' to stay.

SAHP's being paid is a load of twadle.....

Sunnymeg - in our nursery there is a toddler and baby room that is for HV/social work referrals. It's for children with mums with PND/deprived children/children with LDs and family situations like the one you've had. I was offered a place as I had severe SPD when pregnant. The number of people that have told me to put DS in early is amazing, I'm not pregnant now DS will start his funded place at age 3 in Aug, there's no reason for him to be in nursery just because I fancy a break and it could be taking a place away from a truly needy child.

SAHMs do not need free childcare or a nursery place before the age of 3 unless in the circumstances I've stated above. If you want your child in nursery before 3 pay for it yourself.

I do think SAHPs are aggrieved not just by this but by the changes in child benefit and the emphasis that this government had put on having two parents out working and paying tax. It's turning WOHMs and SAHMs against each other the same way as they are turning rich against poor.

As a SAHM I do not ask for anything from the state, having already lost CB but I would like to be treated fairly and with respect for the job I do.

And as an aside I would also like to see better pay for early years workers, some I know have degree equivalent qualifications and ongoing Professional development yet are on 20K with no prospects of earning more. If all these SAHPs go find the non existent jobs are there really going to be enough early years workers to look after their children? Or maybe the SAHMs could be the early years workers, so go out look after someone else's children for not enough to pay your own childcare and see your own children less but who cares because you'll be paying tax and won't be sitting about skiving watching Jeremy Kyle!

The thing is once your child turns 3 you have your free childcare. And once they start school you have almost the day to yourself.

Its lovely to think I would never be late for a school pick up because a meeting has over-run (my DS has extended days) or to always be there for every sports day, every chat with the teacher about next years subject's and the various coffee mornings. I have missed some of these events. For a school to put an invite for 11am to chat through with parents extra activities really does benefit a SAHM.

However I recognise its the price I pay to work full time so I am not complaining at all.

And I have had some experience of recruiting for a part time worker a few years ago answering the question someone posed about non -existent jobs.

Out of the applicants invited to interview (10), three didnt turn up, one called to say her child needed to go to the GP, and one stated she only wanted term time hours and could she do the role at home to save on childcare costs for her young baby!!

sweetkitty I would like to be treated fairly and with respect for the job I do.

what should the govt do to show you that?

For a start they Gould make the child benefit cuts fair, cap it at 60K household income if they have to.

Stop making us feel like scroungers as we don't pay tax, apparently you are only good to society if you pay tax.

Most of us have paid a lot of tax pre children and will do again, yes it's our choice to not pay it for a few years whilst our children are you g but stop berating us for it and when we complain we're told to shut up as we're all drinking coffee in our slippers whilst our children are in free childcare.

How on earth is it an attack?

You don't use child care so ...you don't need it.

There must be a million services/benfits out there that most of us don't access. I mean, my house has never been on fire, but I'm kinda glad the fire brigade are around to put out other peoples.

No one is really saying you are scroungers at all! I knew I would be a better Mum working than not. For some for all sorts of reasons they decide to become a SAHM. Their choice of call but not something you should be paid for.

I do think some would like the gov to pay them to get a 'break' from the children and allow them to run their errards!

I've heard it said that the state should recognise and compensate SAHPs for raising the next generation of good citizens!!!!

I mean, really!

That's our role as parents to do that. That's our responsibility. That's the morally right thing to do...we can't expect to get paid for it.

That's like saying we should all be paid not to engage in criminal behaviour. No, it's just what civilized people do.

I think the attack is coming from the fact that just now if you are a SAHM you can in effect buy childcare vouchers from your husbands employer and use them for nursery/afterschool or summer clubs. Once this new scheme comes in they won't be able to do this and to access any discounted childcare both parents have to be working.

There's great flaws in the scheme and yes there are SAHMs who use childcare to get their nails done but there's also student parents, some doing OU courses, one Mum I know puts her DS in nursery a half day a week to clean her fathers house and do his shopping, another volunteers and another has a disabled child so uses nursery as a place for her other child to go whilst she looks after the disabled child (hospital appts etc as she feels the other child needs a break from his sibling) if all these people are using childcare vouchers they will lose them under this new scheme.

I don't think SAHMs are up in arms saying "we demand free childcare" just that they want the same tax breaks as people in work if they chose childcare for whatever reason.

As I've said already ins SAHM I don't use childcare vouchers and have my DC in childcare as much as I would loves few hours to myself, I couldn't afford to.

Thing is, why does someone with a combined income of £300k need tax breaks either? It's a tax cut by the back door dressed up as an incentive to work. Absolutely support two income families who have no choice and yet are crippled by childcare costs. But I'd rather the government didn't find my wealthier friends with their lifestyle choices just the same as they don't fund ours. At the beginning I thought the child benefit thing was fair-the higher earners shouldn't get it. But neither this nor childcare tax breaks for the rich are fair and they're cynical vote winners. The lowest paid workers won't even benefit from this.

sweet they want the same tax breaks as people in work

SAHP get different tax breaks. A SAHP gets NI credits - everyone else pays their own NI contribution.

Someone earning 26k pays 2k in NI every year. if the same person gave up work to be a SAHP, they would get NI credits - previously costing them 2k.

NI credits if you SAH, childcare credits if you WOH. Whats not fair about that?

Sweetkitty as looking after your own children is NOT an actual job no one should get tax breaks for it, or paid child care either. It's the working parents and other workers funding all this and I really don't agree with the tax I earn paying toward breaks or child care for people who don't actually need childcare. Paying taxes for benefits for people who actual need them, sure that's fine.

I'm agreeing with you, I just trying to explain, rather clumsily, where I think the attack on SAHPs thing is coming from.

Personally I think the system is far too complicated, if two parents are working and you earn under X you should get a discount in childcare. Student parents and special circumstances like unpaid carers should also get done help.

I actually did not know that about SAHMs being paid NI credits up to their last salary, so I will have had NI credits for the past 9 years up to my last annual salary which was around 40K I think? I thought I had done protection that would give me a standard state pension, I was trying not to think if my pension shortfall and was thinking if just ramping it up when I returned to work.

I really hate the working parents attack on sahm and vice versa,

It doesnt acheive much.

some people have no choice but to go out to work I apperciate that.
There as some sahm who have no choice as even with help they either would not benefit as have to earn 10k+ if they have 1 child its less than current system and stops at 5.

I dont expect to be paid to be a sahm mum.

Im fortunate my husband has decent paid job and I can stay at home but with 3kids 2preschoolers cant afford to return to work right now hence why going down self employed route.

I paid my taxes prekids.
hubby pays a lot of tax.

I get to keep cb as hubby does not earn 50k.

its the inequality of the child benefit changes combined with inequality now of the new childcare changes.

Mums who already work few hours part time lose out
student mothers lose out.
sahm mums lose out.

I dont see anything wrong ith current system as long as one parent works pays tax then they should get the relief its really not a huge amount of money compared to the extra money a 150k earner will keep from april extra 5%of earnings on 150k 7.5k gift for them and providing they both high earners they get 1200 per child as well..

What im trying to say is look beyond me and consider people you know.

do they get free childcare and support from family.
Do they volunteer and do stuff in community.
do they not only care for for their kids but also elderly parents/inlaws?
Do they sadly have period of illness where the smums got cancer or the their husband has.

I missed 2family funurals this year as dident have childcare adn felt bad about it.

Well said mam29

I'm just not understanding this vitriol against SAHPs right now.

If I put my DC in childcare then went out and looked after other DC all day I would be a lot more valued probably because the person employed to look after my DC would be paying tax and I would also be paying tax, as I've said your value seems to be on whether you pay tax.

My DP and I are a partnership, he pays an awful or of tax, much more than if we were both out working and earning half each of his salary ( we often joke we should job share as it would save money, I wish), I know he is paying much more tax than the average person so as a household we are contributing, he works bloody hard for it though and can be called away at short notice so needs me at home to pick up the pieces. We don't grudge paying tax it's needed for the services we use. We just want it to be a fair system.

I actually want up work but its not feasible just now

When I was working I never remember thinking, my taxes are going on child benefit why should I have to pay for children I don't have? I never really have it a second thought, you paid tax that was it so I'm so shocked by all this that's going on just now.

Just thought if another thing.

Suppose I'm a SAHM and in using the tax break hubby's vouchers for some "me time" by using childcare, could I in theory then get a job at an hour a week thereby be in employment and take the full allowance?

Does that make sense? You presumably don't need two FT working parents so you could claim the full allowance but font actually need the childcare to work, a few working parents I know have DC in nursery on their days off?

So you could work one or a few hours a week and still claim it?

Or you could have DC in nursery a few hours and then have GPs doing most of the childcare and still claim it.

Or "work" for your husband as quite a few SAHM mums claim to do. I think there's done tax benefits or something of having your wife on the books and paying her salary. So if you "worked" for your husbands company you could still claim the childcare?

But how can a SAHM get a tax break when they dont earn anything....

Tax doesnt work like some are saying, just because you paid some tax previously doesnt give you the option to claim some of it back when you decide to stay at home.

If it worked like that please can I have my money back for not using the state education system and having private medical insurance.

I didnt know that SAHP's got NI credits when they werent earning How does that work? Surely if you arent earning you are not paying into the NI pot? How can you get the same out as someone who has paid - or have I got that all wrong.....

In my distant mind though, didnt something come in about this or am I dreaming....

I don't see this as an attack on SAHP.
A crucial point (which was made earlier too) is that families with both parents working are already maxed to the limit in terms of earning power, ie 2 x people working. When one is a SAHP there is still more earning capacity. Even if the SAHP can't earn enough to cover childcare, there is the option to work in evenings/ weekends to fit round the other parent. And yes I appreciate that it's not always easy to do that, but neither is being a 2 working parent family easy for anyone .

Being a SAHP is a valid choice if it's what you want to do, but I don't see why anyone is looking to the state to provide that validation. It should be something you do because you want to and feel is right for you. It's absolutely not comparable with a job where you are being remunerated. Of course, raising a generation of well balanced young people is vital- but thats parenting and we all do it whether we work or not

I agree Janey. When SAHP's list out what their role is - well I have to do that too or pay someone to do it. Washing, ironing, driving the kids around, cleaning etc.

It does make the family's life easier when one doesnt work. I have to sit down with my DH every weekend and run through what pick up's, and tasks I can do and what he can do. If we have a clash we probably have to pay someone to do it for us.

Im not sure I get you swwet kitty.

do you mean the tax free allowance of 10k from next year?

if you a part time person under 10k fromapril next year then you paying no income tax anyway.

if you earn £100 a month say.

you cant then transfer the other 9900 to husband no.

If you mean the new childcare vouchers.

the rules stipulate both parents have to be earning a income ok 10k or more as guess the new childcare help is taxable allowance.

At moment the oldstyle childcare vouchers are pre tax relief benefit of his earnings.

The other thing you mention setting self up as company yes that happends but could only do that if self employed and at momeny self employed not entitled to new vouchers.

I guess theres a loop

if married couple set up business and paid his wife extornionate 10k for being his pa maybe running the house,
Then both would be working and get new help I guess.
a;so both be suing full tax allowances so have tax allowance of 20k.

Mps frequently employed their wives, relatives dident they at tax payers expense.

I have seen some high earning mummies on twitter discussing if loophole of nannies being london expense but dont know anyone in real life her who has a nanny.

My voluntry work as preschool commitee takes up hours of my time and we decide on hiring and firing its like being a employer.

same goes for school governers much respect to them as its lot of work, time and responsability for no pay.

Apart from 15hours my 3.5year old gets I pay the remaining gap to nursery so funding someones job.

Pay for breckfast club and one after school club.=paying someones wages.

pay for gym, brownies and cheerleading for eldest.

I was gutted to miss grand dads funural I was only grandchild not there.

Theres no sort of adhoc flexible childcare .

people who have supportive families are so lucky.
growing up my mums sisters and both grandmothers looked after us.

Mam29- but the argument about missing funerals etc applies just as much to WOHP as SAHP. In fact, arguably it can be more tricky for WOHP. When my children were small, they were in nursery from 8am to 6pm on the days I worked. If I needed to attend a funeral, I wouldn't automatically have childcare if it didnt fall on a work day. And if it did fall on a workday, I'd have to negotiate time off work and then still find flexible childcare if the funeral wasnt nearby and didn't fall neatly into the hours of 8-6. Oh and pay for the usual nursery hours on top because they had to paid for whether I was working or not.
This isn't anti SAHM at all. I just can't see the logic behind some of these arguments. If you are a SAHM you don't need childcare. The odd occasions when you might have a funeral or whatever are absolutely no different for WOHM