Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

AIBU to think that saying the new childcare proposal discriminates against SAHP is like saying JSA discriminates against the employed?

731 replies

AnnieLobeseder · 06/08/2013 14:46

So I know it's fairly old news, but the new government proposals to help working parents with childcare costs have been popping up on my BBC newsfeed this week.

Now there are plenty of things wrong with these new proposals, such as the "help" only being available for parents with under-5s to start with, and that students don't count as "employed" so if you're both/one of you are students and need childcare while you're at college you get no help at all. At least they're apparently going to count being a carer as "employed" so families where one parent stays home to care, they will get help with childcare.

However, what I don't understand is why these aren't the issues being highlighted, but instead, just people whining that SAHPs will lose out. Erm, please correct me if I'm missing some fundamental point here, but isn't that because SAHPs, by their very nature, don't need childcare!! That's why they stay at home - to look after their own children.

I've seem quotes that this is a "carrot dangled at SAHMs to tempt them back into work". Um, no, who the heck would put themselves into a situation they don't want for the sake of claiming a benefit they don't really need?

So to my mind, it's like complaining that you aren't entitled to JSA because you have a job, and saying that having JSA for those who need it is "dangling a carrot in front of people with jobs to tempt them into unemployment".

AIBU?

OP posts:
littlemisswise · 06/08/2013 20:31

Thank you! I hate GO too!Grin

Dackyduddles · 06/08/2013 20:33

From what I understood, a person had to work 5 days ft? Or can a sahp return part time/ flexi etc and be eligible?

Where does one find out?

Also what happens if sahp cares for other members of family but might not be eligible for help to caring? I know several who assist wider family by putting dc in nursery et a few hrs a week to do so.

Rinoachicken · 06/08/2013 20:34

Solve problem - I think we'd have to be VERY lucky to find that sort of employer. If it were me looking then maybe, as I have qualifications and skills et and do a particular job, so if they felt I was the right candidate they'd hopefully be flexible on starting dates etc.

But my husband is 15 years older than me, has no qualifications or 'skills', he has generally worked as a driver or in retail. Candidates for those positions are ten a penny. If you can't start when they want for the hours they want they just move down to the next person on the list.

Like bearleft said, it's a trap.

Plus I am now 20 weeks pregnant with a totally unplanned and unexpected pregnancy. So by Christmas he will be caring for 2 children.

I honestly can't see him being able to find work until both are at school, but by then he'll be 50 and probably viewed as 'too old'.

Dackyduddles · 06/08/2013 20:34

Little miss well put

Rinoachicken · 06/08/2013 20:36

Oh, and we have no family to help. His mum is elderly and would not be able to cope with providing childcare for more than a couple of hours, and my parents live New Zealand!

Dackyduddles · 06/08/2013 20:37

Rino I had that arguements in jsa apps. The staff had no idea how childcare worked. They were baffled. I was quite surprised. Would've thought that chicken/egg scenario was flipping obvious.

Rinoachicken · 06/08/2013 20:40

Exactly dacky, they seem to think nurseries are happy to provide childcare for free for the first month/term while you wait for your first paycheck.

Nope! It doesn't work like that!

After all, no one works for free right?
Except SAHP of course...

solveproblem · 06/08/2013 20:41

Rinoa, well that is really shit. The gov should definitely do something about that!

solveproblem · 06/08/2013 20:43

Rinoa, I need to add that I was in that situation too when I went back to work. I was however very lucky to did a childminder who invoiced us at the end of the month so I had my first pay heck before the first payment was due.

Rinoachicken · 06/08/2013 20:47

I'd happily pay back a govt 'back to work loan' or whatever if something existed, you know, the first month/terms fees as a loan so my husband could start a job, then pay back once he's earning.

Now that WOULD be helpful.

Shitsinger · 06/08/2013 20:54

WOHP plus SAHP = 1 set of taxes paid plus ( hopefully) children well brought up and one contribution to society via job role.

WOHP plus WOHP = 2 sets of taxes paid + childcarer employed( if needed)+ children well brought up(hopefully) plus 2 contributions to society via job role.

SAHP always go on about how much they contribute to society but forget that most WOHP do the same andpay 2 lots of tax and employ childcare and contribute twice with their job role.

Shitsinger · 06/08/2013 20:55

WOHP x 2 no childcare here btw

HappyMummyOfOne · 06/08/2013 20:55

YANBU OP. I dont see why SAHPs are moaning either, tax credits didnt pay for childcare where all the adults in the household didnt work so no different. Students were not paid by tax credits either for childcare unless working. They get support from the college etc if they qualify.

The main benefit to this scheme is that its just a tax saving so people arent being funded by the state just having some od the childcare costs made tax deductible. Its a good start in the right direction. Presumably thats why the limit starts when paying tax and has a high upper limit.

Being a SAHP is a lifestyle choice regardless of whether its because you want, you believe your partner cant possibly work if you do or you cant afford childcare. People choose to have children, surely the costs are part of the financial planning before having them?

ThinkAboutItTomorrow · 06/08/2013 20:56

I appreciate that the difference between the CB change and this is unfair. They should cut it back so the childcare vouchers are cut off for working parents at £60k each if that's what everyone wants.

But the OP is NBU SAHP do not need childcare no one seems to be challenging this are they?

Besides surely we are talking about a very small number of people.

2 working parents, each earning between £60k and £150k (since everyone is so keen on quoting the £300k) with children under 5.

It must be in the low hundreds?

I fit this criteria and don't think we should get help, if it's a choice of us or parents retraining.

Rinoachicken · 06/08/2013 20:59

Yes happymummy, careful financial planning is part of family planning, but when the economy then changes beyond what you could have envisaged and is beyond your control anyway, what worked a few years ago suddenly might no longer work. Then what?

soverylucky · 06/08/2013 21:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Shitsinger · 06/08/2013 21:01

I think what Im trying to say is that what the WOHP does during their working life is often dismissed or not recognised .
Teachers, Nurses, Doctors, Post Men/Women, Vets, Bin men /Women, Nannies, Retail workers, Accountants, Physios plus many more .
We need them in society - they are valuable .

littlemisswise · 06/08/2013 21:08

" People choose to have children, surely the costs are part of the financial planning before having them?"

So is that not true of WOHP's then HappyMummy? If so, why do you need help with childcare costs? Why did you not plan for those costs?

Reluctant2ndtimer · 06/08/2013 21:08

My Dh is a SAHP. It's not a lifestyle choice, it's because he can't get a fucking job. This is despite him graduating with a first in applied computing this June. Before his degree he was a SAHP because he'd been made redundant and couldn't get a fucking job. I only work 21 hours, so we lost our working tax credits this year too. If I could get 24 hours at work, which I can't, we'd still get wtc. Or if he was in prison. Thankfully our kids will be in school by 2015 or we'd have to uproot them from nursery and DH would have to give up looking for work as its not likely interviewers would take kindly to 2 kids being dragged along to interviews.

Pigsmummy · 06/08/2013 21:13

Yanbu.

This scheme is for anyone, as long as they are not earning too much. If satp's want to buy thousands of pounds worth of childcare vouchers then they too can benefit. No one is getting anything for free out of this. I don't understand the outrage either tbh

3birthdaybunnies · 06/08/2013 21:19

No it's not Pigsmummy you can only claim if you both work more than 16 hrs per week and you both pay tax.

Shitsinger · 06/08/2013 21:23

littlemisswise
WOHP also contribute to society via their career/job - we all benefit from teachers, doctors, nurses, retail assistants etc
How many WOHP do it for their sole benefit and no one elses ? - they are benefitting society as a whole.

ihategeorgeosborne · 06/08/2013 21:24

Sorry to hear that Reluctant. That sounds really shit for you. I so hope you're dh gets a job soon and things look up for you Smile

opilo · 06/08/2013 21:26

YANBU, if you don't work then why do you need childcare. Similarly why would the Government wish to encourage people into economic inactivity.

HappyMummyOfOne · 06/08/2013 21:28

Littlemiss, i dont need help with childcare costs and am a firm believer that having a child means providing for them.

As a policy though, making childcare tax deductible is a good idea. Its an expense of working like travel, uniform etc. Its not giving people money but allowing them to keep more of what they earn.

If we do need to suppport any area for families then childcare is the way to go as its short term. The person earns income, pays tax and will continue to do so after the childcare costs cease. May be even before if the person gets promoted, pay rise etc.