To think this misses the point about costs of childcare?

[adsy]

"Critics have complained that homes where one parent stays at home to look after children will not benefit."

This is in response to the new scheme where parents will get 20% of childcare costs paid for by the government.
I'm a CM and all for subsidies of any sort to help out parents, but other than the odd day when you might need to go for an interview etc. I can't see why a stay at home parent needs to get childcare subsidies or am I missing a major point here?!

What time with their own children, in their homes? I am sorry but that doesnt count in my book.

Doesn't count?

www.theguardian.com/society/shortcuts/2012/jun/27/why-british-children-so-unhappy

The report concluded, essentially, that children growing up in the UK were the unhappiest in the industrialised world, and that parents in more than half the countries surveyed spent more time "just talking" to their children than did those in the UK; and that just 40% of UK 11-, 13- and 15-year-olds find their peers "kind and helpful"

"Children in the UK are among the most pressured, unhappy and commercially vulnerable in the western world," Ellyatt says. "The cultural and environmental tensions are unprecedented. And in this country more than others, we have focused away from children and the family, and on to work and the economy." The new group, she says, "doesn't necessarily have the answers. But what we can't say any longer is that we don't have a problem.".

I earn a lot
I pay a lot for child care
I pay a lot in tax
If I didn't get the tax relief for child care I'd be less inclined to keep working
They would get none of my tax
It was my decision to have a child and chose to work and therefore pay child are BUT whilst I earn well there is a world of difference between self supporting, mortgage paying, student loan repaying 30 something with a family at £70k to someone at £150k
I am not moaning, but I am merely pointing out that when I was on £25k the WTC and child benefit meant my disposable income wasn't actually that different to now
Gov also assumes it's still men as main breadwinners... Maternity leave blasts breadwinner women most

• And in this country more than others, we have focused away from children and the family, and on to work and the economy

loads more cannot be bothered to find, children are bottom of heap, in terms of whats best for them.

Daisy well sorry "need" is debatable and frankly if we're going to be so mercenary doesn't cut it.

Save and plan ahead.

You know you will have childcare bills or lose a salary.

Neither choice is more deserving.

Interns of qualifying for childcare Arsenic

In terms not interns!

I am talking about paying into society.

There is more to paying into society than paying in with cold hard cash as per articles listed above.

I agree seagulls, I'd be all for a party brave enough to scrap all child related benefits. Then everyone is on an equal playing field.

The new tax scheme won't benefit me but if we have to support workers then childcare is the best place to do it as it can be the highest cost of working.

Save and plan ahead.

That's exactly what we did. Hence we didn't have our first DC till I was 37 and DP was 42.

LittlePea

The teens who are usually hanging about in the town making a nuisance of themselves are the children of working parents, the kids doing their homework and behaving are at home with a parent.
How many wohps would be surprised their little johnny wasn't where he said he was at home but creating a disturbance.

The teens who are usually hanging about in the town making a nuisance of themselves are the children of working parents, the kids doing their homework and behaving are at home with a parent.

Just spat my drink out laughing! That's a strecth! . How do you figure this one out?

All you working parents need to take control of your nuisance DC!

not sure about that morethan

however I am sure we are sleep walking into a horrid society where children and their needs are still bottom of the heap.

we do not value are children in the uk, we dont! we need to put them first, only then as a whole does society flourish as we are all happier.

and i would put an hour with dedicated mother, sahp, grandparent over a 17 year old texting bf any day.

I agree with OP, don't see why SAHP would need subsidised childcare. But then again, at the moment I'm a SAHM, I'm looking for work and I'm in a bit of an impossible situation. Can't afford childcare without a job, can't get a job without childcare. I don't really know how to solve that one. Any help for parents looking for work would be appreciated, any interviews that I go to cost me between £10-40 in travel and babysitter fees. That doesn't seem like much but when you are on low income, it all adds up very quickly. Also, the only available childcare I have found within easy-ish commute (less than 60mins) from home, have been for either 1 day a week (Mon) or 2 days a week (Mon&Fri). No friends or family nearby who could help. Sometimes I don't know why I even bother.

littlePea

I keep my eyes open, there was no figuring it is my experience.
I didn't suggest it was founded by empirical research. My ds's mates did it all the time, parents thought they were in house doing homework.
It was funny watching one of them squirm when I saw their mum at parents evening, especially after she said my Johnny comes home every night straight from school and straight into homework.

What about people who are full time carers with small children? Not even one day a week for a break? hell there are some heartless people out there

I am not adverse to carers getting a break but I take exception to the suggestion that somehow the government should subsidise anyone's 'break' from children they chose to have. I am a full-time, single working parent of 3 young children. I never get a break. I am regularly up at midnight completing essential household and paid work tasks. I do my paid work at least one day at the weekends (as well as being in work Monday - Friday). The only breaks I get are the ones engineered by holidays and even then, I am still with my children 24/7. I didn't make a choice to be a single parent, nor a single working parent. I personally don't think I have a choice but to suck up the following bloody lot and deal with it because shit happens and you have to do what you have to do.

I should also say that my youngest has just turned 5 so up until about 3 weeks ago, I could have spent the last 5 years on Income Support. I made a choice not to do that - mainly because I didn't want to be a 'single mum on benefits'. Few people understand just how awful that is. It beggars belief that there are people out there who want me to support their having the luxury of being stay at home parents with childcare when my own children have, I believe, suffered as a result of my trying to do the 'right thing' and support them. If you want a break, pay for it yourself.

Moretahn you cheered me upmost before bed. Thanks.

Short term sahp still have an income ( maternity pay) and return to their same role normally. Different to a sahm who has to start again.

Up just not upmost! How annoying!

Oh Beyond, turn the record off

Not all people are the same, not all SAHMs are doing a good job, it doesn't suit everyone to be a SAHM and those of us who work do do for good reason

I am the main breadwinner in my house because I married a man who earns significantly less than me, we do not neglect our children, they are with people who care about them and people who are professionals

We CAN'T all stay at home for gods sake, we are not putting our children at the bottom of our priorities and you are not putting yours at the top just because you are home all day and I'm out at work, we all have to do what we have to do to survive you idiot

daisy if the tax system should stay based on the individual like you say, how will it recognise that you and your partner both work? Surely my dp will also be entitled to a childcare tax break then even though I don't work because they are a WOHP? Or is it only individual when it benefits two working parents? Where children are concerned it doesn't make sense to have individual tax thresholds, hence the cb nonsense.

Morethan
Mine always came straight home to eat! [Grin]

If I was paid to be a SAHM I would most likely spend the money on gin to drink whilst the children watched Peppa Pig on a continuous loop. That's probably beside the point though.

beyondrepair whilst I agree that there is more to adding value to society than cold hard cash there are many jobs that add value to society, and there are many societal benefits to having women in these positions. And whislt you may cry what about men, there is little point in pretending that making access to childcare harder would not impact disproportionately on women.

arsenic very old point from further down the thread, but dismissing the goodwill point re tax because PAYE is shortsighted, not all income tax is collected via PAYE and there are many other forms of tax. Besides, is it not just healthier for society to have a tax system people believe in and trust? The arguments on this thread are a pretty good indication that the current system does not help create a cohesive and harmonious society.

I still maintain this policy is an improvement, it will provide 1.9 million families with access to tax relief on childcare, rather than the 450,000 who currently participate in the voucher scheme.

Goodness, Beyond, if that's the impression of childcare you have, no wonder you cling to home. It's not real world, though, is it?

Your arguments are a wee bit ridiculous as well as being hyperbolic and conflating issues where no evidence of a link exists.

I'm fortunate that I've found and can afford amazing childcare, with great people supporting my child. I'm fortunate that I've got a job that will allow me to work from home when my child goes to school, keeping them off morethan's streets (and how delightful you sound, enjoying watching the despised working parents squirm). I work compressed hours but I don't kid myself that either I or his father can offer his everything. He has a great variety of care that is hugely enriching to him.

If it weren't, we'd reevaluate. But I wouldn't stop working. Why? Oh, I earn twice as much as DH. If either of us were to stay at home it would be him. However I support his decision to want to work outside the home and continue his much-loved career, just as I would support him (but my stress levels would skyrocket) if he wanted to stay home more than he does (he also works a compressed week).

arsenic very old point from further down the thread, but dismissing the goodwill point re tax because PAYE is shortsighted, not all income tax is collected via PAYE and there are many other forms of tax. Besides, is it not just healthier for society to have a tax system people believe in and trust? The arguments on this thread are a pretty good indication that the current system does not help create a cohesive and harmonious society.

Not what I was saying. Probably not clear because I was also making a joke. I wasn't actually making a distinction between PAYE and S/E. My point was that tax is inescapable for most and very few people are happy about spending decisions in any case. At least I think that's what I was saying, it was a while ago.