Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Lone parents with babies of a few MONTHS old being threatened with sanctions...

220 replies

MrsNextDoor · 15/05/2015 14:02

here on the Gingerbread site

Bloody bastards!!!

One lone parent was told that she was being sanctioned because she'd turned down a nightshift job on account of not being able to find overnight childcare.

Others with children of 3 or 4 months old were being told they had to find work immediately or lose their benefits.

What the actual!??? In many cases, job advisers are giving their clients the wrong information....seemingly deliberately...telling them the law has changed and they must get work now....the most vulnerable people...lone parents with infants...being bullied. Angry AIBU to think this should be stopped immediately!?

OP posts:
NotSureThisIsWhatIWant · 15/05/2015 17:51

The changes to benefit rules are Tory policies, this is a training problem but still.. i can't forgive Cameron for claiming the London Riots were caused by all those children of single mothers. Obviously he never realised that it was the mum who stayed by and for the children when the dad signed iff of parenthood. The father are all innocent apparently, the mums are the ones to blame.

By the way Free, most single parent are duvorced or had pretty strong partnerships before the relationship broke down and the dad fecked off, many are wudows, so if I were you I would get down from that high horse as it may happen to you too.

As for the irresponsible NRP... People tend to assume that an irresponsible NRP is a low life, unemployed or living in benefits bastards, they are not, many are well professional "family" men, who have found how to play around the rules to avoid paying CM now they have new families of their own.

StormyBrid · 15/05/2015 17:52

fortunately if you're unemployed and pregnant you continue jumping through ridiculous hoops for your JSA until 29 weeks, at which point you move over to IS and breathe a massive sigh of relief that the bastards will finally leave you alone for a little while.

NotSureThisIsWhatIWant · 15/05/2015 17:53

Damn, I need to get my glasses and check my messages before I press "post".Blush

Viviennemary · 15/05/2015 18:08

This scaremongering and blatant untruths won't get sympathy. It's completely the wrong approach. Are women at this present time expected to seek jobs and sign on as unemployed when they have babies as young as three months. I'd suggest they are not.

DrCoconut · 15/05/2015 18:22

My mum was on her own with a 6 year old and a 3 year old. Our dad had dared to become terminally ill and die. Yes they had split but he was still in our lives and would have continued to be had he not died. So not everyone is a lone parent "to get a council house", "because they can't be arsed to work" or whatever. It was a conservative regime then and very tough for my mum, with plenty of stigma attached. I don't want to see a return to those days.

traceybaybee · 15/05/2015 18:23

vivien my jobcentre advisor is expecting me back at the jobcentre 2 weeks after im due this is after seeing her at 38 weeks. How i can be expected to look for work at this time is unreal (not that i wont be at a suitable time). To even get to the jobcentre its a 30minute bus ride then a 2 mile walk if you miss the other bus needed

traceybaybee · 15/05/2015 18:24

Rather a pain so heavily pregnant

fortunately · 15/05/2015 18:33

Bloody hell £140 a week isn't much!

I can't see a problem with going back to work once the baby is a year or so old though.

Stinkersmum · 15/05/2015 18:34

tracey has no one advised you about changing to income support instead?

Viviennemary · 15/05/2015 18:51

Yes. You don't have to sign on with such a young baby. You change to a different benefit as Stinkersmum advised. But I don't know if that's less money.

StormyBrid · 15/05/2015 19:10

JSA and IS are the same rate, CB, CTC, and a higher LHA allowance kick in when the baby's born.

WienerDiva · 15/05/2015 19:25

Dr Coconut, exactly my point.

All this article highlights is the diabolical training the staff have had.

From what I gather, single parents with children under 5 should be claiming Income Support with no obligation to look for work. When the child turns five you have to swap to JSA and actively seek employment in accordance to the rules.

Anyone on here who is a single parent and on JSA should change to IS now!

Anyone being judgemental about single parents and then claiming should take their heads out of their arses (for your bum isn't a milliner) and naff off.

traceybaybee · 15/05/2015 19:29

Yes ive been asked if i was changing to IS from when i told them i was pregnant and i told them no as its a big drop in money

LithaR · 15/05/2015 19:34

This is one thing I agree with the US on. The non resident parent should support the resident parent.

lazymum99 · 15/05/2015 19:37

There is no difference in money between IS and JSA. You should change ASAP. Stormy bird is absolutely right. If you've been working but don't qualify for SMP you can get maternity allowance for the same 39 weeks. When that finishes you can claim IS. These rules have not changed under the Tories. They have gradually bought the Aged of the child down to 5 and I think it'll moved to 3 soon.

fortunately · 15/05/2015 19:39

Pointless if the NRP hasn't got any money LithaR

traceybaybee · 15/05/2015 19:44

Im on employment and support allowance which is more than income support. I got told the age has been lowered to one

Charis1 · 15/05/2015 19:52

fortunately if you're unemployed and pregnant you continue jumping through ridiculous hoops for your JSA until 29 weeks, at which point you move over to IS and breathe a massive sigh of relief that the bastards will finally leave you alone for a little while.

Which bastards? The ones spreying out free money for doing nothing, expecting even more free money for bringing dependants into the world you can't support?

lazymum99 · 15/05/2015 19:53

If you have a disability you should qualify for a disability premium which will be added to your IS. Which group of ESA are you on? Do you also get DLA cos done of the premiums are based on this. The bloody job centre staff should know this

lazymum99 · 15/05/2015 19:55

From the Gov.uk website

Income Support (IS) for Lone Parents is currently available to un-partnered parents, over the age of 16 who have a child under the age of 5 years old and to Lone Parents who qualify for IS for other reasons e.g. caring responsibilities or short-term disability (www.gov.uk/income-support/eligibility)1.

PtolemysNeedle · 15/05/2015 19:55

Why are women without jobs concieving children in the first place? It's asking for trouble.

m0therofdragons · 15/05/2015 19:57

I strongly feel the absent parent should have an actual legal responsibility. Ie) you don't pay then you go to prison.
There's one thing to encourage parents back to work but child care needs to be more available.
In the USA many parents return to work at 3 months so it's not maybe as harsh as it seems to us as we are used to expecting a year maternity. Each case is so different it's surely impossible to legislate?

PiperIsTerrysChoclateOrange · 15/05/2015 19:59

Well I had to go back to work when ds was 5 months old.

I believe income support should be in line with the maternity leave policy for maternity allowance.

SouthWestmom · 15/05/2015 20:04

Tracey if you are still claiming a benefit for people who are looking for work but you don't want to look for work then you can't really complain if they expect you to go to interviews and things related to the vendor you're on.

traceybaybee · 15/05/2015 20:07

lazymum i am in the work related group for employment and support allowance.
ptole i worked up until ill health stopped me working. I find your comment a bit harsh

Swipe left for the next trending thread