Is there any reason why SAHP shouldn't be described as 'unemployed'?

[BrendaandEddie]

I know they are busy etc. But is this a box you should tick if you are at home with children?

There's always one goady feckwit.

But then pensioners, students and children would be unemployed, too?

Unemployment suggests seeking work to me.

Most surveys I do have two boxes, one that says 'unemployed' and one that says 'not employed (not looking for work/retired)'.

Some places lump both categories into one if the distinction is irrelevant to them.

Working a damn sight harder than FT people who get nursery to do the hard bit for them! Easily one of the most unnecessarily shitty things I have read on MN.

Working a damn sight harder than FT people who get nursery to do the hard bit for them!

What a horrid and unnecessary thing to write!??

OP, is that you Katie Hopkins?

I find many forms have a "houseperson" option. Unemployed doesn't really convey the situation of a SAHP.

I'd say SAHP are self-employed. They are working for themselves / their families.

"Unemployed" means "not working" in my head.

i dont think claiming benefits is relevant - some people might have redundancy pay outs for eg

I think those who said about intention are right probably

Question: although off topic of origional post

Am curious. A few people on this thread have commented about others just joining that day, only posting on this thread etc

How do you know when someone has just joined etc?
TIA

A few people on this thread have commented about others just joining that day, only posting on this thread etc

they really shouldn't, a) i have been here for years
b) that would be TROLLHUNTING which is, like, well bad

Unemployed simply means not working, whether it's because you're disabled, a carer, a SAHP, a student or you're on the doll and can't be bothered. They can't have a box for every single option. Everyone who has ever had a kid knows that being a parent is a bloody hard job so why does it matter whether we have to write 'unemployed' on a form or not. If it bothers you, then you can tick working.

I'm sure needaninsight works much harder than most. Just the other day I saw my GP dropping her children off at nursery - she might very well save lives but i know the truth - the nursery does the hard bit and she is a lazy fucker.

"Working a damn sight harder than FT people who get nursery to do the hard bit for them!"

Ah the smuggery of people with young children. Wait until they're fully grown until you decide what's the "hard bit".

The definition of unemployed is : "Those who are out of work, but who are looking for work and willing and able to work in the next two weeks."

SAHP are economically inactive, the same way that pensioners, the long term sick and others are.

So it would be a completely incorrect thing for people to be classified as unemployed as they are not actively seeking work.

There's your reason.

its funny - H and I had that conversation recently. Toddler and primary is hard physically, teenager and YA way more worrying. And you can't just tell them what to do!

I agree with the sentiment that unemployed means you're actively seeking work.

I'm a SAHM and my eldest is disabled, i have to be available to the school in case of emergency, so i class myself as his carer (and i need to get my butt in gear with claiming carers allowance tbh), but there isn't a 'Carer' box when filling that shit out, so i have to use SAHM.

I think it's quite important in this context that 'work' is defined as 'paid employment'.

Unemployment is used to describe someone who is involuntarily not in paid work. Usually a sahp is voluntarily not in paid work. Therefore they are not unemployed.

The term 'unemployed' doesn't indicate whether you are seeking or not seeking work, just that you don't have it currently!

Your logic is based on the assumption that there are only two possibilities, employed and unemployed. In some contexts that may be true, but in many contexts there are one or more additional categories, so not being unemployed is not the same thing as being employed.

In most contexts pensioners, SAHPs, children and wealthy people living only on investment income would not be described as unemployed, even though they are not employed.

I see it as employed = working for an employer (this is why self-employed is often an option to tick) so unemployed = not working for an employer which fits SAHP's. It isn't a judgment on anybody.

No more reason than why someone retired should be described as unemployed.

Same reason as why a pensioner isn't unemployed.

Or a rich heir.

You are only unemployed if you are seeking employment.