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

To talk about benefits?

163 replies

TinyTapDancer · 30/07/2016 21:02

It seems such a sensitive subject around here!

I don't work, well not 'paid' work as such. I am a SAHM, but it's not a luxury as some would describe. But I wanted to describe what I do to give some insight into why do what I do, because I do feel judged, and I do feel guilty...

I have 2 dc's and a dh we have a mortgage. DH works ft. DH's wage is over the tax credits thresh-hold BUT we do get tax credits because both dc's have 'special needs' (hate that term). The boys get DLA and child benefit.

I claim carers allowance, only one lot mind, because that's all I'm allowed to.
Both dc's are in mainstream school full time.
Why don't I work while they are in school?

Well I could, but just now I am so tired, it's exhausting caring for my 2 dc's.
Yes the carers allowance and tax credits cover the earning gap, and I would probably lose that if and when I start earning that, and that's why I feel guilty. I would struggle to find a job in school hours.

Anyway, I just wanted to highlight, that not everyone is a money grabbing benefit cheat.

OP posts:
pimmsperfecto · 31/07/2016 07:56

Good point name. I expect they go through the motions but don't have any real commitment. I don't understand it at all.

StealthPolarBear · 31/07/2016 08:07

Total recall usually I'd agree about the "sahp being a full time job" line but when the child or children have additional needs I do think it's full on in a way that can't compare to woh and then coming back to 'parent' nt children.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 31/07/2016 08:14

Pimms or maybe they are upset at not getting jobs so putting on a front.

Stranger things have happened.

Sirzy · 31/07/2016 08:24

Unfortunately Cody when children have additional needs its often impossible to think long term about yourself.

I am a single mum, I have given up a career to be a full time carer for Ds. Not from choice but from necessity. I have no idea what the future holds sadly but for now I need to focus on surviving in the present.

Imnotacelebgetmeouttahere · 31/07/2016 08:39

Sirzy Flowers totally agree that long term thinking for ourselves is bottom of the pile

pimmsperfecto · 31/07/2016 08:43

Maybe Fanjo, but I don't think so, from what I've heard. and they live in a big city where there are loads of jobs, especially in catering.

user87654321 · 31/07/2016 08:45

In my humble opinion: The majority of people who claim benefits are not trying to cheat the system.

The majority of people who claim DLA are disabled.

The majority of working women do not think SAHM are lazy.

The majority of SAHM do not think that working mothers are a problem.

And we can apply this to any section in society. Most of us want that common goal; a happy family with happy children & we will all take necessary/different steps to achieve that.

hazeyjane · 31/07/2016 09:08

I appreciate SN can be more demanding but presumably they're managing school and therefore sleep at night

Hey? It doesn't necessarily work like that. Ds is disabled, he goes to school, he goes to sleep in the evening thanks to melatonin but is up multiple times a night with his chest or reflux, then he is up for the day around 4.30/5. He gets extremely tired at school, which means he is full on when he gets home, overtired, overwhelmed andvall over me!

I do work pt, in school hours, and am studying for an NVQ, but it is bloody knackering, my boss is very understanding about time off for ds's appointments and I do it more to maintain my sanity than the money (I am paid a pittance!)

I completely understand why others wouldn't be able to work, and need to rely fully on benefits, because I am not a dick.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 31/07/2016 09:13

That's hilarious isn't it hazey

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 31/07/2016 09:13

Dd has never slept through ever. She is nearly 10.

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 31/07/2016 09:15

I do still work. But people should understand that this is an issue. And not even comparable to people working with small babies. It lasts longer and is more severe.

WankersHacksandThieves · 31/07/2016 09:18

There is really only one question and only the OP can answer it. Do you or don't you need to be a carer for your children? Once you honestly answer that question then it really doesn't matter what anyone else thinks. It sound to me that maybe you aren't sure so are looking for justification from others. No one here can answer for you because we don't know your exact circumstances.

Lemonwords · 31/07/2016 09:22

Tiny - I made a point I wasn't sure of your DCs needs and I certainly didn't know you had health needs yourself. If you can't work you can't work.

I just wanted to highlight a difference between a need and a choice Flowers

IcedVanillaLatte · 31/07/2016 09:28

If we're going with telling individual stories, I'll tell you about a friend of mine and what "tightening" the system has done for him. He has brain damage and a mental illness, and is morbidly obese because of the meds he takes, so has bad joint pain.. He used to live in supported accommodation and got IB and DLA. His needs haven't changed. When IB changed to ESA he was put in the WRAG at first, but then moved on to JSA. When DLA became PIP, he no longer qualified (and his assessments for that were in London, which requires long, complicated public transport journeys which he can't really do, so his dad has to drive him). His supported accommodation was closed down and very few of the residents could find places elsewhere, so now he's on his own. Cutbacks mean he no longer gets support for his mental health problems from the mental health team. He tries to work. He's qualified to work in kitchens but when the jobcentre can find him something, it's often things he can't cope with very well, due to his weight and his brain damage, like moving stuff around a warehouse, He does what he's supposed to do, in that he tries to work, but many of the jobs found are a long way away, so the transport thing again. He doesn't struggle with transport just for fun or as an excuse - he wants to work but every (rare) time he gets a job, he loses it because he can't work quickly.

So these edge cases, those people who were at the bottom end of qualifying for help, now have to endure this limbo where they're "capable of work" buy not really capable of what an employer actually needs. He's suffering and we're not really paying much less, because he still gets JSA.

mum2Bomg · 31/07/2016 09:43

To reassure you, not everyone is judging you - I'm happy for my tax to go towards supporting people who need help. I think it's my duty to do so and I hope the help you're getting is enough. No judging here - I'm sure you're doing a great job X

LoloKazoloh · 31/07/2016 09:57

More and more I think just scrapping the whole welfare system and issuing everyone a Citizen's Income would be better. Better for cashflow through the real economy as well.

It's too easy for people to feel hard done by when they see their neighbour working 15 hours and getting the same they do on 30, or whatever, and that sense of unfairness is too easily exploited by people who wouldn't notice £72 a week falling out of their jacket.

islandtiare · 31/07/2016 10:47

lolo

Totally agree with that!! And I'm in favour of a citizens income

Girlgonewild · 31/07/2016 13:39

Lolo I support a university income too which goes to everyone. I would feel a lot less resentful for working 6 or 7 days a week full time with what feels at times very little back when many other single mothers work shorter hours (albeit some have of course very disabled children at home which is a very difficult thing for them, but not all do) and the state tops it up. If we all got exactly the same there would be a huge incentive on people to earn more and much less pressure if they chose not to work. Now it might mean some get less money than now but their partner would also get the university income and 3 or 4 single mothers could live together pooling their universal payments too so it could all work out very well. It would need not to be so high everyone stopped working and no one paid tax however as we could not afford it!

StealthPolarBear · 31/07/2016 13:42

I assume you mean universal?

cannotlogin · 31/07/2016 13:54

The problem with judging simple parents who work part time is understanding motives for doing so. I am single and work full time - but only do so because my pension pot is non existent and I am not young. I can afford not to work full time but have my eye on the long term. In my experience, single parents often work part time as an effort to maintain some kind of balance - I barely see my children and can understand why some will take the decision to do school pick up sometimes, for example. Childcare costs alongside travel and other work costs can make anything other than part time just financially unviable. Yet we are vilified and screamed as disgusting people while the tax credit claiming SAHM is part of a 'hard working family'. As a single parent yourself, I would have hoped the bigger picture for some in the same position was clear to you. There is apparently no hope...

Girlgonewild · 31/07/2016 13:57

..oops, yes a universal payment for everyone over 18... That what working all day Sunday does to you as a single parent... muddle up your words. I shall return to funding the teenagers and Big State and no doubt may get my reward in heaven.

StealthPolarBear · 31/07/2016 13:59

Assumed so but wondered if we'd also moved onto higher education :o

TheRealAdaLovelace · 31/07/2016 14:01

" but there are people who don't actually understand that that it's the taxes that people pay that pays their benefit money "

If you think that the link is that direct, you have been DM'd

Sirzy · 31/07/2016 14:09

A universal income is all well and good, but that should never replace dla/pip which need to be separate entities altogether as they are to cover the additional costs which come with disabilities which won't disappear

WankersHacksandThieves · 31/07/2016 14:21

If you think that the link is that direct, you have been DM'd

And what's that supposed to mean? I am perfectly sure that there isn't a big bucket called "Taxes In" that all our money goes into and then they take the benefit money from it, but the net effect is the same. If there were no people paying tax, spending their earnings and paying more tax, saving what they can and paying more tax, then there wouldn't be money to pay benefits. The government may well be doing other things such as investing and borrowing, but it is tax revenue that keeps that all rolling.

I've already said, I am perfectly happy to pay tax, and more of it to support vulnerable people in our society. But there is a core of people that think it just comes from the government without computing that ordinary people in their millions are funding that. Apart from anything else, people should have the morals to not claim when they don't need to. that's the problem. There are people (a minority but a significant one) who feel that they are owed an existence and that they should have the same as everyone else without contributing. Again, i am not referring here to people in genuine need.