Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be shm after children are at school

921 replies

Notthinkingclearly · 05/02/2017 17:45

I have 2 dc who are 6 and 9. Since my first child was born i have been a stay at home mum. My DH works away alot abroad so I am often on my own. My Dc's have not been the most robust and have both had quite a few weeks off school with legitimate reasons over the last few years with hospital appointments. I have felt that if I had been at work I would have been a rubbish employee. I seem to be really busy all the time but feel I am constantly justifying to everyone why I don't have a job. I look after a relations 2 year old one day a week, help in school one day a week and I am a member of the schools PTA. I don't go out apart from supermarket or a walk during the week and only ever sit down to eat my lunch during the day. Am I as spoilt and lazy as I am made to feel?

OP posts:
Blistory · 07/02/2017 20:26

Well, no - my whole point is that deliberately choosing not to work isn't something that should be considered as an acceptable option

And your household income would benefit from not having childcare costs in the first place. Why should one person's tax support an entire household for a period beyond that which is entirely necessary ? I've already said contributions should be credited for a period of time where a parent stays at home but a higher tax kicks in when that position changes.

I will happily pay more tax to support those in genuine need and with restricted working capacity but we don't have enough to do that and to fund a family choice to stay at home for 10 -20 years. Yes, there will always be the outliers who will be worse off/better off whatever way it is done but we need to consider that the vast majority fits somewhere in between.

MommaGee · 07/02/2017 20:50

Nah bunny

I worked through a-levels and uni, I worked up to prem labour and I'd have gone back but I had a really complex baby. What it would cost to provide adequate support in nursery for his medical needs, how much I'd p off an employer having 4-5 months off a time - we are justified in my now working and the support we get.

Judged tho? Hugely

NataliaOsipova · 07/02/2017 20:57

I could volunteer to teach a course in basic economics.....

GimmeeMoore · 07/02/2017 20:59

Ft working men aren't described as fiercely independent as if working is a battle
The language fiercely independent it implies dysfunctional and oppositional
Again not an inference levelled at salaried males

MommaGee · 07/02/2017 21:06

deliberately choosing not to work isn't something that should be considered as an acceptable option

So despite being able to afford to pay for private health care and education, someone should be forced to get a job and then pay for childcare to accomodate that? If a family can afford for one parent to not work then good luck to them and that's a job that can go to someone who needs it more
Meanwhile the sahp can volunteer and fundraise and bake cakes for the local hospice as well as running aroin after the kids and whatever else makes them happy. of isn't anyone else's decision.

People also deliberately choose not to work cos child care is more expensive than they make in work.

Or because they have informal caring duties for older relatives, neighbours etc.

We're not talking about someone sitting on the dole since they were 16 refusing to contribute to society.

If were increasing the salary of a partner who financially keeps the other partner what sanctions dp we impose when neither work? Work house?

hickorydickorynurseryrhyme · 07/02/2017 21:07

Juliej thanks for those comments well said

gandalf456 · 07/02/2017 21:11

What one person might consider unnecessary would be different to another. As I said, the school day is relatively short. I do work (approx 26 hrs). I don't earn a great deal but certainly enough to pay NI and tax and contribute to a pension.

If my DH had a better income, I would possibly scale down my hours and study with a view to a more fulfilling job/career in the future but that's not possible right now.

Working more than 26 hrs would not work in terms of my childcare commitments. One of my children is very, very hard work and about to be assessed for something. I also do a lot for my elderly widowed mother. In fact, 26 feels too much right now because all of this stuff I have to cram in a v. short 6 hr day, including the job.

If work was all I had to do, I'd happily do 37 hrs as before but before children I still had more time on those hours and I was considerably less stressed. You cannot compare a parent with a child at school with a single person with 0 commitments. You don't suddenly get them off your hands when they're 4/5. They still need you long after that and, when they're at secondary, they need you more in different ways and I am not the only one who's said that. I know someone who scaled down her hours to get her eldest through her GCSEs. Another friend gave up one of her jobs (she had 2 part time jobs) to support a child with MH problems.

Barbie222 · 07/02/2017 21:15

But, Alaia, with respect that's quite a small and very wealthy bubble of similar households. Up and down the country I'd imagine there are more low income households where the SAHP cant afford to work than there are high income households as you describe. Point being, they don't contribute in the way that Blistory describes but it may well not be through choice.

NataliaOsipova · 07/02/2017 21:22

Just a vacuous, scrounging SAHM here - but surely someone has done the staggering piece of arithmetic that shows that one high earner pays a hell of a lot more tax than two lower earners. For example, one person earning £100k with a SAHP earning nothing pays a lot more tax than two people both earning £50k.....

Alaia5 · 07/02/2017 21:32

Barbie - I totally agree with you in that respect, but surely a "SAHM tax" is the total opposite to the type of child- centred society I would argue we should be aiming for - i.e. where all families, not just the very wrealthy, have real choice. I would argue there are very real benefits to school age children having a parent at home - but I totally accept that this is not for everyone, of course. But women should not be taxed for wanting to bring up their own children. Just because many may choose to pay for childcare, this does not mean that our family is "saving" by not doing so. That is clearly ridiculous. Many SAHM families have live in nannies /housekeepers : you name it in any case!

BoboChic · 07/02/2017 21:37

Good luck to the political party that makes working obligatory for all able-bodied adults, whatever their household circumstances.

Lots of SAHPs do so because the logistics of their family lives are otherwise impossible.

MommaGee · 07/02/2017 21:42

blistory sp what's the sanctions for a couple where neither work or a family where neither parent works?

Alaia5 · 07/02/2017 21:47

Momma - as you said earlier - the workhouse surely! Grin
Natalia -absolutely right as usual.

MommaGee · 07/02/2017 21:53

Well thank god they can just tax us into poverty then!!

Bambambini · 07/02/2017 21:57

Gulag in Auchenshuggle?

Kibbutz - that's the answer. Everyone works and everyone's needs are met.

Blistory · 07/02/2017 21:57

I wouldn't sanction anyone.

If you remove the costs of childcare from everyone, pay carers a living wage, credit a sahp with NI contributions for a set number of years and fund it with a higher tax then I think that's a fairer system which gives women real choice. If you choose to stay at home then the household income should be adjusted to reflect that there is an economic price to pay that choice.

Of course people would benefit unfairly but that happens in any society due to human nature.

The point is to spend more in the right places as a general principle. And to recognise that where possible, we should all contribute.

But thanks for the economic lesson. Using outliers as examples isn't exactly the best way to model figures.

NataliaOsipova · 07/02/2017 22:04

Using outliers as examples isn't exactly the best way to model figures.

Applies at any level of taxable income. Numbers purely illustrative. If you prefer, though, two people earning £20k each pay less tax than one earning £40k and a SAHP earning nothing. It just becomes more extreme above the c.£80k level.

BoboChic · 07/02/2017 22:06

And how do you ensure that children and elderly people are taken care of better and more cheaply when all adults have been conscripted into the paid workforce?

MommaGee · 07/02/2017 22:18

Agree with a living wage but not sure we can afford it!

If not working is unacceptable and you'll charge my hubby extra if I dont what is your solution where neither parent works?

gillybeanz · 07/02/2017 22:35

Blistery

Pardon me for sounding thick but do you mean pay a parent to be a sahp through increasing other peoples tax?
How would that reflect the family with a sahp having to pay a price for having a sahp as you suggest?
It's probably me being stupid but I don't understand.

PoisonousSmurf · 07/02/2017 22:38

I thought this was a free country. If you are not living off benefits then you can do anything you damn well want!

RubyRetro · 07/02/2017 22:41

Not read whole thread yet but just like to thank elecktra for the NI link. I've just checked mine and already have 30 years contributions.

For me personally, even though it was hard returning to work after having ds (when I was 36) I love my part time working life. I wouldn't want to rely on dp solely for everything. It was hard in the beginning, had times when ds was off sick and it was down to me taking time off, being the lower earner, but I was able to juggle my days around. Lucky really.

Each to their own though OP. I never really give it a thought if someone chooses to be a SAHP. Personally, I love my working life and wouldn't have opted to stay at home, even if money wasn't an issue. I'd have probably returned to work a few years later though instead of the 12 months I was off.

TheEdgeofSeventeen · 07/02/2017 22:51

Its up to you - I always remember my mum being available if i was sick or when I got home fro work ( although I think she went stir crazy) also be careful as when my parents divorced when i was 14 my mum who ( before giving up work) earned more than my dad pretty high up in Insurance and after their divorce could only get a job in a clothes shop. She was too distanced from her experience after 17 years :/

Twittery · 07/02/2017 22:54

NOT read the thread ...sorry.

OP, I've not worked for years and I can't think I've ever felt the need to 'justify' myself. A lot of my friends work and a few don't. I don't think anyone cares. My kids are all at Uni now and I have a cleaner a few days a week so it's lucky I don't ever have to justify what I do. 😂 Mostly I just play a lot of tennis, go hiking and hang out with friends.

Do you really not go out except for a walk and to the supermarket. I would hate that as I would go stir crazy.

MajesticWhine · 07/02/2017 22:59

DH and I both work full time and he earns about 7 times more than me and my contribution seems pitiful, but when I was SAH he got quite resentful about it, especially the perception that I had more free time. Of course now I'm working he wonders why the house is in chaos and we spend a fortune on childcare Hmm
I think everyone should do what suits them. If OP and DH are happy with the situation then it doesn't matter what anyone else thinks.

Swipe left for the next trending thread