To wonder why people think single parents sit on their arse if they are not working? it

[malificent7]

So bringing up a child alone isnt a lot of work in itself?

Just been reading the benefit cap thread where someone said that people sit on their arse and still get 20 grand a year.

Im a single mum abd i do work but bringing up kids is the most important job ever ( but only if your middle class sith a rich dp it would seem. If your single then how dare you have kids in the first place )

Yes I think I'd sooner be a widowed lone parent than a married SAHM with no income of my own.

Well - it's a point of view. Raises all sorts of questions on all sorts of levels, but fair enough. Doubt many widowed single parents would agree, though....

natalia, that's precisely what I meant when I said that it is hard for many. Being a single sahm dependent on benefits is not the choice I would make if I could possibly avoid; but can perfectly understand why it is unavoidable for many- due to the challenges of childcare. The govt would do better to subsidise childcare much more.

I'm not liking this idea that those who criticise the system don't know what they're talking about. My mum did a midnight run-away with me from my abusive father. I had nothing but my pyjamas. She kept working, on a part-time nurse wage, we couch-surfed and stayed in B&Bs and she eventually saved up a deposit for a (very, very cheap) house in less than a year, which forced her to move away from all her family.

I'm not saying her way is the correct way, that's what benefits are for of course - to be a safety net. But living through that does cause an eye roll when I see people claiming they must quit their job and spend 10 years of benefits just for being a lone parent when they could arrange childcare* and work a few hours if they wished.

If there's a reason you or somebody you know couldn't do this, you're obviously not the persons I'm referring to.

*I had a mixture of paid childcare, staying with grandma for a week as she worked 50hrs to up her income, and she joined with another single mother to work opposite shifts so one was always available to look after us. She managed.

Yes I am sure lots of married SAHMs are unhappy too - that's why a private income is needed isn't it.

Why would a private income bring instant happiness?

And it's worth pointing out, as an addendum to grobags excellent post, that those who are lone parents due to the death of their spouse since April will only get bereavement benefits (which are actually based on NIC - so the pension their late spouse didn't live to claim) for 18 months. Labour have promised to reverse this change, and I live in hope, in the meantime, of a successful legal challenge to the policy.

I was 'lucky' in that my DH didn't get ill and then pass away until my DC were a bit older, so wasn't really hit by childcare costs. Too much pressure went on the shoulders of my (at the time) 13 YO though. She was classed a young carer for a while, because she looked after her younger siblings so much. (Not my proudest parenting moment... but at the time, needs must.)

One of the things that makes being a lone mother so hard is that so many people think that they should voice an opinion on what a lone mother (Are they as judgemental to lone fathers? Doubt it.) should do better. Why?? I got very good at the approach - I didn't have the spare bandwidth to defend my parenting/work ethic/tidyness of my front garden.

Squeegle Fair enough. (Reading back, I missed some of your other posts, therefore took that one rather out of context, for which I apologise!). I agree with you on the whole; childcare is a huge conundrum. I think the change needs to come from the other direction, though - companies need to be incentivised to employ part time employees (more expensive as it stands) and for childcare to become less of a women's issue and more of a general age related thing.

for every extra £ she earns she loses it somewhere else

Well yes, but the key here is that she's earning it herself rather than relying on benefits. Surely something to aspire to?

Absolutely. And i remind her that while it's tough now, it gets easier and she's building a career. But it's hard for her, every day is a struggle and she'd be no worse off financially if she didn't work. And she's in a job that has prospects with a really understanding boss and good conditions. If she were in a shitty dead end job on minimum wage, i can see why people would just say why bother.

I'm a single parent of 3 and work full time. It's hard work juggling everything and I can't drop my kids off at school or pick them up but that's life. It wouldn't be any different if I had a partner because I would still work full time and it would still be hard work juggling everything. My children are all at school now so it would definitely be easier for me to stay at home. For me it's an easy decision, I have a professional job that i love but the bottom line is it pays well. If the difference between my wages and benefits if I didn't work was only a small amount I would choose to stay at home or work part time so that I could spend more time with my children. I totally understand why people make that choice if working does not reward them financially.

What pisses me off is that it's the LP, usually the mother, who is vilified for not working, but the absent parent, usually the father, doesn't get the same treatment for not paying maintenance.

I've also had a couple of clients tell me that it's not worth them getting a job, because their housing benefit will be cut and a big chunk of their wages will go to the mother of their child.

So it bloody well should, I feel like saying.

as long as you are financially independent, who cares if you work or not, why is it of anyone's business if you are a SAHM or a working one

I am a single parent. And a full time teacher. I get a considerable sum in Tax Credits. Why do you consider my financial circumstances your business?

Why do you consider my financial circumstances your business?

Clearly I don't, are you sure you are a teacher if you can't even read my post?

Well yes, you do. You quite clearly state it is no one's business if you are financially independent. I'm not.

you just said that you work full time...

but once the children are of school age then that's 25 hours a week free. It's not an insignificant amount of time. It's up to an individual whether they choose to use that time to work or not, and school hour jobs are not easy to come by, but let's not pretend all that time is what it takes for housework

Fact.

I think single parents who choose to have DC knowing they will end up a single mum/are a single mum and have no job is the issue.

Yes, people do fall on hard times but why would you deliberately have a DC/more DC if you cannot afford them and are relying on handouts?

I'm not talking about those who were once married etc etc. Some women do choose to be on benefits. That isn't a lie.

People have babies who're in poverty and aren't working do it in a lot of circumstances because it's one of life's most wonderful offerings. It's also (well the actual act and baby itself), free.

They have nothing else to aspire to.

To add to what I just said, this is what needs addressing. It's a huge social issue.

The state is now seen as a replacement for a parent, normally the father. I am excluding people that are disabled or are victims of domestic violence in this:

• the minimum wage needs to rise so that it pays to work. People who work should be much better off than those on benefits.
• more pressure should be exerted on parents to provide when a relationship breaks down, the state should not be so generous.
• We need to go back to the says when the state was a short term support solution not a longer term option.
• women need to recognise that they need to protect themselves and expect more from their partners at the outset regarding childcare etc.

Lastly this whole thing is another ticking time bomb. The people who are at home with children not working will not get all the benefits once their children are out of education and are classed as an adult.

Yanbu
Why is the focus always on the parent who is looking after the DC? My ex left me with DT. I hardly got a second to sit on my arse and he didn't support us at all. I'm sure I'm not an unusual case.

I was on that thread a couple of days ago and it made me cry so I left. The assumption that single Mums have loads of kids to go on benefits is fucking insulting to those of us that are single because we had the crap beaten out of us and we had to run.
Folk on here are quick to say LTB but when you do and maybe have to ask for help you're a low benefit scrounger.

hello I think most people don't have an issue with your situation at all. Working is bloody expensive etc.

People have the issue with those who've always been on the poverty line and have children

That's my biggest fear accidentalmagic. My life is very hard and I am often crushed by grief but I am least free and independent. If DH was here I'd still work at least four days a week. *

sommerville* - hi! The WPA changes are shocking. Once DD2 is in school and I work full time I plan to donate mine to families who have been unable to claim thanks to the Tory cruelty. I hate claiming it now but my childcare bill is over 2k per month.

you just said that you work full time...

Yes. And Jane is smart enough to realise that working full time does not mean you are not taking from, rather than (net) contributing to the state. If you have children, unless you are earning enough to pay a significant amount of (higher rate) tax, then the state subsidises you. Quite right that it does (in my opinion at least). But it does.

I think we all need to be easy on each other and ourselves. There is no right answer.

The fundamental problem is that today, regardless of marital status, having children is expensive, sometimes prohibitively so.

But that doesn't mean that our desire to have children magically goes away because we can't afford them or because we can't find the right man.

The sadness of not having children is, for some women, immense and far more painful than the stigma attached to being on benefits.

I'm a single parent with an 18m old and work full time. However, I'm now lying in bed while my son has a nap. I receive some housing benefit to help pay my rent so I guess I'm scrounging as we speak.

all this will become pretty irrelevant anyway, the way things are changing people will no longer be able to decide to live off benefits, because there won't be any, or hardly any.
Those who are playing the system now can enjoy it, but have better start moving if they don't want to have a very nasty surprise when they reach old age.