To ask for help with universal credit? As a sahm

[CallingPeopleACuntOnFb]

I honestly cannot find the answer to this anywhere 😩

I work in a support role helping parents and i have a service user who’s very worried about UC coming in. She has depression / anxiety anyway and it’s really getting her down.

She’s a SAHM to 3 dc, 3 year old twins and a 6 yo. Her dp earns 26k a year working long and irregular shifts. He works 45-50 hours a week. so being a SAHM is her only option atm as they also both have zero family support.

They have a mortgage so wouldn’t need or be eligible for the “housing benefit” element. She’s in Leicester. At the moment they receive tax credits but will move to UC at some point (no idea when)

She wants to know if she will still be able to be a SAHM as work isn’t an option for her while the DC are so small.

I have no clue, I don’t claim myself, we don’t even get TCs anymore and as I said I can’t find any info online other than the benefits checker on entitledto. Which says she’s eligible for UC at a similar amount to her tax credits. but says nothing about whether she’s going to have to job search as a condition of getting the money.

It’s so bloody complex ! Hope someone can shed some light 💡 x

“Magic money tree”

🤣🤣🤣🤣

Primaryteach. Your post is a breath of fresh air. 😀

agree Phoenix

I suspect this helpless woman may not exist and the story is an attempt to get us to sign the petition.

Me too. Who starts a thread as a 'support worker' seeking advice with their managers permission the user name CallingPeopleACuntOnFb?

Who also posts like a regular and then posts links to a petition, that they supposedly know little about??

Reporting......

I don't think you're a troll, although your posting history isn't consistent with your claims of being a support worker.

The purpose of a support worker isn't to fire your service users up into thinking the government are cruel heartless bastards - I hate UC incidentally but work is not the place to be whipping vulnerable people up into a frenzy.

It's clear you have a personal axe to bring with UC, which is fine, many people don't like it, many (like me) think the idea of having one welfare payment rather than several is a good idea in principle but beauracratically a nightmare and people are suffering as a result.

I have anxiety, depression, insomnia, and (the latest ) apparently bipolar although I really don't think that I do. Someone claiming to be supporting me but actually using me as a political football would not be appreciated.

Also this means you have searched all my posts 🙈

Lol 😂

I’m very sorry you’re suffering Ink (I do sympathise as I’ve had anxiety and depression on and off for years( but I can assure you I do work as a support worker. Alongside another job, (yep I have 2 jobs to all those who think I’m a secret sahm 🤣)

For somebody who is meant to be supporting people you are remarkably uninformed about the benefits system. Your time would be better spent going on a course or finding out about benefit payments. In your opening post you say you have no clue. Why then are you supporting people with benefit claims.

OP

If you want people to agree with you, side with you and support the cause you are promoting, behaving like a ten year old generally doesn't endear people to your cause.

I doubt Wat Tyler whipped the peasants to a revolt by giggling and making monkey faces at them

I'm not suffering particularly, OP.

Somewhere down a long road I have come to understand my own limitations and how to keep myself well. One of those ways is some form of structure to the day, which is why work- which isn't necessarily paid - is valuable.

That's me, of course. Others are different. But what I think we should be very cautious about doing is making assumptions for and about others based on our own political ideologies.

Vivienne I do not have to justify myself to you

But I will say my role is not a benefit adviser or similar. It’s more peer support. So I don’t know the minutiae of Universal Credit but I do know it’s causing massive suffering and hardship to thousands ...I don’t need to be a benefit adviser to know that! I just need to read the news and see it all around me

Thank you. But it would be a good idea to get yourself some leaflets and information on this roll out of UC. Though it seems that even UC advisors themselves sometimes give conflicting information to people claiming.

Yes they do give conflicting information...lack of training I suspect

I'm so sad that so many posters see it as totally normal and right that a mum of toddlers should be in low paid work, have childcare paid for by the state just so our GDP looks higher and she is ‘in work’.

I'm not sure I understand your argument Primary. Are you suggesting that a SAHP should not receive funded childcare?

I assume Primary point is that mothers should be able to afford to stay at home and look after their own toddlers.

Op

Have a look on the CPAG shop page they do a great uc guide, it’s worth the money

It’s less than £20

Cheers NeedsA that definitely would come in handy 👌🏻

Another thing I’ve been thinking about this thread and uc/ tc ...a lot of it comes down to housing cost doesn’t it ? If housing wasn’t so ridiculously expensive more people could be sahms without state help anyway

See the language there is quite revealing isn't it

"More people could be sahms."

I know there is an argument there for "oh well I didn't mean mums" but I suspect on some level you did.

Single parent families are usually women- over 90% of them,

They are also more than twice as likely to raise their children in poverty.

Being a sahm is a risky business. And I am writing that as a mostly sahm myself.

Yes it is usually the case that Mums SAH

And you’re also right that it can put them in a risky position

Women have always worked outside of the home. Traditionally, after the industrial revolution, both women and children worked in factories, mines and mills. A law was put into place to limit the number of hours and there type of work they did but they still worked, for the simple reason they had to. Renting a room in Victorian London in a rundown area would cost between 6 and 8 shillings a week. A woman might earn seven shillings a week working in a mill. She might supplement her meagre wage with laundry, ironing, or more likely prostitution. If she did stay at home, she would work from home making matchboxes or sewing.

Middle and upper class women would not be expected to work outside of the home as such, but would undertake charitable activities. The first social workers stemmed from this era, with women visiting the poor and attempting to educate them on matters relating to health and hygiene. Children from the middle and upper classes were generally 'raised by nannies and governesses and sent away to school.

The war of course dramatically changed all that. Women had to step into roles traditionally done by male counterparts. The thirties hit everybody hard. Then along came world war 2 and as with all things there were winners and losers. The big winners were working class women who for the first time since the dawn of time were working and being paid properly for it. After the end of world war 2, they were reluctant to give up their independence, friendships and structure,

Hence the dawn of the sahm. Women were encouraged through outright propaganda to stay at home. Not out of concern for them but because men were suddenly displaced and disgruntled. Women were to stay at home and raise the children with a ribbon in their hair and a smile on their face.

Being a sahm suits some women. It doesn't actually suit most women. The ideal of the beautiful mellow and golden years where women stayed at home lovingly raising their kids is a myth created and encouraged by men.

I think we would all be wise to remember that.

Interesting post but it should still be an option imo

Personally I loved my time as a sahm it was blissful in many ways, a slower pace of life. I do like working though in a different way but it’s nice knowing I don’t have to if that makes sense. I think if I ever felt I had to work I’d really resent it.

The problem with that option is the expectation that it is state funded, and this inevitably leads to conflict between different sets of people - some who can't afford to give up work and some who can't afford to go to work.

The days of state benefits providing anything other than immediate food and shelter are fast disappearing. In addition to this, we are a densely populated country and the work market is saturated at the lower end. Staying at home with your children for a few years is a choice that can have grave repercussions and it's as well to be realistic about this.