Mumsnet Logo
My feed
Premium

Please
or
to access all these features

AIBU?

IMPORTANT. To ask if MNers are aware of this re Universal credit&SAHP’s?

379 replies

UnsolicitedCockPics · 11/10/2018 09:20

So up til now on tax credits one parent can stay home while the other parent works.
And for almost 20 years it’s been seen as completely acceptable

An example is a family with 3 dc
The FT working parent earns approx £26,000. The SAHP receives approx £100 a week in tax credits

Not only on Universal credit will that amount be much less (approx 30% iirc) but the previously SAHP will be made to attend the job centre and job search as a condition to receive Universal credit

The aim is so NOBODY is on “benefits”

There seems to be an assumption from the general public that this will only affect people not in work. THAT IS NOT THE CASE

OP posts:
Report

MrsStrowman · 11/10/2018 09:55

This seems perfectly reasonable, I won't be able to be a SAHM mum as I'm the higher earner in my family (I also wouldn't choose to be for personal and professional reasons but that's another story). We could live on DHs wage but things would be tight, should I be allowed to claim benefits so I can have the luxury of staying at home? As PPs have said being a SAHP is a lifestyle choice, and that's something the welfare state is not there to provide, if you want that fund it yourself. Benefits are there for people who need them, not want them. I actually think over 4 before you job seek is very generous.
There are much bigger concerns for genuinely vulnerable people with the introduction of UC.

Report

Bluelady · 11/10/2018 09:55

Tax credits are a benefit and it's entirely right that they're regarded as such. If the family income can't support a SAHP then both partners need to work.

I completely disapprove of tax credits anyway, they just subsidise employers too mean to pay the going rate to their workforce, they were always a bad idea.

Report

Xenia · 11/10/2018 09:55

It sounds like a good thing. I was back working full time at 2 weeks. I think if we can move from people receivint state subsidy whether in work or stay at home parents to none then more will take work (we have very full employment now by the way getting back to 1950s levels) and may also help employers raise pay so pay is not so low people need a top up even if working full time to pay their rent on a shared room in a shared house.

Report

MsHopey · 11/10/2018 09:57

It's definitely when your youngest child turns 3.
Not over 4.

Report

Wonkypalmtree · 11/10/2018 09:57

I didn’t know that I could get £400 per month as a stay at home parent either!

Report

TomHardysNextWife · 11/10/2018 09:58

When our DC were small, DH worked during the day and I've done evening/weekend work so that our DC always had a parent at home. It can be done.

Families on benefits shouldn't have better lifestyles than those of working families.

Report

Blackoutblinds · 11/10/2018 09:58

If you need benefits to support your family and your child is at school and you’re not disabled, and the child isn’t disabled, why shouldn’t you be expected to go to work?

I was, as a single parent claiming benefits (including tax credits) years ago, so why should you and your husband get a 5 grand top up from the state, when I’m expected to go to work on minimum wage?

Report

ballseditupforever · 11/10/2018 10:00

Why shouldn't you work. Any system that incentivises women back into the workplace is a good one in my opinion. Childcare costs still need an overhaul though. They should be tax deductible in full if both parents (or single resident parent) is working. Ditto care costs for the elderly. And those working in care should be subject to lower tax rates up to a decent threshold to encourage more quality people into the industry.

Tax credits have normalised claiming benefits for working families And left us in a frankly ludicrous position where some
Families are better off not working or working fewer hours.

Report

MrsStrowman · 11/10/2018 10:00

I completely disapprove of tax credits anyway, they just subsidise employers too mean to pay the going rate to their workforce, they were always a bad idea.
Completely agree

Report

Xenia · 11/10/2018 10:02

Indeed./ Tony Blair upped them to people even on £60k because he wanted everyone a benefit recipient as that suited Labour's socialiist agenda - you can control people better if they depend on the state for support.

Report

abacucat · 11/10/2018 10:02

Yes it is anyone on benefits including those who are self employed and receiving tax credits.

Report

tictac86 · 11/10/2018 10:04

This sounds like a good idea to me. Maybe because i wont be affected as not entitled to anything other then child benefit. I wish people didnt expect ithers to give them an income because of there life choices. Sahm for example is a choice in most cases and having children is a choice too.

Report

LittleBookofCalm · 11/10/2018 10:04

i think they had to Do Something. The Trap of being unemployed and being richer than those who work is scandalous.
and what with brexit and european fruit pickers were the people who live locally to the farms wont even get out of bed to pick fruit is also scandalous.

Report

pretendingtowork1 · 11/10/2018 10:04

If you need tax credits then you can't afford the luxury of a SAHP I'm afraid. Most people can't afford that - why should the govt fund it? Staying at home is generally bad for women, they lose their career and pension and become dependent on their man, which is a disaster esp if not married. Completely agree with this change.

Report

SillySallySingsSongs · 11/10/2018 10:05

Tax credits weren’t even seen as benefits

They were seen as tax relief for having a family

Of course they are a benefit. If they were tax relief for having DC then everyone should get them.

Report

Buswankeress · 11/10/2018 10:05

I think YABU, if someone needs to claim benefit to be a sahp then it's not financially viable and the sahp needs to look for work when the children are of school age.
Benefits are there to top up low wages to a standard of living and to support those who can't find work and are looking or can't work due to illness/disability or caring responsibility. If that caring responsibility is reduced then the benefits are reduced accordingly - if you need the money to survive you'll need to earn it.
However with everything else that is coming to light with UC, I can't see it being as simple as that, and I do think that there will be big issues faced by the most vulnerable in society because this whole uc farce just hasn't been thoroughly thought out at all. In principle it's a fair idea, in practice it probably won't work and that's going to affect the people who need it the most as it usually does.

Report

LittleBookofCalm · 11/10/2018 10:05

what concerns me is retirement and pensions, my dh claims a pension and also works but he wants to stop, as is his right

Report

Snowymountainsalways · 11/10/2018 10:06

If you have children of school age it is your choice if you decide not to work (assuming you do not have disabled children that needs lots of care) you should not expect to get 'paid' tax credits. I agree with the policy however across the board for working and non working parents I feel there needs to be much more support from the government but that is a different thread.

Report

Bombardier25966 · 11/10/2018 10:12

@Xenia, Blair was a neo Liberal, not a socialist. If you're going to moan about Labour's policy, at least get your facts right.

OP there are massive injustices with UC, but this isn't one of them. We need an end to the six week payment delay that leaves people unable to feed themselves and their children, the abhorrent treatment of disabled people that has resulted in suicides, the bedroom tax where people can't move to smaller properties because they don't exist. Expecting people to work where they can is not something many are going to worry about.

Report

AamdC · 11/10/2018 10:24

Also something needs to.be done about zero hr contracts , i can see why some people dont wsnt to lose the relative security of "Benefits" when there is no gurantee of work the system.needs a vomplete overhaul

Report

LittleBookofCalm · 11/10/2018 10:25

agree, that is the problem the so called security of benefits and the delay in getting them if you work briefly

Report

buscaution · 11/10/2018 10:33

I don't think it's unfair at all. Quite the opposite. About time.

Just because it happened for 20 years doesn't make it right. That To y Blair has a lot to answer for regarding the benefit fuck up. Interesting that your DH and his ex had the SAHP funded lifestyle from 1997-2007, Blair at his best.

Now people are having issues with being expected to support their own families? Honestly that's ridiculous if you take a step back and think about it. Disabilities aside of course, there is absolutely no reason for a parent to stay at home and be handed £100 a week for fuck all.

Way forward IMO

Report

Rufusthebewilderedreindeer · 11/10/2018 10:39

It sounds like it has not been explained to people that there is a change to this policy

I dont think its the debate over whether SAHP should get money as such...more that this is going to come as a great shock to some people especially the loss of money that they may rely on

Report

hurricanefloss · 11/10/2018 10:39

OP - YANBU but MN likes to shit all over SAHMs so don't expect much support.

Reasons why women remain SAHP when their kids are in school:

School doesn't start til 8.45 and finishes at 3.15 - it can be impossible to find work that accommodates those hours.

School is closed for 13 weeks per year - if you don't have a flexible job/helpful family it can be impossible to find childcare for that amount of time.

I was a SAHM for over a decade for the above reasons. Didn't get tax credit because husband earns over threshold and child benefit was stopped when they introduced new rules. Those of you bitching about SAHMs, do claim child benefit (if you're eligible) don't you? Or do you refuse any kind of benefits for yourselves out of principle.

Report

abacucat · 11/10/2018 10:40

Lots of people are pretty shitty about anyone receiving benefits - the whole I manage without them, so should everyone else.

Report
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

We're all short on time

Log in or sign up to use the 'See Next' or 'See all' posts by the OP (Original Poster) and cut straight to the action.

Already signed up?

Sign up to continue reading

Mumsnet's better when you're logged in. You can customise your experience and access way more features like messaging, watch and hide threads, voting and much more.

Already signed up?