Do you judge single mums who claim benefits to be able to stay home with DC?

[username00000]

Specifically DC before school age.

Yes.

I would expect those deciding that they want to 'bring their children up' to save accordingly for the time they'll be out of work, like all those stuck in crappy rentals or family homes for a decade saving for a deposit for a mortgaged property. Chose your priorities and cut your cloth accordingly.

I wouldn't begrudge anyone benefits to keep a roof over their heads but I'd expect those who chose to stay at home whilst they have a husband working, to quickly get support in getting employable in the event the husband loses work or pisses off and leaves the woman with diddly squat.

Of course I don't make my views known, cos I try not to be an arsehole but also cos rarely is a situation clear to the outsider and there are often other complicating factors we know nothing about, but secretly yes, I frown upon those who seemingly plan a lifestyle they expect the government and tax payers to fund.

Obviously having children with additional needs or the parent becoming mentally or physically unwell or disabled and unable to work is different. Support and benefits should be available to those unable to work. But not those who chose not to, or chose not to put in the necessary effort to improve their employability or find a suitable role to fit in with childcare.

I do a bit if they don't even try to get a job that works. But I also understand that there aren't enough jobs out there that would work with pre-schoolers nursery hours ( e.g.teaching/nursery assistant ). But it doesn't mean that they should give up trying.

IceCream

Oh yes, that's my argument. By todays standards tc have to stop and UC is completely different.
I had friends who knew every trick in the book to get more money.
I was genuinely surprised when we got more for me doing 8 hours for dh. I was only being honest about our income, it wasn't to gain more, but to help him.
As soon as he didn't need me anymore I informed HMRC, contrary to belief I've always been honest with HMRC I couldn't sleep at night otherwise.
It was a way of life for many people, in the scheme of things it's only recently that rich people lost benefits, to become the squeezed middle.

No

Of course you were Romany

IceCream

Waste of time not being honest, you always get caught out, and why bother? We have had a letter that we have been reviewed a few times, I'd hate a thorough investigation though, but you have to trust your accountant.
You have to inform tc of any changes to income, hours, if circumstances change and can face penalties or over payments etc if you don't.
I think it's pretty safe to assume that if you didn't know otherwise that tc payments would go down the higher the income, not higher.

Yes, unless you have lost your job or any other serious reason and don't have any other option. It is unreasonable to have a child and expect to be a SAHM on the taxpayer. It really gets on my nerves that one, especially those who plan it that way.

Honestly......In general, yes. I think if someone has a child they should support them themselves. Obviously there are exceptions and extenuating circumstances etc but as a general lifestyle choice at the expense of the taxpayer, no, I don't like it.