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

[username00000]

Specifically DC before school age.

At this point in the day, I suppose you might be getting a lot of responses from people who aren't working
Talk about a judgey presumptuous comment.
Today is my day off after working four nights in a row, like every week, this week was harder as usual I've to work all Bank holiday weekends.
Still not judging the OP.
BTW @myDHhasahobbyanditsnotcycling your comment around the grey was so true.

I would say I think it depends on the reasons honestly. If it's because of finances, then no. Sadly, for many it works out better to stay at home then to work and pay for childcare, particularly if they have former partners who have dicked them around paying maintenance. I think the child maintenance system and the national minimum wage deserve the critique there. If it's because it's a lifestyle choice, yes, I'd say I do a bit. Lots of people would prefer to stay at home rather than work, but money doesn't grow on trees. I don't necessarily think it's better for children to be at home with a parent to the exclusion of having a better standard of living and the benefits that could come to families from having working parents. But that's not a blanket statement, what is better for one family may not be better for another.

I'm going to let the ignorant people who do judge, in on a little secret. When I was a young single mother, I got approximately the same amount of benifit as a sahm, as I got when I went back to work.
Now I'm no expert on benifits, and that was a long time ago so it could have changed, but as a tax payer, I don't see the difference in paying for a single mother to work and paying for her to stay at home.
Not many woman who are capable of earning a decent wage are going to chose to stay at home and live on a pittance.
I was on benifits because my employer sacked me when they found out I was pregnant, so I had no other choice.
Do what you need to do OP, who cares about people who judge. They're not worth thinking about.

Men who don't pay for their children face loosing their drivers' license and jail time. There are no consequences in the UK for men who abandon their children.

Very true, my first ds father did exactly that. Haven't heard from him since I was 3 months pregnant. After ds was born I heard through the grape vine that he had moved away but no one knew to where exactly.

Oh and he claimed he didn't work, he did he just worked with his dad so would be paid cash in hand.

Also no one judges married women when they don't work, do they.

Oh, they really, really do! Believe me...

I agree with what ThisMustBeMyDream said.

At this point in the day, I suppose you might be getting a lot of responses from people who aren't working

Im working, I work from home, I can use my phone whenever I like. Not many jobs where people can't touch their from from start to finish, with no breaks.
Does that mean you don't work?

@adaline

Wholeheartedly agree with your stance on absent fathers just walking away with no redress. I went through years of trying to get something, in the end the only course of action left was taking him to court myself - a luxury I couldn't afford unfortunately because everything coming in, and a bit more besides, was all going back out again. Until you've scrabbled down the bag of the sofa praying for enough change for a pint of milk so your child can have breakfast, I don't think you can appreciate the harsh realities some people face. And his stance? Why should I pay when you get 'all that money from the government anyway'. But that I think is one of the reasons that absent fathers don't get such judgement, society has this image of single mothers getting 'all this money from the government' too. He also said he wasn't supporting my lifestyle - which is now as it is then, working ft and juggling life to support my DD. I took, and continue to do so, responsibility for my choice, and am still judged and looked down upon. He didn't and no one really has much to say about that.

No,somebody's got to look after the child/ren. Who better than the person who loves them the most?

I was widowed with two babies still in nappies. It never crossed my mind to sit at home on benefits. I continued to work to support my children, which I have always seen as my responsibility as their parent.
I received an automatic state widow’s pension of about £300 a month, but I paid considerably more than that in tax.
I’m happy for the benefit system to be available as a safety net where mothers can’t immediately find work, but it shouldn’t be a long term lifestyle choice. And I’d certainly crack down hard on fathers who walk out on their responsibilities - they should be made to pay adequate child support, deducted at source, and jailed if they default.

The government doesn't do enough to get women with children back into the workplace
I think they do, many take this chance to retrain, they supply childcare, with WTC and Childcare support when you do start work.

the government doesn't do enough to make absent fathers step up and support their children
This I agree with, they need to deduct from wages or benefits, prosecute if unpaid.
The funny part is they'd hunt people down and send them to jail for non payment of TV licence, but not their DC.

No

Yes. Why would you decide to have a child which you can't comfortably provide for financially? Having a child isn't a God given right.

Honestly would I judge it? Yes
Would I comment on it? No chance.
I am a SAHM because I can not afford to go back to work. I wish, wish, wish I could afford to go back to work. I wish I could support my family more. I WANT to support them financially.
I do not claim benefits because I don’t think I should be entitled to them at all, if We can’t afford Our kids, then it’s selfish of us to expect the state to. But that’s our opinion.

if We can’t afford Our kids, then it’s selfish of us to expect the state to. But that’s our opinion.

Not everyone has the luxury of choice

Yes. Why would you decide to have a child which you can't comfortably provide for financially? Having a child isn't a God given right.

Because fathers never fuck off and abandon their kids.
Because people never become widowed.
Because life ALWAYS goes the way we plan.

Right?

Staying at home is not a luxury. I am sick of reading that on here. And I read it on here a lot.

My DS is 4 and autistic. He cannot attend a mainstream nursery as they cannot safely meet his needs. He attends a nursery at a specialist school for 15 hours a week. He has therapies and appointments at least 2x a week, which I take him to. He is high need and I receive DLA and carers Allowance.

My DH works in the entertainment industry earning a decent wage, but his work is sporadic and can be very much 'drop what you are doing and work in New York for two weeks' at very short notice with no understanding of parenting responsibility.

How would I work in this situation? You tell me!

Not everyone has the luxury of choice

seriously

I wouldn't even think of judging anyone about such things, not my business.

thetonsillolith

You could be self-employed working at your own hours, from seamstress to book keeper, virtual assistant.
You could have an online shop

The list of things you can do from your own home at your own hours is very long, thanks to modern technology. You seem more than confident online, so if you really wanted to you could work.

The fact that you have a partner who bring an income gives you even more flexibility.

Point is, if you really wanted to, you would. It's a choice, but let's be honest about it.

I think the problem is, because it is available to those who need it, those who want it believe they are entitled to it.
A lady I know has 7, he has 3 from a previous, he is unemployed she worked part-time and gets top up of FIS by over 400 euro a week.
She believes she is entitled to it because it wouldn't be available otherwise, she knows the ins and outs of all entitlements.
When I was out of work, she was saying claim this or that, after all you're entitled to it.
Benefits has lost their purpose as being a safety net and become a lifestyle for many.

@myDHhasahobbyanditsnotcycling Do you have a child with complex additional needs? Yes? Congrats on being amazing. No? Thought not.

I'm afraid I believe everyone should work if able and children should be set this example. I am widowed parent and work full time, before youngest DD started school I worked 80 percent. The state should not subsidise lifestyle choices, the money is needed for cases of genuine need.

No. I wouldn’t judge anyone for claiming any kind of benefit, unless I knew they were doing so fraudulently.

@myDHhasahobbyanditsnotcycling

Yes, not everyone does have a choice about claiming benefits. Lots of women are in your situation (a SAHM with a husband that works) when their husband fucks off and decides they don't need to support their children anymore. Then they're in a situation where they need to claim benefits in order to keep a roof over their children's heads.

If you have the luxury of a husband who can support you while you stay home, you're in a much better position than pretty much any single parent out there.

I have nothing against people choosing to stay at home with their children, but let's not pretend that married SAHM's are in anyway comparable to single parents who have no other form of support.