15 free hours (punished for not having a partner?)

[glossypeach]

Title is a bit weird but let me continue. I’m disabled and unable to work at the moment, I’m also a single parent to a three year old. He is eligible for the 15 hours free childcare because I’m currently not working. But if my circumstances changed and I got a partner who worked, I would be eligible for him to have the 30 hours free childcare. But the only thing that would change would be having a partner. I’d still be disabled, id still be unable to work but because I’d have a partner my child would be allowed to have that extra time in nursery. It feels like I’m being punished for choosing to remain single, and a bit discriminating that I’m unable to work at the moment but because I cannot do that, my child is missing out. My child is very active and although I have a good support network to help him get out when my disability disabled me to, he thrives at nursery - so I cannot see how single disabled people don’t get that 30 free hour funding also??

Hi OP, the issue with most responses is they're comparing you to other people and so you're being classes as unreasonable, when YANBU. More than 2 parent families or other single parent families, single parents with disabilities need greater access to childcare.

When people wake up and see how this government is making us fight with each other and not holding them responsible for stupid, discriminatory rules, the quicker we will get a government that actually thinks about people and society as a whole, not just the 1%.

rolls eyes

How do you know what the OP's disability is? I have disabilities (autism, ADHD and dyspraxia) and they don't cost me a penny. The cognitive / emotional cost, however, is massive.

I don’t think it should matter what the OPs tax contribution is. I’d like to think things were in place to support the more vulnerable members of society.

Fantastic.
OP and people like her (and me) are so silly! We should just be eating better and doing more exercise! Then we'd be cured! How silly of us!
Ever thought that 20 minutes walking is wayyyy above what many chronically ill people can do? Maybe OP uses a wheelchair like me. Maybe 20 minutes walking would put her in bed for a week. Maybe cooking fresh food is physically impossible. Maybe you can't actually cure disabilities through eating more veg.

Maybe you just haven't got a clue and should stop spouting bullshit, however much love you're writing it with.

Even if Labour get in, and properly fund things; there simply isn’t enough money to give everyone everything they want. We are a very unproductive population, with huge debts and our ‘needs’ increase year on year. We’re not the wealthy nation we used to be. It’s pie in the sky thinking.

She can’t be in bed for a week, she has a child to look after. I also assume she cooks his meals. People aren’t being nasty, they’re putting what OP says in the context of her life and situation. Ultimately posters don’t know for certain unless explicitly told so they have to go with what makes sense from what the OP says.

To benefit the child I should imagine disability restricts how you get out and socialise this will have a effect on the child

She said she was in significant physical pain, which comes with added financial costs. Eg mobility aids, taxis, pain management systems (tablets/ tens machine/ heat pads etc), increased heating costs due to reduced mobility... I could go on.
Also I have dyspraxia adhd and autism as well, they do cost money sometimes! eg ear defenders, ready meals due to executive dysfunction, food waste because if you can't see it it doesn't exist, and so on and so forth

Is the additional 15 because of the disability because I definitely didn't qualify when I was working for it due to not earning enough.

No. This is about new proposals.

Well exactly, she has to prioritise energy to look after her child over energy for exercising. Being able to care for a child doesn't mean you can go on a 20 minute walk. And yes, presumably she cooks his meals - and eats herself. PP was saying she should be eating better , without any knowledge at all of her diet. She might already eat solely superfoods! The point is that none of us know and it's nobody's business on this thread.
I don't know the OP's exact situation either. But I'm tired of people with no personal experience of chronic pain conditions offering unsolicited, irrelevant, and potentially dangerous advice.

I have a partner but still probably only entitled to 15. We both work.

No you’ve misunderstood, you BOTH have to be working to be eligible for 30 hours free childcare. Getting a partner who had a job would not make you eligible.

You're not working (unable to), so why do you need childcare?

Some people on here really do get a kick out of being nasty to people just for the sake of it.

The OP is correct - disabled people, on the qualifying benefits, who have a working partner are classed as disabled for childcare purposes so the child gets 30 hours.

It is illogical that someone with a partner to share the load is disabled for childcare purposes and therefore gets 30 hours support, whereas someone in the same situation without the support of a partner gets 15.

That depends on a lot of different factors, like being working, how many hours and how much you earn. It is not a given out of being a single parent.

Sorry you're living in pain, OP. I'm pretty sure I'm menopausal, as I'm as stiff as the tin man! But to live with constant pain must be so, so difficult. And I can understand how extra nursery time would take the pressure off you a bit.

The 30 hours free childcare is for working people, that is why you don't qualify. Every child gets the 15 free hours early years education grant which is what you are currently eligible for. You are not missing out because you don't have a partner, you are missing out because working is the criteria for claiming that.

The OP, as someone on disability benefits, won’t be entitled to paid childcare as she’s not working.

If she had a partner they would be entitled (obviously dependent on income) to help toward childcare even though the OP still wouldn’t be working.

But if the partner is working full time how can they share the load?

Regardless the scheme as PP said is to support working families. OP is not working. It’s not a judgement of worthiness, it’s to encourage people to work.

well the partner wouldn’t be working 24 hours so the OP would at least get a break at points.

It is somewhat illogical that the OPs partner, had she had one, would get double the amount of help despite having the OP around based on the OPs disability, than the OP gets on her own.

And many of the comments on this thread have been downright judgemental about not working.

But the scheme doesn’t operate to support disabled people. It operates to encourage people to work and support them in doing so.

It’s like complaining a single person doesn’t get child benefit when he/she needs it more than somebody with children does.

You’re missing the point entirely.

*child free that should say. Not ‘single’

OP if your DS qualifies for EYPP (ask the nursery as they will know). You can ask them to consider using some of that money to pay for additional hours. They have to be able to justify it as is isn't stricty what the money is for, but in your case it sounds like it might be doable.

I agree with this.

It’s not the governments job to put everyone on a level playing field. Plan your life depending on your own circumstances. It’s nobody else’s job to care for your children if you’re unable. We are responsible for ourselves and our children.

i accept things change and a bit of help is sometimes necessary but it should be the exception not the norm.

Also - don’t have any particular difficulty attending appointments with a 1 and 3 year old - my childcare is so I can work and those things are done on my day off.