Tax Credits/Universal Credit support SAHMs

[Hippodogamus]

I am a single mum who has pretty much always worked since I’ve been on my own - I own my own home and have to. I also receive some Universal Credit, help with childcare costs etc.

So I’m on a few Universal CreditFacebook groups and am shocked at the number of coupled-up SAHMs posting to ask if they will need to start looking for a job when they switch from Tax Credits to Universal Credit. Their kids aren’t even young - think 10+. They moan that if they work their kids will have to be left alone. HELLO, my kids were home alone after school from the age of 11. I had no choice.

TBH I’m furious that these women get to play happy families, being there for their kids while their DP works a low-responsibility, minimum wage job so is actually around lots to help with it all.

Whereas as a single parent, not through choice, because of DV. With no support, I work and do everything- shopping, cooking, cleaning, life admin, decorating, diy, gardening. I’m so fucking knackered and actually feel like the stress and exhaustion will take years off my life.

How is it that the benefits system supports this? These women should be working like everyone else.

This is an interesting take and I don’t doubt that filling these lower band vacancies would help the NHS immeasurably…but it’s a bit of a leap to assume that this staff shortage can be directly attributed to the very small proportion of SAHMs who also receive some state help.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with women choosing to raise their children rather than work outside of the home. And if they receive benefits to facilitate that choice then that’s ok too.

I work in a profession whereby I can afford to work part-time and receive UC for my childcare costs, and UC leave me alone because my earnings at just 21 hours per week are sufficient. I’ve ran all the numbers and while I can’t afford to not work, this is a happy medium; less money than if I worked full-time but more time with my child.

I dare say that the jobs you speak of in the NHS don’t pay very well and so the incentive to go out and work just isn’t there. Yes, UC is set up in such a way that it pays to work, but if the margins after childcare costs are negligible then why would they? And, again, what business is it of anyone else’s? These women would be receiving UC either way so more power to them for choosing whatever makes them happiest.

Whilst it worked out well.for you
There were some people who.used the system to their advantage I live in a poor area before the benefit system changed there were people who would essentially have numerous children rather than go,out to work I know mums net doesn't like to.admit this but I saw it happen
My child is disabled and im.on various DLA groups there are some peoples, who try to claim.for the most tenous of reasons i see it every day generally they don't succeed but it doesn't stop.people trying
If a system is in place there always be people who try to take advantage of if.

It’s not like these people are being offered careers, they’re just being coerced into minimum wage jobs to suit a populist ideology. Most of the time they have as much in benefits paid to them (including childcare) as when they were SAHM. As for long term job prospects, most people I know don’t struggle to get minimum wage jobs when they want to, even if they haven’t worked for a few years. By all means encourage and facilitate parents who want to work but all the economic arguments are rubbish

Society would soon break.down if nobody worked in minimum wage jobs .

Please don't think like that. Many have teens with SEN. I am my mums carer and we have a teenage son who can't be trusted to be on his own. He needs much more support than his peers.
When tax credits end I will have no money. My husband's wage pays the bills. We have no mortgage as I worked full time and paid it off before we had our son. No holidays. We won't be entitled to any universal credit as he earns just over the base amount. It's going to have a huge impact on us. Our son is still at home needed food, clothes, activities etc

I can see your point but I don’t think it’s the best way of tackling that issue. We already have the 2 child limit with UC. There are already lots of incentives to work in the current benefits system and if some people are not taking that step due to lack of confidence etc then there should be help for those people. I believe most of those choosing to be SAHM despite all these incentives are making that decision for a good reason and for remaining minority for whom the pros and cons of working are even then live and let live, it’s not actually costing the state more than if they were in a minimum wage job and more jobs then available for those that want to do them

@x2boys So why is it a struggle for people who do want to do those jobs (e.g. teenagers etc) to get them? There are plenty of people without other commitments who work in minimum wage jobs so I don’t see the point in forcing parents into them

You know what we really need to look at?

It used to be possible to buy a house and raise a family on one regular salary.

Now it isn't. Housing costs are out of control.

THAT is the problem.

People should not be needing all these benefit top ups. Fix the system.

@Clariee45 I think we see things differently because I think it's in everyone's best interests to work. That's including their own children. My children are so much more resilient and outgoing due to me having to work. A lot of people say that their children cannot go to school due to MH or ASD and I get that but I do notice that some parents chuck in the towel much earlier and easier if they don't have to work.
I'm a degree educated woman and I've found a lot of satisfaction in minimum wage jobs. I ran a health food shop for a bit, I was a ward Clark in a hospital, I've worked for the council. What are we teaching our children by not contributing to society? What are we teaching our daughters about their own dreams and independence?
If you can work, you should.

@Sapphire387 they're not benefit top ups though if the parent isn't working, they're just benefits.

I think there is a bigger societal issue at play. For some people, holding down down a job is hard for multiple reasons. I live rurally in NE Scotland and the sahms I know fall into 2 categories.

Group 1: Benefit claiming, left school at 16 (or earlier), no qualifications, more than 2 kids in many cases, can't drive and have limited access to public transport (because its totally unreliable atm). Often wider family issues.

Group 2: well educated, at least one degree but usually more. Married to a high earner. Doesn't claim benefits but are old enough to have got at least one degree paid for by the tax payer. Can drive. Have access to a car.

I'm in group 2 and the tax payer paid for both my undergraduate degrees, neither of which I'm currently using for employment purposes. I do a lot of voluntary work including acquiring funding for charities, support, chairing meetings etc which does require the skills I gained professionally and I do ad hoc hours for the LA loosely related to the field in which I used to work. Given I have a bunch of up-to-date references/recent training and qualifications suspect I could translate that into reasonably paid full time work should I choose.

From a tax perspective I suspect people like me are a bigger issue but unfortunately, the Government haven't quite figured out how to push my demographic back to tax paying work.

I think it depends on why they aren't working with an older child. My sister is 11 years old and can't be trusted to walk to and from school by herself. She's just less emotionally and socially aware/mature than her peers. It also depends on where you live (we live in London and she has to cross lots of busy roads). I grew up in Cornwall and we had the opportunity to walk to and from school by ourselves from a young age and then happily entertain ourselves outside after school. We would play on the street for hours while out parents were busy which just isn't possible here because of all the cars, traffic, less community, safety etc. Everyone's living situations and children are different.

I would certainly not want to live in a country that tried to do so, by all means make jobs more flexible and attractive etc but disagree with outright coercion. I think people usually do the best for their individual situation, sometimes the state needs to step in and help them do what they would ideally like to do and what would also be a benefit to society

I think it’s insulting to say a parent bringing up their children isn’t doing anything. My adult DC all work and have an amazing work ethic despite me being a SAHM for a period of time. As for your children being resilient, that’s great but a lot of that is down to luck. I work, my kids love going to the childminder and holiday club and I love my job. When I was at uni/doing placements I was luck enough to have a fantastic network that I couldn’t of coped without (not to say there weren’t hitches at time which were a headache to sort out). I feel really lucky to be in the situation I’m in as a working parent but also know how hard it can be and how important that choice ultimately is

If talking about parents then mainly the outsourcing of childcare (I know there are always exceptions, I gave up my evenings to chill to work twilight shifts for a while) but generally if child in nursery or wrap around care that’s saving an awful lot of work compared to if they weren’t

Couldn’t agree more, why have rules that make people’s lives miserable, it’s seems all very much advocating for a race to the bottom rather than trying to make the rules a bit fairer and better for single parents. I work in the NHS and have worked part time since qualifying, knowing how hard we work, the stress, the unpaid hours etc and how much more I am able to give to my job because I’m not burnt out from working full time alongside juggling family. All the years I put into getting the qualification and experience so I can give the care I do, the years I paid my entire salary in childcare (now married and not eligible for any benefits) working through covid and often caring for positive patients with minimal protection when the rest of the country was terrified of the virus. It makes me furious that someone is advocating coercion to get people to work full time in these roles, no less already stressed out single parents. Even if the economic arguments had any grounding to them which they don’t, would they be worth for the stress for that individual
and their children. My department has no issues with recruitment and retention as they’ve got bloody good at it by offering contracts that actually work for people, not sending them to work in areas of high practice they have little experience and are terrified or working and just generally treating them relatively decently. BTW The entry level jobs in the NHS usually don’t have any shortage of applicants despite being atrociously paid.