Why doesn’t the country support having children?

[NameChangeAsICouldBeOverReacting]

Just seen an article on The Guardian about the 15 free hours for childcare for under 2’s and how the whole system is a mess.

I’m just starting to lose hope that this country doesn’t support working families anymore?

AIBU and need to think more positively, or have we screwed up massively by not supporting families?

The Guardian article which I read.

Let's not compare ourselves to America... we're not that fucked up...yet.

We get no funded hours at all in Northern Ireland except the preschool place which is 15 hours a week

Comparing to 30 years ago isn’t helpful - the cost of living (especially housing) was very different then. No one is saying it was cheap back then. But it is absolutely way more expensive now when you factor in the cost of everything else families need to find the money for

What exactly are you last in the queue for?
What do you think you should be getting from government? Something of equal value to nursery fees?

On your specific points, carers leave will provide employment protection rights for people providing long term care to family members, meaning you will have the right to carers leave and be protected from dismissal for reasons related to taking carers leave. It comes into force in April this year.
https://www.carersuk.org/news-and-campaigns/our-campaigns/right-to-carers-leave/#:~:text=Carer's%20Leave%20Act%202023%20will%20come%20into%20force%20on%206%20April%202024!&text=to%20be%20entitled%20to%20the,week%20of%20leave%20at%20once.

People with kids are also subject to benefits means testing. It is adjusted a bit but it is still means tested!

When you talk about points, I presume you mean for social housing? Yes, true they will often get more points as more vulnerable household but a single person with children is not competing with a family for the same properties. You would be only qualified for studio or one bed homes while a family with children would be on the list for two or more bedrooms.
So even if they have more points, it doesn't greatly impact your access to social housing which is largely driven by how many homes of suitable size there are.

Having kids doesn't get you treated on the NHS any quicker.

(I also don't have kids and pay top rate tax but fail to really get the gripes about parents getting more services from government. I don't need nursery and education services. They do. I also don't drive but accept that roads are required to be funded.)

Where will Labour get the money from for all you expect?

I think the more pressing issue is the utterly dysfunctional housing market, which I suspect is having a major impact on the declining birth rate. The cost of housing is so high, and the money simply doesn’t buy much space, and the expense of childcare needs to be seen in that context.

Unfortunately it doesn't stop the feckless, for whom having kids is their "career" and the door opener to benefits, housing, etc.

We need to find ways of encouraging the "right" kind of people having children, i.e. the ones more likely to be able to nurture them into future workers to earn money and pay their way, rather than the ones who are more likely to regard child as their career and be "takers" all their lives!

YANBU OP. We are mid-20s and would love to have kids. At our age, our children would most likely grow up to become tax/NI payers before we hit state pension age, so you would think it would be in the government's interest to encourage us to get on with it.

As it is, despite having 2 national average-ish salaries, we cannot afford children on top of our (IMO) fairly modest lifestyle without having to make compromises beyond what we would be prepared to do.

I think this is a common situation to be in but no government seems to care all that much about the aging population and plummeting birth rate...

You benefit from other people having kids. That's why society pays towards people having kids.
If you don't want to have to pay for them, I suggest you not plan on getting old.

I'm a higher rate taxpayer too, thousands a month - just wait till you become sick and made redundant like I am, and need any support out of the fortune you've paid towards the NHS and social benefits. I'm not sick enough for DLA, and because my husband works an average salary job I'm told I get next to nothing.

I'm sick of paying for others lifestyle choices to have multiple kids and getting absolutely zero in return for what I've paid, we don't even have the police coming out to crimes anymore in London when their little darlings trash the place! If I was able to pay the amount I paid for NI into a decent insurance scheme instead, it would be paying out now, no means testing or children required.

How much more do you think can be robbed from peter to pay paul?
Unless we have a massive tax increase across the board.

It's another Tory failure (they don't care) and Labour need to wake up on this because a low birth rate means fewer workers to pay tax to support public services.

Exactly this. We support parents a lot in my workplace - very flexible hours, family friendly policies etc - I do think some people don’t seem to realise what I would be like elsewhere.

There just isn't enough money in the pot to give us all the things we need. Quality of life and opportunities are definitely better than they were 30+ years ago, but that has come at a cost. A lot of money is spent on health and social care (it still needs more), on education, on training, on supporting businesses etc. The money being used to fund these "free" childcare hours will either be taken from something else, or it will mean something else will have to do without that cash injection. Probably the NHS because I think it is pretty clear there won't ever be enough money left in the pot to fix that. It will end up having to be privatised because right now people are actually suffering and dying. Then that money can be put into funding childcare! Woohoo! Except wages will end up being spent on birthing costs and general medical bills instead. Especially those who won't be entitled to help because of low earnings. This means family QoL will drop, and therefore will mean people will have to limit how many children they have...

I'm grateful now that our 30hrs has kicked in making it £500 cheaper per month. Also benefit from the tax free system.

I think more emphasis should be on nursery workers. They should get more pay, shorter shifts and other perks.

I imagine there is barely anyone having kids for housing and benefits - most councils have years long waiting lists for social housing and some benefits are capped after a certain number of children. 🙄

Forger about the child’s expenses. SMP should be enough for the parent on leave to at least cover their own basic living expenses without being subsidised by the state or their partner.

Let’s say that the child’s expenses can be covered by the other parent until the parent on leave returns to work, so we can take that out of the equation. But £650 is not enough for one person to live on unless they’re in a box room in some house-share and on a diet of pot noodles. And that’s clearly not going to be the case for someone on parental leave. Plenty of other countries manage longer parental leave on better pay.

It's the accumulated factor makes it really unbearable. Everything else is rising. Some parents planned children they could afford 3 years ago, and no longer can afford them.

As an average of 4 years, it isn't as big a proportion of wage to fees. But the first 2 years of no support make it very hard.

I didn't have another big amount of ££ I could direct to childcare for another child or another financial lose to mat leave (Stat mat at the time).

One was all we could afford and I'm sure it's the case for many.

I don't think what I paid was too high for good quality childcare though. The issue is the rest of life being extremely expensive.

I'm not convinced of subsidiaries as they are are the answer. They prohibit decent care as the funding is woefully insufficient that the nursery receives.

There are always complaints about the ‘economically inactive’ - I dare say that would include many parents (particularly mothers) of young children, who would like to work but can’t, because their pay would barely cover childcare costs, or not cover them at all.

It would obviously mean higher taxes, but heavily subsidised childcare (as in e.g. Sweden) would surely also mean a higher tax revenue from the parents who were then able to work.

I can’t see it happening here, though.
(I am not saying that all parents of young children ought to work if they would rather stay at home with babies/young children.)

Just leave this here

https://www.theregister.com/2024/01/15/narayana_murthy_long_work_comments/

I knew a lawyer in the same boat, she ended up taking 2 years leave of absence because it would cost her more than her salary to put her twins into nursery. She also looked at childminders and nannies.

Parents of multiples definitely need more help than they get.

Yes it's a strange set up...in the sense that i want to stay at home with my little ones and have made the necessary cut backs to do so. Husband earns £52. However my mate and her husband both work and earn 49k a year, and still get child benefit because individually they are under the 50k theshhold. Bit of a flawed system. When the government talk about 'there are millions of adults of working age who are not working or looking for work', they include me in that, with all it's negative connotations, even though I have worked full time since I was 16 and i'm in my 40s now.

Mý youngest one has just started nursery 2 morning a week, at 3, and i m grateful to the government for funding that. Also to the Mayor for funding free school meals in London. I know many would say he shouldn't, but it has helped us tbf. So, there are flaws, but overall I think we are lucky.

Or I could just set myself up well enough to be able to get old and not at the expense of others?

It hilarious all these posts warning me to not get old etc and yet I literally make a living from aging! Like I don’t know how that works 🤣

And again, no where have I said society shouldn’t pay at all. I just think it’s all getting a bit ridiculous and expensive, not to mention completely unsustainable and yet people STILL moan it isn’t enough.

Perhaps if the tory patriarchy would overhaul the pathetic excuse of a child maintenance system and make the hundreds of thousands of absent fathers actually pay for their own children then that would go someway to balancing things out.

Try living in Northern Ireland, no free childcare apart from 12.5 hours a week nursery school for 3-4 year olds. We do have tax free childcare but £500 every 3 months barely touches the cost of full-term childcare.

Luckily in my situation, my partner and I are just about able to live off my salary. He was self-employed as an audio engineer and although he earns more than me per hour, work is variable and we can't rely on his salary. We have very few luxuries, old cars, etc no holidays but still much cheaper than sending our two year old and our new baby due in April to full-time childcare.