To think maternity pay should be better funded?

[iguano88]

I saw this post earlier this week.

We are expecting our first baby. As it stands we won’t be able to comfortably afford a second: finances of maternity leave, childcare, mortgages rates, everything.

Surely people will start to choose to have no kids or just have one, because of the financial barriers. If everyone does this there are going to be huge consequences population wise down the line. If people are employed I am not sure why they are not entitled to better pay while they are on leave.

You could go on long term sick and get full pay for 6 months and half pay for 6 months, why should that be any better than maternity pay? I just don’t understand.

Okay, but I also pay 40% tax and student loan contributions, so I’m not actually bringing home much more than someone on say £35k.

You're not comparing like with like, which is ever so slightly disingenuous.

Statutory sick pay is £109.40 per week. Statutory maternity pay is £172.48 per week.

The liklihood is that if your company pays enhanced sick pay they probably pay enhanced maternity pay.

The reality is that you choose to have children but nobody chooses to be sick or incapacitated. I'd rather sick pay be improved so that people dealing with things like cancer have less financial pressure upon them than to plough money into facilitating lifestyle choices.

It isn't going to put those that can afford kids off.
Should we be making having kids more attractive for those that want afford it?
Should we encourage people to birth kids into poverty?

I’m private sector, not remotely connected to those type of industries. I’ve saved like crazy for my maternity, but I’m still looking at only taking six months max. It’s pretty shit really!

You could go on long term sick and get full pay for 6 months and half pay for 6 months, why should that be any better than maternity pay? I just don’t understand.

Depends where you work - some places wont even pay the first week, then its SSP

The vast majority of people don't use their full sick pay allowance, if people were taking a years sick, going back to work for a year, then taking another year off sick, then potentially another, and another..... then I doubt many companies would pay anything beyond SSP.

I do think that maternity leave should be higher, but you can't compare sick leave and maternity pay, they are not comparable.

Statutory sick pay isn’t better than statutory maternity pay!

Surely its a decision. I moved companies to civil service a few years before i wanted to start TTC. They offer 6 months full pay, then its SMP for 3 months then unpaid for 3 months. I knew the situation with SMP and that wouldn't be enough so i chose to change jobs so i could take 6 months off on full pay

If you're on £50k ish you're barely paying anything at 40% and whilst you're paying student loan, so probably is the person earning £35k.

You could go on long term sick and get full pay for 6 months and half pay for 6 months, why should that be any better than maternity pay? I just don’t understand.

Eh? Most employers pay statutory sick pay, not 6 months full pay. The ones that do pay 6 months full pay 6 months half are generally also paying enhanced maternity pay. And are probably public sector.

I live in Scotland so our tax thresholds are different.

People on 35k will be paying significantly less student loan than people on 50k because you pay back 10% of everything over £25k.

The difference is £200/month in take home pay. Plus on £35k I am entitled to UC and Scottish child payment.

This it is incredibly unfair to compare the two

I know it's a cliche, but taxpayers are already spending a fortune funding people who make the lifestyle choice to have children. It's really not up to other people to subsidise this.

12 mths on maternity leave isn't a luxury, shouldn't be anyway. In fact I think 2-3 yo is when kiddos are kinda ready to go to nursery.

I believe its better to use some savings and return to work after min 12 mths, at 6 mths a child is still v tiny...

Out of curiosity, just googled maternity pay when I was first pregnant.

Maternity Act 1999

“An employee is entitled to 18 weeks of ordinary maternity leave and 29 weeks of additional leave if she has been working for the business for more than one year. Ordinary leave is paid; additional leave is unpaid. However, she must tell the employer at least 15 weeks in advance of taking the leave.”,

So the situation has improved. Also, if I recall, dp’s had to take time off as holiday.

I actually think SMP is sufficient in the context of all the other things the government would have to cut back on if they increased it.

I really detest this idea that taxpayers should fund choices related to having kids. If you can’t afford the number of kids you want, you either reduce the number of kids you have to maintain the lifestyle you have, accept changes to your lifestyle are necessary to have the number of kids you want or space out the number of kids to ease some of the financial burden in the early years.

@ruby1957 No offence intended. I'm a boomer too, born 1963 and had ds very late.

And what do you think a taxpayer is?

This.

YABVU

I thought this would be a sticking point. Not really as an adoptee and a mum to (birth) children myself. Parenting traumatised children is really hard. Bonding with children who have attachment issues or full blown attachment disorders is beyond hard. It’s a very different situation and parents are dealing with getting to know new children who are strangers and vice versa. These new children often have very difficult backgrounds and are afraid of adults. They’re potentially making disclosures and/or needing therapy. It might begin to become clear there are issues that weren’t recognised before, like FASD, that parents have to seek support for. They have to relearn things, build trust and begin to feel safe. A newborn can hear you while the woman is pregnant, they are already beginning bonding through this. They are born ready to bond. It’s not the same situation at all. We’re hoping to adopt when our children are older (it’ll be the panel’s decision, so we’ll go for it, but whether they find us suitable will depend), but very aware that that journey will be very different to the one with our birth parents. And I didn’t have an easy road! I had birth trauma with my first followed by a year of health issues that nearly killed him.

I’d happily extend paternity leave to be equal to maternity. At the time, it wasn’t possible as we had couples in the company and couldn’t afford to lose half the work force for 4 months (which can limit an employer). Equally, we’d always consider every situation specifically, so if someone had a very premature baby, we’d find a way to support them. Or if a baby had complex health needs, the parents would often get extended leave on full pay.

I do think the way things are now is very unsustainable. There needs to be room in society for people who are in these kinds of non-paid caring roles. It's a lot more important than a lot of stupid shit we spend money on.

On the other hand, in the system as we have it now, I'm not sure how it works. Because the question then is, better funded by who? The government is not swimming in extra money as much as we might like it to be, everyone wants them to pay for more. Many people are maxed out and struggling already and won't vote for new taxation.

I think housing is key, and personally I think we should move to a model where there is generally higher pay but more people who don't work in paid employment (people caring for kids or elders for example), and maybe an expectation of simpler lives with fewer consumer goods. But I don't think enough other people will go for that to make it a reality.

If this is true, people who don't have children should not get any of the benefits those children will eventually contribute to society.

After all, the parents paid for it all out of their pockets, why should they not reap all the benefits?

Society needs children, it's not just a private decision.

In my experience, sick pay provision is less good than for maternity. It's also harder when you need medical appointments as employers do not need to allow you to take time off, whereas for maternity appointments you have to be given paid time off. Not saying maternity is great or doesn't need improving, but I dont think your assumption that sick pay is better is fair.

Should say ‘different to the one with our birth children’ (obvs we’d be the parents) 🙂

Parents don’t pay for it all out of their own pockets - the birth, healthcare and education are funded by the general public.

I would absolutely leave a country which decided that state services would only be provided to parents and not us unworthy barrens.

This is the fourth time I’ve seen this suggestion on MN this week and it’s vile, frankly.