Do some mums just not like working?

[Dragontooth]

I know this sounds awful, and judgey but I'm trying to understand. I am not a benefit basher and I used to be on benefits, also a single parent.
I'm on a lot of 'being skint' forums, I was on UC but now I have quite a lot of experience in various things so I like to try to help.
There are a number of mums who were previously on legacy benefits who are terrified by UC and the work search appointments. Lots who are unemployed and some who do very part time jobs, 10 hours or less.
I don't understand why they are so resistant to finding work or better paid work. Having been on benefits, it is a horrible existence. I was paid £850 per month. Clearly it would only take a MW part time job to make me so much better off. And they pay for childcare/ holiday club.
It literally changes your life. You can pay for things to have a better, easier life like driving lessons. Not only that but you are back in the work place so it's not such a shock when your children leave home.
I feel these women are so anxious, they can't see how their lives could look with more money/ options. Not only that but a lot of them have their heads in the sand about retirement, will we even get a state pension? Then there's the fact that it's so much harder getting back into employment after five or ten years out, I think that's what UC wants to avoid. I'm not saying it's a kind or person centred system but in reality is taking years out of the workplace really in these women's best interests either?
Disability/ disabled children obviously excluded.

What are we talking about though?

Having £20 and that's it...no access to anything else.

Or

Having £20 before you enter your overdraft...ie you have access to more than just £20

Exactly.

I grew up with a SAHM. They scrimped and scraped so she could be home. It was miserable, not to mention stressful watching your parents worry about money.

I would never put my DC through that. Financial security is important.

Agree with you, confirming on your 4 children.
Can understand why you feel u r on autopilot, I felt that with one working FT!
Yes, I can never understand why some people need to make unkind,sarcastic comments

Congratulations on your 4 children

But that PP is choosing not to work and therefore only have £20 to their name, while her partner only works two days a week and therefore is likely not bringing in a huge amount.

That PP could choose to work and not be in such a precarious financial situation.

It's not the same as people working themselves to the bone for minimum wage because their jobs, while important, are not valued, and not having much in the way of savings. It's choosing to have no ability to save it deal with emergencies.

In my situation, it was predominantly the first one

I think you have to earn above 45k to cover your own costs from welfare (NHS, schooling, pension etc) so if you earn under that you're taking more for yourself than you're contributing

@Justcommentingby
I value my DD over my job.
However I also value giving her a financially secure upbringing with a good diet and enjoyable experiences. Every hour I work is absolutely worth this.
I also value showing her that it's 2024 and women can have a worthwhile career, a great standard of education and be a great parent.

@MsCactus

I don't really understand that argument as surely you are paying council tax and not on any benefits.

Does that apply per household?

You can pay council tax, and not be on benefits, but if you are a heavy user of the NHS (maybe due to chronic issues), have kids in school etc, then you are taking more out than you are paying in... if you are on less than £45k

At least ptax and N.I is being paid though

So everyone takes out of the state - the cost of your education, healthcare, state pension, but there's loads more that you get for free in this country.

If you earn less than 45k as an individual - not as a household - then you haven't even covered the amount of money you've taken out of the state. Most people don't cover their own costs, so they're not contributing to other people's welfare bill at all

At least they are trying though

Just shows how low the wages are

No offence to you but most of this thread has been posters being insulting to sahms even sahms who are financially supported by their partner not tax payers money have been insulted! Not that it's always as simple as getting a job for mums on benefits it's not easy to find a job that fits round school hours and child minders are expensive.

Personally I work part time so can see both sides of the argument but it's a bit disingenuous for full time working mum's to complain about people disrespecting them on this thread when there's been A LOT more disrespect shown to sahms but it's suddenly offensive when it's the other way around?

I don't disagree that there's been disrespect to SAHMs (I'm the same as you, I work PT so see both aspects).

But have you seen all the things that particular poster has been saying? You may understand why the PP you quoted was astounded if you read all the posts by that poster.

If a mum doesn't work to support or kids, someone else is working on her behalf. And that includes other mums who are working. The money just doesn't come from "the government".

Sorry but the dead beat dad's should be forced to pay child maintenance. The tax payer shouldn't have to make up for what the useless fathers fail to do. It's not as easy to just get a job that fits in with school hours for a mother as it's made out on this thread especially with no family help for baby sitting.

Make the dads pay, they do a much better job of enforcing child maintenance payments in America this country is a bit of a joke when it comes to CM.

Not all mother's are single mothers....

That PP didn't say "if a single mother doesn't work....*.

Are you suggesting that if both parents work (and live together, working as a team), the dad is a deadbeat for not earning enough to support the mother being at home??

Not quite as simple as that. If you don't work, voluntarily then no NI and poor pension. That's not fun for people to come face to face with.

You do get NI contributions if you ‘claim’ Child Benefit - even if you don’t actually get any payments as the household income is above the threshold to receive it. On the form, there is a box you can tick to declare that you do not wish to receive payments (to save you paying it back anyway).

Pension… I agree. It’s important to future-proof and relationship-proof. Marriage is best, really, of course.

Thanks, the changes happened after DD was much older. not sure why marriage is best with regards to my pension? Genuine question.

Be realistic, some need to get coffee out, as I do , long term health condition, means it’s impractical to carry extra junk or stuff!
And folk need jobs

That's obviously not what I'm saying 🙄way to deliberately misinterpret what I said for the sake of arguing.
If it needs spelling out for you what I'm saying is people should stop moaning about single mothers taking tax payers money and start going after the father's who don't pay maintenance. There's a good 37 pages of posters calling mothers lazy for not being able to magically get the mythical school hours 10-2 job.

That mythical job is usually school dinner lady btw and the pay is not going to come close to covering bills and rent

I’m just speaking broadly about making the decision to become a SAHM and it was off the back of my comment that it’s best to future-proof and relationship-proof ie consider what would happen if a relationship breaks down. As part of this, I’d personally ensure I pay pension contributions if doing it for a longer period of time.

BTW, I am a SAHM and will be for a few years. I am very happily married but I think it’s sensible to think “What if…” about my marriage too. I wouldn’t do it long term if I wasn’t married or didn’t have my own wealth personally but that’s me.

Some Mams simply don't want to leave their children when they are small. Or it's their norm to have the kids at home if that's what happened when they grew up