AIBU to wonder if a stay-at-home mum could become an MP?

[Questionsssss]

Do you think a degree educated, middle class 30 year old SAHM without any notable work history would ever have a chance at becoming a local councillor or MP? I feel like most MPs have either a local council or highly skilled professional background (law, finance etc). I’ve googled and I can’t find a single MP who has a SAHM background.

But you are arguing that the care of your own children is not you taking personal responsibility and that should be subsidised?

Inconsistent.

There is no reason why you can't give it a go. Join and be active in your local party of choice, learn what it takes and bits of the job. Then move up from there.
People vote for policies, people and want someone they can believe in, whatever their political view.
I think if you are interested in this path then start,nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Either you don't even try and put the idea aside, or you just start getting involved in politics and see what happens. Maybe you might find another role rather than MP that you enjoy in politics, or maybe you find that you have a natural talent for fronting a campaign and gravitate to being an MP.
I don't think people care so much what their MPs did as a previous job,more what are they going to do in this job and if they are trustworthy.

Yes I am aware.

I don't qualify for benefits beyond CB and need to work. My kids are in after school club and nursery.

The poster wants to increase the number of people who can stay at home with kids.

I'm asking if I would qualify to stay at home funded by the state within her proposals or if you need a partner.

Jeez, ADHD and autism are not mental health disorders, you numpty!🤣

OP stop embarrassing yourself, get off Mumsnet and go back to your cushy simple SAHM life. Oh and look up the Dunning-Kruger effect

I'm so glad you and I will likely never cross paths...

Given your stance, for their sake, I hope you don't have daughters but only sons.

I think it benefits society to stay at home and raise kids. I don’t think it benefits society to pay benefits to people with anxiety.

Well how does you being sahm qualify you to do the job? If you cant answer that i cant imagine voting then

Well yes, obviously , one needs time on their hands to go around, speak to people, pay for their transport and engage with various places

I think OP you might be a good candidate

How does staying at home and not in paid work benefit society more?

You think it’s detrimental to teach children that there is value in caring for their own children instead of whisking them off to nursery at 11 months old?

I think it would reduce a lot of the issues that are prevalent in today’s youth.

Not really in all honesty. You almost always need the backing of a party so you would need to join and go through all their selection processes. Independents normally have significant community involvement over a long period of time or a specific hook, or were previously in a party and are known names.

I agree people need to work less and spend more time with their kids

May I ask you a question though: do you think most mothers should not do paid work? Or maybe part-time but not in very demanding jobs?

@Questionsssss you are ignoring questions about single mothers that a few posters asked in various forms. You can't ignore your electorate like that as a politician. Do we increase support for them too to comfortably stay at home with their teens?

OP, of course it’s possible, but you would need to start in local politics - and also then be the best person when it comes to choosing the candidate. There is quite a lot of competition for becoming an MP, though.

So who will do the jobs where people aren’t paid enough to be the sole earner? Nurses, teachers, police officers, none of those professions at entry level are paid enough to sustain a family on their own and the tax cut needed would be more than the salary they receive.

But can't you understand that it would only benefit high earners?
If a couple earn 30k each ( an average wage.) Even with tax cuts they couldn't afford for one parent to stay at home. Your policy will only help those people who are already in a fairly privileged position. And it is taking money away from people who are much worse off and do need it

I think you are getting a lot of harsh responses .

You are 30 , you have opinions and have time to gain life experiences which will reinforce your views , or make things more nuanced , or perhaps change your opinions entirely . As others have said volunteering is probably the first step .

I wish you luck , I respect your courage to consider having a go at improving the UK - it certainly needs help. Some of those criticising you probably wouldn’t hold their nose and jump as you are considering doing

There is when you are trying to teach that using an archaic familial stereotype, yes. Women have fought so hard towards equality and you think we should wipe all we've achieved. Shame on you.

How? Parents can work and raise perfectly responsible 'normal' chidren

In fact the way you are answering questions without anything to back them up make be question how serious you are it

Of course not. I think people should be free to do whatever they like. I think there should be some financial incentive to be a stay at home parent though. I don’t know what that looks like - either reducing the household’s tax bill, allowing the transfer of the full tax allowance between married couples, NI relief etc.

She is in the majority party at the council and her constituents still need her to pester her colleagues to deal with dog mess? Perhaps she should look to other parties to get cross party support in order for it to be dealt with without the need for pestering, if her party colleagues won’t?

So you’d have to rely on benefits? I’m not sure that taking your children into poverty is something the state wants or needs. Your ex is extremely unlikely to give you a penny more than he needs to.

I’m ignoring questions because either A. I don’t have time to answer them all right now or B. I don’t have the answer to everything! I don’t claim to know how to solve the country’s issues single-handedly.

But the research doesn't really back you up with regard to the benefits of having a SAHP. The benefits are primarily in terms of lifestyle for the individual parents rather than outcomes or wellbeing for the children, or benefits for our wider society.

And as an employer, I don't really want to have to deal with a load of employees who are not well enough to work being forced back into the workplace because of some sort of political ideology. I have seen the immensely negative impact that this can have on the rest of the team. Our workplace is not a daycare centre. We are not qualified to provide specialist mental health support. And dealing with colleagues who have significant mental health problems takes a huge of time and attention away from our actual work leading to reduced productivity. Can you articulate how exactly how forcing many more people into the workplace when they are not well enough to function is actually going to benefit them as individuals, the people around them or our wider society?