To think that being a single SAHM on benefits is not a 'lifestyle choice' but .........

[Littleredshoe]

basically scrounging ?

Surely being lucky enough to SAH with your children comes IF you can afford it? Either because you work part time, or have a partner who provides for you to do this.....

To just 'decide' that you 'prefer' not to work and live off benefits (when you are fit to work) is ridiculous and it makes me bl**dy angry that I pay tax to enable others to sit on their arses......

maybe I am ? But ......I bet there would be a lot less feckless teenage mothers if the 'right' to benefits and SAH was withdrawn.....

But KatieDD - why is it a single parent issue? As I said in my previous post, if you believe children need to be looked after by a parent until a certain age, then this should be made available to ALL, not just single parents. It's ridiculous that a single parent can be given benefits to stay at home with their children, while many parents who stay together both have to work!!

I'm not in agreement that a parent needs to stay at home btw - I think there are often enormous advantages to parents going out to work, which aren't necessarily all connected with money, but that's a separate issue.The point is that this shouldnt be a single parent debate - it's about having fair, equitable systems.

Tinker ...I'm not trying to convince you, thanks. I am merely stating a point that all NHS charges should be free for all or chargeable to all. That's all. We all need their services - its just bloody unfair that some pay and some don't.

As regards parents needing to be at home with their kids up until the age of 5yrs old...it would have driven me mad being at home all the time. I actually loved working before I had my children and have enjoyed working whilst they have grown up by working evenings and weekends....I have done so for myself because I do have a life outside of my kids but also, more importantly, for the extra cash because we'd have never survived on simply DH's income.

"These days if you have 3 children you would collect £60 in income support, £130 for your children, £190 per month in child benefit on top of rent and council tax being paid."

So you are telling me, and I believe you, that you would collect around £250 a week in benefits to support three children.

In a country where the average wage is around £25k, the sums that you quote equate to a life of poverty. Enough to eat but no more than that.

It would be a bleak life. It would not be my choice.

I do think that it is fair that this is available. Not fair of course if work is available and people choose not to take it. But for people who have no other choice, I think it is only right. What would you have them do? Starve?

I do think it's more of an issue where there is only one parent though because that parent doesn't have on hand support 24/7 which for all his faults my DH gave me when I worked.
I guess we can only speak from our own experiences can't we and for me working whilst I had little children added pressure and stress that was simply too much and thank goodness I had the option to quit.
I've said many times I think the min wage should be increased to ensure that somebody working would be better off and that fact needs to be advertised too.
My final word, because this is getting boring now, is that for some it is a lifestyle choice and you have to accept that. Nobody is going to hold their hands up and say I'm a lazy person who couldn't hold down a job so I got pregnant, but as I say we have unfortunately met one and heard her braying about what she can't do now she hasn't got kids and going to college, work etc are not on her radar for the foreseeable.

Typo of course I mean now she has got kids.
Oh and the irony of it all is those children spend 5 days a week at her mothers with her popping in and out, so frankly she's got better childcare than most of us.

katiedd....not all single parents are like that...they are not baby machines. There are a lot of single parents out there who have absolutely no choice but to claim benefits because the fathers of their kids have cleared off. They may not have the childcare available to them in order to work.

Don't keep singling out single Mums...you must remember there are 1000s of others out there who are not single Mums who claim benefits...men included whether they be in their late teens or in their 40s who simply don't want to work. Yes, I agree, put the minimum wage up - it may encourage some to go and earn it but for a lot of these individuals it has been a way of life for so long...having 24/7 to themselves and receiving money to live off by doing so that to go back to work would be incredibly hard and not really something they'd want to do. Why go out there every day and earn the money by working when you can have it handed to you over the counter once a week? Its those type of people who should be kicked up the backside not the single Mums.

PLUS, working couples who "both have to work" often 'have to' work because they are paying a mortgage on the home they own. Which is absolutely FAIR enough. That's absolutely what I would do in their shoes. But they are working towards owning their own homes, possibly saving, contributing to a pension...

It is comparing apples and oranges to compare single mothers on benefits who are just treading water and unable to make any provisions for the future with a working couple, working as a team for their future.

AGREE with PP. STOP demonising single mothers. I thought we'd all agreed about four hundred posts back that this was misogynist, simplistic, mean spirited, ignorant of the practical difficulties, judgemental etc.

There are of course a lot who find themselves in situations that are not of their own making, we agreed that about 400 posts ago too. BUt what is incredibly naive is to assume that they are all in that situation and those saying they don't envy them etc are absolutely correct but again not judging by their standards. £1,000 a month for one family of 5 might be pocket money, but to a great deal more it is more than 2 people bring home for 40 hours of work after they have paid for housing, rented or bought.
I am putting this topic on ignore now, we covered this ground more than once now.
I'm sure we can find something more interesting to discuss.

I totally agree, I hadn't stated my pov, just the legal one so wasn't sure why you were directing your post at me.

"£60 in income support, £130 for your children, £190 per month in child benefit"

That's not all weekly figures I think only the IS figure is. I get a little more than that in IS (because I don't claim it as a single parent) and less in CTC/CB as I don't have three kids.

I think (if I have worked out what's weekly and what's monthly and going on calendar months rather than 4 weeks) that your figure is aprox £7,500 a year to bring up three kids on. I know I get less than that, can't remember how much it's been awhile since I worked it out. I'm not sure how many people would be happy to or capable to live on that.

Wonder if I come into the same category I've had to move my daughter in with my parents, who both work and have to work with Sure Start, friends and her other grandparents to keep her looked after when they're at work. I'd love to bring her home, it's killing me I can't but I'm not well enough to look after her.

'I do think it's more of an issue where there is only one parent though because that parent doesn't have on hand support 24/7 which for all his faults my DH gave me when I worked.'

• neither do parents who stay together necessarily have support on hand 24/7 - I know loads of couples where one partner works away during the week, or there are all sorts of other stressful factors. And equally, just because parents separate, does that mean one of them should be absolved of all responsibility, emotional, financial and otherwise? Of course not! Two parents may choose not to live together, but they should certainly take responsibility for their children until they reach adult hood. On a practical level, this should mean paying maintenance, looking after the children at agreed times etc, though of course parenting is about so much more than just practical things.

And before I get flamed by people telling me about feckless fathers who bugger off and never offer any support - yes, I know there are some bloody awful parents out there (although they are not always the ones who bugger off - I've seen awful parenting among parents who stay together). But at the end of the day, the responsibility for this can't simply be shifted onto other people who do take their own parenting responsibilities seriously, and go out to work and pay their taxes - it's simply not a good foundation for society. The welfare system should be a support system for people who absolutely cannot support themselves independently - and I have no issue with people like this being paid a decent amount, not the bare minimum, but enough to have a decent quality of living.

But sadly the culture has grown in our society that people can have children, keep on having children, and then if they decide they don't want responsibility any more,they just offload the financial burden onto the taxpayer. The emotional issues often get ignored. And we'll be reaping the consequences for generations.

I dont understand why people are having a go at single parents claiming IS. If my exh paid maintanence i would get LESS IS so shouldnt we be having a go at them instead?

I lost my full time job because my child was ill and i kept having to take time off. My exh refused to give up his free time (free time i didnt ask him to take time off work) to look after her.

Absent parents who dont pay for their children are to blame IF anybody.