Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To question this...?

318 replies

foureleven · 08/04/2010 15:43

I saw this on another thread and kind of hope the mum in question doesnt see this because I dont want to cause offense... just genuinely interested in peoples views..

(..treads carefully...)

I spotted this person say that she is a SAHM and her husband brings home £1000 a month. Plus they get child tax credits. Now I assume this is not 'working tax credits' as thats for childcare right? And they wont need it if she doesnt work.

It may be that its not a lot of money anyway and not worth getting one's knickers in a twist for but AIBU to wonder why a SAHM can claim benefits (other than initial maternity benefits of course)?

If you are a SAHM because your partner earns enough to cover everything thats one thing (and a debate for another thread, this is not ANOTHER SAHM Vs WOHM debate!)but why can women receive top up money to be able to stay at home with the children they cant really afford to?

Shouldnt we be responsible for bringing enough money in to the home for our children?

Genuinely ponders....

OP posts:
xkaylax · 08/04/2010 18:40

violethill i agree my post does look like i judge people who work sorry it came across this way its just my opinion not meant to offend anyone

xkaylax · 08/04/2010 18:40

violethill i agree my post does look like i judge people who work sorry it came across this way its just my opinion not meant to offend anyone

ouryve · 08/04/2010 18:41

Foureleven, I'm an SAHM and just like you, my husband earns a reasonably good (not particularly high for a professional) wage and pays quite a lot of tax. We also get a lot of CTC, since both of our boys are disabled.

I'm sure your cogs would start really whirring when I reveal that the government pays me about £50 a week to stay at home with the kids. It's called Carer's allowance and like most carers, they've really got me on the cheap, since I have to keep putting down my packet of sweets and getting myself up off the sofa and caring for these kids!

titch7069 · 08/04/2010 18:42

i assume you mean TYPE of toilet paper? and as to whether SAHM of WOHM it depends, how much actual time is spent with the child/ren, i know some SAHM who spend sod all time with their dc's and some WOHM who spend all their time outside of work with their dc's

titch7069 · 08/04/2010 18:43

it depends, if using a bag in a mug, milk last, if using a tea pot then milk first!!

jcscot · 08/04/2010 18:43

I'm a SAHM. I couldn't do anything else, really. My husband is in the Army (an officer - earns over £50,000 pa) and works away from home, coming back every other weekend.

We have two children (aged 3 and 20mths) and another on the way. Full-time childcare to allow me to work would cost us a small fortune, so we opted for me to stay at home and look after the boys. We thought this was doubly important to provide a certain amount of stability for the children, given the peripatetic nature of Army life/employment.

We get a small amount of CTC (around £30 per month) but given the amount my husband pays in tax each year as a higher-rate taxpayer, it seems quite that the taxman gives us a little bit back.

We could afford to live without it, of course, but why should we? It's not a benefit, I'm not a "benefit scrounger" and we certainly pay our dues in tax and - via my husband's job - public service.

There's a big difference between sitting at home because one is caught in the "benefits trap" where taking a minimum wage would actually mean you have less money and the position we're in where the taxman gives a little back out of the large amount we pay because we have children.

AliGrylls · 08/04/2010 18:43

I would argue the point the other way round - unless you can comfortably afford childcare and have a bit left over what is the point in working so that all your money goes on said childcare.

I think women that stay at home and receive "top up" are more than entitled to it - being a SAH is not a free option, it does require work and for someone it is actually a job. At the end of the day someone has to bring up the children.

The thing I don't like about this topic is that some women don't seem to see being a mother as a valid option as something to do.

Original poster
foureleven · 08/04/2010 18:44

ouryve you are the second person who has assumed I would begrudge someone with disabled children of receiving a carer's allowance... Not sure where it comes from tbh.

OP posts:
EggyAllenPoe · 08/04/2010 18:45

Shouldn't the way out of that trap be to raise minimum wage?

no. minimum wage is earned by many people with relatively high disposable incomes (thinks back to being 18-25 year old living with parents..) incraesing minimum wage also drives jobs abroad (except in industries where they have to be done here.

upping the minimum wage = the scattergun approach.

violethill · 08/04/2010 18:45

Thanks for clarifying xkaylax

It's worth remembering because working parents (and let's face it, the majority of parents work) will get mightily pissed off at hearing things like 'looked after by strangers'.

We all raise our children, it's just some of outsource bits of the looking after to other people for some of the time. And it's all an ongoing process anyway. You don't stop raising your children when they go to school, or off to a friend's for the day.

runnybottom · 08/04/2010 18:45

Er, hello? Healthcare, 14 years of free schooling per child, plus university, roads, water, public transport, courts and social workers, street lights and cleaners, arts and culture, benefits and tax credits, trees and parks and libraries and sure start and childrens centres, special needs provision and care of the elderly and on and on and on and on.

One of the richest countries on the planet with a high standard of living, and all you can do is whinge.

jcscot · 08/04/2010 18:46

"...it seems quite that the taxman gives us a little bit back."

That should read:

"...it seems quite reasonable to us that the taxman gives us a little bit back."

Original poster
foureleven · 08/04/2010 18:47

titch - we agree thats how I make tea too! who would have thought.

And I agree totally with your other comment too about the stah wohm thing. Scary heehee

OP posts:
lou031205 · 08/04/2010 18:47

foureleven I would imagine it is because you are begrudging families with a full-time working parent the CTC. By extension, it is quite plausible that you would not see it a good use of your taxes to pay someone like myself or ouryve to look after our own children because they are disabled.

titch7069 · 08/04/2010 18:47

runnybottomm nope get none of those, despite 20+ yrs of being a british taxpayer

jcscot · 08/04/2010 18:47

Well said, AlliGrylls. I completely agree.

DinahRod · 08/04/2010 18:47

Am with Frank Field MP who proposes to help to families where one parent wants to stay at home. They would be given 25 per cent of the total child allowance and tax credits that they would normally receive over a period of 19 years in the first two years of their child's life. The idea would be to enable more parents to spend longer with their children in those crucial first years.

runnybottom · 08/04/2010 18:51

If you don't live in the UK why are you paying tax there?

Original poster
foureleven · 08/04/2010 18:55

runnybottom - I thought you meant what do I personally get from the tax I pay.

*As far as I am aware my childrens university wont be paid for...
*Roads are paid for by council tax, as are street lighters and street cleaners i believe.
*I dont use public transport.
*I have never been to court or used a social worker (if I did go to court I would pay for my own lawyer)
*I dont claim benefits or tax credits.
*I do go to the library occassionally (and end up paying huge fines because its never bloody open outside of working hours to return books)
*The elderly hardly get much care do they poor buggers, we have to pay an extortionate amount for my nan to live in a half decent home.

I dont begrudge paying tax so that those less fortunate can claim carers allowance/ unemployment benefit/ disability allowance etc of course. Before you jump on me.

OP posts:
Original poster
foureleven · 08/04/2010 18:58

"foureleven I would imagine it is because you are begrudging families with a full-time working parent the CTC. By extension, it is quite plausible that you would not see it a good use of your taxes to pay someone like myself or ouryve to look after our own children because they are disabled"

No, I appreciate that it if you have a disabled child you will probably struggle to find care for him/her and that even if you did it would be extortionate. I also appreciate that they need more one to one care and am happy to agree that it is most practicle that this is done at home by mum or dad/ grandparents etc.

That is in no way comparible to someone wanting to/ feeling they need to/ having the choice/ right whatever to stay at home with non disabled children.

OP posts:
titch7069 · 08/04/2010 18:59

because we are british citizens and although we pay tax overseas, because we still own a house in the uk we are subject to double taxation, and yet i had to pay £6000 to give birth in the uk last year, we lived and paid tax and nI etc until 4 years ago in the uk now we still pay tax but not ni

Original poster
foureleven · 08/04/2010 18:59

Ouryve - Also, where did I say my husband earns a good salary..? Im not married and I have made no mention of how much my partner earns... I dont think!

OP posts:
fernie3 · 08/04/2010 19:01

We get child tax credit - my husband works I do not. Wouldnt we get this anyway even if I worked? so its not to support me is it?

Original poster
foureleven · 08/04/2010 19:02

"Am with Frank Field MP who proposes to help to families where one parent wants to stay at home. They would be given 25 per cent of the total child allowance and tax credits that they would normally receive over a period of 19 years in the first two years of their child's life. The idea would be to enable more parents to spend longer with their children in those crucial first years"

Who will pay for that? I love all these ideas they come up with before an election.

Am expecting an MP to promise to give us each a magic lamp if they are elected and grant us 3 wishes.

OP posts:
MrsC2010 · 08/04/2010 19:03

"That is in no way comparible to someone wanting to/ feeling they need to/ having the choice/ right whatever to stay at home with non disabled children."

I'd say that this is a choice that everyone should have the right to.