Why do people complain about childcare costs?

[Teawithsugar40]

I’m a working mother and 65% (was previously near 100%) of my salary goes on childcare, we get by but holidays etc are out of the question. We’re not rich and have small children, it’s just how it is. I don’t resent what we pay and feel quite lucky that we’re a few hundred better off than if I was doing the equally important job of caring for my children full time.
Maybe because when I had my first child there was absolutely no childcare help and scant provision but I really don’t understand so many people these days complaining about childcare costs, especially when it still leaves them better off working? Totally understand single parents needing help and thankfully they have had generous help for years but why are couples who are definitely not on the breadline complaining? Did they seriously think they could have children without making any sacrifices and why do they expect people often worse off them themselves to pay for maintaining their previous lifestyle?

@SickAndTiredAgain

Women should put their career at the same level of Importance as their partners, childcare costs are split. No one is working for nothing if the costs are shared.

I never quite understand this view. We have shared finances and childcare is never assumed to be “my” cost. However if I earned less than the cost of childcare (I don’t), while I wouldn’t be working for nothing, it would still be the case that as a family we’d be better off if I didn’t work.

Exactly, I’ve never understood unless a woman is a single parent why childcare always correlated to the woman’s income? I think this is what really gets my goat, the fact that a lot of people complaining about childcare costs are where the man earns e.g. 70k and the woman 30k and they want everyone else to pay (including childless Susie in Newcastle who earns 20k and the struggling SAHP one earner family in Liverpool) to pay for their childcare because it takes up 70% of ‘the woman’s salary’ and are basically just miffed because they can’t now afford centerparcs plus their mortgage. Poor Susie would love to be lucky enough to even have a mortgage!!

@cakeandcustard

The government doesn't subsidise things, taxpayers do! Are you saying those without young children should pay for your life choices then? I stayed at home when mine were tiny and took employment I could do from home, I returned pt when they were in school - I did the maths and it was not cost effective to work and I chose to have children. Taxpayers already subsidise nursery from 3, it's doubled since mine were tiny (I got 15 hours max).

I had children young and made do renting a tiny house, no mobile phone contract (basic payg) no gym no pay tv no streaming contracts. I resent people wanting my taxes to pay for their children when I can barely afford everything now

@camelfinger people generally could not afford back then, many things that are now routine such as eating out, cafes, takeaways.
I actually think life was better back then in some ways, and not in others. But I don't think younger adults these days would accept the lifestyle back then. Because for many people it was like lockdown, except you could visit friends and family. Most people never or rarely went to paid attractions or leisure places.

@camelfinger

Given the choice, I would prefer to have children back when costs of living were lower and housing was cheaper than the “help” we get nowadays. It was definitely cheaper and easier years ago.

Yes if you were a couple was perhaps easier but certainly not as a single parent!!

I think people complain because it's bloody expensive! We pay £800/month for 3 days a week (plus some minimal expenses to family for the other two days to cover food and travel etc). That's for one child. The other is just breakfast/occasionally after school club. It's also cheaper here than our previous area (where the eldest went to nursery).

I don't usually complain about it as such (only to my husband), it was all carefully budgeted before we had kids. I knew it was going to be expensive. We can afford it (just).

We both earn decent wages and everything still has to be carefully budgeted. I wonder how people on lower wages even afford to work - and I know many don't.

It annoys me that some people are better off not working. It annoys me that in those first few years when you really need it there is no funded hours. It annoys me that it will still cost me almost as much in childcare when we do start receiving funded hours. It annoys me that it's usually women who end up making the sacrifices (and dealing with the admin of it!). It annoys me that I have had a pay rise in the last couple of years but nursery costs £30 more this month than it did last month!

Some countries do it better, some worse.

You can still complain, even if you knew the situation before you entered into it. In the US where mat leave/pay is pretty much non existent and you can still basically be fired for having a baby, Mums knew this before - I still think they can complain about it.

@Teawithsugar40

I’m a working mother and 65% (was previously near 100%) of my salary goes on childcare, we get by but holidays etc are out of the question. We’re not rich and have small children, it’s just how it is. I don’t resent what we pay and feel quite lucky that we’re a few hundred better off than if I was doing the equally important job of caring for my children full time. Maybe because when I had my first child there was absolutely no childcare help and scant provision but I really don’t understand so many people these days complaining about childcare costs, especially when it still leaves them better off working? Totally understand single parents needing help and thankfully they have had generous help for years but why are couples who are definitely not on the breadline complaining? Did they seriously think they could have children without making any sacrifices and why do they expect people often worse off them themselves to pay for maintaining their previous lifestyle?

A large part of the problem is that it's generally women, who on average earn less than men anyway, who bear most of the childcare costs.

[quote RoyalFamilyFan]@camelfinger people generally could not afford back then, many things that are now routine such as eating out, cafes, takeaways.
I actually think life was better back then in some ways, and not in others. But I don't think younger adults these days would accept the lifestyle back then. Because for many people it was like lockdown, except you could visit friends and family. Most people never or rarely went to paid attractions or leisure places.[/quote]
Completely, people have a very warped view of an age they didn’t experience parenthood in.
Some things were better, especially for the middle classes but not for single parents, those on low incomes etc. Probably golden age of best of all worlds was around 2003-2007 but this was a very different time to the 80s/90s

My childcare bill is €3100 a month, and I'm a single parent. I can't wait for them to start school, and not need full time childcare!

@Ploppy1322

If they are a single parent they are more than likely eligible for help through universal credit and if they’re part of a couple why are they both not paying?

@user1471604848

My childcare bill is €3100 a month, and I'm a single parent. I can't wait for them to start school, and not need full time childcare!

Are you in the UK? You should get help through universal credit unless you have a high salary? No help through maintenance etc either?

@monotonousmum

I think people complain because it's bloody expensive! We pay £800/month for 3 days a week (plus some minimal expenses to family for the other two days to cover food and travel etc). That's for one child. The other is just breakfast/occasionally after school club. It's also cheaper here than our previous area (where the eldest went to nursery).

I don't usually complain about it as such (only to my husband), it was all carefully budgeted before we had kids. I knew it was going to be expensive. We can afford it (just).

We both earn decent wages and everything still has to be carefully budgeted. I wonder how people on lower wages even afford to work - and I know many don't.

It annoys me that some people are better off not working. It annoys me that in those first few years when you really need it there is no funded hours. It annoys me that it will still cost me almost as much in childcare when we do start receiving funded hours. It annoys me that it's usually women who end up making the sacrifices (and dealing with the admin of it!). It annoys me that I have had a pay rise in the last couple of years but nursery costs £30 more this month than it did last month!

Some countries do it better, some worse.

You can still complain, even if you knew the situation before you entered into it. In the US where mat leave/pay is pretty much non existent and you can still basically be fired for having a baby, Mums knew this before - I still think they can complain about it.

You can complain about anything but it’s the complaining about it like you think it’s so unjust and everyone else should paying it for you. BTW low income families will get childcare help through universal credit so that’s how they are often better off working

Because for 1 child its usually around £13-14k a year cost. Round here, a full time nursery place for an under 3 year old is more than a private prep school fee. While noone is surprised that many families with 2 working adults cant afford private, and of course the state should provide free schooling for every child regardless of parental income, why is it we see preschool care as something that's a privilege we can't afford?

Other counties manage to subsidise or even often for free childcare - its just in the UK we hold this idea that obviously its a choice if a woman works, obviously its going to be expensive if you insist on working when it is optional - of course if you haven't got a career or pension later that's your own fault or making poor choices. We should presume all parents will work full time and provide childcare places for that. Some won't use those places (as some now home educate or use private schools), some will prefer to use a private option (like a nanny or a private nursery), but everyone should have access to childcare and arrange our welfare system on the assumption adults will work if they physically can.

I feel you're wrong there... i think we need universal childcare. That would make a massive difference for EVERYONE. I think you shouldn't have to choose between working or childcare because one is more financially efficient than the other to work or not to work should be just because want to (or not) not because you're forced to because not working ends up being "cheaper".

Sounds like you need to raise your bar a bit op.

For us it's not just childcare costs either. The cost of living has risen dramatically. I've chosen not to go back to work after having my second as just wraparound care for DD6 is £16.25 a day, that's over £80 a week, plus the huge cost of nursery. If you then factor in that our gas and electric bill has gone up and is due to go up again, petrol/diesel prices have risen, our monthly food bill has gone up, our finances are already stretched. My pay wouldn't have covered the childcare costs, let alone have anything left over to contribute towards anything else. I'd have been working just to actually be worse off financially. For many the childcare costs aren't the only monthly cost up for consideration. If people have debts such as credit cards, loans and car finance which need to be paid off and childcare takes more than one wage there may not be enough to pay the rest.

Where I live nursery is £2000 a month full time. Even if you earn over this a month, there is the added time cost of working full time, then fitting in all the other chores around it (when I was on maternity leave I found it easier to get a lot of the chores out the way during the day). I think it’s perfectly acceptable to say that paying nursery fees way over your mortgage, being in a financial deficit, is appalling when it doesn’t have to be this way. For many of us going back to work is emotionally and financial essential.

Yes @OnlyRainbows - its not like we'd accept the state saying well now there's only private primary schools and you need to make sure your child is educated, so if you can't cover £12/13k a year education, then one parent should become a stay at home parent and home educate.

@MargosKaftan

Because for 1 child its usually around £13-14k a year cost. Round here, a full time nursery place for an under 3 year old is more than a private prep school fee. While noone is surprised that many families with 2 working adults cant afford private, and of course the state should provide free schooling for every child regardless of parental income, why is it we see preschool care as something that's a privilege we can't afford?

Other counties manage to subsidise or even often for free childcare - its just in the UK we hold this idea that obviously its a choice if a woman works, obviously its going to be expensive if you insist on working when it is optional - of course if you haven't got a career or pension later that's your own fault or making poor choices. We should presume all parents will work full time and provide childcare places for that. Some won't use those places (as some now home educate or use private schools), some will prefer to use a private option (like a nanny or a private nursery), but everyone should have access to childcare and arrange our welfare system on the assumption adults will work if they physically can.

I know how much it is as that’s approximately what I was paying until recently out of a net salary of about the same! However that is just what we expected for the privilege of one of us not having to give up work to care for our children at such a young age. Obviously we’d expect to not have those costs when children 3+ but knew that’s what it would cost until then if we both wanted to work. I certainly don’t want to subsidise people just to incentivise them to work over staying at home to care for their baby. Would much rather that money go to the poor, giving people the choice to decide what is best for their family, NHS etc

I also don't understand it. Do people expect their kids to be looked after for free. Childcare workers deserve a good wage too and it's not up to the government to pay for their kids it's up to them. If you can't afford them dont have them

But education is different to childcare. Paid for education is about ensuring children have the education they need to get jobs and build an adult life. It is about the child future.
Subsidising childcare more would be largely about subsidising middle-class families so they have more money.

@MargosKaftan

Yes *@OnlyRainbows* - its not like we'd accept the state saying well now there's only private primary schools and you need to make sure your child is educated, so if you can't cover £12/13k a year education, then one parent should become a stay at home parent and home educate.

That would be a total change of the status quo so a little unfair (pandemic excepted!!) I suppose we all have our views on what our taxes should be spent on. Kids receiving an education I’m totally up for paying for (including children’s centres in all areas not just poor ones) along with the NHS, childcare and benefits for the poor and many other things but I suppose I’m just used to the idea that the everyday care babies/toddlers is the parents responsibility until nursery school age. Billions to be spent so professional couples with small children can enjoy a 2nd annual holiday wouldn’t be my priority and in regards to gender equality there are a 100 better initiatives that would improve that, that definitely don’t include professional coupes 2nd holidays

@RoyalFamilyFan

But education is different to childcare. Paid for education is about ensuring children have the education they need to get jobs and build an adult life. It is about the child future. Subsidising childcare more would be largely about subsidising middle-class families so they have more money.

Absolutely, actually find it quite vulgar that such couples always pushing the gender equality angle because their miffed at their lifestyle being affected by children when in actual fact evidence shows most of these professional women would remain in employment anyway.

@stuntbubbles

Because it’s really expensive and people can complain about anything they like? Are we also not allowed to complain about pregnancy being horrible, labour being painful, and newborns being tiny devils, because we chose to have children?

I don't understand your answer to this OP

@cherrypie66

I also don't understand it. Do people expect their kids to be looked after for free. Childcare workers deserve a good wage too and it's not up to the government to pay for their kids it's up to them. If you can't afford them dont have them

Totally agree childcare workers deserve far more appreciation, I’m so thankful that your work has meant I have been able to continue with the career I love and don’t resent s penny we pay (even when we were paying virtually 100% of my salary)

I don’t so much agree with the if your can’t afford kids don’t have them view, but do think that you accept its probably going to affect the luxuries you can afford (although if already poor you shouldn’t have to be even worse off)

The subsidy for childcare costs was first introduced to reduce child poverty. It was about improving the life of children, not giving middle-class families more money to spend.