Labour's plans for childcare

[babieslovemumsbest]

Also discussed on www.mothersathomematter.co.uk facebook page - 'Mothers at Home Matter Too'. Surely little ones love mums and dads better than being in wrap around care all day or nursery when they're just little babies? Surely that's not rocket science - why do the parties come out in favour of more childcare being the solution to everything - it's clearly not!

Because working mothers pay income tax.
Because when mothers opt to use childcare, this provides jobs for childcare workers, who pay income tax.
Because millions of mothers want to work, and providing financial incentives wins votes.

It's not rocket science, and it's not fair, but it's true .

It used to really piss me off that many of my friends went back to work when their DCs were still babies and received financial help with childcare, paid for in part by my DH's taxes; meanwhile I felt we were penalised twice: once by having to financially support the care of their children, and secondly (in spite of saving the government thousands of pounds in subsidised childcare for our DCs) getting no financial support for the loss of earnings.

Grrrrrrrrrrr!

Why do only mothers at home matter? Why not go the whole hog and tell girls not to go to school in the first place so they don't get ideas...?

Mmmmmmmm WidowWadman surprising, I know, but some of us SAHMs are actually well educated, professional types.

(If I'm always at home when my DCs are, and only work when they are at school, can I call myself a SAHM? I was a proper SAHM for 7 years )

You're missing the point by a mile Widow! - the OP is not saying that , far from it, she is saying that SAHMs should be valued for choosing to look after their own DCs, and not be made to feel undervalued compared to working mothers who pay for childcare.

[shocked] at your implications that SAHM are SAHM because they're not very bright and are not very well educated!

What grates is that the 'SAH' option seems to be only open to mothers, promoted to mothers and expected from mothers. It's ultimately a very sexist stance, to call a site "mothersathomematter.co.uk" instead of "parentsathomematter.co.uk".

I know plenty well educated SAHMs and I've no issue with someone making that choice. I've an issue with people making it out to be a woman's choice only.

Not sure why one lifestyle choice should be valued more than another, tbh. People should be happy with their own choice, and not feel threatened by others making different choices, and not feel the need to justify their choice by it having to be "better" than another's.

It wasn't clear from your post that it was the use of the work 'mother' you were objecting to. It was quite ambiguous, and I interpreted your argument as being about the stay-at-home-mum v working-mum debate.

I totally agree about the name of the site, I though the same when I clicked on the link (I've never heard of it before).

Presumably you have equally strong opinions about the title of 'mumsnet' and have expressed these views equally as strongly?

For the record, the name 'mumsnet' is a bit too exclusive for my liking. Even my DS (8) asked me the other day why wasn't it for dads too. When I told him it was, he couldn't understand why it was called 'mumsnet', and I couldn't think of a decent explanation myself!

Anyway, I just thought it was a bit ironic that you were posting that particular message on 'mumsnet' of all places!