Single parenet benefits proposed to end when youngest child is 11 rahter than 16

[uwila]

Oh this will be popular round here.

here

I just think on principle people appreciate their benefits more if say they had to do three hours litter picking a week for example even if the baby were in the sling as they did it. A lot of countries believe some form of workfare is fairer (for men as well as women). Also I'm saying it can be better for the parent because they get back into work and meet other adults too. So even if it doesn't save the state money it's better for the single parents, some of whom of course are male - not just women.

And yes I know it's harder being alone with a child. We need to force the other parents to do a huge lot more which again frees up the mothers to help ensure they stop being a burden on the state. if you choose to have a child you should ensure you can afford to keep it surely which is why most people don't have babies immediately - they wait until they and ideally a partner have somewhere to live and money to enable them to bring up their family.

Nice try, Xenia. Yes, it is possible to do "say, picking up litter with the baby in a sling" but what do you do when the baby is a mobile, active toddler and there are no nursery places/family members to help out? Quite aside from the way that workfare programmes are often a way to get the shittiest jobs done even more cheaply...what you never seem to address when you bang on about the dignity of work is how one might feel dignified when one knows one is being thoroughly exploited. I think it was you whining about those who knock the rich: if the rich company directors are only getting rich by cutting the pay and extending the hours of the staff at the bottom end of the company then they deserve to be knocked. Research appears to show (rather contrary to the researchers' expectations in some cases) that when the directors of a company award themselves huge bonuses while holding down the wages of the majority of employees, it's bad for the economy in general because the employees work less hard, take more time off sick etc. You only get self-resepct through working when you're treated like a human being, paid a living wage, etc. Employees who feel that their employers have some respect for them work much, much harder and may well go the extra mile because they feel engaged and involved and appreciated.
You don't seem to understand any of this. If your circumstances change to the extent that you are struggling fincancially or desperately hunting for work, you're going to find it very hard indeed to cope.

Litter picking says it all!!!

Unfortunately we dont live in an ideal world and there are alot of single parents in this world through no fault of there own.

I believe all parents get child benefit rich or poor working or not

I find the idea of a woman with a baby in a sling picking up litter totally abhorent!

I am quite happy to pay over my taxes for someone not to have to do so! And believe me, they will pay for many a litter picker upper!

agree soapbox.

it's like something out of the magdalene sisters 'you got pregnant,you silly cow, here's your punishment - girls! look what happens if you have sex'.

It also gives the message that picking up litter is all that these women are capable of. encourage women to get better qualifications, provide family friendly employment that gives a degree of flexibility so that women can pick up their kids from the school gate once in a while and do fun things with them and/or provide decent community based out of school care that is affordable and structured.

there is an absolute wealth of talent and enterprise being squandered because it's only women and even worse, it's women that were too ugly/shrewish/high maintenance to keep a man interested once they got pregnant... just get them mcjobs to get them off of the unemployment figures...

I wanted to add a wee bit about new deal for lone parent advisers at jobcentres - they're having to diversify, do other interviews for other client groups and have grossly increased targets to try to hit ( they have targets for days they're on flexi or annual leave!) the time of an advisory interview has been cut, so it's now a target driven conveyor belt rather than spending time with a client. If the government sincerely wants to get lone parents back to work as a way of helping to alleviate child poverty, then they have to stop cutting public services and trimming back the processes in jobcentres etc.

I've picked litter. I do it in my own road. I've done it with a baby in a sling, just like all of us have probably hoovered the house holding a baby. There's nothing wrong with working and it's good exercise too. Wouldn't people feel better in their mind if they did just that little bit of something to earn the benefit even if it were just a few hours in an old people';s home taking their small children round to chat to the old people a couple of half days a week? There are lots of things like that that coudl be done just as a token effort to give something back for the benefits, to feel that connection and gratitude to other hardworking mothers and fathers who pay the taxes that fund the benefits to enable those non working parents to stay at home when the couples and many single parents are working in effect double shifts.

FFS, Xenia!

Let's just make them all wear a scarlett letter on their clothes over their left breast as well, shall we?

As if it's not bad enough your partner has swanned off - and by the way, I agree w/your point about not allowing these so-called 'fathers' to skate off scot free and the state to pick up the tab for their children, you're stuck in a crap housing and you've got limited prospects, now you can increase your qualifications and skills by litter picking!

There's a route out of poverty!

Er... I could never get the hang of a sling. And actually, I think I would never have got the hang of picking up litter while breastfeeding. I found the latter difficult enough. And I've never vacuumed while holding a baby, I've never been able to do that. You must be very big and strong and co-ordinated Xenia.

If I pick up litter for my community and I'm not doing it on a voluntary basis, then I expect to be paid wages for it, not benefits.

Where does the welfare of the children figure in all this? How is it good for a baby to be taken out every day to pick up rubbish? When lone parents tell you that their children needed them around all the time for the first three or four or five years after the family breakdown to ensure that they had a sense of stability and security in the face of the enormous emotional blow they'd undergone, why is that so difficult to believe?

I find it very sad that people approach this debate not wanting to make choices better, but to restrict choices with no thought whatsoever for the outcomes for the children. I have been extremely lucky and priviledged to be able to have a job which enables me to work from home so that my work does not impinge on my time with my children. And because of tax credits, it also means we can just about afford to live within society, not just on the margins of it. I wish these sorts of flexible work options were available to all parents, not just lone ones.

Everything about your posts suggest that you're happy for children to be brought up on the margins of our society. Yes in the UK we have a long and proud tradition of wanting to achieve a society where every child is included and has access to the same opportunities as every other child. I don't think we need to be remotely apologetic about that, I don't care if some rabid right-winger calls that lazy.

We break the cycle of poverty through making single parents work. It's better for them. As you see below the Germans do it when the child is 3. In the US I expect in some states it is similar.

By the way hoovering with a baby in a sling is a brilliant way for them to get to sleep and doing any manual work holding a child is a great thing to do as any of us who have done gardening with small babies will know. It's what women do all over the world when they take their children out into the fields or forest. The child is upgainst you warm and snug all day and you're moving around all the time, not stuck in a chair all day so it's good for the mother's health too.)

Xenia I am under 5 foot and I never ever felt comfortable trying to do stuff with the baby right there. It's just so dictatorial to tell other people that this is easy, this is what you should be doing. It's like when someone tells me I should be doing the DIY because I am as capable of it as somone who is 6ft and double my weight and strength.

Also "we break the cycle of poverty by getting single parents to work. It's better for them".

Again, so dictatorial and final. It is not true that people stop being poor when they work. Most jobs available to single parents are low paid at poverty wages, so we are not breaking any cycle of poverty by forcing single parents to work, they continue to be poor.

And "it's better for them". In some cases, it might be. In other cases, of course it isn't. Your "one size fits all, regardless of circumstances" is just wierd.

And once again, you have totally ignored the issue of the welfare of the children and that at certain times in a child's life, such as when their parents are coming to terms with the breakdown of their partnerships, the best thing may be at that stage for their primary carer to be available to them emotionally and physically, which is sometimes impossible if your energy and brainspace are being taken up by the stresses of work.

And once again you have failed to acknowledge the lack of flexible, realistic part time work options which would benefit all parents, not just lone ones.

'We break the cycle of poverty through making single parents work.'

Xenia that is PANTS!

Complete and total BS!

Unskilled and low-skilled workers are POOR. They are working POOR. They are often no better off than those on benefits, except knackered and pissed off and beaten down by being treated like crap as well.

Do you think that's good? Because I sure as hell don't. I think it sucks, and I would know, b/c I live that life every day and it's a load of crap.

You break the cycle of poverty through educating people so they can get jobs that will pay them enough to live, b/c you certainly can't expect the fat cats of Tesco to be magnanimous enough to do that.

As for the US, have you ever lived there, Xenia?

Cuz I have, and there's a lot of reasons why I don't anymore. They're sliding towards recession just now.

You're expected to work like a slave there for peanuts and be happy doing little else but.

Well, b*&locks to that!

Also vis a vis the US and workfare, I think I may have pointed out further down the thread (and it was ignored, surprise surprise) that the children of workfare mothers have worse outcomes in terms of educational results, drug use, involvement in criminal activity, truancy, etc.

But their mums are working, so that's all right.

It's also down to employers offering flexible working that is family friendly as well as decently paid. and the attitude of your individual employers.

I work in public service, making complex decisions. i have a huge amount of legal, technical and procedural knowledge. In the opast I have managed teams of fifteen with all their problems both work and social related. I have a breakfast club at my childrens school and afterschool care to enable me to work 37 hours a week (not including commute etc) I earn £21k a year. I've been doing this job for twenty years and one of the reasons i stay is the (on paper) family friendly policies (flexi time etc) in practise I'm meant to feel like a total heel everytime i have to do something with the kids and was told today that 'you've chosen your circumstances' by my (childless female) boss.

I get absolutely NO support. I am stressed to the back teeth. I would LOVE to be able to pick up my kids after school, but that would mean a cut in wages that tax credits won't make up and we are in so much debt that i can't juggle that extra loss of wages.

yes, jobs are good. they generally promote self esteem, tehy shoudl give families moremoney. they're also a minefield where you have to juggle childcare, family responsibilities, and deal with people that think you're somehow beneath them because you're a single parent.

xenia - you know twins in a sling ....erm no. you have twins you know that.

and what when they get about 8 moths old. and heavy.

what about when they are 2 ?

considering the bbc news today of not taking enough time to communicate with them that your proposal is proposterous.

Are you thinking about the Peckham thing Custardo?

i dunno am i ?!

It's just that I was thinking of this thread this AM when two lots of reports about parenting dearths and the uselessness of top-down regeneration with regard to the Peckham incidents were being discussed on the radio. (There was some bloke on saying that we spend less time with our children than any other country in Europe and we're also the country that has most pester power, kids dressing as adults younger, teenage pregnancies etc. He was specifically talking about Peckham, but was relating the more general points about people not communicating with their kids to that, so I wondered if your comment was alluding to that or just more general)

lol sorry - no.

it was an item on teh bbc news telling us how an alarming number of children haven't got sufficiant communication and language skills when they start school.

becuase mums work! becuase we would rather do housework! and becuase we watch too much tv.

i think tv is the root of all evil - and if i didn't think my children would divorce me and live with their father with a flat screen big fucking thing that i couldnt monitor - i would bin it, grow my own vegetables opt out of society and start my own cult where you can only watch downloaded versions that i like, becuase obviously i have a tv need which need to be fulfilled.

I'm sorry, did you just say that kids have poor communication because their mums work?

Don't think so!

I recall watching one of those Robert Winston programs and they asked what most determined how well a child would do when he/she went to school, and the answer was the mum's level of education and didn't have anything to do with whether or not she worked.

jesus christ - no! i didn't say that
behave yersel; uwila before the mumsnet massive hunt me down and skin me

just caught up with this thread.litter picking??

im not sure if education is the route out of poverty either,what difference does it make if you live in an area of high unemployment?

I've noticed that a lot of the senior schools around here have a 2:30ish finishing time!

That's a lot of hours for an 11 year old/teenager to be at home by themselves waiting for their parent/s to come home from work.

What's the norm in European countries where the school day is brought forward. Do the children go home to an empty house? Have a parent at home waiting for them? Stay on at school doing non-academic activities?

OMG, I cannot believe someone suggested litter picking. Exactly how is that going to build up my self esteem, confidence etc.

Being a single mum is down right shitty as it is without the litter picking.

Why can't we put all these people in jail out to litter pick?

I mean, they're living off the state, too, and unlike single mums, they're also law-breakers.

Why criminalise people who've done nothing wrong?

Or their children?