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

[uwila]

Oh this will be popular round here.

here

Grrrrrrr. Do you work in the caring profession kslatts? No, didn't think so.

Kslatts, I've worked for my employer for 4 years, and flexible working STILL isn't an option.

Do you get that?

MOST offices are going to tell you 'no' and that's just too bad.

Also, not everyone can or wants to work in an office setting.

A lot of lone parents do not have the option to work b/c of the way work is traditionally set up in this country.

It's still a society based on the premise of two parents and one being able to afford to stay at home.

Which is a LAUGH when you consider the cost of living, tax rate and low wages here.

yes I agree uwila - I think that's a big part of the problem (that working, for the average person, just does not pay all the bills anymore). Add that to a confidence issue (having not been in gainful employment for a number of years) and you have a situation that's very hard to change.

If an employer is not compelled to or given incentives to offer flexible working conditions - and this benefits not only ALL employees as well as the environment - they won't.

So most don't.

Hunkeydory, could you post constructive arguments please. I actually have some sympathy for you. 4 kids = can't afford childcare. I'm with you there. That is a problem. Childcare needs to be affordable if people are to return to work. I only have two kids and we've decided not to have any more because we can't afford them. I wish childcare was more affordable. And I believe that is a problem which should be dealt with sooner not later in the government.

I don't have a choice about working, if I didn't work, all of dh's money would go on the mortgage and bills, we would not have any money to live on.

Get yourselves over to the sitestuff thread carriemumsnet is going on 5 live to talk about this and wants peoples views!

Yes Uwila, we all know that you don't believe staying at home is a valid lifestyle choice. You've said so often enough.

Bugger the kids as well. Who cares if they have been traumatised by a family break up? What relevance is it if they need extra input because their lack of a father figure (something we're constantly being told is a major issue btw, until it comes to going back to work) is damaging to them?

Honestly, people can't have it both ways. Either the lack of a father around is a real problem and means the kid needs extra input so therefore the mother needs to be able to give that input (and that means being there) or it doesn't matter at all and the mother can go out to work full time (which we keep explaining is mostly all that's on offer). If that's the case, then why all the concern about lone parenthood? If it doesn't matter about not having a father, and if lone parents should organise their lives just like coupled parents, why all the worry about family break up? It obviously doesn't matter.

Had I known I was going to end up a single parent, maybe I wouldn't have had 4 kids. You just don't know what life is going to throw at you, whilst everything may be going perfectly for you now, you don't know what is around the corner.

I think you're just assuming that because you do it, everyone can. Not everyone can be a highflyer in a well paid job. I was a secretary before I gave up work, it's a job that needed doing, but it was never going to make me a rich woman. Not everyone has sack loads of qualifications and the opportunities that others have.

Oh and btw, of that 4% of lone parents with children over 11 who are on benefits, 10% of them have a disabled child.

So this proposal affects even fewer people.

Well I am a single parent and I do agree that single parents of school age children should work if possible, but sometimes there are too many things that need to be in place for that to be practical.

Oh and i'm not sure what exactly they mean by single parent benefit. My benefits are made up of CTC which is exactly the same amount as when I was with xp so no extra for being single mum, and then I get Income support which as far as I know is a set amount for single adult with family and isn't based on how many kids you have, at least thats what I was told.
So not sure which bit of the money they would be stopping.

I definatly want to go either to college or work once Ds starts school, sooner if I can find something with suitable hours and can sort out childcare.

I never said I was a high flyer with a well paid job. I work in an average office job as an administrator.

Yes, so, kslatts?

This is about lone parents.

There is no 'DH' whose salary goes for mortgage and bills.

There's just them.

So the office salary would be ALL they get.

Could you afford to live off your office job salary?

If the answer is no, then you're sort of getting to where this thread is trying to go.

Aren't you all (mostly) making the same point: if 2 parents live together and one works - at all - then that family is entitled to pretty much bugger all support?

Whereas if you lived apart and did not work, you'd be entitled to full state support at the cost of all those working families who are receiving bugger all.

I'm frankly pissed off with the govt pussy-footing around the issue of non-working single parents, when working families - who make up the majority - are shat on from a great height without anyone making a fuss at all.

Affordable childcare would solve a huge financial burden for all sectors of society, but they are peeing their pants that they'll be seen by the left wing of the party to be helping "middle class" families.

kslatts , im with you on this one, why should our hard earned money be taken away as tax to pay for SAHMs?

I have to say that, the majority of the jobs I have tried to apply for so far would have made me no better off what so ever after I factored in travel etc.

In answer to expats question if i was a lone parent my salary would just cover the bills and mortgage (if we stayed in the house we currently live in), dh and i earn about the same.

it says in the article that they want to do this to 'stop lone parents moving "seamlessly" on to incapacity benefit once their child-related benefits stop.'

what does that imply? do you get incapacity benefit for depression, is that what he means?

Message deleted

Gees, french, why should my taxes go to fund the fracas in Iraq, either?

Or to line big business fat cats' pockets?

Queenoftarts, being a single parent of 1 is a whole different story to being a single mum of 3 with regards to working anyway.

Message deleted

Um, if you don't understand, why don't you read the thread?

I never considered going on benefits either, until I got made redundant. I also never considered becoming a single parent, until I found I could no longer live with my xp without wishing he would meet with a tragic and fatal accident.

I'm really glad that I don't actually need to go through an experience, in order to have a modicum of understanding about it. It must be terribly difficult to have to actually experience everything before you can have some understanding of it.

Um, if you don't understand, why don't you read the thread?

I never considered going on benefits either, until I got made redundant. I also never considered becoming a single parent, until I found I could no longer live with my xp without wishing he would meet with a tragic and fatal accident.

I'm really glad that I don't actually need to go through an experience, in order to have a modicum of understanding about it. It must be terribly difficult to have to actually experience everything before you can have some understanding of it.

Expat...i agree, the whole tax thing is a total f**K up, going to all the wrong places.