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

[uwila]

Oh this will be popular round here.

here

K, so people made mistakes. Or their ex is a git and dumped them.

The point is, now they're a lone parent.

How best to help them.

Message deleted

Yep I didn't just mean financially.

I don't drive and would have to use 2 different forms of childcare if I worked at the moment, plus I have no formal qualifications or much work experiance as I had my kids young and stayed at home with them whilst xp worked until we split.

So I need a job with flexible hours, close to where I live and the 2 different childcare providers and the job needs to be one which requires no previous experiance or qualifications.
Chances of me finding a job like that are pretty much nil.

Oooh my favourite subject

Well, my story so far (all related to thread I promise).

exH and I split up about 2 years ago, 2 DDs were about 2.5 and 1.5 at the time. For reasons it would take too long to explain, I had to give up our family home and find rented accomodation, and exH went to his parents place.

I went to BA and asked what benefits I could get, they said (wrongly) that as I was working (I was the only earner even before we split up) that I wasn't entitled to anything except WFTC to cover the childcare. I was happy to work when I was with exH as the money had to come from somewhere, and he was looking after the kids whilst I was at work, so no childcare costs to deal with.

I really did panic, worked FT and struggled to make ends meet (and then some), never saw the kids, and was always thoroughly exhausted so couldn't really enjoy them when I had them.

A couple of months ago, I was told that I was entitled to housing benefit. I now work school hours, DD1 is in reception, DD2 with a childminder that she adores. Having been through the nightmare of juggling childcare, demanding work and finances on my own, I think that it is wrong for ANYONE to demand that a lone parent with dependant children works outside the home

nutcracker, the answer is, in my opinion, to help you get some training so that you can get a job.

Yep Uwila, I agree which is why if by Sept I still haven't found a job, I will be going back to college instead.

QueenofTarts, I am with you on that one. Iam in a similar situation as you, no family in this country, no real support apart from the one I pay for (nursery).I also understand your point Nutcracker, 3 kiddies must be difficult to juggle.
I have always worked, never considered benefits as I want the best for my ds and myself. Not earning lots after paying everything but I would get fuck all on benefits anyway, so I made my choice a long time ago. By the way, I have been a lone parent since the day I got pregnant, so no help from ds's dad.

Wheresthevallium, we are talking about single parents of teenagers.

That's the other thing, these able-bodied fathers swanning off scot free.

QoT I don't dispute that it can be done - I'm doing it myself. (Functioning as a mother and as an employee, that is - just!)

But just because I can do it, doesn't mean that I don't understand why many other lone mothers can't. Some of the reasons they can't, are quite well detailed in this thread, I thought.

I do agree that it is not a good thing for kids to grow up in a household where there is an assumption that benefits is the only way to live. But what pisses me off about this debate, is that it always assumes that that is the attitude of many lone parents (which it isn't - survey after survey reveals that most lone parents would like to be able to work in the cash economy) and also, that the duty of the government to make it possible for all parents to function both as parents and as workers (which would be the quickest way of ensuring that more lone parents got paid jobs) is almost never discussed. It usually turns into a rant about what a lazy bunch of skivers lone mothers are.

My food bill for ds doubled when he hit 10, plus secondary school costs increase astronomically.
Awful idea, should be contingent on being in full time schooling though IMO

I have no time for able bodied fathers who do not embrace the resposibility of providing for their own children. But, that is another topic...

I can see why people that work do get so het up about it tbh.

My aunt had her Dd1 when she was 18 and before that she had not worked. She was a single mum right from the start and she lived with her mum.
About 6 years later she had Dd2 again as a single parent and continued to live with her mum.
Eventually about 8 years later, she met a guy and they moved in together and she had Dd3. Not long after that he left her.

2 of her dd's are now grown up and the youngest is 10. My aunt still has never had a job and I don't think she ever will.
She had plenty of oppurtunities to get one as she had built in childcare for the most part, but she chose not to.

Do secondary school costs increase astronomically? Why? More school outings or somethign?

By Nutcracker
"Yep Uwila, I agree which is why if by Sept I still haven't found a job, I will be going back to college instead. "

Good for you.

it's a problem for all parents really - not only lone parents (but in general, SAHMs with a working partner who want to go back to work don't claim benefits so it's less of a problem for the government).

Would still like to see the government incentivising flexible/job-share/part time work especially as most jobs can be done this way.

Message deleted

I have no objections to my tax going to hard up parents (male or female) who have been left holding the baby or babies.

I am also someone who spent 8 years being a lone parent (before getting married), because I got up the duff whilst in school and decided to keep the baby. Once out of school I got no financial help with going to university or arrange childcare whilst I studied as they insisted on means-testing my parents - neither of whom financially supported me. IMO a stupid flaw in the system as I could have been a much higher earner and tax payer if I'd been assisted in going to uni.

Nevertheless, I worked. I worked my way up from crap McJobs (getting income support) to begin with and now work in an admin role in an investment bank and paying the higher rate of tax.

What really, really got up my nose all those years, was living next door to a woman who made no secret of the fact that she:
(a) lived with partners but didn't declare it so as to get full benefits
(b) had "additional" children to bump her benefits
(c) refused to name any of the 5 fathers of her 6 children so that she could get financial support from the fathers without declaring it.
(d) drove a f-off 4x4 when I was slogging my guts out and commuting an hour to work on a packed train.

And I only managed to afford to work (after moving to the uk) because my grandmother provided free childcare for my daughter, so yes, govt sponsored childcare would go a long way to help people.

Those are the situations that need to be addressed - the ones where people choose to live on benefits - not those that can't manage without them. And they need to give more incentives and help to those of us who are just begging to get off benefits and income support. Having been a lone parent and worked my way out of the poverty trap, I think I at least have a right to hold those views.

oh, I just had to lol at kslatts 12.22 post.

If you didn't work, all of dh's money would go on the mortgage and bills?!

Lucky you to have a dh and to be able to afford a mortgage.

Pmsl

In response to your 11.59 post kslatts, the reason the woman you are talking about doesn't get a job is probably because she knows, as most of us single parents do, that she would be no better off working (so still wouldn't be able to hire a hall for her dd's birthday)

and as for your comment about why can't single parents 'co-ordinate' childcare, as you and your dh do, errm, who do you suggest they co-ordinate it with, then?

There really are so many different facets to this issue, that without a coherent strategy there is never going to be a long term solution!

1. Affordable child care - how are lone parents on even the average wage supposed to meet childcare costs/holiday clubs costs etc?

There is increasing evidence that the govts strategy on increasing the number of publicly funded childcare places and afterschool provision, has led to a significant increase in the costs of employing childcarers (some might argue, not a minute too soon)!

This is pushing up the costs of providing places significantly, making nurseries/afterschool clubs even more inaccessible to those on average wages.

1. Provision of affordable housing to key workers. Many lone parents cannot afford to be mobile enough to take up opportunities in their chosen jobs - teachers and nurses and childcarers cannot afford to move where teh work is - increasing dominance of the South East doesn;t help - the costs of housing sprial ever upwards.

1. The provision of flexible childcare options - if you are a nurse, a tescos worker, etc etc you may need to be available to work overnight shifts - childcare is usually provided on a 7-7 basis - bugger all use to an 11 year old expected to look after himself overnight, while mum is off manning the hospital ward!

1. Separated fathers taking greater reponsibility for their children - both direct caring (if desirable in teh circumstances) and financially.

The CSA is just a complete joke!

1. Flexible working arrangements to be made compulsory for businesses that employ more than 200 staff.

1. Scrapping child tax credits - make businesses pay a living wage for people - increase the minimum wage! Why should I as a tax payer subsidise Tesco's when they are more than able to pay a living wage to their employees?

1. Increase the stock of social housing - dramatically!

I for one do not quibble with women staying at home looking after their children with me footing the bill! There are far greater ways in which my tax payments are squandered right left and centre - starting with the CSflippingA! However, I do also believe strongly, that as society we have to work hard to reduce the trap of poverty of opportunity that blights the lives of so many of our citizens - especially mothers!

Well also kslatts says if his wage wasn't coming in her wage would cover the mortgage and bills.

Which begs the question, how would you pay for food, transport and childcare?

Because maintenance payments are set at poverty levels and won't cover those costs. And it's amazing how many men suddenly become penniless when they stop loving their wives (and yet are able to afford new cars... )

Well said soapbox

Well I'd be screwed if this comes to effect.
Just how am I supposed to work, find/afford childcare for an autistic child, holiday schemes for SN kids are few and far between etc.
I am also planning to go back to college in September but the few times I have asked about jobs, all employers hear is term-time and special needs then I get the line 'We'll call you'

Just adding further support to the ideas that what is mostly needed to help everyone who isn't loaded is

1. more flexiblity with regards to working hours. Those of you who do work, how much of your working day is wasted in unecessary meetings and/or counting your paperclips to "look busy" as there's no actual need for you to be there at all till later on.

2. More affordable housing

As to more affordable childcare, yes I agree it's necessary but I do wonder how it can be made cheaper when the wages paid to nursery staff, etc are already pretty dreadful - I know this because one woman who worked at DS nursery left to work at a supermarket (and we know how lavishly f* paid that sort of work is) because it would be more money.