One woman in ten aged 25-54 in the EU27 is inactive due to family responsibilities

[legalalien]

See here

PMSL at "inactive due to family responsibilities"

Inactive???? INACTIVE?????

That was SO written by a man

Although "family responsibilities" apparently include "long vacation" if you read the small print. Wonder what language this was translated from......

my thoughts exactly, miaou.

Inactive indeed

Now now, settle down you prickly lot, they just mean economically inactive.

so you can all go back to watching daytime tv and drinking coffee

Marriage is also a family responsibility. Hmmm. Is it a responsibility for the man too? Do you think I can not come to work next week on the basis that I am married?

Clearly more women should be in full time work so that they can spend more time on mumsnet.

Honestly, why read such boring stuff.

Does it really matter whether someone is a works or is at home with children.

What is important is that someone who is physically fit does not expect Joe Tax payer to financially support them for decades.

If two people make an arrangment, ie one person is a houseperson and the other goes out to work then it is up to them.

A houseperson is ecconomically active in that they look after the house and family and the working person pays for everything.

lost the will to live reading that report

Does it mean that we don't have time to go to the gym or for a long swim and sauna followed by a massage, facial and nails????

Oh, I remember it well, life BC!!

Ah but, the positive side of this report is that all the way from 25 to 54 is "prime-aged".

But if they mean economically inactive they should say so.
Otherwise they are implying that economic activity is the only worthwhile sort of activity.

my brain's been inactive for a while. Does that count?

Do they mean economically active? Because they aren't including the unemployed. Who are therefore more "active" than people with "family responsibilities".

I'm economically active, I am a marvel with £300 housekeeping a month and four kids.

I am decidedly inactive at this very moment

Short-sighted view! having children and raising them properly is essential to the future economic wellbeing of the country. Do you WANT a pension and NHS when you get old?

lol Sue!

oh yes, I am inactive

LOL, it's just technical jargon. Irritating but quite funny in a way!

I'm afraid this government has long made it clear that looking after your family isn't what they consider a job. Hence the harrying of women back to work--even if what they can earn barely covers a childminder. Where I live, out in the Styx, it's the SAHMS who do a lot of the good stuff round the place: taking elderly people to hospital, helping in school, volunteering for various important but non-glam and unpaid jobs, etc.

I say this as a non-SAHM--I work part-time.

And some of the women are much more vitriolic about SAHMS than are the men. Many men really like the fact that there are sensible, caring, responsible adults at home during the day and value their contribution, both in raising children and doing things for the wider community. It's some of the working women who sometimes don't. And I again write that last sentence as a working mother.

well, I'm inactive staying at home caring for a severely disabled child. maybe I'll dump her in residential care and cost the taxpayer 2k a week and go out and earn bugger all.
sheesh

No NMC, what you need to do is, find someone else with a disabled child and swap, so she pays you to look after hers and you pay her to look after yours. Then you will both be economically active and, er, much more useful than if you were just looking after your own children

yeah... we're all losers on here.

We shouldn't have had kids, we should have worked lots of overtime and bought a plasma telly, as that increases GDP. Kids are a drain on the country, and should be discouraged.

says inactive excludes own illness - well it's true we can never be sick.

also why is only economic activity classes as meaningful? the "inactive" are busy caring for others

Didn't they once work out how much you'd have to pay a mum - and not just SAHM's as paid wordk mums come home and do childcare/cleaning etc too.
I seem to recall the work I do is 'worth' about 33k a year. Add 2 grand a week disability care.
But as I do it all for no money its not counted. Only money is important.
Society wouldn't function without the unpaid work. The mums, the volunteers, the people who do LETS or Freecycle, the helping hand in the street, the children helping.
I am more 'active' than my sister who works and has no kids. From 5pm and at weekends her time is her own and she sits playing computer games and IM'ing. I'm still going at those times.

Why bother with families at all? Why not just hand the babies over at birth for the state to raise for us?

That would mean using taxes to pay for childcare.

We should all hand off our kids to privately run nurseries from birth, and market forces will ensure they all turn out bright, beautiful, intelligent and highly motivated.