Babies and jobs: no easy choices (tell us something we didn't know)

[winnie1]

Thought this would interest mnters....

www.guardian.co.uk/child/story/0,7369,1358939,00.html

[Gobbledigook]

Right Batters - I mean what does it matter what everyone else does really, just so long as we feel comfortable with our own decisions?

You are so right - I can't understand many things that parents do with regard to their kids but at the end of the day, they aren't my kids are they?

[rockdaddy]

This is a thread close to my heart as I discuss this reguarly with DW, as someone who works in retail which require long hours away from home, I find I am not able to spend the time I think my DS and DD require from a father, I see lots of examples every day of the same people dragging their children around my shop and moaning non stop about them. I would love to spend a fraction of the time that they can spend with their children but my job stops me from doing this. I am sure a lot of working parents feel this way and for most there isnt a choice as I know I work like I do to provide for my family.

[tiredemma]

i have to work, couldnt afford to live other wise, however even if we could afford for me to be a SAHM i know i wouldnt do it, i take my hat of to SAHM's i find my time at home with the boys more stressful than a day at work and more demanding. i think people who can stay at home with the children should be applauded- its a bloody tough job!

[WideWebWitch]

Caligula, I very much doubt it. Prices so vastly out of proportion to incomes are one reason I think the market deserves to crash.

[Caligula]

Blimey, I won't be moving to North Wales.

How do people afford houses? Anywhere? Is there anywhere left in Britain where their cost is actually related to the income of people who have to buy them?

[Fennel]

Marina and MariaLuisa have you tried a formal application for flexible working or reduced hours? It's hard for a big employer like a uni to refuse that - and I don't think "precedent" counts as a good reason.

[mishmish]

Dear tallulah, North Wales is not a desert in terms of our cost of living. A 3 bedroom terraced cottage in my town is at least £240,000.

[prufrock]

Oh so true. If you dare to admit that something in your life is more important than your job.....

[WideWebWitch]

Serenequeen, ikwym, I do.

[serenequeen]

let's face it, your work outside the home isn't valued either, once you become a mother!

[prufrock]

Agree completely with www.
One of the main problems for women in this country is that working at home (or in a nursery etc) to bring up children (which lets face it is still mainly "womens" work) is seen as being so much less valuable than working in an office or doing other (traditionally male) jobs outside of the home. Just because paid childcarers get paid a pittance doesn't mean that the work they do has any less value.

[Gobbledigook]

Agree totally with your last paragraph!

Not the one about the soapbox of course!

[Caligula]

No, you're doing fine on it!

[Bigfatmomma]

What needs to change is society's attitudes to parenting. In almost all cases, children need time with their parents and surely most parents would like to have more time with their children?

It should be recognised that a parent giving up work to look after their children and raise them the best way they know how is (hopefully!)actually making a worthwhile contribution to society, in creating confident, secure, well-adjusted adults. (Before I get stoned, I'm not suggesting you have to give up work to raise confident, secure well-adjusted adults - just that some people find being a full-time parent the best way of achieving this ).

It should be recognised that having or wanting to work does not make equate to being a bad parent. The demands society makes (esp in my line of work, where 9-5 is considered part time by many) of those who work need to be reviewed. For example, why do we have to work 9-5 5 days pw? Many workplaces could realistically offer a shift approach, which would enable many parents to arrange their hours so that one starts early and finishes late, while the other does the reverse, which immediately facilitates shorter hours of childcare and fewer problems with the school run. This would also enable employers to cover longer hours without employees being expected to do unpaid overtime.

Parenting is more important to society than money. Society should be willing to help all parents do the best job of parenting that they can, whether that's as a stay at home or a working parent and I personally believe that would better be achieved by looking at shorter/more flexible working hours, rather than longer childcare hours.

Errrr, anyone else want the soapbox now??

[WideWebWitch]

Agree with you Caligula re 'as if bringing up your own children isn't of any social or economic benefit to the country.' Uwila, you seem to be coming from a position that says sahps are less worthy (for want of a better word) of government subsidy/tax breaks and that society shouldn't be paying for parents to stay at home to look after their children, in any way.

You say '...the difference is that a working parent is looking for a reduction in the taxes that they pay. Whereas a SAHM/D is looking for someone else's tax money to be given to them.' So do you think that sahps shouldn't have any money or subsidies or incentives? Do you think they aren't making a contribuion to society? Not wanting a fight, just genuinely interested.

(Cloud Cuckoo land alert again) I think parents should be incentivised equally to work outside the home or be SAHPs: being at home with children IS WORK. Absolutely. It's not opting out, it's working hard bringing up a child/children. Surely we all agree that's valuable? Even if we don't want to/can't do it? In fact, as someone who worked full time without children, was a sahm for a while and now works full time again, I would say being at home with children is harder than working outside the home. I really think it is and feel I have it easier that my dp who is a SAHD. But I appreciate not everyone will think so or agree with me. I work in a fairly high pressure/stress job but still think my day easier than dp's.

I'd like the government to concentrate less on getting all parents out to work and more on giving all parents real choice. We're not all the same and we don't all want to work/be at home with children in the same way or for the same amount of time or for the same reasons. It would be good if society recognised that sahps are a) valuable and b) worth incentivising. Paid work outside the home isn't the only thing that's valuable.

[tallulah]

kaz33, whenever we get into this sort of discussion I wonder whether other MNtrs are on the same planet as me, & you've confirmed they aren't!

"I earnt a lot of money but was taking home about £1200 a month after the nannies pay and tax". I earn just less than this for working fulltime and still have the other expenses of working that you mention, travel being the biggest.

Other people talk about downsizing. OK how do I downsize from a 3 bed terrace worth about 3/4 the cost of a new 2 bed house, with 3 teenage kids still at home, without moving to north Wales? We have 2 cars because we couldn't get to work with only 1, but can't reduce our hours because of a mortgage that takes up the whole of one salary... If someone knows the answer to this catch 22 please let me know!!!

When I started school at 5 years old, finishing time was 4pm (started at 8.45). My friends 3 year old goes to nursery from 8 am to 6pm yet somehow school hours that long for an older child is too much? Doesn't make sense. DS2 went to a private school (assisted place, minimal fees) from Y3 to Y6. Drop-off from 8am, pick-up up to 6pm. Made our lives so much easier without the rush. Didn't do it every night but the option was there.

[Caligula]

I think part of the problem is that they don't support two parent families very much, unless both are working (and even then above a certain income level, not very much).

Whereas they're chucking money at me to work and send my DD to official childcare, when in fact quite often if you are a lone parent family, your kids may need the security of having you around more in the couple of years following a traumatic split for them.

If only all parents' choices/ needs could be respected and supported...

Ah, Cloud Cuckoo Land!

[Kaz33]

Snap we have lost over 50% of our income by me leaving full time work to look after our boys. Not only I am not contributing taxes but also we are no longer paying our nannies taxes so the state loses out again. Though I wished that we got some taxbreak for me being at home - I do realise that it is not pratical unless it is related to how much you have put into the system before you decided to give up work and that is a bit morally abhorent.

The big issue for me was affordable childcare - paying £25K ( £37K after I paid my nannies tax as well ) out of my already taxed income is just ridcolous. I earnt a lot of money but was taking home about £1200 a month after the nannies pay and tax. Then on top of that you add transport, food at work, convience food because you so knackered from work, maintaining your work wardrobe, nanny taking kids to various expensive activities and you turn around and say WHAT IS THE FG POINT.

Ok, I might have left anyway but a more sensible tax system might have increased the incentive to work part time and given my family some real benefits from me working.

[geordie]

Can I just add something......I just wanted to say that I see the turmoil over making benefit available for sahm's and the need for further tax relief to help with childcare etc etc...

what really worries me about all this is that we are trying to justify and affirm one choice over another (not here on MN but as a society in general). I really believe that parents should have the choice to either work or care for their children full time (pre-school)- mothers or fathers. As someone who has made the incredibly difficult decision to be a sahm and loose %50 of our income by doing so, I feel let down by the notion that it's ok to give fanancial aid for working parents to provide the best possible environment for their children....but that no support be offered for parents who wish to do that themselves.
I personally am happy that the tax dh pays will help other women to work....but what I want to ask is how it will help the women who don't and struggle because of a positive choice to not work in thsoe first few years (especially as for many women it is a matter of a few years career break).

this might be off topic a bit and I might eb idealistic...I don't know... I am not attacking anyone here btw

[Caligula]

I rely on benefits to stay at home, because I work from home and at least 40% of my (after tax) income does not come from my employer, but from Child Benefit or tax credits. As from January, nearer to 50% of my income will come from central government, because of getting rid of informal childcare (au-pair) and putting my child into formal, OFSTED inspected childcare. If I were on the dole, I would actually cost the country less money!

I agree with JoolsToo here - there are many cases where women simply don't have a choice, but there are choices you can make according to your priorities and your current lifestage. I moved out of London and changed industry in order to be able to work part time. But I'm not suggesting that everyone should do that (or that everyone could - lots of people live outside London to begin with!) People make choices according to their own priorities and what they think is important, and it's no-one else's business, but I don't understand why government should only support those who work outside the home, as if bringing up your own children isn't of any social or economic benefit to the country.

[Gobbledigook]

Got you now Uwila - I have to say I don't know anyone that relies on benefits to stay at home although of course there will be some single parents finding them in a position of no choice (work wouldn't pay enough to cover child care). For the most part, I think people either rely on dp salary or do something a little extra to bring some cash in.

I class myself as a SAHM because I am here 24/7 and ds2 and ds3 don't go into any kind of care (ds1 does pre-school in the mornings) - but I do freelance work for my old employer to keep my hand in and to bring in extra money and I have to fit that into evenings, weekends, dh's days off (like today!). It's so tough and I'm permanently knackered so it does p me off when I see these people on programmes who do bog all and still manage cars and holidays.

Still, I'd still rather have my lifestyle than theirs so it's all down to choice. DH and I could I suppose go unemployed and live on benefits but we wouldn't have the lifestyle we've got!

[Bigfatmomma]

Uwila, now I think I understand - thanks! Good point.

[Uwila]

Yes, Gobbldigook, I mean (primarily) people who don't work at all (but are capable of working).

Bigfatmomma, the difference is that a working parent is looking for a reduction in the taxes that they pay. Whereas a SAHM/D is looking for someone else's tax money to be given to them.

Now, I'm realising that some people who refer themselves as SAHM/Ds actually have part time jobs in the evening/weekend/part time. I qualify those people as working and they should be subject to the same tax break. Likewise, if you stay home, and your husband works, then his salary should also qualify for a tax break (as he is a working parent too).

I suppose I'm just digging my grave on this thread, just me somewhere nice, please.

[Gobbledigook]

Uwila - when you say "I just think it isn'f fair that those who go to work to pay the bills should be asked to contribute to funding those who choose to stay home" I'm not sure what you mean - do you mean people who give up work and then claim benefits??

It's just that the people I know that have given up 'careers' have taken on evening or weekend work to make up some extra cash or they rely solely on dp's salary.

If you are referring to those that claim benefits instead, I suppose I can see your point. The other week there was a programme on where a couple had 5 kids, neither parent worked and they were still talking about holidaying in dubai next year - well that makes me mad because I care for my children all day and work in the evenings, pay tax and I object to my taxes going on these lazy layabouts!!! OK, I'm not badly off but we've only managed 3 days in the Lake District at my Mum's house for our annual holiday this year!