Anyone feel stigmatised about being a SAH single mother?

[hammerhead]

Just wondering if anyone else feels stigmatised about being a SAH mum on income support? DS is preschool and a lot of people seem surprised I don't have a job. I get the impression they think I'm on jobseekers and actively avoiding employent. I'll be quite happy to work when DS is in school but want to stay at home when he is still little. I worked before DS was born and have paid a lot of tax over the years, but some people still make out like I'm a scrounging chancer.

IIRC, the first £15 of earnings doesn't have to be declared. Which I suppose makes an hour or two of work without paying tax legal....I'm sure I didn't just make that up!

Good ol' AlouiseG, say something about a dog so old and miserable and you're a cunt. Say something positive about a lone parent on benefits, and you're just some entitled so-and-so.

God this is really depressing. I didn't think there were so many sociopathic tories in the world any more. Why are you ok with 'paying tax' for missiles and royal weddings but not for people, who have mostly had horrible times with relationships and a lot of us are also depressed and would probably be declared unfit to work anyway after abusive exes etc, to look after their children? That seems to me like pure evil, actually, to be ok with taxes going on the former but not the latter. I think single mothers who stay home and look after their children until the child is 3 at least are heroic, brilliant and should be thanked and respected by society in general, actually. Just as married/coupled parents who do this should be, but allowing that single parents have a lot harder time of it so it is much braver and more brilliant that they manage it. I have paid tax in the past (not at the moment), too, and I wasn't a resentful nasty little fuck when I was paying tax, so that's no excuse. It really disgusts me when 'taxpayers' whine about supporting people and call it entitlement- well, yes, it IS entitlement because people are entitled to that as a basic human right (just as you would be if you were unlucky enough to be dumped when pregnant/with a young child or lost your job).

I started this thread looking for support about stigma and yes, I do now feel I am being discriminated against. I also see that the stigma is real. It has been stated that I am a bad mother for not working, even though I cannot work. I have been told that I am teaching DS the wrong values and encouraging him to live of the state when he is an adult. I have been called a liar for claiming there is no childcare or jobs in my area. It has also been implied that most SAHP are benefit cheats working on the side.

Most shocking of all, it has been noted that 5 years caring for a child at home somehow disqualifies me from re-entering the labour market - as if being a SAHP will turn my brain to mush to the extent that no one will want to employ me. This is the main assumption that I would like to see changed. Let's try to place a positive value on motherhood and the skills it teaches us.

I'm going to leave this thread now because it has turned quite vile. No one knows how I've ended up in this situation and I have felt real hatred from some of the posters. Maybe some of them will now reflect on the wider picture and try to think of real solutions to the problems faced by single parents, i.e. more flexible working hours, childcare solutions, a liveable wage etc. Thanks to everyone who has given me support and encouragement. xx

I don't think anyone has called you a bad mother, hammer. And you're not being discriminated against, because it is difficult in your circumstances. I think it's really a shame that you have taken the bad from this thread only, there has actually been very little of it. :(

Good luck with your future.

hammer I don't know your reasons for not working but I'm surprised that you aren't actively seeking work bearing in mind your child is at preschool. If you are looking and there simply isn't anything then that is different but your OP gave the impression that you had the right to stay at home and claim benefits because you had paid tax and had a child. Personally I think that doesn't reflect well but if I have misunderstood then I apologise.

Hammer - your OP didn't say you couldn't work, it read very much like you don't work because you'd rather stay at home with your DC - a privilege lots of women wish they had, but don't because they have to work to put a roof over their children's heads.

WibblyBibble - I'm intrigued that you can make the assumption that not thinking tax money should support people who are capable of working means I approve of tax money being spent on wars or weddings. There are many things I don't like the government spending money on, but they're not what this thread is about.

It was mentioned somewhere on the thread that lots of working mothers use their parents for childcare, which is sometimes true, but many of us do pay for our own childcare as we have no parents around to help. Someone else said it's not fair that lone mums are expected to work just because they don't have a partner to support them to SAH, and that they have just as much right to SAH as women with a partner. I see the two points as much the same argument. Should I complain that it's not fair that I have to pay for childcare when other people have family to do it for free? Should I expect the state to pay for my childcare because I don't have parents to look after my children? Of course not. That's just how life is, we do the best we can with what we've got.

I also don't get the argument that raising a child is a job in itself and needs anyone's full time attention. Most people have children. Millions of people manage to raise children and work at the same time. It's not something that should award anyone a special position. I also think that staying at home is a luxury, not a right. It's a thing borne of Western privilege and a relatively new invention. Children have turned out just fine having been raised by relatives, collective village childcare and going to work with their parents for millennia. They really do not need undivided care an attention from a parent for their first few years.

I will add to the argument though, as was also mentioned earlier, that men are getting away far too lightly. Why does all the responsibility and stigma fall on the mother when a couple splits? The law should be far, far harder on fathers and they should be made to pay a sizeable amount of support for each and every child they father. It might make a lot of irresponsible men a lot more keen to learn how to put on a condom. I have no respect for any man who leaves his child and the mother of his child to struggle while he waltzes on with life.

Hammer, I didn't mean to imply that all single SAHM's were working on the side. I didn't when I was on IS but earned the allowed income. My friends that I mentioned were on benefits long term and that was the only way they kept their heads above water.

Annie, good post.

As for the condom thing both sexes need to take responsibility for a pregnancy. I nearly went for the morning after pill with DD but it was only a small possibility so I didn't knowing full well that it would fall on me to spend the next 18 years and beyond caring for an offspring. If men had the same responsibilty ethos then they might think twice before having sex without a barrier.

Don't let anyone get to you, single stay at home mums...if the children of the rich can be brought up properly, why not more "ordinary" children?

hammerhead, can I ask why you haven't looked at working for yourself doing cleaning, childminding ( especially if no one in your villlage does this!) ironing etc?

Annie, great post.
I think expecting the taxpayer to bankroll your lifestyle choice to SAH when thousands of other women do not have the luxury of that choice is pretty obscene, actually. And if there is a stigma, well, do you need to ask why?

Arf at ''bankroll your lifestyle''

Ah, the flash cars, holidaying on Necker, luxury apartment on the pages of Hello magazine...........

Moonferret - children who have some form of childcare are not brought up worse than those with SAHP. How dare you imply that?! The last thing working parents need is to be confronted with idiotic comments like that!

I'll second that Wallis, Annie wrote a brilliant post.

It's clearly a better lifestyle than they can earn themselves, though isn't it? As has been said repeatedly on this thread.

Great post too Annie.

What interests me is where this victim mentality comes from. As I previously said bad things happen to lots of people but that doesn't mean you just give up all responsibility for your children's welfare to the state. Just because they live with you doesn't mean you are supporting them.

Wallis - hammerhead has already answered that question.

And no, it's not a better lifestyle than working, it's just not that much worse and when you factor in the costs associated with having a job, it must be bloody soul-destroying. Still at least people will think you're a noble single parent

I don't have a victim mentality. And it's not about a mentality. It's far more practical and more real than a mentality.

I have a low earning capability and I have 100% responsibility for two children.

REading this thread I can't believe how stupid some supposedly intelligent people are. Have they not heard of welfare traps? Are they unaware of the fact that even if you find good affordable childcare what do you do in the holidays!!?!? are they aware that you can't just DECIDE to get a job that pays you well.

If childcare were free then I could have attempted to make working 'work'. But I can not operate at a loss every month. ie, say 1,000 net coming in and 1,000 going out on childcare before I've even met a single regular non child related expense.

Have you made any steps during the years you've been at home to improve your , " low earning capability" though? Have you advertised to clean, iron etc to make your own living? Why have you not looked at childminding?

Also, the jobs I've applied for that I could fit around the children, I was not successful.

People who have walked in my/similar shoes do not judge so quickly.

When people say "i can't afford not to work" that is the statement who obviously earns a lot of money. It's a ridiculous thing to say to somebody who is only capable of earning minimum wage.

Band withering, what do you think the rest of us do.? My husband is rarely home from work before seven and I do everything in the home, school runs, as well as holding down a job, and we have no family support at all. All my pay this summer is going on paying two sets of childcare but I know it is only six weeks so just have to accept it, better than having no money for rest of the year. I just get on with it.

Also, if you have low earning potential, do something about it!!! Go and get qualifications. If you need help with literacy or numeracy go and get it, there's plenty available for free. You just have to take one step at a time like the rest of us had to do.

Bandwithering, you wouldnt be paying out a £1000 in childcare though as tax credits would pay the bulk of it so the childcare cost is just a "get out" clause. Childcare also operates in holidays - if it didnt companies would have to close as millions of parents work.

Yes it may mean the state pay out a little more in the first few years but it means both the parent and the childcarer are paying tax and hopefully one/both will go on to not need state assistance after a couple of years.

Given you seem to think people shouldnt work for min wage do you really believe after spending years on benefits with no work experience you are going to walk into a highly paid job? Why shouldnt people work for min wage anyway - far better that they start at some point than sit back and let others pay for them and their children. Looking down on min wage jobs when you are on benefits is plain ridiculous.

And also, people on low incomes get lots of help with child care costs. Have you ever asked the benefits office what help is available? And also, it is nonsense to say that by saying "I can't afford not to work" you must earn loads. I take home 1000 a month, hardly a huge amount, and pay out half of it in childcare, but that 500 allows us to eat.

Just like to point out that the benefit system can make it impossible to do casual work like taking in ironing. To become eligable for working tax credits you need to have at least 16 hours work , when it drops below this you have to reapply to IS which can take 6 weeks to come through. Unless you can get guaranteed regular customers you are screwed financially if you constantly need your benefits reassesed. And you cerrtainly could't live off cleaning or ironing alone. All low paid employees with kids need housing benefits and tax credits to survive.

The problem is low wages, high housing costs, zero hour temporary contracts. It's ridiculous to blame the people trapped in the system who have the least power to change it. These working class issues just don't get addressed and it is down to prejudice IMO.

There's little incentive, that's the bottom line, for low skilled single mothers to try and get work when the state is such a good provider.