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.

I sincerely wish you would stop trying to make this thread about single mum discrimination though. It's not.

gilly- I work because I have too. That is just a fact of life. Why is it ok for some people not too just because they think its ok to have tax payers support them? yes, they may get help with child care costs but at least they are doing something productive with their day, contributing to the economy, sending the message to their children that working is a positive thing and not taking the piss out of the rest of us working mothers!

So basically you are saying the only thing that matters is the financial contribution to your family?
That the emotional contribution, nuture and care of a young child is less important? Especially in a single parent family where the dc have probably been through significant turmoil and need stability and consistancy of care?

christine: 'better jobs', im not on minimum wage but no better off than if i was so thats a pointless argument, whatever i earn over a certain point just means i pay more of my own rent and nursery fees which i would need to be a HRT payer to afford without help( extortion) this is why i am doing a degree with OU so i can earn more money 1 day and not claim anything. so a degree a job and raising a toddler alone, i dont buy into sob stories about it being to stressful or too much hard work to get a job. surely being out of the job market for 5 or more years is making it harder to ever be self sufficient?

All children need nurturing and caring for not just those of single parents. Unfortunatley they also need feeding, clothing and a roof over their heads and all of these cost money. I dont see what's wrong with parents providing the latter things as well as the former.

Not even remotely saying that. Stop putting words in my mouth. I never said it was the only thing that mattered, just that it does matter. It should not be seen as a choice between the two. The children of working parents are just as nurtured and loved as the children of SAHPs. Significant turmoil can happen in any family. And stability and consistency of care is not dependant on having a SAHP.

Seriously - would any of you bother working if it wasn't worth it? There are thousands of threads on here with SAHMs saying that they want to work but that it isn't financially viable. Can some of you give those lazy cows a hard time too because I really don't understand the different. The benefits are what make the difference to them too.

This is basically saying that it's okay to be a poor single parent and be having an utterly miserable time but not okay if you're a poor single parent and having a slightly less miserable time because you're not working.

Er, this thread is about single parent discrimination - read the title!

MollieO - income support is the same rate as your contribution based job seekers IE £65/wk.

No, it really isn't. The title refers to whether SAHPs feel stigmatised, that doesn't equal actual discrimination. Perhaps you may like to have a read of the rest of the thread as well. It's possible that some MNers would like this to become about discrimination, but it's really not.

gilly- children from single parents have been shown time and time again to do less well at school and have a much higher rate of youth offending. Lets not pretend that all the single mothers out there are spending their days working on their children's development. Obviously this doesn't apply to all single mothers, but that argument just doesn't hold up. It also is an insult to those of us who also want the best for our children and have to work.

I would've done much better as a child if I had been raised by a single parent, rather than in the sometimes unbearable situation I was in. You will never in a million years catch me knocking single parents for being single parents.

This simple rule of parents on benefits are bad parents simply because they are on benefits is simply wrong. I'm sure that some parents on benefits maywell be poor at providing the support and guidance that a child requires to make them a good and productive member of society.

But to apply this as a factual rule is just as stupid as saying that parents who choose to have a carrier and leave a large proportion of their child's care to a nursery or nanny, is teaching their children that your work and carriers are more important that forming a relationship with your children.

There both bloody stupid arguments that simply don't hold water.

christine- i do, im not better off financially for going to work than i would be sitting at home but because i want to work, for my self esteem , to teach my ds work ethic and to keep me sane, i go out 5 days a week and work.

I have read the thread thanks

Okay, that's cool. Just seemed like you hadn't, that's all. :)

jbabyj - I think that's slightly unhinged but if it makes you happy :o

I don't think I could be a SAHM long term, it drives me bonkers but I know not everyone feels that way and I don't resent them for staying home for the few years that children are small.

Good luck with your degree :)

Which bit did I miss?

The OP that was posted on the lone parent board asking other lps' if they feel stigmatised for SAH?

Or the subsequent pile in from non-LPs moaning about the benefit system allowing LPs to SAH?

I think you just misinterpreted the general feeling on the thread, there's no need to be defensive.

MrsPles then I'm impressed at anyone who thinks that £65 is enough to live on and raise a family! Wasn't for me, nowhere near. How do people pay for housing, electricity, gas, council tax, water rates, food, clothing etc on £65 per week?

I object to supporting those who can't be bothered to work or think that they have a right not to work. I'd much rather give support to those who do work but on low incomes than people who think because they have children they are automatically excused from seeking employment.

There is a stigma about being a single mother and I can understand why if there are mothers who think they have right not to bother working.

Christine, would make me happier if it did pay me , i understand thats the benefit systems fault, there should be more incentive. thanks

MollieO, housing and council tax is paid for. £65 is the adult allowance. The amounts goes up depending on the amount of children in the household. A certain amount of earnings are allowed, not to mention cash in hand earnings, and if maintenance is paid it now goes to the parent with care (I think) rather than the government.

So when it all adds up it's a reasonable living income.

My housing and council tax wasn't paid for. I wasn't told I could earn any money whilst I was on JSA and certainly wasn't told I could work for cash in hand (surely that's illegal?). I've only got one child so I get child benefit but nothing else.

I'm not being defensive - whilst I am a lp I'm not a SAHM so this doesn't apply to me iyswim?

It just seems that it's a number of the same posters (and I'm not meaning you) who pop up on these type of threads to lambast LPs. And all this despite the fact that they are not LPs and have no apparent experience of the benefits system despite being so vehemently opposed to it.

It's one thing to keep reading this crap in AIBU, but another to purposefully come over to the LP board to preach it IMHO.

I think it's been in active conversations, I had commented a couple of times before I even realised what board it was on, as it happens.

But yes, I get what you mean. I don't think that's what's happened here though, I think some people have seen a discrimination issue because it is a thread that is centred around single parents and benefits. For the most part, I see nothing even resembling discrimination on here, but it certainly is interesting to see that the link is made so easily, when the concepts do not and should not link automatically.

Cash in hand is illegal, a couple of friends of mine did some cleaning whilst being SAH single mums, it's not unheard of to make a bit of extra money. You can earn a small amount before it affects IS.

If you were renting and without a partner living with you then you should have claimed housing benefit whilst being unemployed. If you have a mortgage then your stuffed. Margaret Thatcher didn't sell off the council houses out of the goodness of her heart. It was to take people out of the benefit system by threatening them with homelessness if the event they lost their jobs. You should have got council tax paid.