Mega survey of UK parents shows unaffordability of childcare

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

Over the past month or so we've been assailing you all with links to a huge survey of parents in the UK asking about their experiences of using childcare. Now the results are in - 20,000 responses from parents on MN as well as Pregnant then Screwed, Gingerbread, the TUC, the Fawcett Society, the Women's Budget Group, the Fatherhood Institute, Black Mums Upfront, Mother Pukka and a few others - and they show:

96% of British parents say the government isn’t supporting them enough with childcare

97% said that UK childcare is too expensive (83% said that it is ‘much’ too expensive)

One third (33%) of parents using childcare say their childcare payments are bigger than their rent or mortgage

40% (and 53% of parents under 30) say childcare costs mean they don’t spend as much time together as a family as they’d like, because of the need to work longer hours or do shift work

28% (and 40% of single parents) say they’ve had to use credit cards or credit arrangements to pay for essential items, as a direct result of childcare costs, and 12% (34% of those with a household income of less than £20,000) say they’ve had to cut back on essential items, including food and housing

82% of mothers (and 56% of fathers) say ‘I think I would have attained more seniority in my work, or earned more, if I had not had childcare considerations’

16% of mothers, and 42% of fathers, say childcare responsibilities have not affected their seniority at work

Unsurprisingly, parents are willing to consider radical alternatives to the current mess:

94% of all parents believe that subsidised childcare should start from the end of paid maternity leave, and 90% think there should be taxpayer-funded subsidised childcare from when a child is 9 months old

90% of all parents support at least three months of ‘use-it-or-lose-it’ parental leave for fathers, paid at at least minimum wage level

84% support a duty on large employers to provide subsidised childcare

83% support universal free childcare (covering the full working day, for all pre-school children and all children with ongoing Health and Social Care needs), funded by the taxpayer

82% support tax-funded subsidised childcare covering the full working day, for all pre-school children, with subsidy levels dependent on household income

59% support a Universal Basic Income for all UK adults.

You can find out more here and read the Guardian's coverage today here.

Let us know what you think!

Thanks
MNHQ

Exactly. Childcare vouchers (for those eligible) are also deducted from pre-tax income. We have tax free childcare, the 15/30 free hours, paid maternity leave. The problem is the gap between the end of paid maternity leave (9 months) and the start of the free hours (the term after the child turns 3, so nearly 3.5 in some cases). I am in London, and two children in three day per week nursery cost me £2,800 per month (even with the free hours for the older one) which nearly wiped out my take-home pay

The childcare voucher scheme is closed. The tax free childcare goes up to £2000, which is generous but still leaves a major shortfall for those in higher cost areas.
Paid maternity at SMP is laughable for many Vs earnings, there are many women who finish maternity already signficantly in debt.
'Free hours' are hardly an answer either. My 3 year old was born in September and I have not found a nursery that is within reachable distance of work, home and my older childrens' school that offers 30 free hours and will take him until next September, when he's 4. The only places that have even 15 hours are the playgroups doing 3 hours in the morning, term time only, which is very little help to me as a single mother working 4 days a week.
For now I've found a childminder who's happy to do pickups and half days during term and longer term, but because of the way the hours and lunchtimes work, it's not much of a saving.
For older kids, finding holiday clubs that cover working hours is almost impossible, and their favourites don't take the Tax-Free Childcare payments.

It's exhausting, and unsustainable, especially as a single parent.

@forinborin

I'd probably prefer to see more options for mothers / parents to stay at home when their children are small rather than subsidising childcare. And I did pay close to £3K/month at the peak with two at nursery.

One problem with that is that it's very difficult to catch up career-wise after a long term career break. It's effectively giving up any chance of a senior position which contributes to women being stuck in lower paid jobs despite their abilities.

@Ajl46
Yes, this is true. But since I had children (and I am a single parent as are many who commented above, and returned to quite intense well-paid career almost immediately after having children), I think the narrative of "you can have it all" (usually understood as both children and career) is actually quite toxic.

Reproductive choices, risks and consequences have to be openly discussed from an early age, so that an informed decisions can be made by young women.
Yes, having children puts you at a much higher risk of not having a successful career, due to a multitude of reasons. Some "fair", some not.

France recently made school obligatory from age 3 (first couple of years are akin to kindergarten) to combat social inequality, and halved class sizes in deprived areas in key years to 12.

@KeflavikAirport

France recently made school obligatory from age 3 (first couple of years are akin to kindergarten) to combat social inequality, and halved class sizes in deprived areas in key years to 12.

That's excellent- wonder how they are funding it. I'm guessing wrap around childcare will still be required for children of working parents (ie before / after school to cover the working day).

I never had a "career", just jobs to pay the bills, never paid much, long hours shit pay etc. Dh switched careers and we went from a £40k household to a lot more. Had we stayed on the old household income, we wouldn't have been able to afford children in the area we lived in, and would have either moved somewhere cheaper to be able.to afford one child, or stayed where we were and remained childless.

If you ask anyone do you want something for free and someone else pay for it I dont think many would say no. As for getting into debt for childcare costs same can be said for vet fees & bills whether you have kids or not. Nothing is free its just who you want to pay for it and how. If the high cost of living can be reduced job done, ie HOUSING

It would be cheaper for sure, but in reality their are way to many humans on the planet as it is, imagine the chaos if everyone had kids and had a few the country would go broke.

But surely in more expensive areas many earn way more, if you earnt less surely it would be better to move somewhere cheaper as many of us do rather than expect someone else to subsidise where youd like to live

@forinborin

The alternative to funding care is having a load of children show up at school at 5, not able to do basic self care, or having ever read a book, or with zero English, little socialisation, or with problems that will be much more severe than if they'd shown up for 15 hours at 3. This is such a patronising attitude. I am from a country where it is quite rare for the mother to return to work when the children are young, and definitely not before they are 3 - there's no organised childcare for children that age at all. So unless there are grandparents nearby willing to provide a full time reliable cover, the mother usually stays at home for years and years. And all children, SEN aside, start school able to read and write - it is actually an official requirement.

It's not patronising or an attitude, it's data from a large body of research - here's just one study, via the University of Oxford. assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/738725/SEED_Impact_Age_4_Report_September_2018.pdf

Under 2, results are more mixed, especially with high hours, but especially from 3 onwards there is a lot of evidence to support some level of early years group care. Of course many families are able to meet their child's needs at home - but many aren't, for a large variety of reasons, and those children will be hugely helped by having at least a few hours a week of structured early years provision between 3-5.

I'd love to hear of which country has it as a legal requirement that children can read and write before starting school, yet relies on parents to do this .

so what you are saying you want someone else to pick up the bill, having kids is nice but its a choice and quite why folks assume others without kids or one kid want to pay for a strangers

For the record I have no kids, yes I like them to put that straight but I dont want to pay more tax for others to have loads of kids while I struggle to pay my bills as it is, no one pays for my doggy day care

@stuarttipo

It would be cheaper for sure, but in reality their are way to many humans on the planet as it is, imagine the chaos if everyone had kids and had a few the country would go broke.

Subsidised childcare pays back in a relatively short time, because of the impact in getting women into work and keeping families out of poverty. A woman (or man) who is out of the workforce for 5-6 years while having 2 kids and waiting for the youngest to turn 3, for example, will be hugely more limited when returning, both from having a CV gap, and often because the expectation in the family is then that she will continue to do school runs etc. If there is domestic abuse she is less able to escape. If the family was already low income, they are then hand to mouth - but not able to get jobs to get their children out of poverty.

It's not just about the people with kids - the parent's tax will pay for roads in the next decade, those kids will be paying for your social care in old age. Would you prefer them to be higher earning?

Thats the problem with short sited dinosors, in my next business to do with dogs & holidays im more than happy with flexi time, as id imagine the co workers would work far better than working 5 or morein those three days, itll be open to anyone though kids or no kids

and even worse for low paid single people with no kids

depends on the company, in my next business ill be more than happy to employ returning mothers, then again its going to be an equal pay company so everyone earns the same, only difference is a bonus the longer you have worked with us

no disrespect 40K is a good figure dont you think

@nomoneytreehere

Childcare should be fully tax deductible without an income ceiling. To exclude women that can earn high salaries is contributing to the brain drain and frankly keeping us all in our place. Many high salaries jobs require excessive and often unpredictable hours. It's easier to leave altogether or take a lower status job than end up doing everything badly. A nanny can cost nearly £3k a month.

all very well but who do you want to pay for all this free childcare, I dont want to pay more tax so thers can have free childcare no one pays my doggy day care

@stuarttipo

For the record I have no kids, yes I like them to put that straight but I dont want to pay more tax for others to have loads of kids while I struggle to pay my bills as it is, no one pays for my doggy day care

Helping people to become better educated and able to go back to work quicker, the less kids that they will have, so it's actually in the world's favour to heavily subsidise childcare as much as possible so that women can work.

Wraparound care in France is again on a sliding scale based on parental income. We paid about 15 euros a day in the top band for lunch and after school care.

“ I've never really understood why you get 15 hours free childcare from 2 if neither parent is working.”

You don’t.
It’s 15 hours nursery education for vulnerable 2 year olds. Do you really begrudge this?

We use a childminder which although is considerably cheaper than nurseries is still quite expensive
I pay £35 all day for my toddler and £15 a day wraparound from 7:30 until 5:30

I work 8-4pm 4 days a week
Partner works compressed hours over 4 days so we pay this 3 days a week so £150 per week

It's a huge amount and in the holidays it's even more so we tend to only have a couple of weeks a year off together to cover the childcare

So many people complaining about the cost of their childcare bill on this thread and wanting others to subsidise it but yet they have multiple children. If you can't afford the childcare then stop having 3 or 4 children.
I would dearly love to have more children than I already have however I can't afford it so why should I then have to contribute towards others childcare bills?

@metellaestinatrio the problem with the NI increase is that it disproportionately affects lower earners on PAYE and employers. (New graduates who hit the threshold to pay back their student loan have a 50% tax rate. )

An income tax raise would affect everyone in proportion to their earnings regardless of how they earned their income. It would also not affect businesses particularly ones who had to close during lockdown.

In my case I would be worse off but having worked in higher tax countries I've felt less bitter being clearly taxed on my income then having random taxes applied.