SAHM numbers lowest for 15 years - we need your views for Sky interview tomorrow am

[carriemumsnet]

The headlines for the report say:

• Number of stay at home parents in the UK drops 21% from 2.8 million in 1993 to 2.2 million today

• Parents say their household would need an average income of £31,731 for one parent to stay at home, yet the average annual income for a male is £28,464 (10% less) and a female is £18,047 (43% less)

• Over a third (36%) of families with children under 2 have both parents at work, and 1 in 3 (38%) working parents spend less than 4 waking hours a day with their children

• If money was no object, 7 out of 10 (71%) working parents would have stayed at home to raise their children[9]

I guess the first question they'll ask is does this reflect Mumsnetters' experienec? Are Mumsnetters feeling the pinch financially and is this making folks who might have considered staying at home - go back to work?

What would be your ideal?
The Gov giving you money to either :
Pay for childcare
Pay grandparents/extended family

Or do you think it should be left as is - personal choice but dependent on financial circumstance?

Any other pithy thoughts and insights gratefully accepted. Will only have about 3 or 4 mins so won't be able to completely set the world to rights, but be good to know what you think.

Thanks in advance

Only read Op but actually I think one half of a couple should be encouraged to be SAHP's until the child is five by perhaps allowing the partner the SAHP's tax allowance.
I am a SAHM and we can only manage this because DH is in the forces and so our rent is not at a commercial market rate.
I resent the expectation that I should be returning to work. Particularly when it comes from the gvt sending me fliers about tax credits and childcare credits with my child benefit statement.
I also feel I contribute to my community by not working as it means I have the time to be treasurer and help run the local toddler group and be a trustee on the Nursery committee (run by volunteers to fill the places promised by this gvt , volunteer at the school and help out at the Nursery.
It makes me sad when I think that if things continue like this my children will not have a choice. They will have to return to work and it will probably be me as a grandparent who will be covering the childcare. It is not right.

I've been a SAHM since 2002 .. previously I was the higher earner of the two of us.

We are incredibly fortunate that we are able to afford this lifestyle with strong budgeting (no holidays for 5 years, careful shopping etc) and that we built up savings when we were both working that we can go into on a necessity basis .. which unfortunately has been more frequently than desired

I think one thing the govt. could do quite easily is allow us to give our tax allowance to our partners / husbands so that there is a tax benefit in being a full-time carer

I find the focus on childcare, wraparound childcare scary and un-family focused

I live in a 1950's enclave in London it seems, I have met a few full-time parents who were previously professionals, the educated, intelligent, succesful type ... I think we're lucky and I'm grateful that we're lucky

Oh, I think I would like to read Steve Biddolph.....

I feel the same re wraparound childcare.

twiglett - what a good idea about the tax allowance!! I'll second that idea.

I second (third?) the opinion that the focus on wraparound care is really quite negative and scary .

I have been a SAHM since having my dd 9 yrs ago. DH has had a number of different jobs and 3 redundancies in this period so our income has varied.

ds has severe ASD and there is NO child care provision available for him so both of us working is just not an option. I am doing casual work right now as dh can do the school run.

The changes in tax credit are now not taken by phone so it could take months to get our new claim sorted. Our monthly tax credits went down April because last year dh income had increased. Fingers crossed dh will find work - its not from lack of trying, until he does it is very difficult for us financially.

It is not just parents of pre schoolers that need incentives to stay at home. My boys are 13 and 11 and so need me now, sometimes I think they need me more than when they were pre-schoolers. Like Vanilla my DH is in the forces and this makes it easier to stay at home, but it should not be about choice it should be your right to bring up your children rather than a childminder/nursery.
The whole taxation system needs reworking- for a government who claim to be so family orientated they don't seem to be doing much for most of us.

Do you not think that it is just the effect of the government childcare subsidy schemes having an impact (pre school funded sessions and childcare vouchers)

i.e. it is now possible to work and not be financially worse off for more families than before these subsidies were introduced.

It's still not the case for everyone but it must have pushed some families over the line where working pays more so its worthwhile to go back if you enjoy your job and want to return.

I don't agree that the government aren't doing much, they are but it is biased towards getting parents out of the home and into the workplace.

Perhaps we should look at making personal allowances transferable for married/ civil partnership couples. I fear this would be very expensive though and benefit the middle classes/high earners disproportionately.

I am a SAHM for 2 reasons
a) we can afford it, just about
b)my employers were very uncooperative regarding flex working

ideally we wanted flex work for both, which dh could actually get, for the first few years.
maybe compromise and do 1/2 days at childminders/ nursery

it was not to be, I like what I do but it took time to get used to it and I worry about skills on going back to work.
and besides going to work is good only we both agreed we did not want dd with paid care in her early years - personal choice but obviously only available if financially viable

I don't want to pay for childcare, I want to bring up my children myself. Why not have a SAHP allowance?

Tax incentives/make it compulsory for employers to have x% of their jobs available to people who want to work from home. Cuts pollution and traffic jams at the same time.

I'm a SAHM, things are tough but we didnt have children to pay somebody else to look after them. I would however like to work pt and with the holidays when my youngest dd starts school, but suspect the chance of finding a job that suits virtually impossible. However, I do strongly believe that my dh should be able to use my tax allowance while I am a SAHM.

DH has just come home and pointed out (as others have) that if I worked we would get childcare vouchers. But the government put no value on me staying at home to look after DD. Why is it considered better (or at least weighted towards) children being raised by strangers?

I'm a SAHM and we're just about managing, but it's not easy. We've been lucky to have help from both sets of parents during drastic situations (unexpected bills etc), but we live in a rental property with no hope of getting on the housing ladder for the forseeable future. We also haven't been on holiday since DS was born. I feel very fortunate to be able to stay at home, because I wanted to, but feel the pressure on DP to provide is horrendous, which in turn makes me feel guilty. I agree that the minimum should be transferrable tax allowance from SAHP to the working partner.

riven, a mate of mine is a qualified Nanny and works part-time.

She finds it absurd that soon she could be in the postion of having to pay a CM to look after her dc while she looks after someone elses!

That's the stupid thing isn't it? We're given incentives to pay a stranger to look after a child, but not the child's own mother/father.

Yes. It is madness!

I'm a SAHM to my dd who is 4 and in reception. I want to be at home for her, I don't want someone else doing the school run etc. Often in the car is when we have the conversations about her worries, school friends etc etc.

I am very unusual in my circles and am always being asked what I'm goign to do now. Well until I can find a job which allows me to be there for my dd whenever she needs me, and that includes helping in her classroom, going on school trips and the like, then I will remain a SAHM.

Some kind of financial incentive would be great - my dh does not earn a great wage and we bought a small house which needs a lot of work, which we can't afford to do.

I am a SAHM, we are worse off financially, we cut our cloth accordingly, it would change things dramatically if we were offered something like prescription charges, dental care,
in fact changing the child benefit as was mentioned a little while ago would make a HUGE difference to us.

Lots of people can't afford to walk away from their jobs to stay at home.

I am a SAHM and I would rather my DH gets my tax allowance, to give us a bit of breathing space in our budget. It would be lovely if I could have the option of having the money in my pocket which is normally used to give a free nursery place for my child, if I decide I don't want her to use all 5 sessions a week.

I never expected to SAH but after work turned into a nightmare once I got pregnant and my plans of returning to a part time flexi role were squashed, we had to rethink.

We moved cross country to a cheaper house closer to family and live simply. I am happy to be a SAHM and this has allowed us to plan a second child. If I had stayed at work there is no way we could have afforded two sets of childcare fees plus the wrap around care which would be needed for me to stay in my career job.

I think it should be left as it is - it's generally a person's choice to have children. I don't expect any help from anyone - I've decided how to live my life so it's down to me to fund it. That's my view anyway.

babiesEverywhere, I like that idea of DH being able to use my tax allowance.