Looking after our own children

[Rachelmusgrove]

Well done to the woman to stood up to Nick Clegg today and set the government straight on the tax situation for families where one parent is at home looking after the children. One minute we are told there isn't enough care in the community, that elderly neighbours are neglected, that nobody volunteers to make society a better place, the next we are penalised for choosing a lifestyle that makes communities truly work. I have been at home with my children for 15 years. I volunteer to help out at the local school with a school choir, I am always busy, look after my disabled parent, shop locally, keep and eye out for my neighbours. As an arts graduate it probably would never have been financially beneficial for me to carry on working once I had children. My husband shoulders the burden of responsibility financially for our family and I am eternally grateful to him. But losing family allowance is a really big deal for us. Fed up with not having my voice heard

That's really well put. I'm in a similar position, working from home much of the time. You paint a picture of Big Society in action: exactly what Cameron's been harping on about and seems to have conveniently forgotten. Just goes to show how clueless he is.

It's because the Big Society is not really a priority for them - just a nice slogan. He honestly doesn't care about that. Getting people into paid work is their real priority. I have a lot of sympathy for your pov but I do know why they are doing it.

Btw odd to be eternally grateful to your DH for earning while you do all the caring unpaid work. Presumably you are eternally grateful to each other!

I'm guessing OP means child benefit???

Those things aren't just the preserve of SAHMs though are they? I work 4 days a week and I'm a school governor (not my children's school), I shop locally and used to help out with reading at a school in a deprived area. My neighbour works full time, looks out for our elderly neighbours, organised last year's street party and has just taken on neighbourhood watch. My friend who works 4 days a week and is doing a PHD is also an active member of the PTA. As a SAHM with school age children yes, you have more time to do those sorts of things. But that doesn't mean WOHMs aren't doing them too and helping to make communities truly work.

What is it that you are losing? Sorry I don't know what family allowance is.

I have to disagree I am afraid and I am a single parent to an 8 year old who has never had a penny from my ex. I don't need the `benefit' and I don't think I should have the money. I think it should go to people who need it especially when there is little money to go round. (I know that that may not necessarily be the case as in other people who don't need/deserve it may still not get it).

Whatever your personal circumstances and family unit type I think all `benefits' which is state assistance, should only be given to those who need it. The system of working out who needs it is wrong by a long shot, esp in relation to lone parents which may also reflect the feelings of some SAHM or D's but I don't think that everyone should just get it.

You don't think there should be an obligation for parents to provide for their children? Unusual.

This is not about universal benefits. It is about tax relief for families who have given up on a second income in order to look after their children or members of the community. This is the government telling those who make the backbone of the big society to get smart and "get a proper job" .The government has decided that a family on a single income of 60 k can no longer have the( small) tax relief on childcare they had until now, because it will now go to a couple on 300 000. Well done, definitely efficient capital allocation. Worthy of a top economist.

well that's kind of what they have been saying to single parents all along (I am one) so I can only partly sympathise.

I do get where you are coming from but speaking as a single parent with a single income who has no choice but to pay for all childcare out of one salary and who gets absolutely no assistance of any description for any of it (wasn't even entitled to childcare vouchers as am self-employed) I think there are many rough edges to the policies, however you cut them and it's a shame to make a sahm/wohm face-off.

I do not see where the face off between mothers of any kind comes in.

The question is why a family on two salaries needs more help than a family on one salary.

The non salaried parent might :

1. have been made redundant and be seeking employment ( a full time job in itself that cannot be seriously done without some childcare), 2)re training in order to get a job
2. volunteering her time by working for a charity.

All of these cases require childcare.

It is deliberately simplistic on the government's part to assume that every unemployed parent is unemployed out of choice and does not need childcare.

This new policy is actually going to make it more difficult for parents out of work and wish to go back, to actually do so.

The government would say that in cases 1, 2 and 3, if the person working is earning enough that the family receives no or minimal welfare payments, then it is no skin off their noses if the person can't do as much jobseeking, retraining or volunteering as they would like.

They are only interested in getting people back to work where they are claiming benefits, and they are only interested in providing subsidised childcare prior to the 15 hours pw after 3, for people who are going out to work.

I am not sure why this is surprising.