Parents organising students lives

linni

Hi Surfsister, I mean't things were much simpler than they are today. There is so much more to think about now. If I wanted a job back then, I just went out and got one, if I didn't like it, I left. Now you have to prove yourself, fill in forms for this, that and the other and it is much more complicated. I would want to help my children as much as possible to take some of the stress away from them.

Lokolo

linni wrote: »

Hi Surfsister, I mean't things were much simpler than they are today. There is so much more to think about now. If I wanted a job back then, I just went out and got one, if I didn't like it, I left. Now you have to prove yourself, fill in forms for this, that and the other and it is much more complicated. I would want to help my children as much as possible to take some of the stress away from them.

And do you know why? WOMEN. They get more and more powerful on this world and look what happens!

(if anyone can't tell, I'm taking the ****)

Oldernotwiser

Lokolo wrote: »

And do you know why? WOMEN. They get more and more powerful on this world and look what happens!

(if anyone can't tell, I'm taking the ****)

You better be, kid; you better be....

noelphobic

andrina_nightshade wrote: »

I'm in two minds about this. My parents can't afford to support me (even more so now that my Dad has been made redundant and ended up working in a minimum wage job), but they refuse to let me take out a student loan. Apparently the facts that a) I don't repay it til I'm earning over a certain threshold; b) it gets skimmed off my wages along with tax etc, so I don't actually have to physically part with the money and c) the interest rates are tiered to inflation, all missed my parents when they spoke about student loans to "hundreds of other parents".

I find this a bit confusing - how could they stop you applying for a student loan?

I encouraged my son to apply for the maximum loan available, as I knew he would not be able to borrow money elsewhere at such a low interest rate. He doesn't often go into his overdraft, just occasionally when a grant or loan payment is due. He will be graduating with a big student loan to pay off but at least he won't have to worry about an overdraft as well, which he may well have done had he not taken the maximum funding available.

Oldernotwiser

noelphobic wrote: »

I find this a bit confusing - how could they stop you applying for a student loan?

If parents don't complete the section of the form about their income then the student can only claim the non means tested part of the loan.

andyrules

DCodd wrote: »

To be honest I do not totaly disagree with you. The EMA system is not perfect but I would much rather these kids get EMA and further their education than sit around doing nothing and getting whatever benefits they can. At least we get some level of value for money with EMA.

Some familes truly would not be able to afford the extra cost of 6th form education with out their child receiving the EMA. We struggled to send O/H Daughter on the "necessary" trips and visits which were "essential" and the EMA enabled her to fund herself and did teach financial responsibility.

I agree, they shouldn't be sitting around. If a teen doesn't want to be at college, then they shouldn't go! Let them get a job - they will either settle in and possibly rise within that, or else at some point chuck it in and return to education - then they will be motivated. That would be a good time for financial assistance if needed. You can lead a horse to water and all that.

I wouldn't mind if it was paid to the low income parent, but in almost all cases I know it is spent on nights out and makeup. If it is to assist with books/necessary trips - why not just have these free for those students?

I struggled to pay out for mine - so they got jobs. Can't see why all students don't do this. It also benefits them on their CV. Additionally, they have money they have earned to bank and learn about budgeting. As for the bonuses - whoever dreamt up that needs shooting!

andyrules

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

Have you never heard the expression "keeping them off the streets"?

Besides, the discipline of having to get up every day and attend something is good for people's morale and training.

why do people think the choice is - go to college or fester in bed all day? Have you ever heard of work?

This thread is about parents letting go and standing back so their youngster can sort out their own arrangements. Yet whilst we all should (and seem to) agree with that (to varying extents), some people still believe that lazy or reluctant students should be bribed to turn up at college. (I'm referring to those that fit into this model - the ones the gvt is really targeting) If a teen wants to go, they will go - if they want money, they will find work.

Oldernotwiser

andyrules wrote: »

why do people think the choice is - go to college or fester in bed all day? Have you ever heard of work?

.

Do you realise what a small proportion of school leavers go straight into employment? It's fewer than 25% if you include jobs with training and just over 5% for jobs without. There just aren't the jobs there for school leavers and it's not a viable option for most people. All that happens is that people cadge off their parents and turn to crime.

£30 per week is money well spent if it keeps some of them doing something constructive with their time.

The_One_Who

Although this doesn't apply to all school-leavers, it does apply to a lot of those who I know. The only jobs which are available in my area are those which are either manual or tedious. They don't want them. They're 'too good' to be a cleaner or whatever. They'd rather take the money in the form of EMA or JSA. Also, most of these types of jobs don't have a great amount of progression, employment is a lot different to how it used to be. You can no longer climb the ladder in most industries.

Oldernotwiser

The_One_Who wrote: »

Although this doesn't apply to all school-leavers, it does apply to a lot of those who I know. The only jobs which are available in my area are those which are either manual or tedious. They don't want them. They're 'too good' to be a cleaner or whatever. They'd rather take the money in the form of EMA or JSA. Also, most of these types of jobs don't have a great amount of progression, employment is a lot different to how it used to be. You can no longer climb the ladder in most industries.

I do agree that 16 year olds won't take that type of work but the other side of the coin is the fact that very few people would want to employ someone of this age as a cleaner. I know I wouldn't!

Of course in 6 years' time this option won't be available to anybody anyway.