Child Care is costing us the equivelent of a mortgage!

skintchick

onlyroz wrote: »

This is only true if you make it so.

Unfortunately it seem like a lot (if not most) women believe that all they can aspire to is to play a supporting role in the family rather than be at the head of it, or be on an equal footing with their husband.

Not at all. I had much more earning potential than my husband, but my decision was about what was best for our child, not what was best for me personally or for us financially, because I think there are more important things than money and myself.

I am the one who gives birth, and who breastfeeds, my husband cannot do those things, so while men can and do bring up children, it makes more sense for mothers to be with them, and to be flexible about working patterns, than it does for men.

THat's a biological fact. The real issue is that society does not value parenting, and it is arranged entirely around the needs of money-making rather than the best interests of society as a whole. If women were able to work AND parent at the same time, as we did in hunter-gatherer times, there would be no need for any of this discussion, about work, about equality or even about finances.

I fail to see why someone bringing up the children is playng a supporting role to someone who works. In my mind, my husband works in order to support ME and our child. It's him who has no choice, not me.

seven-day-weekend

skintchick wrote: »

Not at all. I had much more earning potential than my husband, but my decision was about what was best for our child, not what was best for me personally or for us financially, because I think there are more important things than money and myself.

I am the one who gives birth, and who breastfeeds, my husband cannot do those things, so while men can and do bring up children, it makes more sense for mothers to be with them, and to be flexible about working patterns, than it does for men.

THat's a biological fact. The real issue is that society does not value parenting, and it is arranged entirely around the needs of money-making rather than the best interests of society as a whole. If women were able to work AND parent at the same time, as we did in hunter-gatherer times, there would be no need for any of this discussion, about work, about equality or even about finances.

I fail to see why someone bringing up the children is playng a supporting role to someone who works. In my mind, my husband works in order to support ME and our child. It's him who has no choice, not me.

Absolutely brilliant post that I totally agree with.

Blobby8_2

^^^^^^^^^^^^
What he/she said.

lendorav

I believe tax credits threshold changed in April that any joint income over 40k means there is no help with tax credits in any shape of form. And yes it is difficult, we have the same problem having to pay out our usual expenses and soon childcare means i will have to work 2,5 days a week instead of full time like before (and my salary is less than 17k) to be able to pay the nursery and some of the bills and even so we will be about 300 per month short so will look at additional work as all extra expenses that are not necessary have already been cut from our budget. I agree that people that want to work should be able to get help to do so rather than have to choose work or children. If I had a child so I could stay at home and not work because I dont want to that would be a different story altoghether. And that is not the case I would love to be able to go back to work pay reasonable amount for nursery and pay our bills, we dont do flash holidays or spend every night out anyway...

Littlemiss-lotsofdebt

I can fully sympathise with the OP, our mortgage is £600 a month, our childcare is between £600-740 per month depending on whether it is a 4 or 5 week month. In a way, I don't begrudge the cost because LO is very settled and happy at nursery. In another way, I do feel that OH and I are penalised because we worked hard to get into the jobs we are in. Yes, we earn a reasonable income between us but we have the same outgoings, if not more with childcare as parents who sit on their @rses all day.

skintchick

Littlemiss-lotsofdebt wrote: »

I can fully sympathise with the OP, our mortgage is £600 a month, our childcare is between £600-740 per month depending on whether it is a 4 or 5 week month. In a way, I don't begrudge the cost because LO is very settled and happy at nursery. In another way, I do feel that OH and I are penalised because we worked hard to get into the jobs we are in. Yes, we earn a reasonable income between us but we have the same outgoings, if not more with childcare as parents who sit on their @rses all day.

What is it with this assumption that parents who don't work (and yes I do know you mean people on benefits and not people like me) sit on the sofa all day? Do you not think they might be, er, PARENTING?

Even if people have chosen to be on benefits, which is not something I personally agree with, I am sure the benefits do not come with a live-in nanny, or some drug to give to your children so they never demand your attention or care.

I would imagine those people are, just like the rest of us, cooking, cleaning, washing clothes, wiping noses and bottoms, playing games and going to the park, none of which counts as 'sitting on their !!!!!! all day'.

Can we please stop with all the insulting comments? What about people who want to work but can't get a job in the current climate? Or people with disabilities?

It is not actually necessary to be in paid employment to be a valuable contributing member of society.

andrealm

Littlemiss-lotsofdebt wrote: »

I can fully sympathise with the OP, our mortgage is £600 a month, our childcare is between £600-740 per month depending on whether it is a 4 or 5 week month. In a way, I don't begrudge the cost because LO is very settled and happy at nursery. In another way, I do feel that OH and I are penalised because we worked hard to get into the jobs we are in. Yes, we earn a reasonable income between us but we have the same outgoings, if not more with childcare as parents who sit on their @rses all day.

Do the staff at your LO's nursery sit on their !!!!!! all day then? I don't think any parents of young children get the chance to, unless they are seriously neglecting their kids.

onlyroz

skintchick wrote: »

I am the one who gives birth, and who breastfeeds, my husband cannot do those things, so while men can and do bring up children, it makes more sense for mothers to be with them, and to be flexible about working patterns, than it does for men.

This is perfectly true ... for the first six-months to a year of your child's life. Then why can't the dad reduce his hours, if you want one parent to "be there" for the children?

andrealm

onlyroz wrote: »

This is perfectly true ... for the first six-months to a year of your child's life. Then why can't the dad reduce his hours, if you want one parent to "be there" for the children?

There is no reason why the dad can't be the one to stay at home, or go part time if he wants to and it's financially viable. But if one parent earns more than the other, it's likely to be the lower earner that has the choice to work or not, as the family needs the higher earner's salary to pay the bills.

CH27

andrealm wrote: »

There is no reason why the dad can't be the one to stay at home, or go part time if he wants to and it's financially viable. But if one parent earns more than the other, it's likely to be the lower earner that has the choice to work or not, as the family needs the higher earner's salary to pay the bills.

Also some jobs are not doable part time.