Child Care is costing us the equivelent of a mortgage!

melb

yes many are - and they are usually the ones who work opposite shifts, move closer to family etc to make sure they share the childcare between them because it is so prohibitively expensive. Nurseries are for those on higher salaries who don't want to give up their career which is entirely their choice. However to think that putting a child of a few months old into a nursery for maybe 8 to 10 hours a day for 5 days a week is setting a good example is laughable. Instead the government should be encouraging mums or dads to stay at home and look after their children by helping with tax breaks etc.

Pinky15

melb wrote: »

why would it set a bad example if one of the parents doesn't work? I think it sets an example that the child's welfare is paramount and that no nursery can ever do as good a job of bringing up your child and also tells the child that you enjoy spending time with them and that is why you had a child. Also to the original poster i assume that if people are receiving housing benefit it is because they are on low wages.

Totally agree with the above - if you are not happy with the prices quoted look after your child yourself. So many people on here are going on about maintaining careers - there is plenty of time to do this when your little one is at school. We made the decision for me to remain at home as we felt it was best for our children. Yes we are really skint at time but it is worth it!
Also my DH sets a fantastic work ethic for our children and I study on an evening so see my children being at no disadvantage.
I understand some people are happy to work etc and good for them but I am sick of posters on here suggesting SAHM's have low self esteem, are in jeopardy of losing there careers and are setting a bad example for their children - grrrrrr!
Right am off for a cuppa and cool down

osian

Dynamax wrote: »

"
And to your point about setting a bad example if one of the parents don't work. I don't believe it sets a bad example, I believe those times are over, we are in the 21st century and middle class familys cannot afford for both parents not to have a monthly income.

Surely it just depends on how much the working parent earns, how much their monthly bills are, how much savings they have, how much they planned financially before having the child?...etc. Not all families who have a stay at home parent are on benefits.

Lirin

With us, we have no option but to continue working. We're lucky enough in that MIL has stepped in and said she and FIL will look after Hitchhiker during the day- there is no way we'd be able to afford childcare. The prices here are that high, I wouldn't have a chance of keeping up with them.
I'd love to stay at home, but we've looked at the finances, and that isn't an option either.....

onlyroz

Pinky15 wrote: »

I am sick of posters on here suggesting SAHM's have low self esteem, are in jeopardy of losing there careers and are setting a bad example for their children - grrrrrr!

I am sick of people on here vilifying those mums who choose to stay at work when their children are young. I don't see how you can be setting your daughters a bad example by maintaining a rewarding career.

Wouldn't it be marvellous if we could get a degree, find a good job, take a 5-year career break and walk straight back into that very same job with no penalty?

j.e.j.

OP, yes I believe you. A colleague of mine who'd had children said she was working 'just to keep her job'. After childcare expenses were paid there was pretty much nothing left!

Calling people 'spongers' isn't going to help. You are not superior to others just because you have both chosen your careers over and above something as 'lowly' as child-rearing.

Unfortunately it seems in the UK we aren't prepared to pay higher taxes in order for the state to provide child care (as I believe is the case in some Scandinavian countries, for example) and hence unless both parents are high earners it is often the case that it makes more sense for one parent to stay home while the other goes out to work.

Dynamax

melb wrote: »

yes many are - and they are usually the ones who work opposite shifts, move closer to family etc to make sure they share the childcare between them because it is so prohibitively expensive. Nurseries are for those on higher salaries who don't want to give up their career which is entirely their choice. However to think that putting a child of a few months old into a nursery for maybe 8 to 10 hours a day for 5 days a week is setting a good example is laughable. Instead the government should be encouraging mums or dads to stay at home and look after their children by helping with tax breaks etc.

Nurseries are certainly not for the 'higher salaries', lower salaries are supported and its made affordable to those on low incomes.





I personally believe that a childs development is improved greatly by attending nursery. All the social and development skills that they pick up from one another and all the activities contribute towards their future ability.





Obviously in no way does this take away from the parenting responsibleities of the 21st century Mum and Dad. Time is precious, Mornings, evening and weekends & Holidays.



And as for the comment about the government encouraging parents to stay at home....they do.....they fund all the dolites, scroungers, no-income families, by giving them childcare, giving them homes and subsidising their transport.

Pinky15

onlyroz wrote: »

I am sick of people on here vilifying those mums who choose to stay at work when their children are young. I don't see how you can be setting your daughters a bad example by maintaining a rewarding career.

Wouldn't it be marvellous if we could get a degree, find a good job, take a 5-year career break and walk straight back into that very same job with no penalty?

No where on here did I villify anyone choosing to work! - I said everyone makes there own choices and that is fine. In the past I have worked!
But what I don't appreciate is people saying I don't set a good example to my children by staying at home re- work ethic.

charlieismydarling

Child care costs ease once a child goes to school. It is a matter of gritting your teeth those first few years.

Name calling and pettiness towards the less fortunate is hardly going to help your cause. How much financial assistance would you expect is reasonable, given that your joint income is 44k?

Those living on benefits would not be paying a mortgage of 800+ either.

onlyroz

Pinky15 wrote: »

No where on here did I villify anyone choosing to work! - I said everyone makes there own choices and that is fine. In the past I have worked!
But what I don't appreciate is people saying I don't set a good example to my children by staying at home re- work ethic.

My post wasn't targetted specifically at you, just as I am sure your post wasn't targetted specifically at me.