Shoud SAHMs be paid?

skylight

I too am a SAHM.

No way should I be paid! Staying at home is my choice (more or less). Why on earth should someone else pay me to bring up my kids.

I get Child Benefit, Child Tax Credit and although OH isn't earning mega bucks the kids never (ever) go without.

Mind you, the other "stick" (as mentioned) to this, is that the government are happy to provide help with childcare costs to get mothers out to work - they will pay for someone else to look after their kids, but wont pay the mothers to look after their own kids!

I am still in the NO to be paid camp though.

skylight

moggins wrote:

The insinuation that I sit on my fat a*se all day really made me see red.

That is the only thing that really drives me potty! Not the paid bit. I have worked full-time with kids and part-time and I look back and wonder how on earth I ever did it. I don't have time at all for anything now! (maybe because I have more kids!)


And I hope your day gets better Moggins. Any chance of a coffee with a choccie bar soon?????

nearlyrich

snoozer wrote:

I don't see that there was anything offensive in my original post, it was just a question..

I didn't see anything offensive either, hope you didn't think I did?

However, I do think it's much more difficult for young mothers to make that choice nowadays. The cost of housing is so much more that most have to return to work.

When my children were young the cost of housing was a really high part of my rather meagre wages so to be honest nothing has changed, what has changed is people's expectations that they can have it all and someone else will pay for it ( I stress I don't think everyone thinks like that but there will always be people who think that way)

Also in an ideal world people would plan and save to afford to live on a lower income to allow one parent to be home to care for the childen.;)

moggins

We can say that we get CTC and CB but the way I have always seen it is that this is money for the children, not for me. I always worked up until DD was born so always had money that was mine (even if it went towards the bills) now DH gets to buy all the latest gadgets as he earns the money while I feel guilty if I spend £5 getting my legs waxed at the local college as it's not my money I am spending.

Alleycat

Just to point out that not all working parents get childcare costs paid for. Sorry, but there seemed to be a few here who were making that assumption.

Regarding being paid a salary to be a SAHP, I don't think they should. It is a lifestyle choice to have a child and a lifestyle choice to stay at home to look after them. It is possible to combine working full/part time whilst having children. It may be a struggle at times, but it is doable. Why should those who haven't had children for whatever reason have to pay even more taxes to allow one parent not to work? We already get child benefit, most of us get Tax Credits, lots of people are already allowed to salary sacrifice some of their childcare expenses. There are also, surprisingly, quite a few employers who are relatively lenient when it comes to time off. As the one who works part time I tend to be the one that stays off work when dd is poorly, or nursery is closed for staff training. Sometimes its unpaid leave, other times I am able to take it off as flexi and make the hours up or as emergency annual leave. In one department of 11 full time positions, 3 of those are with jobsharers (so 6 instead of 3 employees). I think thats pretty good really.

skylight

Theres the difference I suppose - I see all money coming in as family money. No-one owns it for any purpose.

We have had myself working and OH at home with the kids (lasted a short while - he hated it!) and every penny he earns is handed over for the "pot".

I may stay at home, but would never feel guilty about spending money on myself (once bills and kids stuff is paid for!) Actually, its OH I feel sorry for. He works long hours and gets little back. Occassionaly he throws a wobbly about it and I see why.

comping_cat

shellsuit wrote:

Lone parents ~ No

They can claim benefits as they are a lone parent so why would/should they need a salary?

SAHM with a partner who works ~ Yes, a small payment to help with the costs of bringing up a child/children would benefit the parents.

I dont see why a lone parent should be penalised. I am a lone parent whos partner agreed for me to be a SAHM, and then 2 months later ran off with another woman once i had given up my chance to carry on working.
I had to go on benefits (no childcare) and to be honest, unless it has changed in the last 5 years, i definatly wasnt being paid to stay home, when i started work again, i was heavily in debt - due to just paying to live - i dont smoke, didnt drink, go out (which now causes problems as my DD is incredibly clingy, and doesnt want me to find a boyfriend) or any of the other things that single mums often get accused of doing.
As soon as my DD started school, i trained to be a childminder, which i still do and will continue doing until both my children are old enough to stay on their own whilst i work. Im not much better off than i was on benefits, but i am home and available for my children at all times, and feel that i also do a good job enabaling other parents the choice to work.
I am proud that i work, but even prouder that i am also a SAHM - a job too many people belittle, but it is an important one and for most, hugely rewarding and although i dont expect any extra money for doing this 'job' (work out how much childcare, cleaning, cooking etc would cost if a SAHM couldnt do it, i know a lot of mums/dads do do this after doing a full days work as well, but being home all day, does make more mess than no one being there!!!!) i dont object to the concept, even though i probably wouldnt qualify as i do work from home.

sinizterguy

Should they be paid ? Hell No ... I am sure the arguments have been run through a million times in the previous posts so Ill just leave it at that.

dlb

I am a SAHM of 4, i i dont think we should get paid.
Yes we work dam hard but it is our choice to stay at home and as said before i would be worst off going out to work due to childcare cost ect.
I do think us sahm get a bad name, it is at the end of the day our choice to be at home.

Gabriel-Ernest

Alleycat wrote:

Why should those who haven't had children for whatever reason have to pay even more taxes to allow one parent not to work?

Exactly. Of course the payoff is that my employers have always known I am reliable and won't need to take time off to look after any children for whatever reason, so it's probably benefitted my career in the long run.