Bay 3 months chucked into FULL time nursery

FBaby

Go on the benefits forum, there are plenty with children, who either never worked, or only a few hours a week at minimum wage and are desperate for help because they don't know how they will cope financially on their own.

j.e.j.

FBaby wrote: »

Go on the benefits forum, there are plenty with children, who either never worked, or only a few hours a week at minimum wage and are desperate for help because they don't know how they will cope financially on their own.

No thanks, that board's used by too many forum-users as a platform to bash people on benefits and air their Daily Mail-style views.

lostinrates

FBaby wrote: »

Go on the benefits forum, there are plenty with children, who either never worked, or only a few hours a week at minimum wage and are desperate for help because they don't know how they will cope financially on their own.

I'll be honest and as,it I kow I would if d it very hard to cope on my own now if anything happened to dh, even though we've arranged things so I should have no immeadiate worry.


I'd be petrified.

(Have worked, have created and sold a successful business, worked in more than one industry).

And I don't even have kids to worry about.

FBaby

I don't advocate that every woman in a secure relationship should focus on her career just in case they end up on their own, however, I also don't think it is wrong to do so for these reasons.

I grew up knowing I never wanted to rely financially on anyone else but myself, I therefore didn't have a choice but to prioritise my career before having children (in any case, no boyfriend wanted to make a commitment then, so I don't think I missed out much!!). In my case, it did pay off as I did become a single mum, with an ex not prepared to provide for his children. If I hadn't, my kids would have been brought up on benefits, and that's just not the life I wanted for my children. Again, my values and my choices.

Bangton

j.e.j. wrote: »

Not at all! Women can and do have careers.



There are some trouble-makers. But that's nothing to do with the fact that they're home-makers.

People see the £-signs, but forget that having one partner at home actually saves a lot of money AND it provides a good home environment. Raising the next generation to be decent people IS making a good and valid contribution to society.

In my opinion it sometimes is because they are home-makers. If you can't afford to be one, then you don't..simple as that but yet many think it's ok to rely on the very people your criticising for choosing to work...

Your not a parent so do you actually know the cost of childcare? It doesn't save that much money. Where I live, it's £500 for 4 days at nursery. Less if using a childminder for those 4 days plus I'd be entitled to childcare vouchers which would probably bring it down a little. Now, even factoring in £140 to travel to work each month I'm still earning a significant amount above that £640 total which will go towards the £1000 a month it costs to heat my home, provide water, food, electricity and to pay my council tax and mortgage (I live in a 2 bed terrace before you rake up the fact that people live in homes above their means).

Being at home I am sure provides stability for a child and a loving home in some cases but let's be fair there are plenty of children living in horrid circumstances despite their parents/parent being home with them.

pollypenny

What's all the problem about a so an focusing on her career or her children?

Babies, and children, have two parents and in an ideal world the father should be able to have time from his career to focus on them.

My son would love to have that time, as much as his wife does.

thorsoak

When No3 son and his wife have a baby (TTC at the moment) they've agreed that Mum will have the first year maternity leave, and then DS will work part time and become main carer - he will be able to combine his work from home with chiild care - and his wife is the higher earner and is flying high in her career. Of course, things can change in the ensuing TTC/pregnancy period .....

Pollycat

j.e.j. wrote: »

No thanks, that board's used by too many forum-users as a platform to bash people on benefits and air their Daily Mail-style views.

The Benefits board is far less judgemental and nasty than this one (same with the DFW board).

Yes, there are some trolls who pop us and have a go at people asking genuine questions and there are some people who ask questions that are clearly designed to defraud the benefit system and there are trolls who post deliberately provoking questions - but they're not that common and those posts are usually pretty quickly zapped or moved to Discussion Time, as are those from people airing "Daily Mail-style views" about the Benefit system.

FatVonD

I can understand where the OP is coming from, once you take sleeping into account working such long hours you would have to accept that the nursery would have more of a hand in bringing up your baby that you do. I can see that it would do the baby no harm being in full time nursery but it's not something I'd want to do. After waiting so long to conceive I wanted to enjoy every minute of my son's babyhood that I could. Luckily I was in the position that I was able to downsize so I was mortgage-free and take 4 years off work.

Once he went to school I did make the decision to go back to work and, to be honest, if I had my time again (and going by some of the figures I read on here), I'd have found a part-time job locally and claimed tax credits. I have hated not being there to pick him up from school when he's had problems with bullying.

That said, he's just finished his GCSEs and is desperate for a summer job, really focused on what he wants to do as a career so I have at least instilled a good work ethic in him

clairehi

trevorsminted wrote: »

Sulkisu - Completely agree his wife told mine he has insinuated she needs to go back to work full time as he cant afford to look after them both and the child will need to be in full time care, his wife is upset and wanted her first time with her newborn to be special but feels this will not be the case, my wife has told her to take birth control until THEY are in a position for possible part time nursery and mum to spend some quality time with new baby once here (IT/BOY/GIRL) but he wants her pregnant within next 3 months.

Has nobody read this post by the OP???

The putative mother to be (who is not even pregnant yet) doesn't want to put the child in full time nursery.

She has told her "husband" this but he "wants her pregnant in the next 3 months"

This is disgusting behaviour and frankly, domestic abuse, if he gets her pregnant against her will.

The full time nursery issue is a red herring.

If this is true and not a troll, someone needs to tell this woman to speak to Womens Aid urgently.

I really, really hope this point is not lost among the SAHM/WOHM bashing.