To become a sahm?

BJV

Op I know that this is your first post so I know how scary it can be you get loads of comments. The good the bad and the ugly.

Have you really thought through stay at home. I get the guilt, I get the I want to make my children's child hood a fab time I genuinely do.

But just think not now but 5, 10 15 years from now.

Mojisola

Use the calculator - https://www.moneysavingexpert.com/family/benefits-check - to try out several different scenarios - both working, you part-time, you SAHP.

If you do go for the SAHP role, look at doing some further qualifications while you're at home to improve your employment chances in the future. The rest of your life is much longer than the few years that the children are little.

zagfles

So what? The OP was asking about benefit entitlement in a specific situation, exactly what this forum is for. She wasn't asking for moral judgement of her proposed course of action. Who cares what a bunch of clueless sanctmonious people think of what she's planning? Go over to DT and rant there if you want, that's what it's for. This is the benefits board, read the fourth sticky down and you'll see what it's for.

Well I've reported this thread so hopefully all the judgemental rubbish will be removed and just the factual answers will remain. But in the meantime I thought I'd add some balance to all the sanctimonious ranting about the evils of wanting to at home with your baby.

MissMoneypenny

You need to think about the welfare changes that are being brought in, with their Conditions; as you may not get as much time as a non working parent, as you were hoping for. Universal Credit is replacing the income based welfare payments: JSA; Working Tax Credit; ESA; Child Tax Credit and housing.

zagfles

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

You need to think about the welfare changes that are being brought in, with their Conditions; as you may not get as much time as a non working parent, as you were hoping for. Universal Credit is replacing the income based welfare payments: JSA; Working Tax Credit; ESA; Child Tax Credit and housing.

She should be OK till her baby is 5 by the looks of it, as her OH seems to be earning at least 35h x NMW. Then she may have to seek part time work.

bagpuss38

I fail to see why my post was removed.
I wasnt being judgemental.
Just offering advice.

Poppie68

bagpuss38 wrote: »

As others have said, perhaps look into other work avenues such as childminding, homeworking.
I now work nights sticking labels on shelves at a supermarket.
Not my lifelong career ambition but keeps our heads above water and I get all day and bedtime with my babies.
Also its good for you to have opportunities to be outside of the home environment, I love days of playdough and cbeebies but equally love putting uniform on and applying myself to my job.
Good luck with it all

It's here Bagpuss:)


Funny that a poster who is the only one calling other posters names is the one who complained....it's just a shame that others can't now see that that same poster was inferring that babies suffer serious issues when they have working parents...

BJV

zagfles wrote: »

So what? The OP was asking about benefit entitlement in a specific situation, exactly what this forum is for. She wasn't asking for moral judgement of her proposed course of action. Who cares what a bunch of clueless sanctmonious people think of what she's planning? Go over to DT and rant there if you want, that's what it's for. This is the benefits board, read the fourth sticky down and you'll see what it's for.

Well I've reported this thread so hopefully all the judgemental rubbish will be removed and just the factual answers will remain. But in the meantime I thought I'd add some balance to all the sanctimonious ranting about the evils of wanting to at home with your baby.

It may be sanctimonious to you. But on a public forum surely the point is get advice and points of view from all walks of life.

Not everyone will agree but having their own opinion does not make it wrong.

I don't think anyone was being nasty. Think that they where just giving their points of view.

Surely by you passing judgement on other peoples points of view you are being judgmental about them?

Pot kettle-Black???

zagfles

Poppie68 wrote: »

It's here Bagpuss:)


Funny that a poster who is the only one calling other posters names is the one who complained....it's just a shame that others can't now see that that same poster was inferring that babies suffer serious issues when they have working parents...

See post #20. There's also posts #11,12,19 which give the OP advice of some of the pitfalls of being a SAHM, but in a non-judgemental way.

Have a read of them, and also of this sticky, then you might understand why your posts were deleted https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/365935

zagfles

BJV wrote: »

It may be sanctimonious to you. But on a public forum surely the point is get advice and points of view from all walks of life.

Advice is fair enough and the advice is still here, as above. The judgemental rubbish has been deleted as it should be. See the sticky link I quoted above.

Not everyone will agree but having their own opinion does not make it wrong.

I don't think anyone was being nasty. Think that they where just giving their points of view.

There were lots of judgemental posts (not yours - which is why they weren't deleted).

Surely by you passing judgement on other peoples points of view you are being judgmental about them?

Pot kettle-Black???

Again - read the sticky. Obviously a judgement will be made about judgemental posts - and the forum team have made it.

If people don't like Martin's rules, they should find somewhere else to rant.