Partner given up work now cant claim a penny

shop-to-drop

There are numerous care type roles 24/7 even on a relief basis. Your OH should be able to work around your hours and you both share care of the baby. Have you not considered this?

dktreesea

There must be quite a lot of people in this situation, where, if the stay at home spouse wants any money beyond the child benefit, or maybe even any money at all, they have to work, as the partner earns enough to keep them out of social welfare's clutches.

If £26k is the cut off point for household income for getting things like child tax credits, maybe this should also be the minimum wage.

MissMoneypenny

dktreesea wrote: »

There must be quite a lot of people in this situation, where, if the stay at home spouse wants any money beyond the child benefit, or maybe even any money at all, they have to work, as the partner earns enough to keep them out of social welfare's clutches.

What's wrong with that? That's how it always was until Tax Credit benefits were invented. We use to plan our finances so that we could afford to have a baby. We would arrange work around each other and were prepared to go without, for our children. Having children, is a lifestyle choice.

The best gift a parent can give a child, is teaching them (by example) to work hard.

Horseunderwater

We did the same - bought all clothing for DD & OH from car boots/jumble sales & due to my large size I had to buy new, but I only bought if it was in the sale & vastly reduced. Am wearing a coat that I bought new in 1999 - gets washed every year & is stll going strong. There was no tax credits when she was born & when they did come out we ended up with an overpayment that got paid back from the family element each year. So we still never had that money & we managed by cutting our budget down to essentials & not going on holidays very often. Last one in 2006. We have a mortgage that has just over 11 years to go & when DD goes to uni in September will have to pay that & all bills out of just ESA & DLA.

dktreesea

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

What's wrong with that? That's how it always was until Tax Credit benefits were invented. We use to plan our finances so that we could afford to have a baby. We would arrange work around each other and were prepared to go without, for our children. Having children, is a lifestyle choice.

The best gift a parent can give a child, is teaching them (by example) to work hard.

Horseunderwater wrote: »

We did the same - bought all clothing for DD & OH from car boots/jumble sales & due to my large size I had to buy new, but I only bought if it was in the sale & vastly reduced. Am wearing a coat that I bought new in 1999 - gets washed every year & is stll going strong. There was no tax credits when she was born & when they did come out we ended up with an overpayment that got paid back from the family element each year. So we still never had that money & we managed by cutting our budget down to essentials & not going on holidays very often. Last one in 2006. We have a mortgage that has just over 11 years to go & when DD goes to uni in September will have to pay that & all bills out of just ESA & DLA.

There's nothing wrong with earning too much to get benefits. That's not a bad situation to be in. But we seem to be dividing into a society of two halves. Those who don't qualify for welfare, so do things like living like ships in the night, working opposite hours so they can afford to have children, and those that choose to game the system, working their 24 hours a week per household, maxing out the benefits they get, renting rather than buying, and maybe even getting just as much household income as the OP as a result.

If the government wants to make work attractive, then it is going to have to up the minimum wage substantially and at the same time keep benefit payments quite modest in comparison.

MissMoneypenny

dktreesea wrote: »

If the government wants to make work attractive, then it is going to have to up the minimum wage substantially and at the same time keep benefit payments quite modest in comparison.

Work attractive! What has this country come to when people would rather let other people pay for their children, than work enough hours to keep their own children.

And what an awful example to give to their children. I look back with pride at my father, who worked long hours to provide for us. Life really is a lucky bag.

Morglin

It has always been about choices, and nothing has changed much, over the years!

I had my two, eighteen months apart, in the 70's. There was no employer maternity leave/pay and women resigned their job at about 8 months into the pregnancy.

Then, came the choice - mum stayed at home, and the family managed on just Dad's income, or a Mum got a job and the family could afford more things.

We had the same bills as we have now, although less luxury stuff, that's for sure lol

Now, childcare tax vouchers available then either..... :whistle:

I chose to get back to work quickly, simply because I was bored at home, and fed up with struggling on one lowish income, other mums chose to stay at home and make do.

I also felt, and still feel, that the best example we can set our kids is to see both parents out there, earning a living.

But, in the end, having kids is an expensive 'hobby' and it all comes down to individual choices, in the end.

I saw no reason to expect the state to keep me sitting at home, doing nothing,when I was physically capable of working, and neither should today's parents.

Lin

evenasus

Morglin wrote: »

I saw no reason to expect the state to keep me sitting at home, doing nothing,when I was physically capable of working, and neither should today's parents.

Sadly, there are many who don't share your principles.
It's the 'entitled to' mentality that seems rife these days.

Podge52

It's a different world to the one I spent most of my working life in. I was only semi skilled yet I could afford to bring up my family on forty seven hours a week without any benefits. Sadly the same can't be said now.

Morglin

No, things have changed - my ex was what used be called semi skilled, and he had to do overtime and shift work.

Don't suppose those jobs are around so much now, as technology has done away with them, and, of course our manufacturing base was destroyed in the 80's, and I do feel sorry for those with these 'phoney jobs' of either a few hours a week, or zero contracts, as it must be a nightmare trying to plan things.

Lin