Working to pay for childcare

jetplane

jackyann wrote: »

Having spent all of my working life in childcare / midwifery / health visiting, a lot of my work conversations were about nappies & breastfeeding.
Those parts of work were lot less boring to me than meetings about the latest management idea foisted upon us; but each to their own. I understand there are people who find writing reports more interesting than playing with children.

I like writing reports I work with children and the conversations we have around nappies, what's in them, breastfeeding et al are in a different context to the mothers' where the conversations between themselves often seem to take on a competitive edge, particularly around development.

heartbreak_star

I'm another who hates the term "full-time mother". All parents are full-time parents, it's not something you can switch off and go home at the end of the day is it?

In my field of work, it'd be career suicide to not go back straight away, so it would be a choice of career or kids. Thankfully, I don't intend having any children...

HBS x

pukkamum

I absolutely love being at home, given a choice I would never work outside the home.
My first job was a nanny and I loved the freedom it gave me, being able to get out and about whenever i wanted to, watching the lo's develop, showing them new things etc. I nannied for many years then worked in an office.
I hated every minute of it.
Each to their own though, do i think it makes me a better parent compared to a mum who works, of course not, but it makes me personally a better parent than I would be if i worked because I love it and I'm good at it and being at work makes me miserable.
Of course if it came down to the difference between paying bills and working I would in a heartbeat but i refuse to work for things we don't need, just because others think i should.
If we were all the same life would be very dull indeed.

Bluejeanbaby

I stopped work when I had DS. That was nearly 6 years ago & I haven't returned since. I had DD two years ago. I've effectively finished my career. Taking such a long break will mean I have to start again from the bottom if I were to return to the profession. However, it was never a career path I intentionally set down in the first place & we are fortunate enough to manage on DH income alone.

When DS turned 2 he went to nursery two mornings a week (6 hours in total). We upped this to three full days by the time he was 3 & DD came along. It cost us quite a bit of money at first but of course the 15 free hours a week you get when they turn 3 helped. DD will start nursery in September but I don't plan on starting again at work until she starts school. I felt it was really important for DS to start nursery so that he had time to socialise away from me, learn to trust adults outside of his family environment & get him used to the structure of a learning environment, ready for school. I have to say his nursery was fantastic; he came on leaps & bounds whilst there & is a very sociable, friendly child. So whilst I don't work to send the kids to nursery, they have/will attend despite there being no "need" to IYSWIM!

Our situation works really well for us & I'm really looking forward to DD starting in September. I do sometimes feel guilty though that I am setting a bad example to my children (in particular DD) by not working. I don't want them to see me as someone who "relies" on her husbands income & doesn't do anything for herself I imagine I'd feel guilty for going off to work though if I did that too!

Counting_Pennies_2

In my fast typing moment I slipped and put full time mother instead of stay at home mother, I correct that to clarify to any one offended.


I have regularly had it said to my face by other working parents at my children's school that they would never dream of scrounging off their husbands.


It is also openly spoken about in groups of other working mums in the middle of the playground when they are on their day off or come straight to school to collect the children. To not be working is seen as lazy and scrounging. Despite none of our stay at home mums that I know of claiming any form of benefits. They all have a partner who is working.


I think they forget that in my spare time I spend the vast majority of my time reading to their children in class, organising events that raise money for their children to have access to facilities they might not have had otherwise.

BigAunty

Counting_Pennies wrote: »

To not be working is seen as lazy and scrounging. Despite none of our stay at home mums that I know of claiming any form of benefits. They all have a partner who is working.

On the benefits forum, it is not uncommon for posters to sincerely say they are not in receipt of any benefits when in fact, in nearly all cases, they claim Child Benefit, often claim tax credits and sometimes claim housing benefit and council tax discount.

Because Child Benefit (until recently) was a universal benefit, it isn't seen as counting (fair enough).

Secondly, working and child tax credits can be paid to households who earn up to around 25k (may have changed a little) but as they are issued by the HMRC and not the DWP, these are viewed by some almost as tax refunds rather than the income related benefits that they really are. Some posters don't see them as benefits but as some kind of tax 'allowance'. Same goes for child care vouchers - some don't class these as benefits, either.

I know they are directly defined as 'benefits' by many but since they are issued on the basis of income and come from the public purse, it's not a stretch to class in work benefits alongside unemployment related ones.

Lastly, housing benefit and council tax discount is issued by the local council (and again, there are (albeit fewer) people that view benefits as solely being issued by the DWP. A household with kids who rent that get tax credits are almost invariably entitled to HB/CT discount.

I am really not disputing that your acquiantances don't get any benefits (other than perhaps child benefit which is routinely given) but there may be cases where they are in receipt of tax credits which they don't class as a benefit or where they are too ashamed to say or where they may have benefit entitlements that they aren't aware of.

A few years ago, before the recent slew of changes, it actually said on the HMRC tax credit website that 9 out of 10 households with children would qualify for some.

This is the latest stats I could find from 2013

"The welfare state is a big part of British family life, with 20.3 million families receiving some kind of benefit (64% of all families), about 8.7 million of them pensioners. For 9.6 million families, benefits make up more than half of their income (30% of all families), around 5.3 million of them pensioners. The number of families receiving benefits will be between 1 and 2 million fewer now because of changes to child tax credits that mean some working families who previously got a small amount now get nothing.....At 13% between 2009-10 and 2011-12, the proportion of gross domestic product devoted to benefits is at an all-time high,"

Counting_Pennies_2

BigAunty wrote: »

I am really not disputing that your acquiantances don't get any benefits (other than perhaps child benefit which is routinely given) but there may be cases where they are in receipt of tax credits which they don't class as a benefit or where they are too ashamed to say or where they may have benefit entitlements that they aren't aware of.

I can categorically confirm the families of the stay at home parents I know do not receive child benefit, and if they do it is paid back immediately through the wage earners salary. No other benefit is paid.


We do however pay a significant sum to the treasury and local government in tax and contribute to the charities by both payment and volunteering

Takeaway_Addict

ema_o wrote: »

With regards to the last part of your question, my partner got his employer to join a scheme so he could get childcare vouchers. He did all the research and they agreed, I have a feeling it also benefits the employer and wasn't much hassle for them to sort.

It benefits the employer in that they pay less NI, however if someone on the scheme goes on maternity leave the employer has to carry on paying the vouchers out on TOP of maternity pay....hence why alot don't bother with it, and I don't blame them considering it was a poorly thought out scheme.

LannieDuck

Sounds like your friend's being very sensible about it all. My OH was a SAHD until recently, with DD in nursery two afternoons for her sake (she loves it). He's just managed to find a part-time job (amazing in his industry), and we're increasing DD's hours to two days full time.

Effectively that means that a good chunk of his new salary will be going straight on childcare, but it's still a good development for us - OH likes the variety of being back at work part time and DD gets more time at nursery with her friends.

lostinrates

BigAunty wrote: »

On the benefits forum, it is not uncommon for posters to sincerely say they are not in receipt of any benefits when in fact, in nearly all cases, they claim Child Benefit, often claim tax credits and sometimes claim housing benefit and council tax discount.

Because Child Benefit (until recently) was a universal benefit, it isn't seen as counting (fair enough).

Secondly, working and child tax credits can be paid to households who earn up to around 25k (may have changed a little) but as they are issued by the HMRC and not the DWP, these are viewed by some almost as tax refunds rather than the income related benefits that they really are. Some posters don't see them as benefits but as some kind of tax 'allowance'. Same goes for child care vouchers - some don't class these as benefits, either.

I know they are directly defined as 'benefits' by many but since they are issued on the basis of income and come from the public purse, it's not a stretch to class in work benefits alongside unemployment related ones.

Lastly, housing benefit and council tax discount is issued by the local council (and again, there are (albeit fewer) people that view benefits as solely being issued by the DWP. A household with kids who rent that get tax credits are almost invariably entitled to HB/CT discount.

I am really not disputing that your acquiantances don't get any benefits (other than perhaps child benefit which is routinely given) but there may be cases where they are in receipt of tax credits which they don't class as a benefit or where they are too ashamed to say or where they may have benefit entitlements that they aren't aware of.

A few years ago, before the recent slew of changes, it actually said on the HMRC tax credit website that 9 out of 10 households with children would qualify for some.

This is the latest stats I could find from 2013

"The welfare state is a big part of British family life, with 20.3 million families receiving some kind of benefit (64% of all families), about 8.7 million of them pensioners. For 9.6 million families, benefits make up more than half of their income (30% of all families), around 5.3 million of them pensioners. The number of families receiving benefits will be between 1 and 2 million fewer now because of changes to child tax credits that mean some working families who previously got a small amount now get nothing.....At 13% between 2009-10 and 2011-12, the proportion of gross domestic product devoted to benefits is at an all-time high,"

It's never been mandatory to take even what you qualify for. Though it could be a pita to get a NI number if your parents didn't receive child benefit for you but you are a British passport holder. My guess is that will be easier for future generations now.