even though our eldest has a partner she is living with us she is classed as single,the goverment pays her £130 a week,she has already sorted a nursery place for the baby when he is 6 months old so she can return to work.As we all know a lot of young'ns don't think like this and will happily sit watching trisha all day for 130 quid aweek and i suppose if they feel like a pay rise they'll just get up the duff again.I know the first year or so its better for the mother to be at home but what insentive do these lasses have off getting off their backsides and working when our goverment are chucking money at them.:loopy: :loopy:

exactely!!!!!

i think the blame lies with the goverment!!

simple as!

oh god here i go again!!

*goes to find prozac*:hihi:

Bring back the days of shame when children were born out of wedlock.

Long live family values! There is not enough humility in this world.:mad:

I know the first year or so its better for the mother to be at home but what insentive do these lasses have off getting off their backsides and working when our goverment are chucking money at them.

kirky its not just single mums us married ones as well mate,thats why im not working,better off staying at home,i hate it,but whats the point in me going to work for the same money to stay at home,government for you

kirky its not just single mums us married ones as well mate,thats why im not working,better off staying at home,i hate it,but whats the point in me going to work for the same money to stay at home,government for you

thats the point i'm making,if you get more money for doing nowt where's the insentive to work,i'm not blaming the mothers i'm blaming our idiotic soft goverment

kirky its not just single mums us married ones as well mate,thats why im not working,better off staying at home,i hate it,but whats the point in me going to work for the same money to stay at home,government for you


true!

mind you i worked when i was with my sons farther maybe i should have saved myself the stress and strain and stayed at home:huh:

My married daughter would have loved to have stayed at home with our grandchild, but economics dictated that she return to work a.s.a.p.

Let her enjoy her baby, plenty of time for work later.

Chuck em in workhouse like they did back in victorian era ;) and there would be no need for social security.

I think the benefit should be a 'stay at home' benefit and paid to the parent who stays at home to look after the child. I think it should be paid until the age of 5. When the child is old enough to go to school and the parent can get a part time job. This would hopefully encourage parents to look after their own children instead of paying someone else to look after them.
It would take pressure off a parent having to feel they have to find work.

And before you all jump down my throat, just remember there are lots of people out there getting benefits for doing NOTHING! Its them who should be looking for work!! Not getting at Mothers! Bringing up a child is no piece of cake.

I don't know how it would get round the problem of those who keep having kids just for the benefits, but it would take a bit of pressure off mothers or fathers who genuinly want to raise their own children.
I hate it when people have kids then expect others to look after them! Why have them in the first place? If you want kids AND work its up to the parents to sort it out together not palm them off on other people.

Now you are going to shout... but we cant afford it or we want to work to look after our kids ... which is my point exactly about the benefit being a 'stay at home and look after your children' benefit. It would leave more jobs open for those who havent got a job, and acknowledge that bringing up kids IS a job! If not why do childminders get paid?
People should be encouraged to raise their own kids, not discouraged and made to feel they've done something wrong.

I'm talking about genuine cases here guys, like this
My married daughter would have loved to have stayed at home with our grandchild, but economics dictated that she return to work a.s.a.p.

Let her enjoy her baby, plenty of time for work later.

kirky its not just single mums us married ones as well mate,thats why im not working,better off staying at home,i hate it,but whats the point in me going to work for the same money to stay at home,government for you

Julie, but im sure you can find a job that pays more than £130 a week- therefore giving you money to spend on your family?

your joking!
not without it being full time,and doing that would mean paying for after school clubs for 2 kids,also who wants to employ you when the kids have so many holidays,eg 6 weeks,xmas,no chance
dont get me wrong,id love to go back to work,im just practical

Kirky, why don't you report her partner to the CSA so that he can contribute to the child's upkeep? If you do this, then her benefit will be reduced and you can take comfort from the fact that you have reduced the burden on the tax-payer?

Max - they'll just take it out of his benefit! :hihi:

Max - they'll just take it out of his benefit! :hihi:

:o :o Kirky on benefits AND window cleaning AND deejaying.:o :o

Has the man no pride?

Kirky, why don't you report her partner to the CSA so that he can contribute to the child's upkeep? If you do this, then her benefit will be reduced and you can take comfort from the fact that you have reduced the burden on the tax-payer?

last time i claimed benifit mate it was thanks to mrs thatcher:rant:

:o :o Kirky on benefits AND window cleaning AND deejaying.:o :o

Has the man no pride?
Noooooooooo ya pud!

The partner :shakes: I dispair

kirky its not just single mums us married ones as well mate,thats why im not working,better off staying at home,i hate it,but whats the point in me going to work for the same money to stay at home,government for you

Government .. Government???? How about supporting yourself? How about self respect and knowing your not burdening the tax payer to pay for you to sit at home?

There are hundreds if not thousands of people out there who would probably be better off if they claimed one of the many forms of benefit, but pride and self respect makes them get off their arse and work to support themselves and their families!

People like this make my blood boil! :rant:

Noooooooooo ya pud!

The partner :shakes: I dispair

OK, I admit I 'mis-understood' on purpose but why does it make any difference whether the partner has money taken from his benefit by the CSA? It still reduces the burden on the taxpayer.

Kirky should still notify the CSA that there is a partner who should be losing benefit to support his child.

Government .. Government???? How about supporting yourself? How about self respect and knowing your not burdening the tax payer to pay for you to sit at home?

There are hundreds if not thousands of people out there who would probably be better off if they claimed one of the many forms of benefit, but pride and self respect makes them get off their arse and work to support themselves and their families!

People like this make my blood boil! :rant:

To be fair, i have to agree with this- why should we pay for you to sit on your arse just because you can't be bothered to work and get the same money.

Government .. Government???? How about supporting yourself? How about self respect and knowing your not burdening the tax payer to pay for you to sit at home?

There are hundreds if not thousands of people out there who would probably be better off if they claimed one of the many forms of benefit, but pride and self respect makes them get off their arse and work to support themselves and their families!

People like this make my blood boil! :rant:


How do you know she claims any benefits if she's married? I certainly dont and I stay at home while my husband has 2 jobs.

By the time you have paid for childcare there is very little left, it's around 25 quid a day for a full time nursery, £100 per week. If I went to work I'd be left with very little and someone else would be seeing my baby take his first steps, and so I'd rather not have the few quid I'd be left with thanks.

Bringing up children well contributes to society if it is done well, and I dont think institutionalising our children from birth is necessarily a good idea. You can contribute to the world in ways other than cash.

could someone tell me at what point being a full time mother became a dirty thing?

I worked before I had children, paid my taxes was nearly forced out of my job because I got pregnant and yet they couldn't wait to have me back in the door as soon as I had my son.

My circumstances (i.e shortage of childcare places and being unable to afford to even learn to drive) means that I can't even get a part time job. I could of course do a full time job at the local supermarket, have them picked up by childcare staff, let them have their dinners at 6pm+ because mummy is at work and give them no opportunity to play with their friends at home because they are constantly in child care and work myself into a coma....

Until my youngest is at full time school age there is little I can do that wouldn't mean my childrens welfare would suffer as a result. So amazingly I do what mothers for centuries before me have done and stay at home and look after our home. I don't sit on my arse in front of daytime telly..can't stand the bloody thing, nor am I sat at the computer 24/7 before someone accuses me of that.

I have no desire to dump the responsibility of bringing up my children on a complete stranger whilst I swan off to work...tried it hated it. My children are my responsibility no one elses.

I guess if I hadn't made such bad choices then maybe life would be a little rosier with a nice white picket fence, dog cat and a goldfish..however I didn't and I am left to do the best I can with what I have.

I will get the opportunity very soon to be able to work either in a normal job or from home and I don't see why I should looked down upon just because I chose a different way to take care of my children.

Moon

How do you know she claims any benefits if she's married? I certainly dont and I stay at home while my husband has 2 jobs.

By the time you have paid for childcare there is very little left, it's around 25 quid a day for a full time nursery, £100 per week. If I went to work I'd be left with very little and someone else would be seeing my baby take his first steps, and so I'd rather not have the few quid I'd be left with thanks.

Bringing up children well contributes to society if it is done well, and I dont think institutionalising our children from birth is necessarily a good idea. You can contribute to the world in ways other than cash.

Good on Ya kookymonster! This suggestion below would suit you and many more people in the same boat. Being a Mother should be made to be a job to be Proud of, and respected. Not classed as second-class work!

:idea: MAYBE IF WE LABELLED IT AS A JOB/WORK IT WOULD CUT THE AMOUNT OF CHILDREN BEING BORN BECAUSE THE PARENTS WHO DON'T WANT TO WORK WOULD BE DOING :hihi:


I think the benefit should be a 'stay at home' benefit and paid to the parent who stays at home to look after the child. I think it should be paid until the age of 5. When the child is old enough to go to school and the parent can get a part time job. This would hopefully encourage parents to look after their own children instead of paying someone else to look after them.
It would take pressure off a parent having to feel they have to find work.

And before you all jump down my throat, just remember there are lots of people out there getting benefits for doing NOTHING! Its them who should be looking for work!! Not getting at Mothers! Bringing up a child is no piece of cake.

I don't know how it would get round the problem of those who keep having kids just for the benefits, but it would take a bit of pressure off mothers or fathers who genuinly want to raise their own children.
I hate it when people have kids then expect others to look after them! Why have them in the first place? If you want kids AND work its up to the parents to sort it out together not palm them off on other people.

Now you are going to shout... but we cant afford it or we want to work to look after our kids ... which is my point exactly about the benefit being a 'stay at home and look after your children' benefit. It would leave more jobs open for those who havent got a job, and acknowledge that bringing up kids IS a job! If not why do childminders get paid?
People should be encouraged to raise their own kids, not discouraged and made to feel they've done something wrong.

I'm talking about genuine cases here guys

Kirky should still notify the CSA that there is a partner who should be losing benefit to support his child.

what as it to do with me? i'm just the grandad,and i'm certainly not a grass:| :|

How do you know she claims any benefits if she's married? I certainly dont and I stay at home while my husband has 2 jobs.

By the time you have paid for childcare there is very little left, it's around 25 quid a day for a full time nursery, £100 per week. If I went to work I'd be left with very little and someone else would be seeing my baby take his first steps, and so I'd rather not have the few quid I'd be left with thanks.

Bringing up children well contributes to society if it is done well, and I dont think institutionalising our children from birth is necessarily a good idea. You can contribute to the world in ways other than cash.

If you go back and read Julie23's post she says:

...thats why im not working,better off staying at home,i hate it,but whats the point in me going to work for the same money to stay at home....

She states clearly "whats the point in me going to work for the same money to stay at home" so she must be getting the money from somewhere and where might that be? From yours and my pockets. While we work, she receives an income because it easier to sit at home and not work if the government is going to pay he to do so! She then has the audacity to blame the government for her laziness!

Benefits are for people with no other means of support themselves. They are there to help the most vulnerable people in our society!

If you go back and read Julie23's post she says:



She states clearly "whats the point in me going to work for the same money to stay at home" so she must be getting the money from somewhere and where might that be? From yours and my pockets. While we work, she receives an income because it easier to sit at home and not work if the government is going to pay he to do so! She then has the audacity to blame the government for her laziness!

Benefits are for people with no other means of support themselves. They are there to help the most vulnerable people in our society!


If her husband is working the only benefits she is entitled to is working family tax credits, which anyone on a low income is entitled to. I dont begrudge this to any family who has a low income. Where does it say she is claiming benefits? By inferring she would be working for the same money she could quite likely mean that the money she would earn would pay her childcare costs so she would be no better off.

If her husband is working the only benefits she is entitled to is working family tax credits, which anyone on a low income is entitled to. I dont begrudge this to any family who has a low income. Where does it say she is claiming benefits? By inferring she would be working for the same money she could quite likely mean that the money she would earn would pay her childcare costs so she would be no better off.

hubby might be in the boozer:|

hubby might be in the boozer:|

Even if this was the case what should she do? Stay with him on benefits, or leave him and stay on single parent benefits? Not exactly a win-win situation.

Even if this was the case what should she do? Stay with him on benefits, or leave him and stay on single parent benefits? Not exactly a win-win situation.


perhaps they are wayne and waynetta slob and are very happy living like this,but back to my original point,if our namby pamby soft touch goverment would stop throwing money at them they would probably do one of two things....get off their arses and work or keep their knickers on and stop producing kids for eveyone else has to pay for.

If her husband is working the only benefits she is entitled to is working family tax credits, which anyone on a low income is entitled to. I dont begrudge this to any family who has a low income. Where does it say she is claiming benefits? By inferring she would be working for the same money she could quite likely mean that the money she would earn would pay her childcare costs so she would be no better off.

If Julie23 is only claiming working families tax credit she is fully entitled to it in my opinion, but if she is claiming benefits for the reason she gave, then I refer you back to my rant.

I dont necessarily disagree, if it were more difficult to claim certain benefits that would not be a bad thing.

But there is more to it than laziness in my opinion, people love to put each other down in this country, and I think in actual fact people love to jump on people who claim benefits, contrary to what they say. If everyone in the country worked they would just find someone else to bitch about.

I think the benefit should be a 'stay at home' benefit and paid to the parent who stays at home to look after the child. I think it should be paid until the age of 5. When the child is old enough to go to school and the parent can get a part time job. This would hopefully encourage parents to look after their own children instead of paying someone else to look after them.
It would take pressure off a parent having to feel they have to find work.

And before you all jump down my throat, just remember there are lots of people out there getting benefits for doing NOTHING! Its them who should be looking for work!! Not getting at Mothers! Bringing up a child is no piece of cake.

I don't know how it would get round the problem of those who keep having kids just for the benefits, but it would take a bit of pressure off mothers or fathers who genuinly want to raise their own children.
I hate it when people have kids then expect others to look after them! Why have them in the first place? If you want kids AND work its up to the parents to sort it out together not palm them off on other people.

Now you are going to shout... but we cant afford it or we want to work to look after our kids ... which is my point exactly about the benefit being a 'stay at home and look after your children' benefit. It would leave more jobs open for those who havent got a job, and acknowledge that bringing up kids IS a job! If not why do childminders get paid?
People should be encouraged to raise their own kids, not discouraged and made to feel they've done something wrong.

I'm talking about genuine cases here guys, like this


im not too sure what you mean are you saying that its wrong for parents to go to work and leave their kids with child minders or relatives and freinds?

Chuck em in workhouse like they did back in victorian era ;) and there would be no need for social security.


"Are there no prisons? Are there no Workhouses?" -Ebb Scrooge

I think the benefit should be a 'stay at home' benefit and paid to the parent who stays at home to look after the child. I think it should be paid until the age of 5. When the child is old enough to go to school and the parent can get a part time job. This would hopefully encourage parents to look after their own children instead of paying someone else to look after them.
It would take pressure off a parent having to feel they have to find work.

And before you all jump down my throat, just remember there are lots of people out there getting benefits for doing NOTHING! Its them who should be looking for work!! Not getting at Mothers! Bringing up a child is no piece of cake.

I don't know how it would get round the problem of those who keep having kids just for the benefits, but it would take a bit of pressure off mothers or fathers who genuinly want to raise their own children.
I hate it when people have kids then expect others to look after them! Why have them in the first place? If you want kids AND work its up to the parents to sort it out together not palm them off on other people.

Now you are going to shout... but we cant afford it or we want to work to look after our kids ... which is my point exactly about the benefit being a 'stay at home and look after your children' benefit. It would leave more jobs open for those who havent got a job, and acknowledge that bringing up kids IS a job! If not why do childminders get paid?
People should be encouraged to raise their own kids, not discouraged and made to feel they've done something wrong.

I'm talking about genuine cases here guys, like this


So all those whom want to stay at home can received a reasonable amount of benefits paid to them to have a life and not an existence?

Bit of a problem though - benefits exist because those whom do work pay taxes. Therefore if all parents who wanted to stay at home can, I bet the amount money in benefits paid out drops dramatically because if there's less tax money in the big pot then there is less to go around, less for the NHS, less for education etc.... Then the children will suffer....

im not too sure what you mean are you saying that its wrong for parents to go to work and leave their kids with child minders or relatives and freinds?

You guys seem to be getting on your high horses and casting moral judgements on every 'single mother' on the basis that she may claim benefits...so why can't they moralise about working mothers?

Men have rarely been 'expected' to take care of the kids so the term parents doesn't really come into it do they?

If you choose to go to work for whatever reason, then as a parent you make suitable and appropraite arrangements for the care of your children.

The common assumption made here seems to be that ALL single mothers have never worked a day in their life and are not entitled to get back tax they may have paid whilst working and do bugger all for free money....:loopy: the assumption is also made that ALL single mothers have no intention of ever going back to work.

Sincerely (NOT) hope that none of the judgmental folk here are forced into a position where they become "lazy good for nothing layabouts" they are preaching about here...what a terrible turn of events that would be.

You guys seem to be getting on your high horses and casting moral judgements on every 'single mother' on the basis that she may claim benefits...so why can't they moralise about working mothers?

Men have rarely been 'expected' to take care of the kids so the term parents doesn't really come into it do they?

If you choose to go to work for whatever reason, then as a parent you make suitable and appropraite arrangements for the care of your children.

The common assumption made here seems to be that ALL single mothers have never worked a day in their life and are not entitled to get back tax they may have paid whilst working and do bugger all for free money....:loopy: the assumption is also made that ALL single mothers have no intention of ever going back to work.

Sincerely (NOT) hope that none of the judgmental folk here are forced into a position where they become "lazy good for nothing layabouts" they are preaching about here...what a terrible turn of events that would be.


I understand what you are saying but once you are out of the work place there are many careers it is tough to get back into if you have taken few years out. It's not always that easy to get a job once you have been out of 'circulation'.

A responsible parent will assess their own family situation and make their decision regarding staying at home or going to work accordingly for what they think is best for their family and their circumstances

You guys seem to be getting on your high horses and casting moral judgements on every 'single mother' on the basis that she may claim benefits...so why can't they moralise about working mothers?

Men have rarely been 'expected' to take care of the kids so the term parents doesn't really come into it do they?

If you choose to go to work for whatever reason, then as a parent you make suitable and appropraite arrangements for the care of your children.

The common assumption made here seems to be that ALL single mothers have never worked a day in their life and are not entitled to get back tax they may have paid whilst working and do bugger all for free money....:loopy: the assumption is also made that ALL single mothers have no intention of ever going back to work.

Sincerely (NOT) hope that none of the judgmental folk here are forced into a position where they become "lazy good for nothing layabouts" they are preaching about here...what a terrible turn of events that would be.


excuse me! but all i did was ask a simple question!

im a single mother myself and i do work and yes i sort out my child care arrangments!

also if a mother is inbetween jobs for whatever reason then yes she should get a little help untill she finds another job

its those who dont want to find a job and think ill just have another baby so i can stay at home a little longer and belive me they do!

and finally rarther than jump to a conclusion like some do! i asked to make sure i was understanding what the poster in question had said!!

:rant: :mad:

Being out of circulation as it were, isn't helped by the general attitude of many people including employers who would see a gap in your cv....you tell them you took time out to care for your children and they look at you like they have just wiped you off their shoe.

I just don't understand why it is such a dirty thing to want to look after your children fulll time?

and finally rarther than jump to a conclusion like some do! i asked to make sure i was understanding what the poster in question had said!!

trouble is Katy your first post was a conclusion jump wasn't it? :loopy: and with questions like that you would be putting Jeremy Paxman out of a job!

Being out of circulation as it were, isn't helped by the general attitude of many people including employers who would see a gap in your cv....you tell them you took time out to care for your children and they look at you like they have just wiped you off their shoe.

I just don't understand why it is such a dirty thing to want to look after your children fulll time?


the thing that people disagree with is when people who look after their children full time with with benifits and choose not to go to work if you have to live on benefits then get a job!! id love to look after my son full time but its not possible at the moment as im the only one bringing money in now as im on my own yeah i could have sat there and said i want to look after my child full time and said ok mr blair you can pay for this for me

i didnt work for the first couple of years when i had my son but i never claimed anything as my partner worked and could provide for us

trouble is Katy your first post was a conclusion jump wasn't it? :loopy: and with questions like that you would be putting Jeremy Paxman out of a job!

now i dont want to p**s on your bonfire but i think youll find that i was agreeing with kirky in my first statement and i wasnt actually saying parents were wrong for staying home with their children i said i blamed the goverment!

and the second comment i made was a statement that maybe i should have stayed at home myself

The problem is not about parents wanting to stay at home.

It's the benefits given.

We get nothing except child benefit and if I give up my part-time work we would not get anything more. Unless I became a single parent. Then I'm entitled to further benefits. And no my other half does not earn loads and we aren't mega wealthy.

I think we are lucky to live in a society where benefits are available to those who need and it peeves me off to see it abused and seen as a right by those whom do not want to work. It takes away monies that should go to those who do need it and to our NHS and education. That comment refers to that minority in society who take the rip.

can i just clear something up please,i am not claming any social funds what so ever,i have worked full time from being 16 years old and i am claiming,working familys tax credits,
and im no waynetta slob i would love to go back to work,i have no one for support and i wont dump my kids on anyone,

can i just clear something up please,i am not claming any social funds what so ever,i have worked full time from being 16 years old and i am claiming,working familys tax credits,
and im no waynetta slob i would love to go back to work,i have no one for support and i wont dump my kids on anyone,


how do you mean dump your children on anyone ? do you mean like a childminder?

and im sorry but i dont understand how that works about not claiming social benefits but you get tax credits im assuming that your not a single mum and your partner works thats why you get tax credits? can you please just fill that bit in for me cos i thought at least one parent had to be working to get tax credits or be claiming some social benefit?:help: :confused:

now i dont want to p**s on your bonfire but i think youll find that i was agreeing with kirky in my first statement and i wasnt actually saying parents were wrong for staying home with their children i said i blamed the goverment!

and the second comment i made was a statement that maybe i should have stayed at home myself

you blamed the governement and jumped on the bandwagon with kirky's feelings that ALL single mothers who claim benefit are all good for nothing layabouts who want to stay there and sponge off those who work....which would be a conclusion jumped to?

Correct?

and you seem to have a severe problem with people talking about dumping their kids on someone other than the childs parents....

you blamed the governement and jumped on the bandwagon with kirky's feelings that ALL single mothers who claim benefit are all good for nothing layabouts who want to stay there and sponge off those who work....which would be a conclusion jumped to?

Correct?

and you seem to have a severe problem with people talking about dumping their kids on someone other than the childs parents....


now your assuming thats what i meant! and as i never said those exact words how can you know thats what i meant without assuming it?!

and why would i generalize that it was all single mothers cos that would surely put me in that bracket myself ?

and yes i do have a problem with people refering to their children being dumped with some one else i leave my son with a child minder does that make me a bad mother because i have to work to pay for things? now call me picky but id rarther my son grow up with a mother that works and learns from a role model that has some self respect and dignaty all of these i belive you get from working!

now your assuming thats what i meant! and as i never said those exact words how can you know thats what i meant without assuming it?!

and yes i do have a problem with people refering to their children being dumped with some one else i leave my son with a child minder does that make me a bad mother because i have to work to pay for things? now call me picky but id rarther my son grow up with a mother that works and learns from a role model that has some self respect and dignaty all of these i belive you get from working!

Apologies Katy..after re reading Kirky's post it seems he is not the culprit for said assumption.

What does concern me and perhaps why I jumped to such a conclusion is your aparant distaste at parents feeling that their children would be 'dumped'...its a parental choice not a moral judgement on you. I understand your problem with it if situations were different I may choose childcare, however from my own personal experience and knowing my children...they have not benefitted from external care.

So what exactly do you think a mother who chooses to be a full time mum gives to her child? Does she have no self respect and dignity because she doesn't work 9 - 5? and thus be an unworthy role model? And why don't you see a full time mother as a worker?

the thing that people disagree with is when people who look after their children full time with with benifits and choose not to go to work if you have to live on benefits then get a job!!

can you just clear this bit up...cos this looks like conclusion jumping right here but I think you got a bit carried away with the typing ;) and I wouldn't like to jump again.

Apologies Katy..after re reading Kirky's post it seems he is not the culprit for said assumption.

What does concern me and perhaps why I jumped to such a conclusion is your aparant distaste at parents feeling that their children would be 'dumped'...its a parental choice not a moral judgement on you.

So what exactly do you think a mother who chooses to be a full time mum gives to her child? Does she have no self respect and dignity because she doesn't work 9 - 5? and thus be an unworthy role model? And why don't you see a full time mother as a worker?


ohhh i do dont get me wrong i understand all to wel that being a full time mother is as much hard work as any other job.

i guess i should have put my words a little better in my last post

i think that either way working full or part time or staying at home with her kids there are valuable lessons to be learnt for the child in relation to this i think its important to find a happy medium

as i said i work full time and ok ill admit im very bitter that i in actual fact have both the job of a mother and a second one on top its difficult we (mothers who work) are very tierd and stressed and feel undervalued we feel our children suffer in one way or another for us not being there as much as some parents but in the same breath we feel proud that we are showing them that you have to work in life its difficult to say the least

im by no means a career woman i work because i dont feel IMO thats its acceptable to live off social benefits

plus my ex doesnt support me or my son financially so i really do not have much choice but to work and before you say get the csa in theres more to it which i do not wish to share on here (sorry)

i think as mothers we feel imense pressure to protect our children and provide for them the best we can and when we feel that some one is knocking our attemps we ALL jump to the defence as thats what were programmed to do so to speak LOL

i guess im lucky in the sense that i dont really need to leave my child with strangers (child minders) as my mother has him when im working and im lucky enough to have a job that fits around school hours

but can in please ask you to take a few minuits to think of all tyhe jobs you have to do with your children and around your home (housekeeping) I.E washing, cooking, homework, school things and events, cleaning ect ect then imagine having to do ALL this as wel as hold down a job

i know all to well how hard it is to look after children and understand its a full time job with that alone never mind another job on top

can you just clear this bit up...cos this looks like conclusion jumping right here but I think you got a bit carried away with the typing ;) and I wouldn't like to jump again.

lol! well ill try and explain

what i was saying was that if people want to stay at home and look after thier kids full time then ok thats great good luck but why should the goverment pay you to do so? now i dont mean people who live with partners cos usually in my experiance one parent works so they support the other

god im rubbish at putting thoughts into writting:D

god im rubbish at putting thoughts into writting:D


yeh but you make interesting reading ;)

I am a uni student and my boyfriend does a rubbish job, and after we have paid our own rent and council tax, plus all the other bills (gas, electric, tv, home insurence, car insurence, tax, mot, petrol, telephone, etc) and food budget of under £20 i have exactly minus 20 left. I know for certain i would be better off on benifits, the LEA would even give me a few grand a year to support my partner, but i wouldn't do it. I remember been 18 with a new baby and thinking this is the life having everything paid for you, no wonder people stay on benefits. We manage because of over time and various other things that come up, but it is tough, but that is life. Its about pride in the long run there is legitimate reasons for claiming bnefts(Illness, being made reundant) and also i think if you chose to stay at home and look after your children until school age (after that theres no excuse), one parent should be allowed to do this in a single parent family this would mean staying on benifits.

yeh but you make interesting reading ;)

lol!! ermmm thanks:hihi:

also i think if you chose to stay at home and look after your children until school age (after that theres no excuse), one parent should be allowed to do this in a single parent family this would mean staying on benifits.
which is exactly my situation. Perhaps there should be a new term for single mothers who don't watch trisha?

yes I know the tear between home and career well Katy...I did the working mother bit and hated it simply because my son DID suffer as a result of not having at least one of his parents there full time. This may be because of the way my son is ( a whole other story)..every child is different.
I don't have the luxury of family nearby to help, don't recieve child support for reasons probably similar to yours katy. So I just have to wait till my youngest is old enough for school (not long now *rubs hands*) or wait till I win the lottery....I suspect school will hit first!

I do however agree wholeheartedly with Kirky's and others comments about those single mothers who see it as a meal ticket and have probably never lifted a finger in work and do little in their childs life for their benefit.

Im a single mum and I did work full time up until a year ago then I reduced my hours because my son was having a few problems in school and I wanted to devote more time to him.

I work 3 full days per week (Mon - Wed) and employ a child minder and the rest of the week I am at home with my son which both me and my son benefit from.

I recieve tax credits and child tax credits which help somewhat towards keeping the bills paid and a roof over our heads.

Unfortunately my ex has evaded paying child support for 5 years, the CSA are so useless in retrieving the money so I learn to survive without it, my family also offer me no support, which at times is really upsetting, recently I became ill and was advised to go to A&E, I rang up my mother to see if she could sit with my son as he was in bed asleep and had school the next day but her response was "I have to get up early" so I couldnt go.

Single parents dont have it easy, I certainly didnt choose to become a single parent, its the hardest job in the world especially when you have to juggle the choices to work or not to work and the prejudices those choices bring and the emotional, physical and financial strains and lack of support, but at the end of the day its all about survival.

Everyone has an opinion about single parents, if a single parent stays at home she is branded a bludger, if a single parent goes to work she is accused of having someone else raise her kids, if a single parents child / children misbehave in school its her fault because there is no father figure or no discipline.

There doesnt seem to be any empathy anymore about circumstances and what the situation was that caused you to become a single parent.

I have suffered the same prejudice time and time again, mainly from the teachers at my sons school and because I choose to work part-time as they feel I shouldnt work at all, my son has special needs and even though I do what I can to support the teachers regardless of my busy lifestyle its never enough and as a result the accusations I have endured have been soul destroying, but I fight the fight because I love my son and I welcome the responsibilty however hard and stressful it makes my life.

Squashie28 I can totally sympathiise it must be very difficult, i find raising a child very difficult with no family support and there is two of us (he is out all night and i am out all day), my child has been in nursery since she was 1 and you can never win there are always the people that think mothers should work and those that think you shouldn't.

Great isn't this guilt we seem to get as soon as we have given birth?

When I had my son (out of wedlock - shame on me, but I had been with his father 6 yrs) we were short of money, so I worked part time in the evenings so that I could be at home during the day with him. His dad would work in the day then would look after him in the evening when I went to work. Oh! and mum would have him during the hour or so before his dad got home. Where there's a will (and a helpful mum) there's a way.

Great isn't this guilt we seem to get as soon as we have given birth?


when my son was about four months old i mentioned that i wanted to go get a little part time job mostly to get me out the house and see other people just like 16 hours or sumat. my then farther in law made comments about it being wrong to leave my child ect ect i felt so guilty then the next day i said ive changed my mind about a job and my freind turned and said you lazy!! its true you cant win!

maybe we should all go to tony blairs and stage a sit in?

DAM IT ! we cant 50% of us have work to go to and the other 50% dont have a babysitter!!!:rolleyes: :P