Too poor to stay warm

[Russethouse]

Personally I wish more parents had the choice of whether the mother ( or father) worked in children's pre school years at least...childhood goes so quickly...

[YCCMB]

It does, RH..but I think I was a better parent to my children as a working mother. I used that word "I" with intent. I appreciate that others feel differently. Like children, I guess adults are all individuals.

[Russethouse]

I'm sure lots of parents feel the same, and that is fine, but from the FB groups I'm on it's obvious that some dread leaving their babies and the whole childcare scenario is costly and good childcare not always easy to find...

[YCCMB]

It's unbelievable now how much childcare costs. We drove past a day nursery the other day and a sign outside was advertising places at £54 a DAY!!

I seem to remember paying not much more than that for a live-in nanny for a week......and less for an au pair.

[NickP]

Your quite right Betty, our daughter pays just under that and if the Nursery decides that the little one has a sniffle they won't allow him in, but they still have to pay, as they do when  they go on holiday.

Funnily enough I think the child care attitude has changed these days, it's now quite normal as it was after the war when my sister attended a local council nursery; so that Mum could go to work, but they were free.

 Later on in the seventies when our kids were arriving; my wife just did what most young mums did, she gave up work to bring up the children. Although I must say the working Mum syndrome today seems a necessity   as  peoples expectations of material things are higher; and the extra wage is wanted. We never missed my wife's wages as even then Nurses were paid appallingly badly.

I must say though; having seen two of my grandchildren going to nursery from an early age I've been quite impressed with the social skills they learn at an early age. So maybe there's good and bad in the system

[Russethouse]

My two went to nursery from pretty much the moment they were three, part time, worked well, but when I see young mums looking for recommendations for nursery's full time for children of anything from 4 or 5 months old I feel sad.....

The nursery they both attended had been built for wartime working Mums and at one stage had little beds so the full time children could have an afternoon nap, which they did right up until the eighties

And with nursery costs so high, I have to wonder how worthwhile it really is.....especially for more than one child....

[YCCMB]

Trouble is, RH, that if you do want to return to work, the maternity leave period in the UK is so pitifully short that you do have to go back when your child is quite young. Compared to elsewhere in Europe, I think the UK's maternity leave allowance is still pitifully short.

[Russethouse]

Two ladies I know of are going back when their babies are a year, which I think was done by working more or less to term. As it happens both partners are in the hospitality industry so they will have Dads around for some of the time...but I wouldn't want to give up seeing my child crawling or walking for the first time or any of the other milestones

I know, I'm just soft and old fashioned....

[Hoddy]

Like you Russethouse I was able to be a stay at home mother until my youngest was three. We weren't well off, but neither were we desperate. Today there are many more single mothers with non paying non resident parents so work is not really a choice unless one decides to live on benefits.

Additionally the cost of houses is so high these days that it seems necessary for both parents to go out to work even if they don't really want to.

[idun]

Old fashioned? give me a break. What is old fashioned about the instinct to see one's kids develop.

And cheap child minding, well, that is what it is.

One could earn the same stacking shelves, maybe more, so children have less value than a tin of beans........ what a world we live in. And this if with families who usually 'plan' in our societies.

And I understand that life is expensive, too expensive........ the hertiage of greed of my generation. So sad.

The world is an awful, rum old place.

incidentally, I do know many young women in the UK who take a year off when they have their babies. And I realise that Dads can now take paternity leave, and only know of one who has.

[Patf]

So why are nursery fees so high now? Is it because of all the insurances and H &S requirements? That's what happened to so called Care Homes.

Ours all went to preschool nursery - two in Singapore which was v. cheap. And one in UK which was very free and easy. They had baked beans for lunch every day - which pleased our daughter as she loves them, and she's not overweight as a result.

[Russethouse]

The number of children per carer has probably improved which makes things more expensive....and there are lots of rules and regs - for instance each child has like a daily diary kept (well that's what my god daughter who is a Montessori trained nanny at a nursery tells me )

If you have more than one child at full time nursery you are looking at around £2000 a month out of your net pay - Ok there are vouchers etc., but in some cases I doubt there's much left over to go toward the mortgage...

When my son was a baby and my daughter was at nursery I did things like Tupperware and Avon to fit in, then when he went to nursery I did merchandising and delivering property papers to Estate agents, plus had a team of paper boys and girls who delivered the local weekly rag and collected the money......we managed.....

 

[YCCMB]

It's getting worse. All nurseries (and, I think, though I may be wrong) have to be inspected by OFSTED now, plus I seem to remember legislation being passed that people working in childcare now need a degree. FGS, as if a baby needs a degree-qualified carer.

I didn't stay at home with my kids. Well, I did after the first and soon realised it was a mistake. I guess everyone makes their own decisions, but I would never criticise anyone for deciding to be a stay-at-home parent, so I kind of expect the same courtesy in return. We are all different.

[Russethouse]

Quite...

However lots of young Mums I see post on social media seem to have little choice, or think they don't...they'd like to stay at home but don't think they can afford it....

 

[Judith]

OK, I never had children, partly choice, but also other things, so I didn't face the choice of work or stay home.  But I do remember that even when both of us were working it was not exactly easy to make ends meet, and nor we were extravagant spenders at all.  But then, we did not earn huge salaries either, even towards the end of our careers.

But if it costs that much to pay for nursery places I do wonder if it is worth the working to pay for it - just think how much pleasure you get out of seeing your child develop.

In those of my family who do have children, my sister gave up teaching at least whilst the kids were young, but returned later (not entirely successfully, but that's another story!).  Of the next generation, only one has been a stay-at-home mum, and some of that was lack of career choice in her chosen profession, but also because she wanted to.  It helped that her hubby had a well enough paid job to allow it, with no comuting costs, as he works a short car drive away - super! - but also it meant that, like  most of us, they did without the nicer materialistic things in life, and took cheaper holidays - like camping. 

It boils down to choice, but some young people today do not seem to accept that having a family means something else has to give.

[chessie]

OK - here goes - and I'm going to get a lot of stick for this - but please think this through before shouting at me.

Up until the Womens Equal Pay Act - mortgages were based on 2.5 or 3  times the annual main salary (ie the man's salary) plus .50 of womans salary (because a married woman didn't earn as much, and was likely to give up work when children were born).   That was the assumption - it meant that house prices were relatively stable, and it was possible to live cheaply in a flat, or save like mad for a deposit for a house  -but wages and house prices were stable.

Then along comes the Equal Pay act (and I do not want us to get diverted into discussing the rights and wrongs of that).

But it had a huge impact;  couples realised that, because of the Act, salaries of both partners in a marriage (and yes, that's how it was in the 60's and 70s) could be 2.5 times JOINT annual salary - suddenly couples could 'afford' a bigger mortgage and a 'better house'.   The result was the house prices zoomed upwards in the early 70s - simply because of the fact that couples could afford bigger mortgages.   Great.   Except that when couples wanted to start a family, suddenly what could be afforded on both salaries - really wasn't possible on just one salary.   So we had the very sad situation where women who had families were more or less forced to return to work to help pay the mortgage.   So the full-time working woman, with needs for full-time nursery care was born.

It is one of the sadder aspects of the Womens Equality Act - the women's libbers thought it was marvellous;  yes it was - but it had unforeseen impacts, which means today's young families  have a much more difficult financial time thatn young families did in the 1960s/1970s.

I can remember my father being horrified that I intended returning to full-time work when my daughter was one year old (for personal reasons I wasn't a happy stay-at-home Mum) - he even volunteered the services of my mother to 'care' for my daughter (without consulting my mother !!!).

I feel very sorry for today's young women;   they really do not, because of financial circumstances, have the choices that we had back in the 1960s and 1970s.   To a certain extent, they really were the 'good old days'.

And as for being 'chained' to the kitchen sink;  my mother in the late 1950s and 1960s certainly was not chained to the sink;  she was a nurse, enjoyed her job, enjoyed using her skills, worked part-time - and made the most of her non-working time.   Washing machines, Hoovers, etc made a huge difference to women's lives.     The impression given on the 'Back in Time' TV programme really wasn't strictly accurate.    My mother would enjoy several hours soaking up the sunshine in the afternoon during the summer;  and made a lot of her dresses, and mine during the winter months.   But she would have been irritated if anyone had said she was 'tied to the kitchen sink' - she certainly was not.

And oh - the freedom of the simple bicycle; no gears, just a simple bike with a saddle bag (luxury) the chance to get away from family and spend time with friends riding for hours, and miles, round the local countryside lanes.   No motorways, no by-passes, no high-speed HGVs;  just hedgerows, and birdsong and fresh rain on the face.   Sheer, utter, total bliss and freedom.   My brothers hated it that I had this freedom - and couldn't wait until they had their own bikes.   And damn me if they didn't want to follow me everywhere - even when I was meeting my boyfriends to go for a cycle ride!!!   (Kid brothers - who'd have them ? !!)

[lindal1000]

Like you Judith, I've never had children so never had to make that decision, so can only speak from what has happened to friends. Amongst those who have had kids after the age of 30, it has often been the father who has stayed at home. In many cases this has been more by chance than design..ie redundancy. In one case the woman really enjoyed her job but the man hated his, so was happy to leave. I also know a couple of gay couples who have kids and in both cases one of them has put their career on hold for a few years. However they are all in reasonably paid for jobs and can afford the mortgage repayments on one salary. The people I know in lower paid jobs have had to return to work and rely on unpaid family carers

[lindal1000]

Like Judith, I have no kids, so never had to make that decision. However I often used to think that had I ever wanted them, the choice would have been children or a house, as I would not have been able to make the mortgage payments on my one bedroom flat without working.

Recent friends who had children seem to have taken a different approach, and in many cases the father has stayed at home. This has sometimes been chance rather than planning. Ie redundancy. In that case it makes sense that the person with the job continues that role. I guess what I'm getting at is that even if you agree that it is possible to support a family on one salary, there is no guarantee that it is the mother that gets to stay at home and one part of the couple will have to miss out to some degree.

[Russethouse]

Chessie, I agree with you and am pretty sure that some one cleverer than me could prove it with statistics.....

Yes, automatic washing machines etc. are wonderful inventions, but they were suppose to give us more leisure - instead we just try and cram more and more in to our days....we have changed direction but I'm not sure all of it is really 'progress'...

[lindal1000]

I'm not sure you can blame it on the invention of the washing machine though..or the women's movement. The problem is an economic one, in that the nature of employment changed. Less jobs in heavy, manual work and more jobs in service industries, light production, office type work..all jobs that were traditionally considered women's work. If women didn't work the economy wouldn't function.

My dentist was telling me that 80% of applicants for dental school in France are women now. Why is that? Nothing discourages men from applying but apparently they don't.

[Russethouse]

With the washing machine and other labour saving devices I think we have shot ourselves in the foot, instead of taking advantage of the leisure they were supposed to give we have filled the time with more work.....

[YCCMB]

My mum was a fairly reluctant stay-at-home mum. I got the impression that there was, back in the late 50's and early 60's, a degree of stigma attached to the idea of a man "letting" his wife go out to work. In fact, in later life, my mum told me that when I was at secondary school, she'd been offered, and accepted a job, but my dad told her in no uncertain terms that if she took it, he'd stop giving her housekeeping money!

I can see that today there are many reasons why some women go to work after having children, and quite a few of them are not so much choice but necessity. My brother-in-law once suggested in complete seriousness (he's a bit weird) that the whole socio-economic crisis and in particular the property price boom, could be swiftly and neatly controlled by the simple expedient of actively prohibiting women from working. We don't see much of him, thankfully ?

Funnily enough, a few weeks ago during half term, I had cause to pop into town for something, and it was the first time I'd really noticed how many smallish school-aged children were tramping around the shops with very haggard-looking grandparents. I thought then how many of the grandparents must have been pressed into service in order for the parents not to have to take precious time off work....

[suein56]

[quote user="You can call me Betty"]Funnily enough, a few weeks ago during half term, I had cause to pop into town for something, and it was the first time I'd really noticed how many smallish school-aged children were tramping around the shops with very haggard-looking grandparents. I thought then how many of the grandparents must have been pressed into service in order for the parents not to have to take precious time off work....[/quote]

Exactly what we see every school holiday hereabouts. Either said harrassed grandparents have retired to-be-by-the-sea and they are obliged to amuse their grandchildren during the holiday or they open up their holiday homes especially to occupy said youngsters.

Though I do get the feeling that it is not an option for the parents to take time off other than during the obligatory 2/3 (or 4) weeks in high season.

Sue