Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

Should lone parents be forced to work?

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
Saw this bought up again today - was very interesting to see views from lots of sides. Anyway - i don't think there's a story in the bbc atm but what do you guys think? Should lone parents be forced to work?
«13

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I think it would be counter-productive both to the parent and the child.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No. I was very 'lucky' when my dad died in the sense that he had taken out life insurance, so the mortgage on the house was paid off, and my mum had her widow's pension, so she chose not to work until I went to school, then she went to college [incidentally, she handed in her dissertation today :yippe: ] but we also had tougher times, and she had to take on 3 jobs at one point, because she had to. While I was ok during all of this, children aren't stupid, and among many other issues, seeing a parent struggle after being literally forced to work would take it's toll.

    Didn't Morgan Sperlock or Michael Moore (can't remember who) did a small feature during one of their films of single parents in the US having to work, and the effect it had on them and their children?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    go_away wrote: »
    Didn't Morgan Sperlock or Michael Moore (can't remember who) did a small feature during one of their films of single parents in the US having to work, and the effect it had on them and their children?

    Yeah Michael Moore did a bit about the "Welfare to Work" scheme in the US in Bowling for Columbine. That was a pretty extreme case of this policy though, IIRC it subsidized long haul bus journeys to work in minimum wage jobs, travelling for hours to work for a pittance that would not even sustain the household. The case he highlighted was a single mother who was forced to work two such jobs, but was evicted because she couldn't pay her rent. She had to leave her 6 year old son at her brothers house, and whilst she was on the bus to one of her jobs he found his uncles gun, took it to school, and shot a 6 year old girl.

    Congrats to your mum btw
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They shouldn't be forced to work, but they shouldn't be automatically immune from it either. Plenty of two parent familys have two parents that work, and in many ways that's no different.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    no, they shouldnt be forced to work, but they should have plenty of help and encouragement if thats what they decide to do.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They shouldn't be forced to work, but they shouldn't be automatically immune from it either. Plenty of two parent familys have two parents that work, and in many ways that's no different.

    True, but at least they have each other's mutual support, and probably that of two sets of grandparents (and other extended family members as well).
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ah ok, pretty extreme example then! And cheers btw

    Ballerina, do you know if the basis of the story is that if lone parents don't work, it's assumed that they'd be claiming benefits or something? I'd imagine that would be the case if it was on BBCs 'Have your Say' webpage.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    carlito wrote: »
    True, but at least they have each other's mutual support, and probably that of two sets of grandparents (and other extended family members as well).

    Not in a lot of cases. Very few families now get much support from their extended family. We only have one set of grandparents who are in another country so are neither use nor ornament when it comes to my parents working, and I'm pretty sure that applies to a lot of people.

    What should be a more feasible option for single parents is being able to work in a reasonable part time job without disqualifying themselves from all support.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    go_away wrote: »
    Ballerina, do you know if the basis of the story is that if lone parents don't work, it's assumed that they'd be claiming benefits or something? I'd imagine that would be the case if it was on BBCs 'Have your Say' webpage.

    chances are that they are though
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    They shouldn't be forced to work, and a single parent with children under the age of 5 shouldn't have to work at all, unless they want to, as I consider parenthood to be a full-time job with very important responsibilities.

    Over the age of 5 parents should be encouraged to work, by properly remunerating them for their labours- an increase in the minimum wage from its current offensive level wouldn't go amiss. Of course "encouragement" normally means cutting benefits, which is a fucking disgrace, because the Government are too busy siphoning money from the poor to pay for the rich because the rich give good back-handers and the poor don't.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I agree - while they're too young to be in school and with childcare costing an arm and a leg, it can be impossible - especialy when you don't have any support. Is it age 11/12 they're cutting it to? My mum works 4 days a week, with wednesdays being 8-6, and then at weekends she's with her partner most of the time. So we don't see much of her, she even had to up her hours when we started getting support because they're not that much tbh. People on low incomes can get in a bit of a paradox - they're probably no better off working part time (as that's usually all they can do) than they are on benefits, so it just makes sense to stay on benefits. I can see it from both sides - we hardly get to see her but thats probably more to my parents separating. But she'd hate to not work at all.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    not that easy to find a job with school friendly hours though unfortunately.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    not that easy to find a job with school friendly hours though unfortunately.



    lady i work with doe the job we do, cause it is school hours (technician) at the secondary school opposite her kids primary
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Its hard enough sorting out childcare when theres two parents at home so if theres only 1 then it can be a big issue.
    Look at how often schools have holidays, its every other week. They have just had a week off and I think they are off for another 2 weeks end of March. Then you have May hols and then the 6 weeks hols so if you dont have family to help your wage aint gonna cover childcare.

    I feel sorry for lone parents who want to work but they would be worse off if they did. I dont think its right to force lone parents to work but maybe put more money into affordable childcare. I dont have to pay for childcare but have a friend that does and she is hating the thought of the 6 weeks hols, she is gonna be a lot worse off as she has no family to help her.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    lady i work with doe the job we do, cause it is school hours (technician) at the secondary school opposite her kids primary

    Im not saying there are NO jobs that fit in with school hours, but that theyre not exactly abundant.
    A lot of two parent families find it hard to juggle childcare too. Most employers arent as flexible as they could/should be and a lot would just rather employ people without children because what is a single parent going to do if her childminder is sick one day - the mother has to take the day off. Nurseries may be more relaible but not very many people can afford them unless its a damn well paid job. Even a childminder is likely to be around £4 or £5 an hour if not more, and thats the cheapest childcare you can get. If someone is working in a supermarket - how much money have they got left over after childcare is taken out? Even with working families tax credit helping with SOME childcare costs - that doesnt apply after the child is at school I believe.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Don't you think that the word "forced" sums this whole idea up?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    BeckyBoo wrote: »
    Its hard enough sorting out childcare when theres two parents at home so if theres only 1 then it can be a big issue.
    Look at how often schools have holidays, its every other week. They have just had a week off and I think they are off for another 2 weeks end of March. Then you have May hols and then the 6 weeks hols so if you dont have family to help your wage aint gonna cover childcare.

    I feel sorry for lone parents who want to work but they would be worse off if they did. I dont think its right to force lone parents to work but maybe put more money into affordable childcare. I dont have to pay for childcare but have a friend that does and she is hating the thought of the 6 weeks hols, she is gonna be a lot worse off as she has no family to help her.

    This is true.
    My mum's a single parent to me. She used to have to take 2 half hour bus journeys in the morning and the evening every day to get me to a child minder. And she was only £20 better off at the end of the week with childcare and travelling fees.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    BeckyBoo wrote: »
    Its hard enough sorting out childcare when theres two parents at home so if theres only 1 then it can be a big issue.
    Look at how often schools have holidays, its every other week. They have just had a week off and I think they are off for another 2 weeks end of March. Then you have May hols and then the 6 weeks hols so if you dont have family to help your wage aint gonna cover childcare.

    I feel sorry for lone parents who want to work but they would be worse off if they did. I dont think its right to force lone parents to work but maybe put more money into affordable childcare. I dont have to pay for childcare but have a friend that does and she is hating the thought of the 6 weeks hols, she is gonna be a lot worse off as she has no family to help her.

    I'm sure I read somewhere (probably in the nursery I do my work placement at) that it's possible get funding or grants or some sort of help with child care - can't remember though.

    At the nursery I do my placement at, there's children (and a few babies I think) that are there until 5.30 and that's just so that the parents can work and can afford to send their child off to nursery whilst they earn money.

    Personally I think that lone parents should be encouraged and helped in finding work, but they shouldn't be forced into it.
    They shouldn't be forced to work, and a single parent with children under the age of 5 shouldn't have to work at all, unless they want to, as I consider parenthood to be a full-time job with very important responsibilities.

    Agreed
    Over the age of 5 parents should be encouraged to work, by properly remunerating them for their labours- an increase in the minimum wage from its current offensive level wouldn't go amiss. Of course "encouragement" normally means cutting benefits, which is a fucking disgrace, because the Government are too busy siphoning money from the poor to pay for the rich because the rich give good back-handers and the poor don't.

    What is the current minimum wage?

    With regards to cutting benifits, can't someone work a certain amount of hours not to get them cut? Or is it that they have to earn under a certain amount of money?:confused:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The current minimum wage for people over 24 is £5.35 an hour. Working a 35 hour week that comes in at a smudge over £9,000pa.

    For single parents it often ends up that most of what you earn from the extra work is swallowed by the amount of money that is deducted from benefits, and the rest is swallowed by the extra travelling costs.

    There are flexible jobs about, but they rarely pay much more than minimum wage.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    We have a son, chris works full time and i work part time now. I was a full time mummy until just before he turnt 2.
    James goes to a cheapish nursery and we get some childcare costs help through tax credits however, it works out i am not earning much really.
    But to be honest, its enough to just ease things just a little bit.
    If i was single theres no way i would be able to afford to work. Which i think is a shame for people who want to work part time but are no better off.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    the childcare element of working tax credit is 70% of childcare costs up to a maximum per week, though you give them the average weekly cost including the inflated costs during the holiday. Once you are over about £60 per week better off than you would be without working -the 30% you pay yourself for childcare, you basically lose 60% of everything you earn that goes to council tax and then off your housing benefit amount. So, you end up being about £60 a week better off before work costs like travel and your 30% of childcare, after that you can work loads on top of the pressures of single parenting but not feel like you are any better off, coz you're not really. The advantage is though that you are getting work experience that can mean you do end up in a much better paid job, but it would have to be a MUCH better paid job than average to FEEL the financial benefit. Most part-time jobs are pretty crap. Mothers face the most discrimination in the workplace apparantly, and I can believe it as none of my friends with companies like to employ women with young children or those they consider of childbearing age because they "take too much time off for runny noses" or "bugger off on maternity leave" *sigh*
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    Mothers face the most discrimination in the workplace apparantly

    There is a thread on this in P&D I think.
    and I can believe it as none of my friends with companies like to employ women they consider of childbearing age because they "take too much time off for runny noses" or "bugger off on maternity leave" *sigh*

    Despite the fact that not every single woman out there would want to have children at a certain age.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ha, yeah- that's why it's discrimintaion init!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6418305.stm

    If you are a single parent you could be expected to find work when your child turns eleven, if you don't they are thinking of cutting your benefits.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6418305.stm

    If you are a single parent you could be expected to find work when your child turns eleven, if you don't they are thinking of cutting your benefits.

    at eleven i really do think single parents should be made to work, even if its just part time, they have it job free for eleven years surly its time they start to put something back into the country that has surrported them and there child?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Doesn't looking after children count then?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    yeah but what if everyone decides that what they are going to give up work, its just a little unfair that some people make that choice and expect other people to support them
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    For a start, not everyone is going to decide to give up work. Most people can't afford to. Secondly, we should be supporting each other, that's what makes a society work and be cohesive.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    All families are different, but if someone is a single parent and their kid is of secondary school age, the parent does not need to be at home full time to pick up the child and do everything for them.

    Maybe I'm biased as my Mum always worked and I learned to be independent and let myself in, cook basic meals and just generally look after myself.

    But I don't see why the state should pay for a mum of a 15-year-old kid to stay at home. Obviously with younger children there is more need, they can't be left alone. I generally support the idea but workplaces should be better with job-sharing/flexible hours/maybe childcare, to make the idea more viable.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What about an 11 year old kid?
Sign In or Register to comment.