Stay-at-home mums should go to work!

[Staunton]

The conservatives would like us to believe that they support 'family values'. What they really stand for is wealth and privilege for their own families, whilst the rest of us toil and struggle to make ends meet.

 

In spite of clear evidence from mental health and social research that children need parents, and do better when there is a consistent, nurturing home environment, the tories tell us that mothers should 'do the right thing' and go to work.

 

What the tories cannot answer is the question – 'What work?'

 

There is a very high level of unemployment today in Britain. And if a mother of young children is lucky enough to find a job opportunity, the work is likely to be low paid, flexible (meaning evening and weekend, or early morning hours) and exhausting.

 

Maternity leave is just a start. Children need a loving and caring environment. And this is critical, not just in the first months after a baby is born, but during the first three years of life. So, if you are a mum or a dad, and you decide that one of you should be at home to provide a positive and nurturing environment, then that is indeed the truly correct thing to do.

 

'Freedom and choice'. That is the neoliberal mantra. But the tories don't like people to choose to stay at home to look after their children, and there is little freedom on offer for ordinary people.

 

Families should be allowed to make their own choices when it comes to parenting, being there for a toddler, how to arrange home life, who might work and who may stay at home.

 

This government is scapegoating the poorest and most vulnerable in society whilst they continue to support a corporate sector that is driving down wages, demanding ever greater 'flexibility' from its front line staff, making high profits and using tax havens in ordedr to avoid their social responsibilities..

[geared]

There is not a very high level of unemployment, stop spouting rubbish.

 

The question 'What work' is very valid tho, along with 'why work'

[janie48]

OP I agree with some of your points regarding the special parent/child relationship being of such major importance in the first years of the childs life It is anytime of course but the early years of a childs development psychologically should always be a priority of attention,especially in the early months of bonding.

Have to disagree on some of the political comments though,i was under the impression Labour and the Lib/dems held much the same position as the Tories on the issue of child care.

[truman]

There is a very high level of unemployment today in Britain. ..

 

Were you around in the 80's?

[Mister M]

I don't think there can be a blanket approach. People have different circumstances: Some have families that can look after their children while they work; some have children who have special needs; some live in areas where there is high unemployment and a lot of underemployment as well.

 

Many of the 'blue tops' are full of conflicting information, usual scare stories, and po faced coumnists who think they know all there is to know and are incredibly smug and sanctimonious about parents who work and parents that don't work.

 

Rather than bully from the pulpit, I'd much rather ministers focussed on getting growth in the economy and ensuring that there are good jobs out there rather than berating people for not wanting to skivvy for a pittance.

[Strix]

Events in my own extended family are demonstrating the damage to society that has been done by completely degrading the role of 'homemaker'. This role is an essential foundation to the whole family, young children, teenagers finding their feet in society, elderly or infirm extended family members

 

My grandmother is in hospital (in Liverpool), awaiting a care package to be put in place for her to come out. In a previous age there would have been family members available to ensure she got meals and medicine at the right time, but anybody who may have fulfilled this traditional role is currently out at work

 

How much is this care package going to cost the tax payer?

 

I also question the part this pressure to go out to work and abandon a home support role plays in the disintegration of the majority of relationships. We're not allowed to just enjoy the early years of our children. We're made to feel like failures if we're not out at work... and paying somebody to do the mothering for us, assuming our child isn't sick so we're letting an employer down and getting more pressure when we least need it

[maxmaximus]

The conservatives would like us to believe that they support 'family values'. What they really stand for is wealth and privilege for their own families, whilst the rest of us toil and struggle to make ends meet.

 

In spite of clear evidence from mental health and social research that children need parents, and do better when there is a consistent, nurturing home environment, the tories tell us that mothers should 'do the right thing' and go to work.

 

What the tories cannot answer is the question – 'What work?'

 

There is a very high level of unemployment today in Britain. And if a mother of young children is lucky enough to find a job opportunity, the work is likely to be low paid, flexible (meaning evening and weekend, or early morning hours) and exhausting.

 

Maternity leave is just a start. Children need a loving and caring environment. And this is critical, not just in the first months after a baby is born, but during the first three years of life. So, if you are a mum or a dad, and you decide that one of you should be at home to provide a positive and nurturing environment, then that is indeed the truly correct thing to do.

 

'Freedom and choice'. That is the neoliberal mantra. But the tories don't like people to choose to stay at home to look after their children, and there is little freedom on offer for ordinary people.

 

Families should be allowed to make their own choices when it comes to parenting, being there for a toddler, how to arrange home life, who might work and who may stay at home.

 

This government is scapegoating the poorest and most vulnerable in society whilst they continue to support a corporate sector that is driving down wages, demanding ever greater 'flexibility' from its front line staff, making high profits and using tax havens in ordedr to avoid their social responsibilities..

 

This is not just a Tory policy; labour pushed single mothers into work even though the end result increased benefits, having to pay child care was more expensive than paying the mother to stay at home.

 

The cost of housing pushed both parents into work, buying a house on one income become impossible for many.

[Staunton]

This is not just a Tory policy; labour pushed single mothers into work even though the end result increased benefits, having to pay child care was more expensive than paying the mother to stay at home.

 

The cost of housing pushed both parents into work, buying a house on one income become impossible for many.

 

We are told that Peter Mandelson called at a chip shop in his Hartlepool constituency one day. He ordered haddock and chips and, pointing to the mushy peas, asked for 'some of that guacamole'. These are perhaps his most famous words (whether or not he ever actually uttered them).

 

His second most famous comment cannot be disputed. He stated that new labour was 'intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich, as long as they pay their taxes'.

 

However, we now know that, in spite of Mr Mandelson's easy manner, those taxes were not being paid. For example, in 2006, the tax gap (that is money owed but not paid to HM Revenue and Customs) was in excess of £90 billion. That is ninety thousand million pounds.

 

Meanwhile, there was no apparent will on the part of new labour to address rising house prices, or to seek more humane conditions in the workplace - administrative demands were rising and work-place bullying had become routine within the public sector. These aspects were placing an intolerable strain on countless families across Britain.

 

If we as a society wish to see a nation in which families might flourish, where children receive the love and care that is essential if they are to thrive, where people can work without becoming harrassed, stressed and exhausted, and where there are the resources to provide support when we need it, then the corporate, monolithic structures of our public and private sectors must be transformed.

 

We ordinary people are the casualties as the multinationals continue to drive down wages, terms and conditions, and offshore their profits, while public sector institutions follow ruthless strategic models that protect senior executives whilst the front line falls to pieces and service failure becomes increasingly apparent.

 

If we care about our children, our families, our neighbours and our community, we must be clear about the threats that fragment our social bonds, and articulate a message that we matter more than remote economic doctrines that inevitably and always favour the richest global operators.

[Parvo]

good consistent childcare produces healthy well balanced children.

 

this does not have to be just a parent (why is it always considered the woman's primary role??).

 

Studies indicate that under the age of two childcare is best provided by a homely setting be that mother, father, family other, nanny, childminder etc. at either the child's or carers home.

 

Over the age of two children generally benefit most from being in small 'family ' group style nurseries until they reach school age.

[tinfoilhat]

I've no problem with stay at home mums, it depends on who is going to pay for it.