Homemaking

Well, being a stay at home mum myself, I have to agree with you. I don't think it's fair at all that people who choose to have kids and not look after them should have extra money to pay someone else to do their job. If someone has kids, it is their responsibility to look after them so yes, it's a job, the only truly full-time job and even if stay at home mums were given the same amount of money as some who get help with childcare, the amount would probably still work out at less that £1 an hour.

I agree with the pumpkin one. I get annoyed when Mothers tell people they don't work, how can you NOT work when you look after children? I personally stayed at home with my son most of the time, occasionally I had the odd day or two when I worked the full day, and the occasional week where I worked the full week, but that's because there was no-one else to do it. At the time I HAD to work so as we had a decent amount of money coming in, and I couldn't get any help with child care costs, we were in the wrong category for that. Yes, I do think stay at home parents should get paid for looking after their kids, up until they're a certain age.

I agree with everything that Pumpkinjam has said. I am a stay at home mom of 4 kids. I live in the United States. I was 16 when I had my first child and the government paid for her daycare while I finished school. When I graduated it stopped. I work full time made $180 a week and paid $85 a week for daycare. Then I got married and had baby number 2. If I would have kept working I would have made $180 and paid $170 in daycare. Now I would have to pay $340 a week. So it would cost me to go to work. No we aren't rich and no my kids don't go without. My husband works his butt off to put a roof over our heads and food on the table and so I can stay at home with our kids. Here in the US you get part of what you payout in childcare back on your taxes too. I think it would be wonderful and very helpful to get part of that $17,000 that I would have to pay in childcare, for taking care of my kids instead of leaving it to someone else to take care of them.

I totally AGREE with you!! If more parents stayed home with their children, kids would be better behaved and not get into so much trouble. Leaving our kids with a sitter, we just never know what the sitter will teach our kids!! Wouldn't it be better if the parent stayed home and taught their own kids how to behave and what not, than a sitter? I am a single mom and wish all the time, that I was home with my kids instead of a sitter! When I am at home, I know what my kids are up to, but when I am at work, all I can do is but wonder. M Most importantly the children need their parents at home than a stranger. Our kids need us and not some stranger telling and teaching them what to do and what not to do. Besides, our kids are going to be told and taught by alot of others, on what is right and what is wrong, what to do and what not to do, in the future, like for example; teachers. So, yes, yes, yes! Our kids need us and the security that we can provide them, by being there for them when they need us the most. Parents should go out on strike or something of the likes. We should sign a petition or something, inorder to get attention for stay-at-home parents (and parents who want to stay home and raise their own children) and get paid! This could could definatley change the course of our future and make a better life for our kids!

Reading the answers here suggests that Americans haven't really got the same notion of the Welfare State that we have here in Britain. I agree that it's not an easy concept if you are not brought up with it. For the benefit of the non-British, everyone who works pays into National Insurance (which is quite substantial - around half as much again as Income Tax). This is used to pay for our free healthcare, partly free dental treatment and also to help pay the various benefits for which one becomes eligible if one is, unfortunately, out of work or on a low inclome. Some of these benefits can help to cover childcare for mothers who wish to work in order to supplement the family income. Sometimes working mums seem to work part time in order to have just enough money to pay for the childcare - which is a crazy situation! I also believe that a child is better off cared for by family (not necessarily mum) up to the age of 3 or 4, at least. In many cultures it is accepted that the grandparents will do a lot of childcare but our culture has largely lost the 'extended family' ethos. Whether the State should help to fund childcare at home is a difficult one. One could argue that a child has better and more secure early development when cared for by its mother and that this will tend to make for more stable and mature adults, thus reducing crime, increasing the level of education attained and thus the earning power and skills, also, very likely, having an effect on the general level of health in the community, so it would be an investment worth making. The problem with this is that our Government is not truly interested in long-term investment. All that really matters is will they have enough plus points to show in order to win the next election! 15 to 20 years before an investment policy shows a return is far too long for most Governments, who can only expect to be in office for one or two terms (if they are lucky).

never thought of that, but i totally agree with you. i think a child should be raised by their mother when their little.

I think it would be worth it, actually, for tax payers to do such a thing.. Many felt that the tax marriage penalties and some other things of social orgs, actually encouraged lack of benefit for "family" whatsoever.. I'm not much for government programs for every thing in life, but this might not be bad :))

I've always said that, at very least, the government should give a tax break to families that have at least one stay at home parent.

I think parents who choose to stay at home should be given childcare fees, cooks wages and cleaners wages, but that's not going to happen unless a Mum with hardly any money becomes Prime Minister, but you need money to do that.

I know I am not going to be too popular for this but I feel, people choose what they want and if one wants to have children then she should stay home and look after her children and not expect to get paid...maybe the Government should spend more money and have new ideas on how everyone can live more comfortably so even the people without children and single people can live comfortably...

I never thought of that, but that would be great. The only way people can really stay home with their babies is if they have the money to. So many people don't have the money and you can really tell the difference when they get into school.

The only response I have to this question is society is really screwed up these days. If the cost of living wasn't so high we could all stay home with our children. Unfortunately, that is not the case. You must either cut back and live on one income or go to work. You certainly shouldn't get paid for caring for your own children. We are a materialistic society and as a result we have to live on two incomes.

I think that if you cannot care for your own child, don't have them. The first few years are bonding times. Who loves a child more than it's own mother and father?

I wish I could get paid for staying home with my children. As it is, I go to school full time and work part time at home and I used to have someone here to help with my kids but she has left now. I have someone who is supposed to come stay and help but hasn't made it here yet and I'm reallt struggling to get the things done I need to do to bring in the money.

Oh, I think that would be great!

Nope. I'm a SAHM and I don't think you should get paid extra for watching your own kids. Your their parent take care of them. Don't try to use a monetary unit to bribe people to stay home that maybe shouldn't stay home.

No, I don't think a stay at home parent should be given childcare fees. The childcare fees would have to come from somewhere and that somewhere would be my taxes. I work hard enough to make money to care for my own children. I don't need to have to work even harder to earn more money because I have more taxes being taken out of my pay because someone had a child and is staying home to care for the child they decided to have. Yes, taking care of children is hard work. I know, I have two of my own. But it is up to the parent to provide for them, not the government and other tax payers.

Wow! That would be wonderful! I'm trying to get the process started in my becoming a certified respite caregiver so that I can earn a little money from taking care of my daughter. I'm hoping to be able to set that money aside to go to school to be an interior designer.

Well i'm a SAHM and let me tell ya its hard work. The hardest job i've ever had. I have 3 kids. two under 5 yrs old. Its pretty hard and i think you have to be cut out for it. NOT Everybody can do it. Your kids or not, its pretty tough. You need lots of patients. I know lots of people that can't do it and choose to go back to work even tho they don't have to. Its a 24 hours a day job. I love being a SAHM and i have my days where its really hard, but thankfully i have a great husband that supports me and helps me a lot when hes home from work. He's also very understanding of me needing my alone time whenever i need it. So that helps a ton, cuz if i didn't have that i'd probably go coocoo for coco puffs!

I think that until your child is ready to go to school that its best to stay at home and raise them, Then learn so fast during this stage in their life and they are only children for a short amount of time. I do however also think that alot of people cannot afford to have 1 parent or both stay at home all day. I think with prices of everything going up and up like house prices it is getting virtually impossible for first time buyers and newly weds and young familys to even afford to buy a house to begin with. Employers pay women and are now paying the men also maternity leave and i think its great that guys are recieving it to.