Ive heard about this new deal for lone parents and it got me thinking, if a single mother got a job full time and lost her usual benefits, then started having to pay more rent and child minders etc and actually ended up being about 10 pounds a week better off, and she has left her children with a carer all day every day. Do you think she should still go back to work, or do you think she should stay at home and be with her children seeing as she would not be much better off working.
2007-02-16 04:36:00 · 17 answers · asked by charlie 3 in Entertainment & Music ➔ Polls & Surveys
I used to be a New Deal Lone Parent Adviser.
For many lone parents going back to work is not just about being better off financially. Many have already stayed at home for a long time and need to get out there and have some adult contact and interaction in order to keep some sanity and thus be a better parent. They also want to set an example for their children. Many have realised that children aren't at home forever and there will come a time when they leave and they want to make sure they have a better future. After a long time out of work they may well start off in a job where they get paid little more than when on benefits but with most I have worked with it does not stay that way for long. With the various skills developed through parenting (organisation, driver, chef, etc) they normally advance pretty quick.
Being in work does not mean you can not claim any benefits and if you are on a low income you may still be entitled to council tax benefit and housing benefit. There are tax credits to help top up incomes and assist with child care too.
Most who return to work and find themselves only 10 pounds better off are working on a part time basis and work during school hours so they still see their children as much as the did before.
I think it is usually better all round for someone to be in work and self reliant. It builds a better individual and has better long term benefits for the parent and child.
Also before someone comes off benefit and into work they can get an in work benefit calculation by an adviser which will show them a break down of finances on benefit and in work so they can make an informed decision.
At the moment a lone parent is not forced to work. It is still a choice but in very general terms I think it is better if they do.
Hope that answers your question.
I was also very careful not to say she, her etc as I have dealt with many lone parents who are men.
2007-02-17 11:17:53 · answer #1 · answered by â?¥MissMayâ?¥ 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
the county pays for my daycare so I can work . The county says I must work in order to get benefits. I want to stay home with my son , but the only way that can happen is if I marry a man with a good job. I also get my school paid for. So I figure , 2 years of my life working and going to school with my son in daycare and I will become a medical biller . Then I can stay home and work . My county only aids mothers for a total of 60 months . period . After that they wont help anymore . So I must hurry to get an education so Im not forced to marry for support.
2007-02-16 12:45:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is true that people who were "raised" living on public assistance are more likely to rely on it to survive once they are adults. However, it often does not make sense to work while your children are small. I don't know what 10 pounds equates to in USD, so I can't compare what she is faced with compared to what I have gone through in my own life. I found that if the kids are in school, it is easier-- then you are not paying AS MUCH for childcare, and not feeling as guilty about not being there for the little one. Perhaps she should just utilize the benefits while the child is small, and then once he/she starts school, mom could go back to work. That is what worked for me.
2007-02-16 12:44:25 · answer #3 · answered by mkt4434 1 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I think they should consider studying for a decent career so they would be better than just £10 a week better off.When i had my son i went back to university for 5 years to ensure i wouldnt fall into that trap.Its hard work but it pays off.
2007-02-16 12:40:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
That's why I stayed home when my children were young, I would end up paying more than I was making to put them in daycare!!
2007-02-16 12:39:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
the woman may not be better off by staying at home but her kids would benefit no end from her being at home with them
2007-02-16 14:14:28 · answer #6 · answered by dottydog 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I wonder why Britney Spears is such a poor mother. She has all the money in the world, doesn't have to work, and could afford to spend all her time with her kids. Instead she's become a ho-bag, shaved her head and is always drunk or stoned.
That's my thoughts. lol
2007-02-17 14:00:26 · answer #7 · answered by ♥Enya♥ 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Defintely work and set an example for the kids.
You can spend the evenings with them and possibly late afternoon too if your job allows for flexi-time.
2007-02-16 12:46:23 · answer #8 · answered by shirju_rich 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
stay home till the kids are in full time education then get a job - less child care to pay I guess
2007-02-16 12:42:10 · answer #9 · answered by caitlin_the_skeptic 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
She needs to work. Her future and her childrens futures are still in the making. Also her kids will be able to learn by example that hard work is necessary.
2007-02-16 12:39:43 · answer #10 · answered by luvmycrafties 4 · 4⤊ 1⤋