Good news for you gran/child carers

Our society and economy as we now know it would collapse in the blink of an eye if this rubbish ever came to pass.
The vast majority of children do grow up in stable, family environments whether both parents work or whether one stays at home. They are spouting nonsense (again), and jumping on the bandwagon of generalisation.

I know a fair few women who earn more than their husbands/partners - seems unfair if they have to stay home instead of them!

I'm sure that Reform have a simple, uncosted, unsupported -by -any- data policy which will bring this into being within weeks.

I remember many years ago a friend was involved in the conversion of buildings (I forget the original purpose) into a home for single parents. it was in a southern county, somewhere quite expensive and the locals were opposed. At the time I wondered where they were going to get their gardeners and cleaners etc if not from within that village.

I'm one of four. All born before my parents reached 30. They wanted 2 of each and that's what they got. They did their very best for us and I don't think that we missed out on anything. Back then however, there was no social media telling us that we were missing out.

My mum stayed at home whilst we were young, apart from nursing a few nights a week. Like many of her generation I suspect that once we were all at school she did find life a bit boring. My father taught her to trace and she worked locally at first and then at one of the London University colleges where she traced scientific drawings for publication. She enjoyed all aspects of working and her salary paid for some of the finer things in life as we grew older and had indeed (2 of us) left home.

M0nica

I always thing this thing about 'not having children if you cannot afford them' is daft.

Some people have much loved children and bring them up successfully on tiny incomes, Others pontificate in the papers that they earn £10k and cannot afford tto have children !

Nor can anyone read the future and a family comfortable off when a baby is born, may at a later stage in childhood be in poverty. Illness, death and desertion can pull the financial rug from a family without notice.

I always thing this thing about 'not having children if you cannot afford them' is daft.

It is daft MOnica, and I have no patience for it.

If prospective parents were to sit down with a spreadsheet and work out the total costs and take into consideration the 'unknowns' of life which no-one can really calculate, then quite a lot of people might decide against having children!

And as Farage and his mates want us to cut immigration and rely on home-labour, we'd eventually be in a right old pickle.

Such individuals that say this usually end up with "you want them? You pay for them" As if they were talking about owning greyhounds or something. It seems to pass by their notice that children will be future workers and tax payers, in economic terms, they are a resource. I bet they moan about immigrants too.

grumppa

Sums up the whole Farage approach. The man is poison.

Farage is toxic indeed

I always thing this thing about 'not having children if you cannot afford them' is daft.

Some people have much loved children and bring them up successfully on tiny incomes, Others pontificate in the papers that they earn £10k and cannot afford tto have children !

Nor can anyone read the future and a family comfortable off when a baby is born, may at a later stage in childhood be in poverty. Illness, death and desertion can pull the financial rug from a family without notice.

Siope

And what do they intend to do about the hit to the pensions (state and private) of these ‘lucky’ stay at home parents?

Yes, I wondered about that.

It's not going to happen anyway, but it would be interesting to know the answer.

Also, with the cost of living as it is now - how will this hypothetical family manage one on wage, especially if it's a low-wage?

One individual on another social media site did have an answer though - he said you shouldn't have children if you can't afford them.

But if only the middle classes and wealthy procreated, there might be a future short supply of shop assistants, cleaners, health-care workers, delivery drivers, and all those other positions that support the infrastructure of a civilised society. I don't think those demographics would encourage their offspring to work in any of those fields.

Sums up the whole Farage approach. The man is poison.

That is going backwards to a time when women were paid just a fraction of a man's salary with equal work. Now that women are in fact the only parent in many families, they are still not given equal pay which results in "child poverty". Is part of the reform to have unequal pay because women have no need for proper salaries?

keepingquiet

Bumface

I read a report fairly recently (sorry I can't quote a link) that found that children often fared better emotionally and educationally in a one parent family (almost always with the mother) than living with both parents in an unhappy, abusive relationship (the abuser being nearly always the father).

Another flaw in this proposed policy is that not all married women are born housewives and mothers, though, of course there is nothing wrong with those who are.

Could you share a link to this report please?

Oh I've just noticed you can't.

Link or no link, I think it's fairly obvious that children who continuously experience the stress of an abusive relationship between their parents would fare better with only one loving parent. Be it the father or mother.

And...

An estimated 4.4% of people aged 16 years and over (5.7% women and 3.2% men) experienced domestic abuse in the last year. This equates to an estimated 2.1 million adults (1.4 million women and 751,000 men).
(SOURCE: LATEST AVAILABLE FIGURES, 2023, FROM THE ONS)

Although the majority of homicide victims are men, they are also responsible for far more homicides than women. 9 out of 10 suspects - are men.
(SOURCE: Statista Research Department, Feb 29, 2024 -England and Wales)

So more men abuse women than the other way round, and women are more likely to be killed by them.

But even if there's no physical violence - because not all abusive relationships feature it, it's hard to believe that constant arguments between two stressed, angry and unhappy people, give children that sense of wellbeing and security that they need.

I remember it from my own childhood, and it was frightening and made me miserable.

Bumface

I read a report fairly recently (sorry I can't quote a link) that found that children often fared better emotionally and educationally in a one parent family (almost always with the mother) than living with both parents in an unhappy, abusive relationship (the abuser being nearly always the father).

Another flaw in this proposed policy is that not all married women are born housewives and mothers, though, of course there is nothing wrong with those who are.

Could you share a link to this report please?

Oh I've just noticed you can't.

And when the male wage earner in the family walks out, or proves an abuser so that his wife takes the children and seeks a refuge, just how is she going to get herself back into a decent job that pays a good wage if she hasn't worked for 10 years because she has been homing being a good little wife.

I am the daughter of a working mother, I was one myself aand so is DDiL. Through three generations children have been raised who feel loved and secure, not neglected and encouraged in everything they do.

It is not whether both parents work, although working long hours, certainly makes good parenting difficult, but how they parent.

You have only got to look around at the millions of famiies with children, where both parents work, and where these children are gowing up mentally and physically supported, doing well at school and not causing trouble on the streets nor running feral, to see the nonsense about blaming working mothers for societies ills.

Just imagine. I would have been crawling the walls as a housewife. and if Reform had also told me I needed to produce more children to feed the need for home grown employees I would be telling them where to get off, not to put too fine a point on it.

Well it's not going to happen so panic not.

I read a report fairly recently (sorry I can't quote a link) that found that children often fared better emotionally and educationally in a one parent family (almost always with the mother) than living with both parents in an unhappy, abusive relationship (the abuser being nearly always the father).

Another flaw in this proposed policy is that not all married women are born housewives and mothers, though, of course there is nothing wrong with those who are.

And what do they intend to do about the hit to the pensions (state and private) of these ‘lucky’ stay at home parents?

Not that there is anything wrong in providing a stable background for a child - but marriage itself doesn't automatically provide it. And if the parent (usually the woman) stays at home, unless she is actively and pro-actively 'parenting' - then neither does that.

Of course, they could always send their kids orff to boarding school for a bit of stability, discipline and bullying...

I think this is the 30p Lee Anderson influence. He doesn't like women getting involved with what he calls "big-boy-politics" - he once told a woman to butt out of this arena-for-men-only... I'd love to have seen him say that to Margaret Thatcher .

I bet you that at some point it will out that it's us wimmin who are responsible for the societal breakdown which leads to kids behaving like feral animals, and blaming them (women) for the absenteeism among fathers. If only we'd been content to stay at home, men would still be men and none of this would've happened. Sort of thing.

But, seriously, a stable background and supportive parents are obviously the bedrock that supports children who are going to grow into stable adults.

But what does Reform intend to do about poverty wages, county lines, deprivation, lack of resources and services for both physical and mental health, sink estates - all those things that contribute to chaotic life styles and none of which help to build stability within families and communities?

LizzieDrip

Eh up, it’ll be back to the 1950’s before we know it. The man being the breadwinner and the little woman at home, looking after the kids and tied to the kitchen sink - where she belongs. All Farage’s dreams come true!

Indeed!

Eh up, it’ll be back to the 1950’s before we know it. The man being the breadwinner and the little woman at home, looking after the kids and tied to the kitchen sink - where she belongs. All Farage’s dreams come true!