Why not send the children out work instead?

by frog

I can’t understand why National normally sounds so keen on having parents (mothers) stay at home with their kids, but is constantly coming up with ways to make it hard for them to do that if they choose to.

Sue Bradford has been reminding people this morning of the risks that might come from  National’s rumoured proposal to put mothers who are on the Domestic Purposes Benefit back to work:

‘In 2001 the Ministry of Social Development carried out an evaluation of National’s DPB reforms of the late 90s, and found that:

  • The financial benefits of being pushed into part time employment were limited, with part time workers on lower average rates of pay than those in full time jobs, as well as facing the additional costs of going out to work.
  • Sole parents found it hard to access childcare that was accessible, affordable and high quality. They often had to take on night work.
  • MSD had concerns about possible negative effects on children, including children under 14 being left home alone while their parent is out at work (see ‘Evaluating the February 1999 Domestic Purposes Benefit and Widows Benefit Reforms’, MSD, November 2001).

The idea that mothers are some how cheating the system by choosing to stay home looking after their kids rather than getting out there into the workforces is risible.  It’s probably the policy initiative of some wonk who has not spent enough time at the time share luxury holiday that is full-time-at-home motherhood (or fatherhood).

frog says

Published in Economy, Work, & Welfare by frog on Mon, August 11th, 2008   

Tags: , , , , ,

More posts by | more about frog