Welfare Group Ignores Role of Mothers

How scary is this!!? The welfare review wants to push single mums back to work when their children are as young as one year old! Disgraceful.

Welfare revamp to push single parents to work
NZ Herald Nov 25, 2010

A major review of the welfare state has put forward options that could require the vast majority of sole parents, sick and disabled beneficiaries to look for work. The review by the Government’s welfare working group chaired by economist Paula Rebstock suggests that as few as 20,000 of the 144,000 sickness and invalid beneficiaries might be exempted from job-search requirements. Sole parents could be required to look for work when their youngest children turn 3, or even 1 – both much tougher than the requirement introduced two months ago to look for work when their youngest children turn 6.

Once again, the message to mothers is that their worth is in paid work. So they do double shifts – full time work, full time mothers. No wonder they struggle to cope. We need to allow mother to be mothers!

Share

5 comments for “Welfare Group Ignores Role of Mothers

  1. Korina
    29 November 2010 at 8:35 pm

    The above is really scary – who is supposed to take care of our children! I am not a sole parent, but I homeschool my children, and if something unfortunate happened that I became a solo parent I would like to continue to homeschool them. Paula’s answer to this was that the state provides good enough education, and only in certain circumstances should you be allowed to homeschool, and if solo, still claim a benefit – these being special needs or too far from a school! I am not sure how correct I am on this answer, and apologize if I have gotten this wrong. My children are out of toddler stage, but what happens to someone who actually wants to take care of their children themselves, not dump them into childcare, before school age, and then before and after school, once they reach school age! – surely the parent’s work should be recognized! It is hard enough parenting on your own, let alone trying to juggle work in with this – it’s the children who are being hurt the most – they are missing out on their own parent’s care!

  2. Philippa
    30 November 2010 at 2:31 pm

    Why have children if you yourself cannot afford to take care of them? Alot of families plan their children and decide not to have any more because of the strain on finances. It seems unfair that those who have children then rely on the government to pay them to stay at home to look after them, and expect this!! Parent’s work at home is recognised and if there is genuine hardship that affect the children then some help is needed. don’t have children if you can’t provide for them! I know this is a sweeping statement, but I have seen so many mothers have child after child and get the money to bring them up from the government. I became a solo parent, money was tight, I worked because I wanted to provide for my children. They did not suffer, my hours meant I had alot of time with them and also when I took leave I could afford to take them away and spend some great times with them. they have grown up to be well adjusted young people whom I’m very proud of! Alot of mums have heaps of time with their kids, but it is not necessarily quality time.

  3. Christine
    30 November 2010 at 5:52 pm

    I applaud you, Korina, for homeschooling your children. I decided to take this path for my children for a year (2009). As a solo parent this was a big undertaking that I would have persisted with had my ex-husband not taken me to court. I have it on record from the Judge that homeschooling is a valid and legal method of educating children and, as such, is a realistic option which should be available for all children and parents.
    The way I am feeling about this situation is that I was punished when my husband left me to raise our three sons alone, and I am further punished, as I am there for them 24/7, having given up a $64 000 salary to be a stay at home mum. I will have to find part-time work, but what will I do during school holidays and if my children get sick (or have strike days, as they are having today)??? My children are punished because their dad isn’t there for them, and now their mum is being forced out as well.

  4. Mark
    2 December 2010 at 3:14 pm

    “Sending solo mothers to work when their child is still a baby (1 year old) is disgraceful and insulting to the important role of mothers”

    But so is The State paying women to have babies…that’s what Hitler did with his Aryan program.

    And what is really disgraceful and insulting is that many of these women also believe it is “their right”.

    If that’s the case, how about they pay some tax before they get paid by The State to have babies?

    Kirk really messed up when he removed the requirement for a person to be of good standing in the community (i.e. had paid tax) before qualifying for a State paid benefit.

    And, at the end of the day, it takes both a man AND a woman to make a baby [the natural way] and, equally, it takes both a Mum AND a Dad to raise productive adults.

  5. Maria
    8 August 2011 at 4:40 am

    Christine,

    I am currently in the situation of wanting to homeschool my two boys as a single parent but will end up in court over it with my ex-husband. Are you able to contact me at all to discuss? I’d be very interested in hearing your story as I cannot find anyone who has been through the Family Court for the right to homeschool their children.

Comments are closed.