The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Single mothers and the budget > Comments

Single mothers and the budget : Comments

By Marie Coleman, published 11/5/2011

We should devise policies that enable single mothers, and most importantly, which avoid stigmatising these women.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All
if the kids were taught to reject the immoral values of their parents then the problem would be greatly reduced. We are not however interested in addressing the root of the problem. It seems no one wants to make any 'moral'judgement. Maybe to have kids from 3 different fathers and then expect the tax payer to foot the bill is not real smart. The problem doe not appear nearly as big in a country like Singapore. I wonder why?
Posted by runner, Thursday, 12 May 2011 10:04:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There was a report years ago demonstrating money allocated to supporting single parents was money well invested against potential fallout costs of juvenile detention, crime and community support around drug counselling.

The conclusions in that older report would still be valid today.

The mothers of pre and post war Britain not only continued to care for their children but manned the factories and services when the men were away at war. One difference is there were greater extended family supports by contrast today where families often live long distances from their own parents or relatives.

Most single parents are not teens, but fall into the middle class category where both parents do contribute to the care of their children after divorce (unless very young children are involved) and where both parents work and share the load.

It is interesting how cultural change also changes the mindset on the best ways to raise a family. Forcibly placing babies and toddlers into childcare would have been abhorrent in years past, now it is accepted without a blink of the eye. There is no credit given to the idea of positive outcomes of parents raising their young babies to school age (at least).

The real problem is how to prevent teenage pregnancy. Contraception is available and yet babies keep arriving. Teens are educated about sex and contraception, so why does it keep happening. Are they all a result of unbridled teen passion and uncontrollable hormones in the heat of the moment or is there still a remnant of not acknowledging that many teens will have sex and parents not keeping the doors open to discussing options. I don't know the answer.

Whether it is subsidised child care or a support pension it is still going to cost taxpayers money, I would rather see it spent on the best outcomes for the child. In some cases it might be childcare is the best option but for many the best option is that which nurtures the parent-baby relationship, no matter how much governments are pushing economic growth and productivity as the ruling principle.
Posted by pelican, Thursday, 12 May 2011 10:20:22 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think you will find most on the Single mothers benefit are those who have been deserted by their husbands or defacto, not young girls. The number of very young mothers has declined over the years.

It is a positive thing to change the mindset, that having a baby does not mean the end of your life or education.
Posted by Flo, Thursday, 12 May 2011 12:05:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Saying the unsayable, Melaine Philips.

http://www.melaniephillips.com/saying-the-unsayable

<The sheer scale of the social damage being done by family breakdown is staggering. But even more astounding is the total refusal of the political class to acknowledge or deal with a phenomenon estimated to cost the country more than £20 billion per year.

On the contrary, our intellectual and political leaders have done everything in their power to accelerate the collapse of the two-parent family.

They have lavished incentives upon lone parenthood, turned a blind eye to or actively promoted cohabitation, and assiduously promoted the humbug that their principal concern is for the interests of all children and that it is invidious to discriminate between different types of family life. >

Recently on our newspaper was a report on education

<A Smith Family study has linked a father's education level to the professional success of his children.

The report - titled Unequal Opportunities: Life Chances for Children in the Lucky Country - compares the lives and backgrounds of 13,000 university graduates aged 30 to 45.>
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/05/09/3211850.htm?section=justin
Posted by JamesH, Thursday, 12 May 2011 2:29:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am a single, middle-aged (43) mother. I am also an Environmental Officer working part-time. I do not expect the Government to support me and my children, but I do expect my ex and father of my two children to contribute as he does throuh Child Support (although it was a fight for the first 3 years).

Enabling single mothers of any age is a good thing, as is enabling mothers in general. Whether it be better support for working from home or part-time etc. The Government may sprout "family friendly" but the individual Managers and Regional Managers are quick to pull out "operational convenience" (or inconvenience to them) if they don't want it - which they have done in my case for wanting to work from home and continue to work part-time (I am being gradually increased to full-time).

I did not put my children in care until they were 15months old and even then it was Family Day Care and only 2 days, as I found it more family friendly. I believe children in care practically full-time from a young age increases delinquincy problems later. Apart from the most obvious fact that their parent's aren't the ones raising them.

As for teenage mums - there is either abortion or adoption, if it was a "true" mistake. Of course there is prevention in the first instance - and this is the most important factor being overlooked. Females may have been just as young having children in our great-grandparent's day, but I would argue that they were also much more mature than the teenagers these days. At least one parent should be able to stay at home with the children until school age and be part-time after that. And yes, fathers of these children should be made to participate in either caring for the children or getting work to support them as they are just as responsible for the child being here in the first place.
Posted by jml1967, Thursday, 12 May 2011 4:46:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One of the ironies of feminism is that the single mother continues to be stigmatised while the single father is commended for doing a difficult job in the face of adversity. Staying at home for women is seen by some as a failure of the sisterhood while men are patted on the back for undertaking a role dominated traditionally by women.

It is a strange world we live in that has, to some extent, lost its way.

Where I worked one of the men who had just started shared care of his kids lamented how difficult it was getting to work on time on 'his weeks', getting the kids dressed dropped off at different schools and organising lunches and dinners. The women in the office used to laugh at this and we often said to him 'welcome to the world of single mothers'. Later even he acknowledged he did not realise how hard it was for his partner until he shared the responsibility. Now both work and share care easing the pressure on one parent. That is the ideal if work arrangements can accommodate family breakdown.

This is not a reflection on the single father but more about why single mothers are not supported (socially/psychologically) in the same way. Despite the negative commentary, it is not teen mums that make up the majority of single mothers.

And in the case of divorce very commonly women are blamed for the increasing breakdown of family (unless I have spent too much time on OLO) even if it is the father that has left many times without contributing to the ongoing care of the children.

Whatever the reason for family breakdown, there is more to single parenting than finding someone to blame like adapting to new challenges in work arrangements to accommodate those changes.
Posted by pelican, Thursday, 12 May 2011 6:53:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy