Do you think the government should pay stay-at-home moms for their work of raising children and managing a household?

31  Answers

0 0

Getting paid in actual cash for what I do, sounds WONDERFUL! As wonderful as it sounds though, I don't believe the government needs any more control over my life. If I become a "government employer," then I will then be told how to run my household. And I don't need any more government control in my life.

I'm a H.O.M.E.M.A.K.E.R. {this all includes, being wife, mother and a homeschooling one at that.} I get paid with love, hugs and kisses. Money will never pay the worth of ANY mother. EVER.

"The homemaker has the ultimate career. All other careers exist for one purpose only - and that is to support the ultimate career." C. S. Lewis

6
0 0

It is fundamentally unfair that women do not get paid a wage for housework but at the moment there is no system that allows this to happen. What we need is political reform I guess! It would be funny for all us women to go on strike and see how the country grinds to a halt without our input at home.

3
0 0

Absolutely not. However, I do think the government should realize that tax policy affects lives. In other words, if our tax policies discourage mothers (or fathers) from staying at home, less will stay home, to the detriment of our children.

http://homeschoolblogger.com/novascotia

3
0 2

America is the only country (other than third world countries) that doesn't pay mothers for staying at home with their kids. And most people ask who would pay for it? Well the answer to that is, that the government already is. The government pays out millions of dollars every year to pay for daycare assistance. It would probably save the government money to pay the mothers rather then the daycare costs!

2
0 0

My initial thought would be 'no' but a similar issue came up in a recent election in my province and it make me think about it a bit more. I work full time and pay a lot for daycare. Many others work the same hours but make less money and are heavily subsidized by the government for their child's daycare costs. Isn't this sort of paying those women to work in a way? Perhaps the gov't should just pay those subsidies to Moms who want to stay home with their kids so they don't have to work. Also, the Canadian gov't does provide families with Child Tax Benefits and certain other supplements depending on financial need and they do not dictate how it is spent and I haven't heard of any parents not applying for that money. For example, we receive $100 per child every month. Also, the government is paying a lot of money towards education for students once they hit a certain age. If you re-consider the current paradigm, it would just mean providing more funding for families when kids are younger. The question really is what society expects from families because it's hard to make a living with one parent working these days. It seems like daycare has become the norm is many cases because both parents need to work just to make ends meet. In the end, the government and social policy has a lot to do with how the family unit operates. Rant over. :-)

2
1 0

And who would foot the bill for that? The taxpayers! Which means those who are childless as well as those who have kids. And if anyone accepts gov't monetary help, they also usually have to undergo increased scrutiny of whether they are "performing" according to gov't standards. Which means more social workers will have to be hired to go snooping into private homes to see if they are up to some "standard", which also means loss of privacy.

I'd rather more money go to supporting orphans and unadoptable kids who are about to age out of the system, or for something like more after-school care programs, so kids who aren't lucky enough to have parents who can afford to do the stay at home thing, can be taken care of better instead of being on the streets getting into trouble.

2
0 0

OMGosh no. Absolutely not. Please no. However, I agree with Kimberly Charron's reply. Tax considerations should be taken into account so as to not make that decision an impossible or difficult one.

2
0 0

its a shame that there are no organizations that would be willing to support stay at home mom's!!!!,
I have been doing it for over 22 years, was able to send 3 kids to college with one more to go. My husband and I struggled and still are, but there is nothing more rewarding than seeing your child grow up to be a successful, educated adult. and yet I always look for ways to bring extra cash to help.
but its never enough. I always say you make more money you spend more money. Power to us Moms
that decide to stay home !!!!!

1
0 0

No. Every penny the government pays, has to come from somewhere. I don't believe in getting something that wasn't earned.

I think we have enough people in our country getting un-earned payouts.

Being a SAHM/Homeschool Mom is the choice that my husband and I made for our family. We are happy to make the sacrifices to make that happen.

The rewards far out-weigh the hardships.

1
0 0

Families living in Germany qualify for Kindergeld - it is an incentive paid per child for women to stay home with their children. My only concern is for folks that would be milking the system - there would need to be certain requirements met like applying for WIC... up to date on doctors visits, participation in community events through volunteer hours, something to quantify they as caregivers are raising their children - not just collecting a check on their behalf.

1
0 0

Have the state pay me for my role as a Mom and Wife? No.

In my role as a Homeschooler, however...

Since my state dictates what subjects I must teach, in what years they must be taught, requires submission of attendance records, standardized test scores, compilation of a yearly portfolio of work samples showing educational progress for each child...including objectives and evaluation by a licensed third party whom I must pay for service in order to remain "In compliance" with state law, (at which time the state then subjects us to a separate review by school district personnel who, more often than not, do not know the legal requirements they are supposed to be enforcing)

Yes. I think that since the state is MASSIVELY intruding into our home education program, we should be compensated for our time, and the cost of materials related to our educational activities. An amount equal to half of what the school district would be allotted for my child if they were enrolled seems fair. Otherwise the states with high homeschooling regulation have effectively set up an UNFUNDED EDUCATION MANDATE. This is unacceptable.

The state can't have it both ways. Either private families pay for all costs of homeschooling, and the state completely butts out, or the state coughs up funding and they can have a say, and a peek into the child's progress. No public funding for a child's education = no public accountability for that education. Pay to play, folks...

1
0 0

It's hard to say isn't it. I have chosen to stay at home with my kids for, whoa, 17 years now and we have done without many of the 'extras' that two income families have. My biggest concern with Government pay would be those who would take advantage of the system and not actually do their 'job' properly. However, many of those who think that way are already happily living off our unemployment benefit. Reading the answers below I am almost afraid to say that yes, I would like to be paid for my role because, on a personal level, it would allow us to grow our family through adoption. An extra income would mean we could extend our house and be comfortably able to meet the costs of a second adoption (including those who are aging out of the adoption system but that's yet anther Government policy that needs looking into!) process thereby giving a child their own mummy who will stay at home with them.

1
0 0

Freedom to teach my children at home. Freedom to feed them what I see fit. Freedom to vaccinate or not. Freedom to teach my children about their GOD in a way I deem appropriate. Freedom is what we were founded on. Simply put, what the government pays for the government controls. I choose freedom over money.

1
2 0

I think the government should pay stay-at-home moms but there would definately have to be regulations so that people don't just keep having kids so they don't have to work, or they don't have a large number of kids so they can recieve more from the government. What some people in politics don't understand is that caring for children, especially your own children, is a full time job. There is no sick days, no vacation from work, and the only pay raise you get is knowing that you were able to spend as much time as you could with your children. Being able to watch your children's firsts (first steps, first words, first day of school, etc) and knowing you raised them up right is the biggest reward a real mother has. I didn't get to see my boy's first steps or hear their first words because I had to work in order to care for them. You also have an increase of mother's trying to go back to school and get a better education. Trying to be a full time student, full time mother, and work a full time job is an almost impossible feat. The government paying mother's to stay at home and care for their children properly would lower the mother's stress levels, allowing her to better care for her children even more, and it would also allow her to get a higher education which would allow her to get a better job and contribute to societies work force once her children are in school. If someone can get this started it will be a shakey start but if the politicians can hold out through the rough spots, this could be the best thing for America. The younger generations will be more respectful and grow to be harder working and up-standing citizens. We would have a more intelligent work force that is better qualified for the jobs they are applying for. In a nut shell, the long term pros out weigh the short term cons.

0
27 0

Hi Carol

Please let us know how we can support your BLOG! Its great! Please have your moms check us out!! www.hipschoolny.com Our company Halls of Ivy Prep (HIP) primarily services the Northern New Jersey and New York City Regions and provides one-one in home instruction to children ages birth - 4. Our certified teachers work alongside nannies or stay at home moms to provide high quality instruction for their young child. We handpick our teachers from the nations top universities and all families participate in an admissions consultation to ensure that HIP is a good match to meet their individual needs. Feel free to have folks reach out to us to learn more 1 (347) 901-9165.

0
1

Yes I believe they should. They give money to working parent's to help pay for their daycare. Thus daycare assistance. The mother staying home is a type of child care. So therefore the mother should get that money paid to her that the government would have paid to a child care center to watch her child.

0
    Edit  |   Delete  |   Get Your Widget
0 0

No, no and no! Why on earth would anyone want to open that can of worms and allow the government that much control over their home and personal life? A mother caring for her children is as natural as you eating each day and you shouldn't be paid to do it. If the government offered me money personally to stay home with my kids I would reject it in a heartbeat.

0
0 0

If the question is whether I think the government should issue paychecks to guardians who stay home to raise children solely because they choose to stay home to raise children and manage a household, then my answer is no.

Don't get me wrong. I think the work is difficult, and it deserves actual compensation, including a retirement plan, a disability policy, some vacation time, sick days, medical and dental coverage. (But maybe I just think that we all deserve those things - regardless of employment status.)

As a policy issue, and not a personal one, I think we all recognize that reproduction is a necessary function of a healthy society. On the other hand, as a society, we want and need able-bodied adults to join the workforce and to be productive. In the absence of consensus about the benefits for kids (and society) of having two working parents/guardians, governmental guarantees for paid parental leave from work seem to me like the best solution.

And it is worth noting that the U.S. is the only industrialized nation that fails to provide its parents with any guaranteed paid leave after the birth or arrival of a child. If you are interested in checking on the rest of the world, follow this link: http://www.npr.org/2011/08/09/137062676/time-with-a-newborn-maternity-leave-policies-around-the-world.

0
0 0

I agree with better tax breaks, but no way should the government pay someone for being a parent! I want to be a parent because the "payment"is enough, but I think that it might encourage some people to have kids for the wrong reasons. Just like everyone else said, I don't want anyone- especially the government- dictating how I mother my children, or having considerable influence over my relationships.

0
0 0

Absolutely not. I am for tax reductions for homeschoolers since they are not incurring costs for the school system, but stay at home moms are blessed to do what they get to without government interference and possible control.

0
0 0

No. Once the government starts doing that, they will tell us how to do our job and on what to spend the money they give us.... It will just give them control that isn't theirs

0
0 0

Oh no no no Darling! Besides, there is not enough money in the world to pay me for all that I'm worth...

0
0 0

Tax breaks would be nice. But NO THANK YOU. The moment we ask for $ from the government to be a mom and a wife (something we chose to do or not), we open the door for the government to find one more way to dictate what happens within our own home.

When I became a wife and a mom (now of 7), I knew that would require a change in what we could buy, etc. The "sacrifices" of anything financial has been FAR outweighed by spending every day pouring into my children.

0
0 0

While I think stay-at-home moms are worth a big salary I don't think the government needs any more control. If they offered me money then they would get say in how I run my household and I don't need any more of their regulations in my life

0
0 0

I don't think we should be paid for it, but I do think that we should be recognized for what we do. It's important to raise smart and considerate kids, at least I think it is. Not only that but if we at least recognized stay-at-home moms are a JOB it will help to end the treatment of moms who stay at home. Also if we think about the moms that are on any type of government assistance that are going to "work experience" or "work study" type places they then send their kids to daycare on the tax payers dime and they aren't actively looking for work, or really improving their skill set much. At least from what I saw during my time as one. I would much rather skimp on everything and be able to put my kids health and welfare ahead of going being sent to a GED school when I had a graduated high school already. That's where your tax dollars sent me. Wouldn't it be better if they could list their kids as a job, then they aren't just sending them to daycare and playing on computers and such all day. It took them over a year to realize they sent me to a GED school when I had my diploma, and they didn't remove me either.

Plus there's the whole point of I like my kids, I want to be with them, and I do consider it a job to raise good children, that are polite, intelligent, and considerate. Plus I also am taking care of my grandparents.

0
0 0

Why is this even a question? Absolutely not. Women have children knowing the responsibilities of being a mom. It is sad that more moms can't stay home with their kids, but we all make our own choices. Being a mom isn't a career. It's a lifestyle.

0
0 0

As nice as that sounds, nope. I stay home with my kids - not for the money (because of course there is none!) but to raise my children. Our government has already enabled enough families who don't take of their kids by improper use of the welfare system and I know that if they paid moms to stay home it would further contribute! Not to mention widen the governmental budget deficit!

0
0 0

I truly do! I have talked about this numerous times with family and friends. As a stay at home mama of 2 girls (and expecting baby #3) I can say first hand how hard it can be financially. I am not expecting a pity party, as this was, of course my decision.
However, I think that just like any other "job" being a stay at home mom requires a lot of work and time.

-1
0 0

No way! It's my choice to be a stay at home mom and it's not up to the government to help me financially. And quite frankly, that's not what the government is for. When you make the choice to stay home, you need to also make the choice to live at a lower level. I don't want the government to have a say in staying at home. Plus. taxpayers are going to foot the bill and we can't afford the bills we already have.

-2
1 9

So sorry, I meant to got for you answer.

0 0

Yes! Yes! And Yes! Do I think they ever will? Probably not, but a mami can hope. What stay-at-home moms do is vital and important and has financial value. How that value would be quantified and paid by the government...haven't a clue. I'm sure many would be opposed to this just because it would require "more" government, but just as less is sometimes more, more is not always bad.

-6

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms