Back-to-school costs pushing some families into debt

Story Bud?

LexieOnRale wrote: »

From 3 until 5:30, you're still getting 6.5 hours free 5 days a week having your child in school. So then the child care is 33.333% of what it usually is?

oh if only it was so simple!

Lucyfur

LexieOnRale wrote: »

From 3 until 5:30, you're still getting 6.5 hours free 5 days a week having your child in school. So then the child care is 33.333% of what it usually is?

In order to facilitate coming from a family where parent/parents work, many children have to go to crèche in the morning. And again after school. Which doesn't really save anything as a crèche will (rightfully) charge you for bringing your child safely to school and collecting them again later.

Now personally I will move heaven and earth to make sure my child has all he needs. I've never had help from social welfare. I have a lot of extra expenses that a lot of other parents don't have but we always make it work. That said, I agree with many points made. Uniforms are crazy money, as are books. And the cost of childcare is a high and ongoing expense for many parents.

Dravokivich

LexieOnRale wrote: »

From 3 until 5:30, you're still getting 6.5 hours free 5 days a week having your child in school. So then the child care is 33.333% of what it usually is?

When you are paying for child care, you are not paying for the time itself.

Well seeing as the first 2 years are usually up to 12:30, it's not going to be such a sharp decrease in time at child care either. There's also a need for a lot of people to put their child into child care in the morning, who'll then do the school run.

You should really review what you keep looking to put others down for. You make it sound like we should suffer our ignorance, but it's you who are.

Neyite

Funny thing is that a lot of the people on here giving out about parents getting children's allowance probably don't have a personal pension that is anywhere near adequate for what their costs will be when they are geriatric.

But they'll forget all that when its them with their hand out for their pension, medical card and bus pass and giving out that they cant afford to heat their house on the pittance the government gives them.

We need people willing to have kids in this country. We have an ageing population and we are going to need the taxpayers paying into the system to support the funding of nursing homes, hospital care for the elderly, and the benefits and handouts mentioned above. Tax payers like my son and the kids of all the other parents here.

There is not a single parent on here that have said they expect the government to fund the cost of back to school. We don't. But assistance in other ways - like introducing a book exchange or rental system or generic uniforms that are uncrested would help parents a lot.

witchgirl26

I'm prefixing this by saying that I don't have kids & just going on my recollections of my school going. My mam would have been the type to budget properly and save but still found August a tough month with the cost of sending us all back to school.

It wasn't so much a moan or a woe is me thing but more that uniforms could only be got from one place (school skirt/trousers for secondary). I was lucky in that my mam used to knit jumpers with crests for the school so didn't have to pay for them. And before someone says about going somewhere else for the skirt/trouser - the skirt was a specific pattern that couldn't be got anywhere else. And one girl was sent home for wearing generic grey trousers instead of the specific ones from that shop.

Books were also an issue - by the time I was leaving, not one of my Leaving Cert books could be passed on to people going into 4th year. Practically none of my books were second hand because of the same thing - updates to the books themselves or the books being used changing meant that second hand wasn't an option. And the books weren't cheap.

I think that's where most parents have the issue - it's not the fact that they have to pay out for little Johnny or Mary to go but rather that they are being scr*wed on price of the things that they have to buy. People are up in arms at the moment about insurance costing so much and it's something that everyone has to have. Why aren't parents allowed the same rant about school supplies?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Dravokivich wrote: »

When you are paying for child care, you are not paying for the time itself.

Well seeing as the first 2 years are usually up to 12:30, it's not going to be such a sharp decrease in time at child care either. There's also a need for a lot of people to put their child into child care in the morning, who'll then do the school run.

You should really review what you keep looking to put others down for. You make
it sound like we should suffer our ignorance, but it's you who are.

Whatever. I agree with you in regards to crested uniforms and books that are no use after 3 years, but a lot of schools do book rental schemes. I would hope my posts sound like i would have a basic expectation for parents to support their own children instead of expecting the tax payers to pick up 100% of the cost. I don't see that being unreasonable

FishOnABike

me_irl wrote: »

I think people should really budget when deciding to have snowflake no. 2... or 3.

Jawgap wrote: »

If you can't afford them don't have them.

Andy From Sligo wrote: »

yeah but there are those in life that can afford it and those that cannot and a lot of the time its no good people whinging that couples shouldnt have had kids in the first place if they cannot afford to bring them up.

OldNotWIse wrote: »

If you cant afford them don't have them. In the same way that people don't get dogs and then moan about the cost of vaccinating and doggie daycare and Royal Canin.

I do think the school book thing is a joke and a cartel but I'd bet that if the money that is spent on lavish communions and confirmations was re-routed to back to school costs, there wouldn't be an issue.

mdwexford wrote: »

It's not expensive to send a kid to school.

As said above, save 15 quid a week and it's job done.
But no people spend every cent weekly and then panic when they need 600 in one go and cry about how expensive it is.

Every child gets €1680 in children's allowance also, if you can't afford it, don't have 5 kids. Just a thought.

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Did children costing you money come as a surprise to you when they were born Queen Mise, or were you aware of the fact before deciding to have a family?

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

Why people take up expensive hobbies, like having children, that they cant afford, I will never understand.
Its like someone deciding to buy a big yacht and then saying they go into debt every year to pay for its maintenance and mooring fees.
Shouldnt have gotten into the game if you cant afford it bud.

Aaaaaaaand...... people's circumstances never change, there's no such thing as pay cuts, reduced work hours, redundancy, illness, family breakups or death of a partner.
If only the real world was so black and white and predictable that everyone could map out the next 20 to 25 years of their lives and plan for every eventuality.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Neyite wrote: »

Funny thing is that a lot of the people on here giving out about parents getting children's allowance probably don't have a personal pension that is anywhere near adequate for what their costs will be when they are geriatric.

But they'll forget all that when its them with their hand out for their pension, medical card and bus pass and giving out that they cant afford to heat their house on the pittance the government gives them.

We need people willing to have kids in this country. We have an ageing population and we are going to need the taxpayers paying into the system to support the funding of nursing homes, hospital care for the elderly, and the benefits and handouts mentioned above. Tax payers like my son and the kids of all the other parents here.

There is not a single parent on here that have said they expect the government to fund the cost of back to school. We don't. But assistance in other ways - like introducing a book exchange or rental system or generic uniforms that are uncrested would help parents a lot.

To be fair, I wouldn't expect children coming from families who expect the social welfare to pay for everything to contribute much in the way to find out generations pensions, as these things tend to stay in families. People I know that are on the dole long term, came from families where their parents never worked. Monkey see, monkey do. If parents are complaining about the cost of sending a child to school, I can't see them sending their kid to college for 4 years.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

FishOnABike wrote: »

Aaaaaaaand...... people's circumstances never change, there's no such thing as pay cuts, reduced work hours, redundancy, illness, family breakups or death of a partner.
If only the real world was so black and white and predictable that everyone could map out the next 20 to 25 years of their lives and plan for every eventuality.

One of my parents died when I was in the first few weeks of college. That left my dad widowed and with 1 16 year old to finish school and start college and 1 18 year old to put through 4 years (at least) of college. So, I know all about circumstances changing. Nobody came waving notes at him to support us, and he didn't scrimp on anything we needed.

IvyTheTerrible

LexieOnRale wrote: »

One of my parents died when I was in the first few weeks of college. That left my dad widowed and with 1 16 year old to finish school and start college and 1 18 year old to put through 4 years (at least) of college. So, I know all about circumstances changing. Nobody came waving notes at him to support us, and he didn't scrimp on anything we needed.

You come from a farming background, right? What's your position on subsidies?

Neyite

LexieOnRale wrote: »

One of my parents died when I was in the first few weeks of college. That left my dad widowed and with 1 16 year old to finish school and start college and 1 18 year old to put through 4 years (at least) of college. So, I know all about circumstances changing. Nobody came waving notes at him to support us, and he didn't scrimp on anything we needed.

He got widowers pension though...

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

IvyTheTerrible wrote: »

You come from a farming background, right? What's your position on subsidies?

Our farm was never a dairy farm so I have no real opinion on subsidies.

Story Bud?

LexieOnRale wrote: »

If parents are complaining about the cost of sending a child to school, I can't see them sending their kid to college for 4 years.

So if you're struggling to make ends meet you're not going to encourage your child to better themselves?

That's a very simplistic, and in fact, snobby view.

My parents struggled every year to get us through school, they indeed complained at the prices of the school uniforms which were extortionate. A non fee paying school with a crested jumper, a very specific tartan skirt, a very particular shirt, a skort, sports top, tracksuit bottoms and sweatshirt with the crest embroidered. The coat alone was £90. It was a huge winter coat and you got detention if you wore any other jacket to school - even in spring when you'd melt in that but would freeze with nothing. You had to get a different jumper and shirt after Junior Cert. They changed the entire uniform when my sister was in 5th year so I couldn't even get her hand me downs. None of her books were the right editions either by the time I caught up with her.

The reality was that the school was oversubscribed, if we didn't wear the uniforms, someone else on the list would.

Did they not want me to go to university? Exactly the opposite - they wanted me to do as well as I could and they would have, as others have said, moved heaven and earth to make sure I succeeded in life. But yes, they complained about the ridiculousness of a public school needing such a specific uniform.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Neyite wrote: »

He got widowers pension though...

No he didn't. He got no social welfare payments at all and when my brother went off the rails and left school and wouldn't work, my dad wouldn't allow him claim social welfare because he didn't want him getting used to the idea of free money. I left my job to take care of my dad for 9 months, and I didn't get carers allowance or dole or anything like that. I've never been in a position where I needed assistance from the government and while I'm able to work, and save, I hope I never will.

andekwarhola

Where is this ideal universe of Absolute Certainties in which some of you appear to reside? I want to live there.

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Story Bud? wrote: »

So if you're struggling to make ends meet you're not going to encourage your child to better themselves?

That's a very simplistic, and in fact, snobby view.

My parents struggled every year to get us through school, they indeed complained at the prices of the school uniforms which were extortionate. A non fee paying school with a crested jumper, a very specific tartan skirt, a very particular shirt, a skort, sports top, tracksuit bottoms and sweatshirt with the crest embroidered. The coat alone was £90. It was a huge winter coat and you got detention if you wore any other jacket to school - even in spring when you'd melt in that but would freeze with nothing. You had to get a different jumper and shirt after Junior Cert. They changed the entire uniform when my sister was in 5th year so I couldn't even get her hand me downs. None of her books were the right editions either by the time I caught up with her.

The reality was that the school was oversubscribed, if we didn't wear the uniforms, someone else on the list would.

Did they not want me to go to university? Exactly the opposite - they wanted me to do as well as I could and they would have, as others have said, moved heaven and earth to make sure I succeeded in life. But yes, they complained about the ridiculousness of a public school needing such a specific uniform.

Listen, I'm on the same page re: uniforms and books being changed every few years to keep the book publishing companies in business. I also have no doubt poorer families will want their children to escape a life of scrimping and saving. But you also have families (the ones complaining about their child needing lunches and clothes, and how the back to school allowance doesn't cover it all) who have no interest in their children ever going to college, who'll look for excuses as to why opportunities pass them by, and kids who grow up expecting everyone else owes them a living.

I'm all for disadvantaged kids getting good opportunities, for example, that asylum seeker who got amazing leaving cert results and wanted to attend RCSI. She should absolutely be supported. At the time people were whinging and crying about how much it would cost the taxpayers and she shouldn't get it for free and how she was taking up the space for an Irish child but I'm sure any Irish child to show that potential would have been offered a place too, but sometimes you're just flogging a dead horse. Parents putting a fancy holiday in front of a child's education aren't teaching their child that education is important

Neyite

LexieOnRale wrote: »

No he didn't. He got no social welfare payments at all and when my brother went off the rails and left school and wouldn't work, my dad wouldn't allow him claim social welfare because he didn't want him getting used to the idea of free money. I left my job to take care of my dad for 9 months, and I didn't get carers allowance or dole or anything like that. I've never been in a position where I needed assistance from the government and while I'm able to work, and save, I hope I never will.

Well he was entitled to it. All widowers are. Nice for you lot that you had enough wealth not to need 'free money'. Your family's choice not to avail of SW entitlements does not mean that you get to be sneery at those who do avail of the entitlements available to them.

Jawgap

FishOnABike wrote: »

Aaaaaaaand...... people's circumstances never change, there's no such thing as pay cuts, reduced work hours, redundancy, illness, family breakups or death of a partner.
If only the real world was so black and white and predictable that everyone could map out the next 20 to 25 years of their lives and plan for every eventuality.

.......aaaaaaaaand I went through a divorce and ended up with a settlement that required me to pay all the back to school costs for my kids, I had my pay cut and my place of employment moved (increasing my commuting costs) - guess what? In the real world you budget and save and plan.

In my case I also had to go find somewhere else to live (while paying the mortgage on the old family home) - and in the real world you cut your cloth, so yes I found somewhere modest, I pared back on the unnecessary spending and I took on an extra job.

.....the problem here is that it's not just the people who've suffered life tragedies who are complaining - and yes their complaints are legitimate, and they should get tons of help - it's people unwilling to make cuts in their spending, or who didn't think through the financial consequences of their decision to have a kid or two. Surely people who have kids know they have to go to school, so it's not like an unforeseen expense?

qo2cj1dsne8y4k

Neyite wrote: »

Well he was entitled to it. All widowers are. Nice for you lot that you had enough wealth not to need 'free money'. Your family's choice not to avail of SW entitlements does not mean that you get to be sneery at those who do avail of the entitlements available to them.

Nice for you lot? Sorry?
If I ever find myself needing help from social welfare, if I have absolutely no way of fending for myself, I will ask them for help. I have no issue with anyone falling on hard times and availing of it. That people pay PRSI for, after all. I do have issues with people who've never worked a day in their lives, following on from their parents never having worked, and their kids probably never will either, who'll bring children they can't afford to support into the world, and expect maternity grants, back to school every year, a council house, the free dole week at Christmas and whatever else is going for those who are "long term unemployed". The people who moan that 140 euro doesn't go far enough feeding and clothing their child, and should be means tested for those who don't need it, and blame the government for children living in poverty without looking anywhere near their own responsibility

witchgirl26

Jawgap wrote: »

Surely people who have kids know they have to go to school, so it's not like an unforeseen expense?

So people can't complain about an expense that they feel is proportionally too large for what it is (specific clothing, changes of books) just because it's not unforeseen?

Again that means no one can complain about house insurance or car insurance because they're not unforeseen so we should all just never question them and just budget for them all?

If people don't raise the point about school uniforms being overpriced (& a lot of schools not allowing generics) or books changing too much & also being high cost, then would it change at all? I think it's right it should be highlighted.

Smondie

Does your child not need clothes and shoes anyway? Unless ye are all nudists at home it really is daft to be complaining about having to buy jumpers, skirts, trousers and shoes for the children. The shoes are one area parents can choose how much to spend, yet in the price list provided earlier they were one of the dearest purchases on the list @55euro iirc.

Jawgap

witchgirl26 wrote: »

So people can't complain about an expense that they feel is proportionally too large for what it is (specific clothing, changes of books) just because it's not unforeseen?

Again that means no one can complain about house insurance or car insurance because they're not unforeseen so we should all just never question them and just budget for them all?

If people don't raise the point about school uniforms being overpriced (& a lot of schools not allowing generics) or books changing too much & also being high cost, then would it change at all? I think it's right it should be highlighted.

the difference is people can actually do something about it - if I organised 200 drivers to complain about insurance the industry wouldn't be bothered - if I organised 200 parents, got some elected to the Parents Council of the school and a rep or two on the BoM of the relevant school it then becomes possible to influence policy.

Second, primary education is free - anyone paying a fee to the school needs their head examined, ring the DoE and they'll tell you the same thing.

Third, insurance etc is an expense I have to meet from my salary - the government doesn't pay me €140 per month because I have a car - I pay them!! If people used the micky money for it's intended purpose and put €50 of it per month per child aside (or even better in a credit union account) there'd be no issue - in fact I wonder how many of those going into debt to pay for back to school expenses are using credit cards when there's cheaper credit on better terms available in their locality?

Jawgap

Smondie wrote: »

Does your child not need clothes and shoes anyway? Unless ye are all nudists at home it really is daft to be complaining about having to buy jumpers, skirts, trousers and shoes for the children. The shoes are one area parents can choose how much to spend, yet in the price list provided earlier they were one of the dearest purchases on the list @55euro iirc.

Throw and extra fiver on that €55 and you'd get a nice pair of Lloyd and Price leather shoes

Neyite

LexieOnRale wrote: »

Nice for you lot? Sorry?
If I ever find myself needing help from social welfare, if I have absolutely no way of fending for myself, I will ask them for help. I have no issue with anyone falling on hard times and availing of it. That people pay PRSI for, after all. I do have issues with people who've never worked a day in their lives, following on from their parents never having worked, and their kids probably never will either, who'll bring children they can't afford to support into the world, and expect maternity grants, back to school every year, a council house, the free dole week at Christmas and whatever else is going for those who are "long term unemployed". The people who moan that 140 euro doesn't go far enough feeding and clothing their child, and should be means tested for those who don't need it, and blame the government for children living in poverty without looking anywhere near their own responsibility

Point out one poster on this thread who expects all this.

You are bashing all parents based on a stereotype of a minority of parents. And it gets trotted out on every single thread relating to parents or children here.

Its like me basing my opinion of dog owners on the few assholes who run puppy farms. A caring dog owner would be well pissed off if every bloody thread on AH about dogs or dog owners descended into a "all dog owners are greedy bastards who cruelly breed for profit" generalisations. When you know that the vast majority of dog owners on here are responsible, kind, and give their pets a wonderful life. There are a few asshole parents. But the vast majority of us are fairly decent and hard working and don't deserve to be lumped in with the bad ones for a good bashing.

witchgirl26

Jawgap wrote: »

the difference is people can actually do something about it - if I organised 200 drivers to complain about insurance the industry wouldn't be bothered - if I organised 200 parents, got some elected to the Parents Council of the school and a rep or two on the BoM of the relevant school it then becomes possible to influence policy.

Second, primary education is free - anyone paying a fee to the school needs their head examined, ring the DoE and they'll tell you the same thing.

Third, insurance etc is an expense I have to meet from my salary - the government doesn't pay me €140 per month because I have a car - I pay them!! If people used the micky money for it's intended purpose and put €50 of it per month per child aside (or even better in a credit union account) there'd be no issue - in fact I wonder how many of those going into debt to pay for back to school expenses are using credit cards when there's cheaper credit on better terms available in their locality?

My mother was quite active on the parents council in my old school and so were others. On the uniform front the most they got through (which took 7 years) was that girls could wear trousers as well as the boys. They had no influence over books which the teachers set. Also publishing companies are the ones who charge for them/change editions.

Most schools will ask for fees for photocopying etc for the year. That's because they don't get funded enough to provide this for every child. I know a number of teachers who pay for supplies for their classroom out of their own pocket because there isn't enough money in the school to provide for it.

Most parents I know use the child allowance for it's intended purpose - to feed and clothe their child and to provide for them. Most do save some of it for the school expenses. Again does that mean that they can't complain about the cost of them? Not many I've seen asking for more money from the government but for more sense when it comes to generic uniforms being allowed etc.

wexandproud

lertsnim wrote: »

It would seem that some people here would nearly suggest that if you cannot afford to put your child through school then take the boat to England to have that little problem fixed before the child is born. :rolleyes:

There is some load of judgemental arseholes on this thread.

that may well be true but there is a lot of these judgemental arseholes who think they have no responsability to provide for their kids and everything should be handed to them
some people need to realise that NOTHING is for free , the money has to be provide from somewhere to pay for things . their could always be an unexpected pregnancy , a job loss , separation or god forbid the death of a parent but the vast majority of kids don't come from a situation like that . Just go to any post office on children's allowance day and watch where the people go after they get their kids payment , it's not to spend money on their kids .
I the circle of people i know their are several who complain about the cost of educating their kids , but they always boast about the bargain holidays they get ,they have all the latest gismos and gadgets and go around dressed like shop window dummies , but have to spend a few euro on rigging kids out for school oh no we cant afford that

BaaLamb

know this is After Hours and I'll probably get a flea in my ear for my post but I've found this whole thread quite upsetting. So much judgemental stuff going on and so many people who appear to be convinced that those who can't save money from the children's allowance or save all year or budget in the same way as they do are quite obviously lazy scroungers.

I planned my three children, I worked after the first one was born and for a while after the second one was born but the second child kept getting ear infections and the creche refused to take her with them. I gave up work, set up a small sideline business that was compatible with kids and husband worked away. Had third child and all seemed to be going well until out of the blue in 2008 my husband was made redundant and the ass fell out of the world in general. I went back to work (lucky to have gotten my old job back) and I worked and worked and worked, minded the kids while hubby went back to Uni to try to upskill. Uni was 4 hours away so he was only home at weekends. We paid our mortgage, our creche fees and all rest of it all the ways through the recession. I changed jobs and moved to the city he was studying in and I worked, worked, worked. We never had much in the way of disposable income but we paid our bills and made sure the kids could do a few activities etc. The children's allowance was part of our monthly budget, it went towards shoes, clothes, food, activities but it was most certainly never spent on holidays, smoking, drinking etc. as people have implied.

The back to school thing is just an additional strain for a family that is always strained and it is a time of year I always dread. The tracksuit has to come from one place, the school coat another etc etc. We try and pick up bits and pieces over the summer but invariably we still have a hefty final bill. This year the second child is starting secondary school and we had to buy an iPad plus iPad insurance and iPad case plus ebooks and then a whole load of stationery as well. Without thinking about uniforms I've spent the guts of €700 already on the one child. Thing is while all of this is a financial strain I want my children to have what they need so I pay for it and while I was working I can manage to juggle the costs.

Thing is I've just been made redundant and my husband's contract is up in another month, neither of us are having much luck finding new work so far. So this thread fills me with fear about the judgements that will be made about me and my family if we need to access the back to school allowance or any other allowance. I'm filled with fear about life on social welfare and about ever getting a job again so threads like this with so many people talking about how they can budget and save make people like me who are struggling to get by feel like absolute crap about themselves. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people struggling with the additional costs back to school time brings are just like me and my family. I would never have had children if I had known how crappy the last 8 years would have been and now it looks like we are back to even crappier times.

Lucyfur

BaaLamb wrote: »

know this is After Hours and I'll probably get a flea in my ear for my post but I've found this whole thread quite upsetting. So much judgemental stuff going on and so many people who appear to be convinced that those who can't save money from the children's allowance or save all year or budget in the same way as they do are quite obviously lazy scroungers.

I planned my three children, I worked after the first one was born and for a while after the second one was born but the second child kept getting ear infections and the creche refused to take her with them. I gave up work, set up a small sideline business that was compatible with kids and husband worked away. Had third child and all seemed to be going well until out of the blue in 2008 my husband was made redundant and the ass fell out of the world in general. I went back to work (lucky to have gotten my old job back) and I worked and worked and worked, minded the kids while hubby went back to Uni to try to upskill. Uni was 4 hours away so he was only home at weekends. We paid our mortgage, our creche fees and all rest of it all the ways through the recession. I changed jobs and moved to the city he was studying in and I worked, worked, worked. We never had much in the way of disposable income but we paid our bills and made sure the kids could do a few activities etc. The children's allowance was part of our monthly budget, it went towards shoes, clothes, food, activities but it was most certainly never spent on holidays, smoking, drinking etc. as people have implied.

The back to school thing is just an additional strain for a family that is always strained and it is a time of year I always dread. The tracksuit has to come from one place, the school coat another etc etc. We try and pick up bits and pieces over the summer but invariably we still have a hefty final bill. This year the second child is starting secondary school and we had to buy an iPad plus iPad insurance and iPad case plus ebooks and then a whole load of stationery as well. Without thinking about uniforms I've spent the guts of €700 already on the one child. Thing is while all of this is a financial strain I want my children to have what they need so I pay for it and while I was working I can manage to juggle the costs.

Thing is I've just been made redundant and my husband's contract is up in another month, neither of us are having much luck finding new work so far. So this thread fills me with fear about the judgements that will be made about me and my family if we need to access the back to school allowance or any other allowance. I'm filled with fear about life on social welfare and about ever getting a job again so threads like this with so many people talking about how they can budget and save make people like me who are struggling to get by feel like absolute crap about themselves. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people struggling with the additional costs back to school time brings are just like me and my family. I would never have had children if I had known how crappy the last 8 years would have been and now it looks like we are back to even crappier times.

You've gotten this far, you'll get over the next bit too. That would've broken many families. So instead of worrying about what people think, take a bit of comfort from the fact that you've what sounds like a great relationship and 3 great kids

Jawgap

BaaLamb wrote: »

know this is After Hours and I'll probably get a flea in my ear for my post but I've found this whole thread quite upsetting. So much judgemental stuff going on and so many people who appear to be convinced that those who can't save money from the children's allowance or save all year or budget in the same way as they do are quite obviously lazy scroungers.
........

I'm genuinely sorry to hear of your problems and hope things turn for you very soon.

My own view - to restate it - is that people who have been prudent, worked hard and lived within their means should be able to access much greater supports more easily, be it for back to school expenses, adult education, debt relief etc if they hit a rough patch and something like redundancy, bereavement, collapse of a business blights their lives.

I'd prefer if Child Benefit was means tested so those that genuinely need it most and would benefit from it most would get ready access to larger amounts to help alleviate that need.

What gets up people's noses is that a lot of people are 'struggling' with back to school expenses while forking out for foreign holidays, full Sky packages, new cars, landscape gardeners etc. You don't sound like you're in that bracket or even close to it, but that doesn't mean there aren't others who brazenly consider themselves to be part of a 'struggling class' because of first world rather than real world problems.

As for the back-to-school allowance then if you are entitled to it you should absolutely claim it - plenty that don't need it do, so why should you not?

Sincere best wishes for the future.

andekwarhola

BaaLamb wrote: »

know this is After Hours and I'll probably get a flea in my ear for my post but I've found this whole thread quite upsetting. So much judgemental stuff going on and so many people who appear to be convinced that those who can't save money from the children's allowance or save all year or budget in the same way as they do are quite obviously lazy scroungers.

I planned my three children, I worked after the first one was born and for a while after the second one was born but the second child kept getting ear infections and the creche refused to take her with them. I gave up work, set up a small sideline business that was compatible with kids and husband worked away. Had third child and all seemed to be going well until out of the blue in 2008 my husband was made redundant and the ass fell out of the world in general. I went back to work (lucky to have gotten my old job back) and I worked and worked and worked, minded the kids while hubby went back to Uni to try to upskill. Uni was 4 hours away so he was only home at weekends. We paid our mortgage, our creche fees and all rest of it all the ways through the recession. I changed jobs and moved to the city he was studying in and I worked, worked, worked. We never had much in the way of disposable income but we paid our bills and made sure the kids could do a few activities etc. The children's allowance was part of our monthly budget, it went towards shoes, clothes, food, activities but it was most certainly never spent on holidays, smoking, drinking etc. as people have implied.

The back to school thing is just an additional strain for a family that is always strained and it is a time of year I always dread. The tracksuit has to come from one place, the school coat another etc etc. We try and pick up bits and pieces over the summer but invariably we still have a hefty final bill. This year the second child is starting secondary school and we had to buy an iPad plus iPad insurance and iPad case plus ebooks and then a whole load of stationery as well. Without thinking about uniforms I've spent the guts of €700 already on the one child. Thing is while all of this is a financial strain I want my children to have what they need so I pay for it and while I was working I can manage to juggle the costs.

Thing is I've just been made redundant and my husband's contract is up in another month, neither of us are having much luck finding new work so far. So this thread fills me with fear about the judgements that will be made about me and my family if we need to access the back to school allowance or any other allowance. I'm filled with fear about life on social welfare and about ever getting a job again so threads like this with so many people talking about how they can budget and save make people like me who are struggling to get by feel like absolute crap about themselves. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of people struggling with the additional costs back to school time brings are just like me and my family. I would never have had children if I had known how crappy the last 8 years would have been and now it looks like we are back to even crappier times.

The race to judgment from most people in here is directly proportional to the narrowness of their experience. You've nothing to prove to any of them. Hope things look up soon as I'm sure they will.