Should Working mothers be given preference at childcare ?? rant and healthy debate :)

[Rowellen]

I think it takes a special type of person to want to work in childcare. I know I personally could not do it. My 3yo drives me nuts at the best of times. I couldn't imagine looking after 10 of them! The carers at his centre are amazing ladies & I applaude them. As with most government funded jobs, they don't get paid enough for doing a very good job, with more & more responsibility thrown at them.

PP, I hope you can get a place soon.

[Rouge]

I hope you can get a place soon PP.

And as a SAHP, on and off WAHP, someone who has done it all on her own for 10 years with no family I still think preference should always be given to those who work. And then single parents who have no support, parents who suffer mental illness and need the break and so forth.

It irks me when people use CC because they just want to (and I'm not talking need here). I had so many people tell me with my first I needed to have DD in care to socialise and give me a break. Erm no. I didn't need it and we had plenty of opportunities to play and I didn't think it was ok for me to take up the space that was needed by someone else.

[Phteven]

a system that is anything other than first in first served is discriminatory. If I wish to access a service the only question I should have to answer is can I afford it.

[Rouge]

Kinders and school give preferences I don't see why CC should be any different.

[Phteven]

If kinder and schools give preference based on employment status it is discriminatory.
Our school has to give preference to students in its zone. After that it is first in first serve which is the fairest and simplest system.

[Astrid]

First in First served is not really fair either. What about when moving? What about registering interest when falling pregnant? Do we need to register interest at every centre just in case (I know extreme, but hey someone out there would do it). How do you set the rules of when you can register? Then there is hasseling. One centre I dealt with insisted that no-one contact them, yet another dropped me off the list, as I was not asking every week?

Someone has to set rule regardless with First in First Served.

[Phteven]

If you move without checking the availability of childcare why should you expect someone else to be bumped down the list for your convenience?

[PinkPalace]

Rouge - i guess people could argue i am wanting CC just because, i can still work without it, but after 5 years of nights and weekends, i would love to work in the day to spend time with my daughter after school at night and see my husband on the weeknds

Onyx - i guess it makes it hard when it comes down to "if i can pay for it", especially when the rate is not the same across the board - whereone mother may pay $3 a day the other can pay $75 a day. but i do see how first comes first served works.

In our situation we were transferred 600km, to a town with no friends , family, hey didnt even know a house - rented it over the internet - are supposed to start jobs within 1 day for dh dh finished on a friday at one office and started monday at the other!) and 4 weeks for me - but WL's are crazy. I have been grateful to get DD into a wonderful school, and now the wait begins for the best CC for my son . But i am willing to wait even if it does mean DH has to take leave for me to undertake the inital training then i stay employed but not work the shifts i would prefer for the first 9 months until 2013.

[Rouge]

Not employment status. But they have preferences

I dunno I just thought child care was supposed to be for those that work. To enable mothers to work. For the economy and all that jazz.

[PinkPalace]

If you move without checking the availability of childcare why should you expect someone else to be bumped down the list for your convenience?

for insight - our move wasn anything but convienct. WDH was transferred with 2 weeks notice and 2 days between jobs, with no finance towards the move (it was a move or lose situation).
We left a town we loved, in a house we owned to a city we dont know with no support network.
the 2 weeks between the move was spent finiding a rental without viewing, a school fo rmy DD to transfer into and me packing and driving the kids down .

i could call every childcare in australia in the 'possibilyt' we will be transferred there, but that is just silly.

[Astrid]

If you move without checking the availability of childcare why should you expect someone else to be bumped down the list for your convenience?

It is not as clear cut as that.

Many rural areas are trying to encourage families to relocate, which is great, but not practical if those families are then unable to access Chidcare in order to work. As has already been discussed in this thread, those familes who move don't tend to have any family or friend support for childcare.

BTW we have made the major move, and we did check and book into childcare before the move. Even if there was an impossibly long waiting lists, we would not have stopped our moved. I still believe it is fairer to go on a needs basis, rather than first in first served. I personally have lost a day due to, so understand the effect of such a policy.

[Rowellen]

a system that is anything other than first in first served is discriminatory. If I wish to access a service the only question I should have to answer is can I afford it.

I can see your point Onyx. However I disagree. Childcare is largely government funded and is there to provide a service for a need in society. Similar to a hospital. They prioritise patients based on need. Someone who is bleeding to death will be seen before someone just needing a bandaid regardless of who arrives first. And so it should be. I realise childcare is not a life or death situation but for some, it could be a lose their job situation which can lead to more serious problems. If we were just waiting in line to buy lunch, then yes, first in first served. But in some cases, discrimination is necessary. I believe childcare is one of those situations.

[Phteven]

Not employment status. But they have preferences

Not to start a public/private debate here but I believe that it's fair to say that private school is by its very nature discriminatory. I don't believe that discrimination in one area justifies discrimination in other areas. Whilst I have no objection to parents who want the best for their children I do not like the system (I hate the game but not the players )

I dunno I just thought child care was supposed to be for those that work. To enable mothers to work. For the economy and all that jazz.

If the taxpayer had to pay for all the work that SAHMs perform I doubt that we could afford to subsidise childcare. SAHMs make a massive contribution to our economy and society. If they all resigned tomorrow or demanded to be paid for the unpaid work we do the economy would collapse overnight.

I can see your point Onyx. However I disagree. Childcare is largely government funded and is there to provide a service for a need in society. Similar to a hospital. They prioritise patients based on need. Someone who is bleeding to death will be seen before someone just needing a bandaid regardless of who arrives first. And so it should be. I realise childcare is not a life or death situation but for some, it could be a lose their job situation which can lead to more serious problems. If we were just waiting in line to buy lunch, then yes, first in first served. But in some cases, discrimination is necessary. I believe childcare is one of those situations.

As you say it's not a life or death situation. By government funded you mean taxpayer funded and I can't help but to take that a little personally. DH and I own a medium sized business. As such we shoulder the largest tax burden in Australia. We pay company tax and then pay ourselves from what is leftover and then we pay income tax on that. As well as paying taxes twice we employ other people who in turn pay tax. Small/medium business owners are the biggest employers in Australia. Like many small business owners with young families we have structured our business so that I do what work I can from home. Officially I am not a working mother yet I pay enough tax to subsidise at least 2 childcare places (possible more I have no idea what CC costs). I can't help but to feel a tad disillusioned that my contribution to society is deemed less than that of my employees and that people think that my children should be bumped off childcare lists because I stay home.

Other people may disagree with me but I think that the unpaid contributions that parents who do not participate in the workforce are just as valuable as the paid work that parents do so I think that unpaid parents should have equal access to babysitting services. If a mother wants some time off her unpaid work I see no reason why she shouldn't have it.

[Rouge]

It ate my post n

Should have clarified. I wasn't talking about money, employment or private school preferences. I was talking about vic schools in general including kinder.

The preferences are in relation to transport issues with those close to schools/kinders, those with siblings already attending and those with special circumstances.

[briggsy's girl]

Child care, IMO, should be on a needs basis. first in first served is not appropriate.

there are many services that are based on needs, not who got in first - this is just another that should be based on needs. i don't think it's appropriate to have to anticipate changes in your circumstances. right now, i have no need for CC, so my DD isn't on any list. if something happened to DH tomorrow though, i would have a need to have her in care so that i can continue working. why should my not having her on a list ahead of my SIL (who uses after school care just because there is a place and her kids like going) prevent me from accessing a place i NEED?

it's not appropriate to assume first in means most 'deserving', most 'in need' of the places


but i do agree, i deal with people daily that cannot find a child care position as there aren't enough of them where they are needed...

i don't envy whoever it is that has to work out licensing etc for child care centres.

[ss_storm]

How do you know that many of them aren't WAHM mothers? Many many mothers run a little business from home, myself included. If I didn't put DD in child care, granted she only goes one day a week and only started this year, I would struggle to get anything done. Just because I don't physically have to travel to a different location and be paid by someone else doesn't mean I'm not a working mother.
Thankfully we live in a small rural town and a new child care centre has opened up (it is a year or so old I think) so I had no problems getting her in. If I was asked to swap days because a 'working' mum needed a spot on that day I'd have no problems doing it. But it wouldn't e fair on my child to kick me out completely..for DD it is her main social interaction, and she was always quite clingy with me so I think it's very beneficial for her to have time without me, as much as it gives me a break. DF is self employed and rarely home, when he is he's not much help so im practically sole parenting anyway. I don't think any of that makes me less deserving than another mother.

[Phteven]

It ate my post n

Should have clarified. I wasn't talking about money, employment or private school preferences. I was talking about vic schools in general including kinder.

The preferences are in relation to transport issues with those close to schools/kinders, those with siblings already attending and those with special circumstances.

ah... gotcha, but I think that CC is a bit different because whilst I believe that every child has a right to education (and schools should facilitate ease of access) I don't see CC as a right.

[sushee]

I agree that the unpaid work that SAHMs do is not valued enough. I agree that there should be more childcare places. But unlike a SAHM I didn't have the option of not putting my child in daycare. I'm all for mothers being able to get the break they deserve from their unpaid work - having raised for kids, I would have appreciated that too - but when it's boils down to getting childcare or not being able to work when you have to, I know what side I'm on. One has some semblance of a choice, the other doesn't.

Ironically though, I was on a waiting list for my cc for 12 months, and they finally offered me a place when I had not yet returned to work. I actually had to place my son there despite not wanting to because otherwise I would have lost the spot for when I did return to work in 6 months. It was only one day a week and I put him in for only half a day despite paying for a full day but the nonsensical nature of how they'd worked out 'need' never failed to make me smh in disbelief.

If Charlie was to arrive in Melbourne tomorrow and I had to suddenly look for daycare for him, I would hope that my situation would be considered more needful than a SAHM who might have the option of being more flexible. I don't assume that they don't need a break, but I'm not putting my child into childcare to have a break, it's to work, so I would hope that that would be weighted in my favour.