Changes to lone parent payment proposed

Nevyn

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/changes-to-lone-parent-payment-proposed-459568.html

29/05/2010 - 08:47:29
It has emerged that a special social welfare payment to lone parents will be stopped once their child reaches 13.

Following a review the Social Protection Minister Eamon O'Cuiv is cutting the One-Parent Family Payment.

The benefit is currently paid to the lone parent until children are 18, or 22 if in full-time education, - and comes in at €196 a week with just under €30 for each additional qualified child.

However for new claimants, from April 2011, the payment will be made until the youngest child in the family reaches 13. emerged that a special social welfare payment to lone parents will be stopped once their child reaches 13.

The move is just one of a number of cuts included in the new Social Welfare Bill 2010 published late yesterday evening.

The Government says the changes would bring Ireland's support for lone parents more in line with international provisions, where there is a movement away from long-term and passive income support.

But its not the only change - under the terms of the Social Welfare Bill 2010 people will be disqualified from collecting Jobseeker's Allowance if they refuse an offer of suitable employment.

The Bill will be debated in the Oireachtas before the summer recess in early July.

Read more: http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/changes-to-lone-parent-payment-proposed-459568.html#ixzz0pKEPaEXt

So the government seem to think it's acceptable to leave a 13 year old at home alone while a parent goes out to work, that is if they can get work.

silverharp

I'm only commenting on your question, but 13 seems reasonable to me. Personally I was left alone for various periods from 9 or 10 years of age.

Kids are adaptable and the last thing "we" need to do is assume they not capable of some level of responsability.

ash23

silverharp wrote: »

I'm only commenting on your question, but 13 seems reasonable to me. Personally I was left alone for various periods from 9 or 10 years of age.

Kids are adaptable and the last thing "we" need to do is assume they not capable of some level of responsability.

It'sone thing to say it's ok to leave them alone from 4pm til the parent gets home at 6pm. But my issue with this will be the mid term breaks, the 3 long months in the summer. Would it really be deemed acceptable to leave a 13/14 year old alone all day long to get up to god knows what?

If the limit was 16, I'd be all for it but I think 13 is too young.

sud1

Sorry...

But what do you think single parents who work do with their kids!!!

Get with the real world....I really cant understand this attitude that single parents need to stay at home with children...

If I choose to stay at home with my kids i would not expect the government to pay for it...

And if they cant get a job then they are entitled to claim job seekers benifit untill they find a job...thats if they really want a job???

mariaf24

Completely agree with sud1,when the child turns 13 the parent will be eligibe to claim jobseekers allowance. It's just another name for the same thing.

Nevyn

mariaf24 wrote: »

Completely agree with sud1,when the child turns 13 the parent will be eligibe to claim jobseekers allowance. It's just another name for the same thing.

I won't be it will be less and if you don't take a job or a training course after a certain period of time it will be cute off.

If you have a job which pays enough for your child care costs or you have a family member who will mind the children then fine but often the types of jobs a person can get won't pay the bill and child care.

ash23

sud1 wrote: »

Sorry...

But what do you think single parents who work do with their kids!!!

Get with the real world....I really cant understand this attitude that single parents need to stay at home with children...

If I choose to stay at home with my kids i would not expect the government to pay for it...

And if they cant get a job then they are entitled to claim job seekers benifit untill they find a job...thats if they really want a job???

Should single parents not have the right to choose to stay at home with their kids if that is what they feel is best for their children?
Would someone turn to a married stay at home parent and tell them to go back to work, that they aren't needed at home?

I am a single parent. A full time working single parent with ONE child on a wage that is above minimum.
And I struggle to pay for part time childcare while my child is in school. I really struggle during the summer months when it doubles. And as I said, I'm only paying for one and I'm not on minimum wage.

How is someone who earns 18k per annum supposed to pay childcare for one, two or three children full time during the summer?

A person in that position would be looking at paying (in my area anyway) 75 per child per week for after school care and 150 per child per week when they were not in school.

So take a single parent with 2 kids on an 18k wage. No rent allowance, no OPFA. A FIS top up to get them to about €500 per week. Rent down here would be about 200 per week, childcare part time another 150.Leaving 150 to feed, pay bills etc. Ok, tight but do able.

Summer months that childcare increases to 300 per month. Wages and FIS are gone and family lives on what exactly????

Max Power1

ash23 wrote: »

Should single parents not have the right to choose to stay at home with their kids if that is what they feel is best for their children?

at the tax payers expense?
No way.

ash23

Max Power1 wrote: »

at the tax payers expense?
No way.

Married stay at home parents cost the tax payer(tax credits given to spouse, low income one income families get FIS, medical cards etc, loss of PAYE and PRSI from person not working). Are they going to be made go back to work when their children are 13?

Max Power1

ash23 wrote: »

Married stay at home parents cost the tax payer(tax credits given to spouse, low income one income families get FIS, medical cards etc, loss of PAYE and PRSI from person not working). Are they going to be made go back to work when their children are 13?

All the examples that you have quoted (afaik you cant transfer tax credits to your spouse anymore) are not a choice but are the result of circumstances - either low pay, or being made redundant etc.

On the other hand, what 13 year old needs their parent to stay at home with them all day when said parent could be out working and contributing to the economy, and society as a whole.

Nevyn

You seriously think it's ok for a 13 year old to be left at home for 3 months
monday to friday from 8pm to 6pm on thier own?

Max Power1

Thaedydal wrote: »

You seriously think it's ok for a 13 year old to be left at home for 3 months
monday to friday from 8pm to 6pm on thier own?

depending on the child involved, yes I do. It wasnt done in my case, but I am aware of a large number of children of that age and slightly older that would be left home alone during the secondary school summer holidays.

Moonbeam

Community creches an the government subvention scheme exist for this reason.

ash23 wrote: »

Should single parents not have the right to choose to stay at home with their kids if that is what they feel is best for their children?
Would someone turn to a married stay at home parent and tell them to go back to work, that they aren't needed at home?

I am a single parent. A full time working single parent with ONE child on a wage that is above minimum.
And I struggle to pay for part time childcare while my child is in school. I really struggle during the summer months when it doubles. And as I said, I'm only paying for one and I'm not on minimum wage.

How is someone who earns 18k per annum supposed to pay childcare for one, two or three children full time during the summer?

A person in that position would be looking at paying (in my area anyway) 75 per child per week for after school care and 150 per child per week when they were not in school.

So take a single parent with 2 kids on an 18k wage. No rent allowance, no OPFA. A FIS top up to get them to about €500 per week. Rent down here would be about 200 per week, childcare part time another 150.Leaving 150 to feed, pay bills etc. Ok, tight but do able.

Summer months that childcare increases to 300 per month. Wages and FIS are gone and family lives on what exactly????

Unmarried co-habiting parents have it worst off,they can not get single mothers entitlement or share tax credits with their partners.

Normally I would welcome the above from the government, it is good for mothers to get back to work and a good example for the kids but the issue as i see it now is there just aren't jobs for them to go in to.
Another reason that I welcome this is the amount of co-habiting women claiming single mothers allowance and everything that goes with it is so high and although I believe the system is not right,I do believe that it is the system and them claiming money that they are not entitled to takes money from those that really need it.
I wonder will it encourage some people to have more children just so their benefits aren't stopped?

ash23

Moonbeam wrote: »

Community creches an the government subvention scheme exist for this reason.

Community creches aren't exactly in surplus! There are none at all in my locality.

Unmarried co-habiting parents have it worst off,they can not get single mothers entitlement or share tax credits with their partners.

But they have the earning power of two. If one stays at home then they have no childcare costs. If both work, they have a double income. A single parent has the earning power of one.
Also it is not "single mothers entitlement". It is one parent family allowance and it's there for any person who is parenting alone for whatever reason. Separation, death, prison sentences etc.

Normally I would welcome the above from the government, it is good for mothers to get back to work and a good example for the kids but the issue as i see it now is there just aren't jobs for them to go in to.
Another reason that I welcome this is the amount of co-habiting women claiming single mothers allowance and everything that goes with it is so high and although I believe the system is not right,I do believe that it is the system and them claiming money that they are not entitled to takes money from those that really need it.
I wonder will it encourage some people to have more children just so their benefits aren't stopped?

There are also people cheating the system on disability, job seekers and copious other social welfare benefits. But instead of focussing on ALL fraudsters they are singling out all those on one parent family allowance including genuine claimants.
Why?

ash23

Max Power1 wrote: »

All the examples that you have quoted (afaik you cant transfer tax credits to your spouse anymore) are not a choice but are the result of circumstances - either low pay, or being made redundant etc.

On the other hand, what 13 year old needs their parent to stay at home with them all day when said parent could be out working and contributing to the economy, and society as a whole.

Rubbish! Of course it's a choice! Plenty of couples make the choice to have one parent stay at home with the children and top up their wage with FIS and claim a medical or GP card. Also I was referring to the home carers tax break

http://www.revenue.ie/en/tax/it/credits/home-carers.html

which is currently payable up to the age of 18. Will this also cease at the age of 13 now?

Because if the children of single parents are deemed to be able to fend for themselves while their main carer goes back to work, then the same should apply to the children of married couples.

dark crystal

Another ridiculously backwards move from the government.

If they spent a fraction as much on providing state assissted childcare for all families as they did on bailing out banks, continuing to shell out child benefit to high earners and TD's expense accounts, the economy would be in a much better state.

All parents need a cohesive childcare policy desperately in this country. The rate of child poverty continues to rise and the government are going backwards with every cut they inflict on families, working or not.

Taking money away from single parents once their children reach secondary school age is going to tip a lot of families over the edge.

This country really needs to review it's priorities.

mariaf24

Thaedydal wrote: »

You seriously think it's ok for a 13 year old to be left at home for 3 months
monday to friday from 8pm to 6pm on thier own?

Agreed,children at 13 should not be home alone...

Off topic a bit but what is happening to rent allowance?

cynder

I cant see any problem with a 13 year old left home alone during school holidays.

Im sure the 13 year old would have friends or family to visit and should be able to make themselves a sandwich or even a dinner. The 13 year old might even have older brothers and sisters (unless an only child).

Might teach them a bit of responsibility, even though they would most likely be playing on the x-box.

I don't see the need for a lone parent to be receiving a lone parent payment for a 22 year old a college.

It could be worse, in the UK its 7 not 13.

gaeilgegrinds1

Do none of ye think if the fathers involved paid their way that they might think more carefully about what they are at? I've loads of friends who have been left on their own without a leg to stand on and have it really tough, it's made too easy for them to walk away!

goodmum

As someone who has one child and has been parenting alone from the start, I have 'lived' on opfa for the first two years of his life. And it was hell on earth. There is no way that any sane human being would WANT to live that way for 18years.
But the government needs to introduce training or up-skilling schemes for these women who will have lost many of their skills over the years, whilst parenting alone. You can't just say, right, thats it, 13 years as a parent, out you go and get a job!
I remember when my son was a baby, there was talk of this being introduced. My bet is it wont happen anytime soon.
And don't get me started on the fathers responsibilities in all of this...
There's no way I would leave my son home alone at 13 (during the holidays), not a hope!

jessiejam

Its only for new applicants AFAIK so those that have it need not worry. Those that haven't applied yet they will know nothing else. I am in agreement about the home alone thing. Teenagers nowadays no way. Its not all just about the childcare issue either, its about providing for a teenager when you dont have the financial support of a partner.

Klingon Hamlet

goodmum wrote: »

And don't get me started on the fathers responsibilities in all of this...

What do you mean? Dads are just as involved in their children's lives as mums.

Some fathers are directly affected by this change to OPFA--I know 3 dads with sole custody of their children.

goodmum

Well I know none.
My experience of parenting alone are common enough - he left when I was pregnant and doesnt see his son -and when I said that 'dont get me started...' I was referring to my own experience, but I didnt want to go into here, that's all.
Sorry for going off topic, just explaining my remark as requested.

Klingon Hamlet

goodmum wrote: »

Well I know none.
My experience of parenting alone are common enough - he left when I was pregnant and doesnt see his son -and when I said that 'dont get me started...' I was referring to my own experience, but I didnt want to go into here, that's all.
Sorry for going off topic, just explaining my remark as requested.

I'm very sorry to hear your son's father ran away from his responsibilities:(

Just please don't tar us with the same brush:o

Men face huge difficulties when it comes to recognition as an equal and capable parent...and as I say, there are a growing number of dads as sole parents for one reason or another, who face this problem too...

(I'm a single dad with shared custody, i.e. the mum gets OFP, and I get nothing, go figure:o)

Splendour

Klingon Hamlet wrote: »

I'm very sorry to hear your son's father ran away from his responsibilities:(

Just please don't tar us with the same brush:o

Men face huge difficulties when it comes to recognition as an equal and capable parent...and as I say, there are a growing number of dads as sole parents for one reason or another, who face this problem too...

(I'm a single dad with shared custody, i.e. the mum gets OFP, and I get nothing, go figure:o)

AFAIK, both parents can apply for lone parents allowance. Pressume it is given to the parent who has responsibilty for the day to day care of the child...

chocgirl

I think it's reasonable that a 13 year old can stay at home and look after themselves when they're not in school. Many 13 year olds are babysitting and getting paid for it during the evening so no reason why they can't mind themselves during the day.

When I was 13 I was at home all summer on my own looking after my younger sister and most of my friends were the same as both our parents had to go out and work. 13 year olds are much more mature now as well.

Klingon Hamlet

Splendour wrote: »

AFAIK, both parents can apply for lone parents allowance. Pressume it is given to the parent who has responsibilty for the day to day care of the child...

As in Primary Carer: the mumsy

Dad only gets Primary Care by taking away custody from the mum, which very rarely seems to happen

(i.e. mums get OPFP automatically, unless dad fights for sole custody, sole guardianship, and wins; that's if he's on the birth cert which only the mother/court can allow)

stovelid

Single mother chooses not to leave 13 year-old children alone

Boards view: spongers...blah...get a job...rabble

Something happens to child or child gets into trouble when mother is in work

Boards view: unfit mother...blah...sterilization...rabble

goodmum

Klingon Hamlet, neither you nor any other human being, need apologise to me for the fact that my sons father abandoned him.
In fact, he need never even apologise to me directly.
He does need to explain his actions to his son though - his son is the only person he's answerable to (apart from his maker of course;)).
But I get your point.
And +1 to stovelid, though I wouldn't exactly have put it that way myself.
Do people not realise that it's not necessarily the 13yr old him/herself who couldn't look after themselves? It's the fact that they could bring pals home and cause mayhem if left unsupervised. What if someone was to knock at the door and the child was afraid to answer? yes, it could be the tv licence guy, but it might not be! You think it's ok to leave a 13yr old in that situation, afraid and alone, if a strange adult knocks on their door????

I have 4yrs left until my son hits secondary school. Already, I know I can't send him to the same school as his peers - I will send him to a school closer to home, so that when he doesn't need a childminder anymore (no clue what that age will be), he can come home for lunch and come home from school alone, and wait until I get in from work at 6.

Splendour

Klingon Hamlet wrote: »

As in Primary Carer: the mumsy

Dad only gets Primary Care by taking away custody from the mum, which very rarely seems to happen

(i.e. mums get OPFP automatically, unless dad fights for sole custody, sole guardianship, and wins; that's if he's on the birth cert which only the mother/court can allow)

It's fair enough if only the primary carer (be they mother or father) gets the allowance as they have all the expense of looking after the child.

cynder

Klingon Hamlet wrote: »

As in Primary Carer: the mumsy

Dad only gets Primary Care by taking away custody from the mum, which very rarely seems to happen

(i.e. mums get OPFP automatically, unless dad fights for sole custody, sole guardianship, and wins; that's if he's on the birth cert which only the mother/court can allow)

Or if the wife dies,

* my brother is married and his wife is terminally ill and has 2 years left to live.

cynder

goodmum wrote: »

It's the fact that they could bring pals home and cause mayhem if left unsupervised. What if someone was to knock at the door and the child was afraid to answer? yes, it could be the tv licence guy, but it might not be! You think it's ok to leave a 13yr old in that situation, afraid and alone, if a strange adult knocks on their door????

I know 13 year olds that are 6 foot tall!
Not too many 13 year olds are scaredy cats.
Im sure 90% of 13 year olds have mobile phones.

Your treating it as a 13 year old is able to throw parties and be completely reckless yet they are afraid and alone.

A lot of them would have older siblings (unless an only child).




*I was left home alone from the age of 8 or 9, we would come home from school and have to wait 2 hours before anyone came home to let us in (that was in primary school). I was able to cook a full dinner at 12/13, was left on our own for full days from the age of 12, I also got my first job at 14.

goodmum

And what year was that grindwald???? Is 2010. There are many, many more dangers for children in this current age. My older brothers would tell the same story about being left home alone, and getting jobs at 13. They were in the days when my parents left the front and back door open also...

The height of a 13yr old is completely and utterly irrelevant in this instance.
It's also irrelevant whether they are scardey cats or not.
No matter what height he/she is, or how scared or brave he/she is, the fact is that most 13yr olds are not responsible enough to be left alone for 8 hours a day, during their summer holidays, while their sole carer goes to work.

And apart from all of the above, what about the child?
It would be very unfair of any parent to leave a 13yr old child alone all day. What would they do? (and don't say playstation!) Where would they go etc etc.

Not everyone lives beside a bus/train station - nor beside friends or family. What would the child do with their day? What a desperately sad way for a child to spend their summer time off school, because their primary carer has been forced to go to work when they are 13.

Klingon Hamlet

Splendour wrote: »

It's fair enough if only the primary carer (be they mother or father) gets the allowance as they have all the expense of looking after the child.

That's wrong---child maintenance covers expenses. Then there's benefit and opfp on top of that. I think the state should fund a free childcare system for more than the first year, so mums can go back out to work part-time. More productivity, no childcare costs.

As for the 13 year olds during summer...perhaps a program where mums are employed as part-time public servants. I know a few ps's currently employed who literally use up their quota of sick days every year because it's tradition. Fire them, replace them with hard-working mums, and provide their places as temp places during the summer to students etc. That way students get summer/Christmas jobs, and mums get to be home during the times their kids are home, and the waster ps's have to actually reset their mindsets and earn a living.

goodmum

Not every 'other' parent pays maintenance.
Maintenance is NOT a given.

Klingon Hamlet

goodmum wrote: »

Not every 'other' parent pays maintenance.
Maintenance is NOT a given.

It's legally enforceable. You don't even need a solicitor. As long as a mum goes to court, dads have to pay it (quite right IMHO). Why claim off the state? (Not directed at you personally) When the money should come from both parents? 50/50 fair's fair, equal parenting and responsibility, money and time.

KaiLee

I am a lone parent of 2 under 3 and I think this is totally reasonable. I dont intend to be home all the time. Once the kids are in school I will have the oppurtunity to get work somewhere. Even if its Mc Donalds 20 hours a week will make me the same money as social pay. Its the responsible thing to do in my opinion. And if I can't find work there is job seekers allowance. I really don't think its a big deal?!

cynder

It was the 1990's and we lived in the middle of no where, no family or close friends within a 15 mile radius.

I think many 13 year olds are responsible enough its the parents who keep them wrapped in cotton wool that are the problem. kids grow up a lot quicker these days, you have 13 year olds climbing Everest yet you wont have him stay home alone.

If the parent cant trust the child to be left home alone than i would have to question the parenting methods. 13 year old throwing parties and going out stealing/causing trouble, not good parenting if you ask me!


I would trust my 10 year old to stay at home, but at 10 she is a bit too young, she is also diabetic so we have manage that, but by the time she turns 13 she will completely trustworthy and able to look after herself and hopefuly we will have trained her enough not to need us 24/7 to look after her blood sugars for her, she will start looking after them herself (with a little help from us).

also there is no legal minimum age in which a child can be left home alone, also at what age they can mind their younger siblings. I think 15 is around the age where they can be left to mind younger kids over night.

goodmum

Klingon, with respect, you have obviously never been to court with an ex to receive maintenance.
Yes it's legally enforceable, but alot of people still don't pay it. You should check out some of the single parent sites - there are thousands of custodial parents in arrears of maintenance at the moment, and there's damn all being done about it.
In my case, he brought me back to court to reduce it to 20pw.
My childcare alone is 125 pw.
Go figure.

Klingon Hamlet

goodmum wrote: »

I will send him to a school closer to home, so that when he doesn't need a childminder anymore (no clue what that age will be), he can come home for lunch and come home from school alone, and wait until I get in from work at 6.

This is where a state-funded childcare system---after-school study groups etc---would come into play. Kids could complete their homework, then get a schoolbus to their homes around 6ish. That way parents know their kids are safe, plus when they're home they're (hopefully) free of their homework.

KaiLee

Klingon Hamlet wrote: »

It's legally enforceable. You don't even need a solicitor. As long as a mum goes to court, dads have to pay it (quite right IMHO). Why claim off the state? (Not directed at you personally) When the money should come from both parents? 50/50 fair's fair, equal parenting and responsibility, money and time.

I believe if you have 50/50 parenting shared custody.. then you are not entitled to lone parents allowance. Its true all parents should do the responsible thing and pay what is required but it sadly doesn't always happen. And if the other parent is unemployed there is very little the courts will do. Any maintenance a parent gives is deducted from other benefits eg. rent allownace.

goodmum

Btw, I agree with these proposed changes also, like I said, I fought hard to get out of the poverty trap that is SW.
I just think they need to include support for childcare and/or training for the parent who's returning to the workforce, having spent 13yrs at home.

KaiLee

Klingon Hamlet wrote: »

This is where a state-funded childcare system---after-school study groups etc---would come into play. Kids could complete their homework, then get a schoolbus to their homes around 6ish. That way parents know their kids are safe, plus when they're home they're (hopefully) free of their homework.

This would be ideal. Its badly needed here!

seamus

goodmum wrote: »

Is 2010. There are many, many more dangers for children in this current age.

No there aren't. Your children have never been safer and less in danger than they are in 2010.

What would they do? (and don't say playstation!) Where would they go etc etc.

They would go out and play football with their friends or talk about boys, or whatever.

How many 13 year old children spend their summer holidays tied to their primary carer? When I was 13, summer holidays consisted of leaving the house at 10am, going to a friends' and sometimes not arriving home till dinnertime.

I understand how this can be an issue for fringe cases where both parent and child are separated from friends and family, but for the vast majority of people whose youngest is 13, their daytimes have little activity beyond housekeeping. My mother went to college when I was 12 specifically because as soon as I hit secondary school she found that she had little to do during the day beyond cleaning and washing.

Any mother who thinks a 13 year old needs them to wait on them hand and foot and be available to them 24/7, seriously needs to cut the apron strings. If you have a child with a disability, different story, but normal 13 year olds are off out of the house at every opportunity anyway.

cynder

seamus wrote: »

No there aren't. Your children have never been safer and less in danger than they are in 2010.
They would go out and play football with their friends or talk about boys, or whatever.

How many 13 year old children spend their summer holidays tied to their primary carer? When I was 13, summer holidays consisted of leaving the house at 10am, going to a friends' and sometimes not arriving home till dinnertime.

I understand how this can be an issue for fringe cases where both parent and child are separated from friends and family, but for the vast majority of people whose youngest is 13, their daytimes have little activity beyond housekeeping. My mother went to college when I was 12 specifically because as soon as I hit secondary school she found that she had little to do during the day beyond cleaning and washing.

Any mother who thinks a 13 year old needs them to wait on them hand and foot and be available to them 24/7, seriously needs to cut the apron strings. If you have a child with a disability, different story, but normal 13 year olds are off out of the house at every opportunity anyway.

Totally agree!

goodmum

So it's the mothers fault...again! For having the apron strings too tight....

A vast amount of single parent families in dublin have one child (there are stats on this, just cant find them at the minute) so the issue of them minding younger kids isn't necessarily relevant.
I work 27 miles from my home.
Because I would not leave my son when he's 13, alone for 8 hours a day, 25 miles away, I'm at fault?????
And the day I do it, and he burns the house down while smoking in his bedroom, I'm still at fault???

State funded aftershool care would be the ideal for those 13yr olds who aren't yet mature enough to fend for themselves.

seamus

goodmum wrote: »

So it's the mothers fault...again! For having the apron strings too tight....

Nope, I didn't say that, I didn't blame anyone for anything.

Because I would not leave my son when he's 13, alone for 8 hours a day, 25 miles away, I'm at fault?????
And the day I do it, and he burns the house down while smoking in his bedroom, I'm still at fault???

He could burn the house down smoking in his bedroom whether he's 13 or 33 and it could happen whether or not you're in the house. Yes, teenagers do make stupid decisions and do stupid things, that's what being a teenager is all about. To think that being at home all day is going to stop that is the height of naivety. They're not little helpless children anymore.

cynder

goodmum wrote: »

So it's the mothers fault...again! For having the apron strings too tight....

A vast amount of single parent families in dublin have one child (there are stats on this, just cant find them at the minute) so the issue of them minding younger kids isn't necessarily relevant.
I work 27 miles from my home.
Because I would not leave my son when he's 13, alone for 8 hours a day, 25 miles away, I'm at fault?????
And the day I do it, and he burns the house down while smoking in his bedroom, I'm still at fault???

State funded aftershool care would be the ideal for those 13yr olds who aren't yet mature enough to fend for themselves.

He could burn down the house with you at home, he could smoke in his bedroom while you at home. He could be smoking at school while your at home. kids are going to do what kids are going to do. there is a difference between having a fag and steeling a car.


All round Ireland there are going to be 13 year old with older siblings. there will be a few 13 year olds with no siblings. Dublin isn't the be all and end all, it the whole of Ireland.

I was sitting in my living room when my then 8 year old released the hand brake off the car and it crashed into the living room, we had to knock the front of the house and rebuild it. It happens. ( it was an accident, she pulled her schoolbag and it was wrapped round the handbrake)

The thing is i trust my lady. Accidents happen, if she set fire to the house, as long as she wasn't hurt no harm done. The insurance would pay for it. *She would not set fire to the house on purpose.

goodmum

I only mentioned Dublin because the stats are from Dublin figures:rolleyes:

ash23

I was listening to the radio (Ray D'Arcy) a couple of weeks ago and they were talking about a study which shows that 14 is the age when girls are hardest to parent
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1269512/Daughters-aged-14-years-old-difficult-parents-handle-study-reveals.html

(forgive me for the daily mail link, it's the only one I could find)

The general consensus for this on the show was agreement. A lot of people saying their daughters went off the rails at 14.

My daughter is 7 and a very good kid. But who knows what will happen between now and 14. Any number of things could have her go off the rails and not necessarily to do with bad parenting.

I would worry about her being home alone at 13/14/15 for 9 hours a day.

Even if she were the queit type, if other, rowdier older teens get wind of the fact that she has a free house all day, who knows what would happen.

Moomoo1

grindelwald wrote: »

I cant see any problem with a 13 year old left home alone during school holidays.

Im sure the 13 year old would have friends or family to visit and should be able to make themselves a sandwich or even a dinner. The 13 year old might even have older brothers and sisters (unless an only child).

what if they go and hang out on street corners? Or worse? And then the parents get labelled 'bad parents who couldn't bring up their kids properly?