Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Pay Parents to Stay Home with Baby for 12 Months?

Options
  • 15-02-2018 1:04pm
    #1
    _Roz_
    Registered Users Posts: 530 ✭✭✭


    Article here.

    Just wondering what people think. Unsurprisingly the majority think this should be the case. I, also unsurprisingly, as someone who has no interest in kids, thinks it mad that anyone feels they're entitled to full financial support for a year for a lifestyle choice they've made. You already get a chunk of money every week for the child once it's born like.

    Should parents be financially supported for first 12 months? 172 votes

    Yes, full financial support
    0% 0 votes
    Eh, no, fund your kids yourself
    45% 79 votes
    Partial financial support/other
    54% 93 votes


«1345

Comments

  • Options
    #2
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    Its a bit simplistic to call raising children a lifestyle choice.


  • Options
    #3
    Hector Bellend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    amcalester wrote: »
    Its a bit simplistic to call raising children a lifestyle choice.

    It is a choice isnt it?


  • Options
    #4
    Silane
    Registered Users Posts: 176 ✭✭Silane


    When you retire you will also get a chunk of money every week, just for being old, that money will come from other people's "lifestyle choices". That being said I think the current system is generous enough, and I have 1 year old.


  • Options
    #5
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    Hector Bellend wrote: »
    It is a choice isnt it?

    It's a choice for the individual but on a population level it's a necessity.


  • Options
    #6
    nice_guy80
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,723 ✭✭✭nice_guy80


    the parents spending time with their kids will be of huge benefit to the family and society

    shoving them into childcare at 6 months definitely isn't the answer


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    Kingp35
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 12,261 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kingp35


    Silane wrote: »
    When you retire you will also get a chunk of money every week, just for being old, that money will come from other people's "lifestyle choices". That being said I think the current system is generous enough, and I have 1 year old.

    It comes from your PRSI contributions that you've made throughout your working life. Provided you actually worked of course.


  • Options
    #8
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Hector Bellend wrote: »
    It is a choice isnt it?

    Its a 24/7/365 job.


    Constant fear wrapped up in sleep deprivation mixed with all your valuables slowly getting destroyed over time.


  • Options
    #9
    Hector Bellend
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,667 ✭✭✭Hector Bellend


    The_Valeyard wrote: »
    Its a 24/7/365 job.


    Constant fear wrapped up in sleep deprivation mixed with all your valuables slowly getting destroyed over time.

    After youve made a conscious decision and effort to conceive


  • Options
    #10
    The_Valeyard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,452 ✭✭✭✭The_Valeyard


    Hector Bellend wrote: »
    After youve made a conscious decision and effort to conceive

    Im sure theres a point in here somewhere.


  • Options
    #11
    Mitch Connor
    Registered Users Posts: 45,387 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    Kingp35 wrote: »
    It comes from your PRSI contributions that you've made throughout your working life. Provided you actually worked of course.

    In reality that isn't the case though.

    It is the taxes being paid by the working population that pays the pensions - without people having kids you don't have those taxes and the economy collapses.

    An economy needs people to have families. Where that is the case, having families should be encouraged, incentivised and supported.

    That said, I wouldn't agree with fully paid year - that is too much.

    (And you could also get into a population control discussion too)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #12
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    The most important part in my opinion is getting rid of maternity leave in favour of parental leave - as things are many mothers, fathers and their children suffer needlessly from our dated-as-f*** system.


  • Options
    #13
    Silane
    Registered Users Posts: 176 ✭✭Silane


    Kingp35 wrote: »
    It comes from your PRSI contributions that you've made throughout your working life. Provided you actually worked of course.

    PRSI doesn't cut it, the only way the systems stays solvent is if the population grows. There's currently 5 workers for every pensioner, at the current rate of growth there will be 2 workers per pensioner by 2050.


  • Options
    #14
    amcalester
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,121 ✭✭✭amcalester


    Kingp35 wrote: »
    It comes from your PRSI contributions that you've made throughout your working life. Provided you actually worked of course.

    It doesn't really, your contributions aren't ring fenced for your future withdrawal.

    Paying your contributions entitles you to receive a payment at a future date, but it'll be funded by the people paying in at that time.


  • Options
    #15
    Billy86
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,495 ✭✭✭✭Billy86


    Hector Bellend wrote: »
    After youve made a conscious decision and effort to conceive

    Not every pregnancy is planned, and while it may change by the end of the year, currently it is illegal to abort an unplanned abortion in Ireland. Even if the 8th is repealed there is a good chance that 'unplanned' pregnancies will still be illegal to abort.


  • Options
    #16
    siblers
    Registered Users Posts: 12,411 ✭✭✭✭siblers


    Hector Bellend wrote: »
    It is a choice isnt it?

    Not if the baby was an accident


  • Options
    #17
    super_furry
    Registered Users Posts: 27,322 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    I'd agree with the proposal to an extent. Give a couple 12 months between the two of them to use the leave as they see fit. Two weeks paternal leave is nowhere near enough for a father and it's a big wrench to have to go back to work that early.


  • Options
    #18
    Mitch Connor
    Registered Users Posts: 45,387 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    It doesn't matter if it is a choice or not.

    Family life should be supported by public policy. The degree to which it should be supported is up for debate, but the support itself should not be.

    We need people to have children. Cause we need those kids to grow up, join the work force, pay taxes, run the businesses and, yes, Government, in the future. We need people to become doctors and teachers, nurses and gardai etc.

    The country NEEDS people to have kids in order to continue to function. So, why shouldn't the Government also support and help in that?


  • Options
    #19
    Kingp35
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 12,261 Mod ✭✭✭✭Kingp35


    Mitch Connor wrote: »
    The country NEEDS people to have kids in order to continue to function. So, why shouldn't the Government also support and help in that?

    How much (in monetary terms) do suggest the government give to support parents and where do you suggest this money comes from?

    Our social benefits bill is already astronomical as it is.


  • Options
    #20
    georgina toadbum
    Closed Accounts Posts: 365 ✭✭georgina toadbum


    _Roz_ wrote: »

    Just wondering what people think. Unsurprisingly the majority think this should be the case. I, also unsurprisingly, as someone who has no interest in kids, thinks it mad that anyone feels they're entitled to full financial support for a year for a lifestyle choice they've made. You already get a chunk of money every week for the child once it's born like.

    Contraception isn't 100%. They may not have made the choice willingly. Also, abortion is still illegal in this country so they have no other option but to keep it.

    *Before people start to think I'm pro-life, I'm not. I'm just pointing out the facts.


  • Options
    #21
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #22
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #23
    Outkast_IRE
    Registered Users Posts: 7,515 ✭✭✭Outkast_IRE


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Less support aimed at everyone and more support aimed at families in which both parents work.

    I think we all know that free education in this country is far from free. Third level fees (Student Contribution Charge) are around €3000 per year now.


  • Options
    #24
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #25
    Mitch Connor
    Registered Users Posts: 45,387 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    Kingp35 wrote: »
    How much (in monetary terms) do suggest the government give to support parents and where do you suggest this money comes from?

    Our social benefits bill is already astronomical as it is.

    Honestly, I don't know. I'm

    I'm not arguing this specific proposal is correct, just arguing against an implication in some arguments that the 'choice' to have kids shouldn't be supported.

    IMO, the support and encouragement of families should be of the highest priority for any Government


  • Options
    #26
    VinLieger
    Registered Users Posts: 17,818 ✭✭✭✭VinLieger


    _Roz_ wrote: »
    Article here.

    Just wondering what people think. Unsurprisingly the majority think this should be the case. I, also unsurprisingly, as someone who has no interest in kids, thinks it mad that anyone feels they're entitled to full financial support for a year for a lifestyle choice they've made. You already get a chunk of money every week for the child once it's born like.

    Continuing the species is not a lifestyle choice, also if you think the benefit is anywhere near enough to meet even one of the single costs of taking care of a child you are incredibly ignorant and naive


  • Options
    #27
    _Roz_
    Registered Users Posts: 530 ✭✭✭_Roz_


    VinLieger wrote: »
    Continuing the species is not a lifestyle choice, also if you think the benefit is anywhere near enough to meet even one of the single costs of taking care of a child you are incredibly ignorant and naive

    When the world is overpopulated, or when you're pumping out three, four or five kids, it absolutely is a lifestyle choice. It only becomes not a lifestyle choice when the population needs to be plumped up. The opposite is when a particular country gets SO overpopulated you're limited to only having one child, or two.

    And I don't think that benefit is enough to take care of a child, but I think it's a good chunk towards something you should mostly be paying for yourself.


  • Options
    #28
    Mushy
    Registered Users Posts: 21,230 ✭✭✭✭Mushy


    Billy86 wrote: »
    The most important part in my opinion is getting rid of maternity leave in favour of parental leave - as things are many mothers, fathers and their children suffer needlessly from our dated-as-f*** system.

    My understanding of the whole thing is that the parental leave currently available will become paid. It's the system that is being worked towards after paternity leave was introduced.


  • Options
    #29
    Reati
    Registered Users Posts: 1,922 ✭✭✭Reati


    Mitch Connor wrote: »
    The country NEEDS people to have kids in order to continue to function. So, why shouldn't the Government also support and help in that?

    Because the OP doesn't have an interest in children hence anything to do with children will not make sense in those terms.


  • Options
    #30
    _Roz_
    Registered Users Posts: 530 ✭✭✭_Roz_


    Reati wrote: »
    Because the OP doesn't have an interest in children hence anything to do with children will not make sense in those terms.

    Actually it would make perfect sense if the country was underpopulated.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #31
    Sleepy
    Registered Users Posts: 24,183 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    If the scheme only applies to those already in work (i.e. the government would cover the parents salaries for the 12 months - (effectively the state increasing maternity benefit to cover the employer "top up" costs), I might be in favour of it if it was done in conjunction with an overhaul of said maternity system that made parental leave usable by either parent.

    Just paying people to have children is a fairly bad idea though: you'd have certain sections of society popping out another child who they'll utterly fail to raise properly just to top up their dole.


Advertisement