Having kids

[Skani]

Never been any different has it QSS?

 

Oh yes it has. As a child growing up in the 1950s, I didn't know one family where the wife was employed outside the home after marriage - none of our friends or neighbours, none of the kids I knew at school. And all those houses are are now beyond my price range. :mad:

 

I've also done a lot of research on previous generations of my family. Most of them owned property - and all of those on one wage.

[Que Sera Sera]

Oh yes it has. As a child growing up in the 1950s, I didn't know one family where the wife was employed outside the home after marriage - none of our friends or neighbours, none of the kids I knew at school. And all those houses are are now beyond my price range. :mad:

 

I've also done a lot of research on previous generations of my family. Most of them owned property - and all of those on one wage.

Have to agree. A gereration or so ago staying home with the baby was the norm, going out to work was deemed strange.

[HappyHeart]

Have to agree. A gereration or so ago staying home with the baby was the norm, going out to work was deemed strange.

 

 

I'd go slowly mad. thank God for womens lib that's all I can say.

[Skani]

Have to agree. A gereration or so ago staying home with the baby was the norm, going out to work was deemed strange.

 

My mother wanted to work when she first arrived in Australia as a war bride (in 1945). She thought it would help her settle in and make new friends, ie. be good for her psychological health. But my father didn't want her to...it was considered a sign that a husband had "failed" in not being able to provide for his wife. I knew my father as a very caring man....but he was a product of his generation and that was the prevailing attitude. And, for many women, it was quite impossible to work because married women simply weren't allowed to work in certain sectors - they had to resign on marriage.

 

My comments in my earlier post were about my very middle class environment. But it was the same for many unskilled, working class people. My husband's grandfather was a labourer with the Public Works Department...but he and his wife managed to raise 7 kids and pay a mortgage on one labourer's wage.

[MovingtoTasmania]

Haven't read the whole thread but I can 100% assure you that once you hold that child in your arms for the first time, you won't give two hoots about expensive holidays, or cars or anything else. Of course it can be expensive but my hubby and I had seven children. We didn't go bankrupt, we owned our own home and we did it all without govt. handouts (because there was only child benefit when we had our oldest and then we earned too much). You will manage financially. It's the sleepless nights I'd be worried about.............

[Paul1Perth]

Oh yes it has. As a child growing up in the 1950s, I didn't know one family where the wife was employed outside the home after marriage - none of our friends or neighbours, none of the kids I knew at school. And all those houses are are now beyond my price range. :mad:

 

I've also done a lot of research on previous generations of my family. Most of them owned property - and all of those on one wage.

Like I said before though Skani what outgoings did they have in those days other than paying the mortgage off. My Mum didn't work when we were kids but my Dad worked 7 days a week, we hardly saw him and when he was off on Saturday he went to the match with his mates, on Sunday we had to be quite in the afternoon as he was asleep on the settee.

No cars, phones, internet, holidays abroad not even a TV. I remember my uncle getting the first colour TV and having about 20 people in his front room with the curtains shut to watch the cup final.

 

My Mum was expected to have a meal on the table when my dad came in from work and her job was to look after us and make sure the house was clean. Mum was happy with that as far as I can tell, it was just the way things were. As far as I can remember they hadn't paid their mortgage off till they were in their 50's and were a lot poorer than most people these days. We just want and expect to have all the mod cons, holidays and a home, then wonder why both parents have to work.

 

I know a few that don't work and are happy to stay at home and look after the kids. It's still doable on one wage but what lady would do without a car, perm her own hair, like my Mum did for years, go everywhere with a couple of kids on the bus, what guy would put up with public transport to go everywhere?

 

I grew up in the 50's too. The house my Mum and Dad had at the time would have been demolished long ago and wouldn't be fit to live in these days. outside toilet, no bathroom, shower in corner of the tiny kitchen, tin bath in front of the fire, no central heating.

[Paul1Perth]

I'd go slowly mad. thank God for womens lib that's all I can say.

 

Yep, my wife couldn't wait to get back to work after maternity leave. She said it was turning her brain to mush.

[HappyHeart]

Yep, my wife couldn't wait to get back to work after maternity leave. She said it was turning her brain to mush.

 

I love home..and domesticity...but I love work too. The trick in modern times is getting the balance right. Not always easy...

[BritChickx]

When my grandparents had their first (my uncle) they were only 19 and had just got a mortgage. Nan stayed at home which was the norm back then anyway, said they went without a lot of things and ate beans on toast often for dinner. Eventually it got better but that's how it was for a while.

 

At this moment in time I don't want children, but that may change in my 30's. I'm too selfish to think about someone being reliant on me, and still in the process of sorting my career out. Oh, and I don't have a man! haha.

[fish.01]

We don't have kids yet, but would definitely want two kids in the future. We don't want to be full time working parents as we want to be there for our kids.

We both had an income of 65k gross annually. And managed to save around 2k net a month when we had a $420 a week rental house.

 

If we have kids, my wife wants to work 2 or 3 days a week. So her income is likely to drop to somewhere around 25k annually. We were wondering if we would manage having kids.

What kind of benefits/rebates/etc would you have? I know there is child care rebate that covers up to 50% of the cost of child care (up to $7500 a year per child). Then there is child care benefit and family support allowance.

 

So I made a calculation on centrelink and we could get around 3k family assistance entitlement a year. Child care at $80 a day for 2 kids, 2 days a week = $16640 a year. 7.5k is covered by the government, so you have to pay 9k yourself.

 

So to sum it up; We would earn $40 grant less a year, due to having less salary, we pay $9000 grant for child care, but get 3k family allowance. So we have to pay $6000 compared to our current situation. And then I didn't even talk about all the extra costs (food, clothes, etc etc). Seems like an impossible or am I overlooking something here?

 

Hopefully your figures are wrong as I think you may have:

 

- missed childcare benefit in your calculations and only counted childcare rebate,

- capped the childcare rebate at $7500 per family rather than per child

- appear to have a lowball figure for family assistance going off your figures.

 

From using the calculator it seems to be:

 

 

Assumptions:

Rent: $420 per week

Income 1: $65,000

Income 2: $25,000

Child 1: 2 years old

Child 2: 3 years old

Both in "Approved" long day care 12 hours max per day 2 days per week

You would both work, study or look for work >=15 hours per week.

 

 

Family Assistance:

 

Centrelink calculator estimates $5356 per year in family assistance payments assuming you still rent (includes rent assistance).

 

Child Care Benefit + Child Care Rebate:

 

EACH CHILD: $80 x 2 days = $160 per week minus $77.31 child care benefit leaving $82.69 out of pocket. Half of the out of pocket is paid by child care rebate so final out of pocket is $41.34 per child per week or $2,149.68 per child per year

 

Total childcare Out Of Pocket for two children per year = $4,299.36

 

Summary

Family Assistance income of $5356 minus childcare out of pocket of $4,299.36 means your govt payments more than cover your childcare outgoings with a "positive" $1,056 balance.

 

 

I hope these figures are close to being correct and I haven't stuffed up as I don't want to give you false hope. Might be worth going into a centrelink office to confirm.

Edited February 6, 2015 by fish.01

[Naomi from Manchester]

Fish.01 - you sound like you know what you're talking about, I hope no one minds if I jump on this thread to ask a quick question, since I'm finding the child care rebate and benefit incredibly confusing. I've been on the phone to Centre link but have somehow come away none the wiser :o/

 

My daughter starts day care on Monday 3 days per week and I've been struggling to work out how much it's actually going to cost us.

 

Day care charges $120 per day. Centre link has assessed us and declared that child care benefit will cover 41% of the fees. (Although the whole $720 went out my bank account today as day care charge 2 weeks in advance, although we requested that Centrelink pay the benefit directly to Day Care). So am I correct in thinking that we will also receive the $7500 rebate? Is this amount divided into fortnights and paid directly into my bank account? Is there also some sort of tax break too?

 

 

 

Cheers.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Naomi from Manchester

[Bound4Tassie]

Well QSS I did say planning in my post, but can we assume you mean some sort of financial planning? if so I still have trouble accepting that if one is wanting to be a loving family with children, is subject to being able to afford one!!! :wacko:, surely one can afford a child whatever your income/financial situation and the child will not be loved any differently, will it?

There would be a good chance that neither you or I, and a good many others would be here today if our parents had decided they could not have afforded to have us, so we can count ourselves lucky in that they chose, as a loving couple to want us.

 

TBF I know a fair few women like it too.

 

I love my girls beyond measure and would happily lay down my life for them. However, I think I could have had an equally or more fulfilling life without children. It's considered taboo almost for a woman to say that.

Sometimes I thought childless couples desperate for children, who were feeling unfulfilled, should've come and looked after my first child who screamed all night and day. She had both of us momentarily thinking of driving over a cliff! ( maybe not seriously but sleep deprivation is a form of torture!) I was quite sure those couples would appreciate the 'easy' life they've got!

[maidensarah]

I think the best age would be to have them in your 30's. I think a lot of people are too selfish really in their 20's really.

 

I'm glad I've had mine in my mid-late 20's. That way when they eventually move out I'll still be young..ish

[blossom]

Going into centerlink doesn't help much. I have been told so many different things since before my baby was born. You can claim this, you can't claim that, that's automatic (ummm no, you have to apply), you have a 6 week withholding period (try 12!), you can't claim paid parental leave and parenting payment at the same time (yes you can). Then the latest one, they stopped my rent assistance. I went in this morning. 'Ohhhhh, you haven't bought in a copy of your rental agreement within the last year'. 'Yes, I bought it in in September when it was asked for'. 'Ohhhhh yes'. They somehow managed to double up all our assets. Pretty useless, but hey, they give me some money. :-)

[Bound4Tassie]

Well QSS I did say planning in my post, but can we assume you mean some sort of financial planning? if so I still have trouble accepting that if one is wanting to be a loving family with children, is subject to being able to afford one!!! :wacko:, surely one can afford a child whatever your income/financial situation and the child will not be loved any differently, will it?

There would be a good chance that neither you or I, and a good many others would be here today if our parents had decided they could not have afforded to have us, so we can count ourselves lucky in that they chose, as a loving couple to want us.

 

Like I said before though Skani what outgoings did they have in those days other than paying the mortgage off. My Mum didn't work when we were kids but my Dad worked 7 days a week, we hardly saw him and when he was off on Saturday he went to the match with his mates, on Sunday we had to be quite in the afternoon as he was asleep on the settee.

No cars, phones, internet, holidays abroad not even a TV. I remember my uncle getting the first colour TV and having about 20 people in his front room with the curtains shut to watch the cup final.

 

My Mum was expected to have a meal on the table when my dad came in from work and her job was to look after us and make sure the house was clean. Mum was happy with that as far as I can tell, it was just the way things were. As far as I can remember they hadn't paid their mortgage off till they were in their 50's and were a lot poorer than most people these days. We just want and expect to have all the mod cons, holidays and a home, then wonder why both parents have to work.

 

I know a few that don't work and are happy to stay at home and look after the kids. It's still doable on one wage but what lady would do without a car, perm her own hair, like my Mum did for years, go everywhere with a couple of kids on the bus, what guy would put up with public transport to go everywhere?

 

I grew up in the 50's too. The house my Mum and Dad had at the time would have been demolished long ago and wouldn't be fit to live in these days. outside toilet, no bathroom, shower in corner of the tiny kitchen, tin bath in front of the fire, no central heating.

 

My husband and I were talking about this the other day. Neither of our sets of parents were wealthy but the dads both worked,mum stayed at home as a housewife. There was certainly a lot of belt tightening but still on 1 wage they managed to pay off a mortgage on 4 bedrm detatched houses. ( not large houses but still a bedroom each). We had a family holiday each year - usually camping in Cornwall, Devon Dorset.

No way we could afford a 4 bed mortgage on my husbands wage. So were they relatively more wealthy? However I made the point to OH that Paul said above. We have and expect so many things these days. Both have cars, internet, cable tv, more adventurous food than my parents used to eat etc etc.

 

I have to go back to work when my daughter is 6 months old when my paid leave ends. I tried stretching it out with last baby ( took 9 months off) but that really damaged us financially. So you do need to consider finances when having kids and accept things can get tight ....unless you are lucky to be loaded!

Edited February 6, 2015 by Bound4Tassie

[maidensarah]

Have to agree. A gereration or so ago staying home with the baby was the norm, going out to work was deemed strange.

 

I'm staying home with our children until they are both at school. I love it and feel lucky that I am in a situation to be able to do it, thanks to a supportive hubby. It wasn't my initial intention though as I had planned to go back to work part time after my maternity leave with my first child, but couldnt do it (lasted 3 days, 3 days of crying). It's not an easy job mind and my nearly 4 year old is definitely ready for school!

[Naomi from Manchester]

I'm glad I've had mine in my mid-late 20's. That way when they eventually move out I'll still be young..ish

 

The average age in Sydney for a first time Mum is 28, apparently.

 

I think that 32 has been the right age for me, since I feel I've spent enough time and money on myself since finishing full time education.

[Que Sera Sera]

I'm glad I've had mine in my mid-late 20's. That way when they eventually move out I'll still be young..ish

Ah that was my plan too, but end of marriage then new marriage to someone who wanted children, result another at 33, so it will be a while yet I hope.

[Que Sera Sera]

I'm staying home with our children until they are both at school. I love it and feel lucky that I am in a situation to be able to do it, thanks to a supportive hubby. It wasn't my initial intention though as I had planned to go back to work part time after my maternity leave with my first child, but couldnt do it (lasted 3 days, 3 days of crying). It's not an easy job mind and my nearly 4 year old is definitely ready for school!

Good for you. I didn't have a choice really pay the mortgage or stay home with my children. Until we came here anyway. I stayed home for two years until our son started Highchool but then got ' a bit ' bored so now work ' a bit ' haha

[Johndoe]

I love my girls beyond measure and would happily lay down my life for them. However, I think I could have had an equally or more fulfilling life without children. It's considered taboo almost for a woman to say that.

Sometimes I thought childless couples desperate for children, who were feeling unfulfilled, should've come and looked after my first child who screamed all night and day. She had both of us momentarily thinking of driving over a cliff! ( maybe not seriously but sleep deprivation is a form of torture!) I was quite sure those couples would appreciate the 'easy' life they've got!

 

My kids were quite good and always went down at night and slept like a log...................the nightmare began when i was asked to look after my grand-kids when their parents wanted a night out. One in particular, Jade, a whingy kid who always had a snotty nose, screamed blue bloody murder the moment her parents left.....there was no consoling her and she used to get out of bed, woefully put her head between the bannister railings, (picture it) and scream like a banshee. This would go on all night with only a few brief moments when we replaced her in the bed and she actually nodded off. Eventually, we had to refuse to mind her and i actually thought she had some disorder such as ADD of BPD...............fast forward to us emigrating............no!.............not because of her............the very same kid, now grown, has a degree in psychology, beautiful and full of life, followed us out to oz after she got it, and now works at Australia Zoo (in her words, "feck the degree and the money, I'm doing what I enjoy)..................and..............she loves her grumpa to bits and I her..................she keeps me alive as much as my own kids do.............life's strange ................innit?

 

Edited February 6, 2015 by Johndoe

[Bound4Tassie]

I hope my girls end up with the same outlook JD

[ali]

I love my girls beyond measure and would happily lay down my life for them. However, I think I could have had an equally or more fulfilling life without children. It's considered taboo almost for a woman to say that.

Sometimes I thought childless couples desperate for children, who were feeling unfulfilled, should've come and looked after my first child who screamed all night and day. She had both of us momentarily thinking of driving over a cliff! ( maybe not seriously but sleep deprivation is a form of torture!) I was quite sure those couples would appreciate the 'easy' life they've got!

 

I agree, I often say if i'd have had my 2nd child first then we may not have had another, he wouldn't sleep as a baby, we took turns going to bed at 2am and it was exhausting. Before I had children I was indifferent to having them, when they arrived I loved them to bits and still do with a passion, and they are two of the greatest things in my life but at times I did fear for my sanity lol

[Keith and Linda]

I agree, I often say if i'd have had my 2nd child first then we may not have had another, he wouldn't sleep as a baby, we took turns going to bed at 2am and it was exhausting. Before I had children I was indifferent to having them, when they arrived I loved them to bits and still do with a passion, and they are two of the greatest things in my life but at times I did fear for my sanity lol

 

No, grandkids first, heaps more fun without the hassle!

[flag of convenience]

I think there are more blokes that think like that than would admit it Naomi, especially to their wives.:wink:

 

I also know a few who (in private) say "being married is good, but it's not as good as being single".:laugh: Once married everything is a compromise.

 

Although statistics show married men are healthier than single and the institution would appear to benefit men more than women. I would argue women certainly after a certain age cope far better with being along and single than do men.

[flag of convenience]

Oh yes it has. As a child growing up in the 1950s, I didn't know one family where the wife was employed outside the home after marriage - none of our friends or neighbours, none of the kids I knew at school. And all those houses are are now beyond my price range. :mad:

 

I've also done a lot of research on previous generations of my family. Most of them owned property - and all of those on one wage.

 

All part of the big con I'm afraid we have been forced to endure. Now the limits have been reached or exceeded that most couples can comfortably afford. All part of my argument to those that consider we have evolved in that people are so much better off now having more than they'll ever need. Not to say the growth of leverage and credit card allowing greater bondage.