Impossible for mothers to look after their own children..
Blogged by James Preece on 7th October 2013
It wasn't often that we made it out on an evening back when we had our firs child, but on the odd occasion we did people used to ask my wife "what do you do?" and when the answer came back "I'm a mother" they used to sort of shuffle a bit and say "oh, er, right, and... will you be going back to work?"
Things are different now.. now they say "oh, wow, I wish we could afford to do that"..
More stay-at-home mothers have gone back into employment in the past two years than in the previous 15 combined, an official study suggests, in the wake of controversial Government reforms blamed for undermining traditional families.
Almost 200,000 women in two-parent families with dependent children have re-entered the workplace since 2011 compared with 185,000 who went back to work between 1996 and 2011.
The increase – the sharpest in a generation – comes on the back of changes to child benefit which saw the Government accused of forcing middle-class stay-at-home mothers back into employment and the failure to implement tax breaks for married couples.
Campaign groups who support the right of parents to care for their children at home said the figures effectively destroyed David Cameron’s promise that he would lead Britain’s “most family friendly Government” ever.
They said it bore out fears that the Coalition policy was driven by an “agenda” which sought to “separate mothers from their young children”.
Laura Perrins, a former barrister who is a leading figure in the campaign group Mothers at Home Matter, said: “I would say the Government have absolutely failed to be in any way family friendly.
“They don’t seem to understand what family friendly means – they think it basically means separating mothers from their young children.
“The Coalition are more interested in ideology and the gender politics of getting more mothers back into work than being family friendly.
“They have dedicated themselves to separating mothers from their young children. The needs of children are completely ignored.
It's okay though because everybody knows that parents are simply two enormous hazards that mother nature dumps on everybody's head at the moment of birth and the best thing any civilised society can do for children is to get them in the care of "experts" as soon as is practically possible.
What's love got to do with it?