amydown

We (www.lushmummy.co.uk) were contacted by a TV production company who is making a documentary for Sky TV about being a first time parent. If you are interested in taking part, please send me a PM for more information.

Briefly, it's not a reality TV type show but a documentary with a more serious tone and you will get an edited version of your clip at the end of it. How lovely! They are talking to a number of people to select the right candidates.

I would have loved this a few years back!

Oh, the joys of bed and bath time with two (or more!).. I started a thread on this a while back when baby was little. Spent many many evenings with toddler in baby's room, me "quietly shouting" (who'd have thought that's possible!?!) to toddler to be quiet in baby's room, lots of tears (all three of us). It was so incredibly tough in the early days but things got easier.

Also, at some point, I put my foot down and insisted that my husband gets home for bed and bath time every evening and that me having to do it on my own has to be on an exceptional basis rather than the norm. This has helped enormously!!! I think sometimes, husbands forget that them leaving work 30mins early to help us can make a world of difference for us during this witching hour.

But the article itself points out that the statistics are only based on "conventional" salarie, excluding self-employed people and non-PAYE bonuses, etc. So, this "fact" doesn't sound very representative.

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This "fact" comes from the BBC amongst other

> sources...

>

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8151355.stm

>

>

> 50K is when you start to partially lose child

> benefit. You lose all of it at 60k. 45k makes

> you a top 10% earner. 42k was just an example of

> why I think not looking at household income is

> unfair. Either way I would lose it but I think

> this element of the new rule penalises single

> parents and families that have a stay out home

> parent.

>

>

>

> ClareC Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Does earning 42k a year really put you in the

> top

> > 10% earners in the country? Where did this

> "fact"

> > come from?

> >

> > A family living on 42k in London will be far

> from

> > wealthy whereas in other parts of the country

> 42k

> > would go much further.

> >

> > I don't think this has been thought through

> very

> > well, surely cost of living should be a factor

> > too.

I can understand that when budget cuts are in place, some form of prioritisation is required to ensure the service is provided to those most in need. However, basing this on the type of childcare appears fundamentally flawed in my opinion.

Am I correct in assuming that a stay at home mum would be given priority to such classes? I know plenty of stay at home mums who can afford to stay at home and not return to work precisly because their husbands have the earning power. On the other hand, the assumption that those who can hire a nanny must be rich enough, isn't necessarily true. The lack of nursery places round here (state or private) means that lots of mums have to consider more expensive childcare options even though they actually go back to work breaking even or even dipping into savings due to childcare costs.

With all the talks of encouraing women to go back to work, you really do have to wonder what else can be done to discourage it even more than the way things are now.

As Pickle says, I think it's been badly dealt with. A proper means-tested system would have been better than basing it on some ill-understood assumptions.

Rant over...

I'm out next Tue too but will try and join you next week.

That is outrageous. On what grounds?!?

And me! Might be able to negotiate an early evening from husband once a week.

I would love a Wagamama on LL.

Just resurrecting this thread as I'm always looking on Rightmove (shameless addiction). How about Crystal Palace? Hubby and I both work in canary wharf so the East London line connection is really appealing. Good primary schools?

We've used the one in NCT magazine and have been happy with it.

I think the point is that as employers, parents are paying for all the associated costs of hiring a nanny out of NET pay, therefore not getting any tax deductions. It's not anything to do with how nannies get paid but the absurdity of the fact that we cannot get any tax deductions as employers. As parents employing a nanny, we are required to do, by law, pretty much everything that a company has to do in hiring someone (e.g., PI insurance, maternity pay, sick leave, NI liability, even providing a payslip) but we get no tax benefit for any elements. Seems very inconsistent, given that companies can treat all costs associated with hiring someone as tax deductible expenses.

In effect, the government is ignoring the fact that working mums are not only contributing to the economy by returning to work but also providing another source of employment for others, helping generate greater economic activity, whether that's through hiring a nanny or paying for a nursery place.

It's absolutely bonkers when you work out the financial cost of going back to work. Nanny costs are getting pushed up in part because of lack of adequate nursery provisions (as evidenced by the ridiculous waiting lists in ED). State incentives to encourage more nursery provisions would also make other forms of childcare less expensive.

Big big sigh.

LondonMix Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think the government should do something to help

> but the way nannies are paid are the way everyone

> is paid who provides you a service-- you just

> notice it with nannies because you are in charge

> of filing the taxes. I'm not saying working

> families don't need help but that often repeated

> argument isn't exactly right. For example, if you

> have a gardener, you pay them a gross wage and

> they pay their taxes. For a nanny, you pay a gross

> wage but are responsible for handing over the

> taxes to HMRC. Even if the gardener has a company

> and pays themselves a wage (which is common) they

> still have to pay taxes both on the wage they

> receive and any profit the company makes.

>

> Anyhow, the gov't isn't likely to do anything as

> long as everyone keeps on having kids! The birth

> rate in the UK is still relatively high and most

> countries in Europe introduced subsidised child

> care to bolster declining birth rates.

Absolutely fab. My 2.5 yr old boy calls it "the button shop" and we have been at least 10 times!!!

We've been in a very happy share for nearly two years now. Some thoughts to share:

- we did two weeks hosting at ours and two weeks at the other family's. Had two high chairs, cots, etc etc so that the only thing to be moved between the houses was the double buggy.

- holidays, each family got to choose one week off, our nanny chose 2 weeks off and we all took a week off between x-mas and new year

- if you have strong views on things (eg. No TV, routine vs. baby led), discuss them before signing up

- with kitty money, whoever was hosting paid that week's kitty money. If we needed one-off top-ups, we shared the cost

Most importantly, think of your nanny share baby as one of your and hard to go wrong! Also, keep the communication channel open and talk to the other family whenever things need discussing.

If you find the right family and the nanny, I think it's a wonderful childcare option for everyone involved.

Work stuff: Banana Republic (huge sales), COS, French Connection, Reiss for some classic pieces

Casual stuff: GAP, Uniqlo

Also do a couple of trips a year to Bicester Village when the sale is on.

I have PM'd you. In case anyone else also has similar dilemmas, we are looking to rent out our house over x-mas period (about 3 weeks in total). Reduced rent in return for keeping our low maintenance cats fed and keeping an eye on the house. We would like to rent it to relatives/ grandparents visiting.

4-bedroom, 2-bathroom, off Lordship Lane/ Melbourne Grove.

Please send me a PM if you are interested.

Fascinating. Thanks filous posting that link Fuschia.

Have you thought about getting a hip seat as well? It's brilliant for around the house or at play grounds, etc. You will need to hold the baby with one arm so only one hand free but so easy to wear the belt around the house all the time to pick them up when they want to be picked up. I use it with my nearly 3 year old as well as 6.5m old.

If you are quite petite, the Pognae baby carrier is very good. Like the Ergo but originally from Korea (where I'm from) and every Korean mum I know owns one. It's become very popular in the US too and you can get one from eBay.

I have been a sling lover too. Baby Bjorn Synergy (mostly used by hubby), loved my wrap sling but after 4m or so, prefer the convinience of Pognae. Recently bought hip seat too and loving that too around the house, at play group, etc etc.

Feel free to send me a PM if you want to try the Pognae sling and hip seat.

I'm so glad to hear it FlorenceRedbird!!!!

Saffron, as well as our own LM clothes, I also love Isabella Oliver. They have some fantastic dresses that are suitable for breastfeeding. Very flattering too. A bit pricey but currently on sale.

I hear you ladies. I know what you are saying as I breastfed my first for 18 months and still feeding my 6m old. Nursing clothes and dry clean are not the best combination. BUT, in the name of style and all. Sometimes everyday basic 100% cotton just dones't cut it IMO! I was quite sick of just wearing jersey wrap dresses (with bobbles after so many washes) to every special occasion :)

In actual fact, that particular dress is made of very stain resistant material so I have spot cleaned it with damp cloth and it's alwasy come out completely clean. Have hand washed it too and it's fine although that's not the manufacturer's recommendation.

Smiler, the dress is free size and has no hard fittings anywhere on the dress so it looks great on most body shapes and sizes that I have seen.

Incidentally, I'm taking a break from Lush Mummy as finding it hard to fit around my two boys, especially seeing as I'm going back to my day job soon. We are offering 30% off for all ED forumites (code: "EDFORUM"). You are welcome to come and try them on too.

Waitrose does frozen mackerel fillets. We just grill it and have it with rice. Our 2.5yr old loves it too. Delicious!

Nope. No tax breaks for working mums that I know of.

As ClareC points out, I find it really frustrating that childcare costs for working parents are not tax deductible. It seems inconistent with other tax rules - if a professional has to incur costs that are wholly and exclusively necessary for doing the job, the costs are tax deductible. Childcare costs when I'm at work are wholly and exclusively necessary in my view!!! For instance, paying employer's NI insurance for nanny's salaries out of my net pay feels like double taxing.

I agree that the government shouldn't have to pay to look after your kids but as someone else has pointed out, it is surely beneficial for the rest of the society if every person that is able to and wants to work remains economically able. Otherwise, who is going to keep the economy going, pay for state benefits for those in need, etc etc. In that sense, every incentive should be provided to help those wanting to go back to work do so.

Personally, when I return to work, it will make no financial sense for the first few years. Like many working mums, my pay will go entirely towards childcare with "luxuries" like travel, lunch, clothes, etc. coming out of savings. I'm doing it to keep my career going for the long-term but it's not an easy decision to make by any stretch of imagination. Waking up in the morning, going to work, thinking "Hurrah, I have the luxury of paying ?20 today for the luxury of going to work!".

Been going to Dulwich leisure centre and very happy with it. Good facilities, lots of machines, etc. I've heard that it can get quite busy in the evenings though. I only go during the day so no issue for me.

I used to go to esph on lordship lane and much prefer the leisure centre.

I just do pay as you go as I only use it once a week so I'm not sure what the monthly fees are. I think their website lists it out.

I absolutely love my p&t. Both seats decline fully flat, toddler and baby both sleep well in it, steers beautifully (on par with cameleon), bags of basket space in single mode, decent storage in double mode.

Latest feature I have fallen in love with is the fold. One click to get second seat out, one click to fold it. It's pretty neat when folded and actually takes up about the same space as our cameleon.

We have used it pretty much every day since No 2 arrived 6m ago when No 1 was 2.5. Best bit is that older son can continue to be in the front seat and baby in the back - in older model P&t, when baby is ready to sit up but back seat is too steep, toddler has to go in the back. Difficult to negotiate with toddler!