Spring

2015

Who Cares About the Family?

ike family, MAHM is about

teamwork.

Were immensely proud of what our

committee of volunteers has achieved
these past few months, despite limited
resources. Weve taken the microphone
at seminars and All Party Parliamentary
Groups; weve organised social media
campaigns; weve written letters; our
media team has pulled out all the stops
to travel to interviews on radio and TV,
often at short notice; weve responded to
consultations; we continue to manage
daily correspondence from all over
the UK and increasingly from other
countries; weve visited our MPs and
other policymakers (and encouraged
others to do the same); weve developed
partnerships with other groups and weve
organised our own events, inviting MPs
and other experts to hear the evidence
about the importance of family life to
children.
We hope youll agree its not bad
teamwork. People often ask us where
our office is based and the answer is in
homes and kitchens all over the UK!
Notable highlights over Autumn and
early Spring included our annual
Open Meeting in London a rare
opportunity to get together with
other members. More
recently, we organised
the launch of a
discussion paper,
Who Cares
About the
Family?, in
the Houses of
Parliament. We
hope youve had
the opportunity
to read through it
and share it widely,

you can find it on our website.

On Mothering Sunday we handed a
Mothers Day card to No 10 and appeared
on The Big Questions on BBC1. We
have also taken part in other live debates
on radio, including on BBC Radio 4s
Womans Hour.
Our campaigning work is two
pronged. On the one hand we aim to
offer support to mothers as well as to
fathers and other caregivers. On the
other hand, we lobby and campaign
in the policy arena. Our two strands
(support and lobbying) cover three
broad areas: the economics of family
life, childhood developmental needs and
womens lives as mothers.
Were often asked Do you make a
difference and what have you actually
achieved? Judging from the comments
we get from all over the UK were
confident that the support element
of our work makes a real difference
to families. We know mothers derive
strength and encouragement from
finding a like-minded community, and
from sharing information, research,
personal experiences and ideas.
On the policy front its less positive.
In the lead up to the General Election
no Parties have any proposals to
recognise the work carried out at home
caring for children, so people tell us they
have no idea who to vote for. Granted,
some parents who are married will get
around 200 annually because of the
new tax allowance, but this doesnt
include all married parents. Its a paltry
sum and hardly compensates for the
significant penalty in taxation and lack
of allowances faced by single earner
couples. Some families also face hefty
bills from HMRC on household incomes
of 60k, due to loss of universal child
benefit, whereas couples on joint incomes

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

of 300k will be eligible for help if they

use childcare services. Its clear that
policymaking prioritises families where
both parents are back in paid work as
soon as possible after having children.
There is more social and economic
pressure on mothers not to spend too
long at home than ever before, despite the
obvious benefits to young children and
teenagers of having a parent available to
them.
We would like to see a more
preventative approach to family health,
recognising the protection that a
strong family life gives to children and
adults. As there are apparently more
mental health problems than ever
before, wed suggest its not enough to
treat the symptoms rather its time to
look at the underlying causes and the
causal links between health and lack of
support for family life. Families should
be better supported with affordable
housing, improved hourly rates of pay,
fair allowances and taxation based on
household responsibilities and income.
Parents tell us they are increasingly
unable to access the basic resources
they need to take care of their families,
including time to care and to nurture
relationships and that they face
considerable stress over accommodation
and paying essential bills, often on low
income.
Our economy should be designed
to work for the countrys citizens, for
family life, and for the most vulnerable
- rather than people being treated as
nothing more than units of production,
expected to work ever-longer hours with
no time for caring. We urge you to keep
supporting us and to please complete
your subscription forms for 2015/16.

Marie Peacock, Chair of MAHM

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

From the Editor

he number of mothers who stay

at home to care for their children
themselves is declining. The implications
of this fact have generated the latest whirl
of national navel-gazing. Is it a good or a
bad thing? It very much depends on who
you ask and the answer isnt that simple.
Of course it is good that mothers are able
to find paid employment, if that is what
they would like. But if it is a question of
sacrificing the needs of her children for
love in order to meet the needs of her
children for food, the working mother
does not seem so much liberated as
enslaved.
Mothers at Home Matter challenges
the views that all mothers want to work
as much as possible, and that spending
long hours in day care or being home
alone as a teenager is ideal for our
societys children.
In January 2015 Mothers at Home
Matter launched a discussion paper in
the Houses of Parliament to a room of
MPs and child experts. Called Who
Cares about the Family?, it examines
in some depth the many issues facing
families who would like to care for their
children themselves. It is available on
our website but these are our primary
findings:
Most mothers would rather work fewer
hours or not work at all if they could
afford it, so they could look after their
children themselves. This sounds like an
obvious statement but who looks back
at photos of their children when they
were younger and wishes theyd spent
less time with them? Although looking
after children can be very hard, it is, at
least eventually, very rewarding. More
than that, instinctively we know that our
children thrive on our love and attention.
And if we dont know it instinctively,
there are many studies which confirm
this.
Families are finding it increasingly
hard to survive on one salary. The
reasons for this are somewhat complex,
although explored in depth in the
discussion paper.
There are two significant factors. The
first is that single income families, where
just one parent is in paid employment,
pay significantly more tax than dual
income families. For example, a family
on 20,000 will pay 2,955 more tax if it
is just one person earning that 20,000
than if both parents are working. If the

family earn 60,000 (bearing in mind

that Government tax breaks for working
couples apply up to 300k joint income
so 60,000 is not considered unduly
wealthy), they will pay 6,520 more
tax if it is just one person earning 60k
than if a couple earns 60,000 between
them. If a couple are earning 60k in
total, they will benefit from two personal
allowances, will be much less
likely to be paying tax at
40% and will still receive
child benefit, along
with tax breaks from
the Government to
pay for replacement
childcare. The
Government, in
this case, actually
receives a much lower
contribution from the
dual income family, yet is
still prepared to fund childcare costs to
ensure the mother (usually) can work,
and to penalise the single income family.
The second factor is what happens
when the single income family tries to
earn more. If a family is on tax credits,
and half of all families are, then as the
father (or main provider) earns more, so
his tax credits reduce. This, combined
with the extra tax contributions and
National Insurance, means he is paying
back to the Treasury 76% of every extra
pound he earns. It becomes almost
impossible for him to increase his
disposable income. The only option the
family have is for the mother to work.
If a family earns above the tax credit
income level, which may be in the realm
of an income of 35-40k, then as the
father starts to earn more to support the
family he will be hit by the 40% tax rate
and the subsequent loss of Child Benefit.
If the mother works instead she can earn
the first 10k tax free and they can keep
their child benefit. The financial odds
are stacked up against the family trying
to support itself on one income.
The Government slavishly follows the
all mothers must work mantra because
what they hear from mothers/voters
is that they want cheaper childcare,
ergo, those mothers must want to
work. However, this is often a false
deduction. Most mothers feel they have
to work, often for financial reasons, and
sometimes because society says they
should be juggling home and work life

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

with aplomb and, in

fact, joy. As they feel
they have to work, and
have no hope of being able to afford to be
at home, they demand cheaper childcare.
However, given the choice, many would
rather be supported for being at home
caring for their children themselves,
rather than be financially facilitated
to leave their babies and children with
external professionals while they
try to fit in work, managing the
home, feeding their nearest
and dearest and, occasionally,
sleeping. Of course there
are mothers who do really
value their careers and
would rather be at work than
at home, but many mothers
would love to have the time to
care for their children themselves
and not have to concertina (Vanessa
Feltzs words) their children, their work
and managing their homes into the few
hours each day offers.
Instead of shoe-horning mothers of
babies back to work ASAP, a family
lifecycle approach should be adopted,
which recognises there will be periods
of time when mothers need to prioritise
their children, and be there for them,
followed by a time when mothers can
return to work. Almost all mothers will
return to work at some stage, particularly
given the rise in the pensionable age.
They dont need to be coerced into work
when every fibre of their being says that
they need to be at home for their children
and their sanity.
I hope you enjoy this newsletter. The
newsletters aim is to encourage mothers
at home that what they/you are doing is
absolutely worthwhile by highlighting
the latest research and sharing stories.
I also aim to bring members up to
date with the tireless (unpaid and
fitted around the children) work of the
Mothers at Home Matter committee
in campaigning for the understanding
of childrens developmental needs,
particularly their need for their mothers
love, for changes in the tax and benefit
system to allow parents more time with
their children, and for the enhancement
of the status and self-esteem of mothers
at home.

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Claire Paye, Editor

News and Media Update

Hardly a day passes without
one of us at MAHM attending
a parliamentary event, taking
part in an online discussion,
meeting with MPs or being
contacted by the media for
comment and debate on issues
facing parents wishing to care
for their children at home.

t is no secret that all the main political

parties are putting election promises
in place for more affordable childcare.
At every opportunity, Mothers at Home
Matter have argued for politicians to
broaden their definition of affordability
to include whether it is still affordable for
parents to care for their children at home
themselves, at no cost to the Treasury,
but at substantial cost to the family
in terms of income sacrificed and the
disproportionate amount of the family
income taken in tax.
As much as this is a key area to MAHM
and our members, it is not the full
extent of our campaign. We also keep a
watchful eye on what is going on in terms
of child development policy, mental
health issues, cost of living and social
matters, plus concerns facing mothers
returning to work after an extended
period away from paid employment.
These are all areas interwoven with and
affecting the choices available to parents
wishing to provide care at home.
Over the last few months volunteers for
MAHM have been present at events such
as the All Party Parliamentary Group
(APPG) on Social Mobility & Parents and
Families launch, the Early Intervention
Foundation Conference, the National
Childbirth Trust (NCT)s Tackling
the Cost of Childcare parliamentary
lobbying event, the APPG 1001 Critical
Days Antenatal Mental Health lectures,
Demos Changing Families & Feminist
Blindspots lecture, and we posed
questions at the Resolution Foundations
Pension Reform seminar. Attending
these events often mean long days of
travelling, meeting and questioning MPs,
of raising issues with think tanks, policy
makers and charities representing family
interests. Without our presence at such
occasions the value of unpaid parental
care and the desire for families to afford
this choice would often go unmentioned.
Notable recent media activity has

included taking part in a discussion on

the The Cost of Caring for a Family on
BBC Radio 4 Womans Hour and being
included as part of the London Evening
Standards Peoples Panel to gauge
opinion of proposed party policies over
the forthcoming weeks. MAHM has also
been asked to take part in numerous
BBC local radio discussions on the much
publicised low numbers of mothers now
staying at home to care for their family.
More recently, MAHM was invited to
appear on BBC 1s Sunday morning
TV debate show The Big Questions
discussing Do we discriminate against
Mothers?
Twitter has proved to be a useful
additional platform for the MAHM
campaign. Quite apart from the regular,
ongoing tweets to our followers from
@mumsdadsmatter we also posed several
questions to a panel of five senior female
MPs representing the main political
parties taking part in a Virtual Question
Time organised by Marie Claire UK. The
questions and (lack of!) responses given
can be viewed via #MCElection.
Our volunteers usually have to react
quickly when being contacted by the
media often during the school run in
the morning or late at night preparing
for a television appearance the following
day. Other activity comes to fruition
over many months. MAHM was pleased
to read of our inclusion in the House
of Lords Select Committee Report
on Affordable Childcare, published
in February 2015. Despite being told
towards the end of the televised oral
evidence sessions that the remit of
the Committee was to only look at
the affordability of paid for childcare,
something that was not stated at its
formation in July 2014, the final report
did include written evidence submitted
from both MAHM and individual
members.
I hardly have to add that Mothers at
Home Matter looks forward to making
sure the voice of parents wishing to have
more family time and genuine choice
in caring opportunities is heard loud
and clear in the run up to the General
Election and beyond being described
by the House of Lords Select Committee,
a small but vocal minority.

In the news on Mothering Sunday

The pressures our teenage daughters are
under is leading them to self-harm
The Independent, 15 March 2015, Yasmin
Alibhai Brown
Girls are turning to self-harm to cope
with the sense of pressure upon them to
succeed, coupled with the very public
persona they feel they have to create.
Lucie Russell, the director of campaigns
at YoungMinds said This is the first
generation of children that live their
lives in the public domain and are under
pressure to create a brand me. [Sue
Palmer explains the background to girls
need to be seen to be successful and their
awareness of the expectations on them
brilliantly in her book 21st Century
Girls]
Mothers deserve 172,000 a year
The Independent, 15 March 2015, Hannah
Boland
Although involving somewhat spurious
accounting methods to arrive at the
suggested salary for a mother, this
article tries to outline the different
roles mothers play and how much they
would be paid if carrying out those roles
professionally. Imogen Thompson of
MAHM was quoted, saying, Although
[the survey] is light-hearted, it shows
mothers matter all year long and not just
on Mothering Sunday. The emotional,
physical and mental energy mothers
devote to their children can be relentless,
but children are also sources of immense
joy and happiness. Investing in time for
parenting and nurturing relationships is
money well spent.

Imogen Thompson, Media &

Communications

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Reflections of a Stay at Home Feminist Mum

Can stay at home mothers
be feminists too? MAHM
committee member, Kerry
Hedley, explores the subject.

n 1981 Barbara Smith wrote,

Feminism is the political theory
and practice to free all women: women
of color, working-class women, poor
women, physically challenged women,
lesbians, old women, as well as white
economically privileged heterosexual
women. Anything less than this is not
feminism. Hear, hear to this. Perhaps we
need to add stay at home mothers to her
list. We are an increasingly marginalised
group, penalised and discriminated
against in the tax and benefit system,
derided as old fashioned in the media,
erased from the political agenda and
simply defined by our usual location.
Have SAHMs been included in feminist
debate? Not always. And do stay at home
mothers need feminism? Absolutely! A
recent Mumsnet survey found that 88%
of women with young children who
work full-time would prefer either to
work part-time or to be full-time carers
for their children. Yet fewer and fewer
women are able to afford to stay at home
with their children due to low wages,
the rising cost of housing and other
expenses. Millions of women are finding
themselves unable to give their children
the kind of care that they feel they need.
This surely is a feminist issue, yet the
difficulties facing women who want to
look after their children at home have
been overlooked by some feminists in
favour of a focus on getting more women
into the workplace and the provision
of childcare to facilitate this. In our
neoliberal society we often see womens
worth equated with our earning capacity.
Womens ability to earn the same as
men and have the same kind of careers
as men is seen as a simple indicator of
equality. Equivalence of role has been
confused with equality of value. In other
words, women must carry out the same
roles as men in order to be considered
equal. Of course these are important
issues and need campaigning for but
sadly this focus has sometimes led stay
at home mothers to feel excluded from
feminism and has created the impression
that feminism and being a stay at home
mother are somehow incompatible. This
is simply not true.

Feminism is about fighting

for equality and an end to
discrimination. SAHMs experience
significant inequality in the tax
and benefit system but this issue has
yet to be given the same attention in
the feminist movement as workplace
inequalities. This needs to be addressed.
Feminism is also about acknowledging,
valuing and celebrating the things that
make us women. Crucially, women have
babies: we carry them in our bodies,
give birth to them, breastfeed them and
are overwhelmingly the people who
care for them in infancy and beyond.
Motherhood is a significant, valuable and
enriching experience in many womens
lives. Its not an inconvenience to be
managed and childcare shouldnt be seen
as a problem as it is so often framed by
our politicians.
You are not a slave to your biology if
you feel a desperate longing to be with
your child and raise him or her yourself.
You are not letting down the sisterhood
if you find more fulfilment in caring for
your children than in paid employment.
Irish Journalist, David Quinn recently
wrote, It is amazing to see how the old
adage, a womans place is in the home
has completely transformed into a
womans place is at work and a childs
place is in day care. The old attitude was
authoritarian and the new attitude is
equally so.
It is important to remember that
although some feminists have criticised
women who choose to stay at home with
their children, there have always been
feminists who have acknowledged and
championed the huge amount of unpaid
care work that women do in the home
and who have supported stay at home
mothers in their choice. Here are just a
few examples:
Feminist Economist, Marilyn Waring
has challenged the use of GDP as a
measure of a countrys production as
it takes no account of the vast amount
of unpaid care work done mostly by
women. She argues that this unpaid
womens work is the largest sector in
any countrys economy, it makes all
other work possible and that the market
would collapse without it. [An Office
for National Statistics survey in 2010
calculated unpaid care as worth 343bn,
or 23% of GDP ed.]

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

Global Womens Strike is an

international feminist organisation
co-ordinated by Selma James. GWS
is asking for all care work, including
raising children in the home to be paid.
All Mothers Work is a blog and feminist
campaign group set up by Esther Parry
to promote maternal feminism and
support stay at home mothers.
Feminist academic, Andrea OReilly,
set up the Motherhood Initiative for
Research and Community Involvement.
She writes, Motherhood is the
unfinished business of the feminist
movement. Thats why I started MIRCI,
largely because of the invisibility and
marginality of mothers work.
Yes, some feminists have been hostile
towards SAHMs but many others have
campaigned for recognition of the huge
amount of unpaid work that we do. Stay
at home mothers must acknowledge
and challenge the hostility we have
experienced from some feminists but
this doesnt mean that we should reject
feminism, rather we should embrace it
and claim it as our own.
So can you be a feminist and a stay
at home mothers? Absolutely, you can!
In fact I would argue that my decision
to stay at home to raise my daughter
was informed by my feminism and my
identification as a feminist has been
deepened by my experience of being a
stay at home mother.
I am happy to call myself a Maternal
Feminist but I am also happy to call
myself a Feminist without any further
qualification. I refuse to let the term
feminism be misappropriated by people
who want to judge and exclude certain
groups of women. As bell hooks says,
Feminism is for everybody and this, of
course, includes stay at home mothers.

Kerry Hedley
email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Keynote Speakers at the 2014 MAHM AGM

The MAHM Open Meeting
and AGM is a chance to meet
up with other members, be reinspired by our speakers and
hear about the committees
work. Here is a
round-up of two
of the talks last
year.

Speaker: Anna Firth

When mothers
speak, the voice of
children is heard.
That summed up Annas
passionate cry for mothers to
be involved at all levels of public life to
promote the needs of children. If we
want society to succeed, we need the
family to succeed. Its social engineering
to have a tax and benefits system which
penalises stay at home parents.
According to Anna, care is spelt T I M
E, but time is the one thing that is being
removed from parents who are forced out
to work at the expense of their familys
well-being . Worryingly, whereas nine
years ago, 45% of mothers worked inside
the home, now only 30% do.
Childrens needs are being ignored
in the inexorable commercialisation
of childhood and the digitalisation of
childhood and care. Children between
the ages of 12 and 18 are spending
an average of six and a half hours on
a screen daily. There are very many
seriously troubled families in the country
and an increasing number of children
with learning difficulties. The oldest and
youngest in society are being neglected
and abused.
In France, you arent allowed to leave
your children in childcare longer than is
determined good for them according to
each ones individual needs. In contrast,
Anna pointed to the advice of a former
Head of the Number 10 Policy Unit,
who recommended school hours of 9am
to 6pm, and reduced school holidays of
7 weeks instead of 13, stating that this
would enable teachers to have a broader
role in bringing up the children theyre
supposed to be teaching!
What he failed to recognise is that
many teachers entered the teaching
profession to allow them time with their
own children, not to force them to bring
up other peoples. He also makes no

reference to the well-being of children, or

what their needs are.
Anna spoke with great conviction
about the horrific way in which we are
replacing intergenerational wisdom
with institutions. Individual choice is
taking precedence over the well-being of
society, and this is an unsustainable
economic model. Society has to
recognise that time spent caring
is very valuable. It makes much
more sense to invest in mothers.
Mother love is the fuel that
enables a human being to do the
impossible.
Anna Firth is the MAHM Advisor on
Women in Politics.
Speaker: Dr Richard House
Too much too young
Stay at home mothers are
swimming against the
tide of societys obsession
with getting mothers out
to work: George Osborne
wants 500,000 more
women in the workplace;
a CBI conference which calls
for free childcare for all one and
two year olds; all parts of the political
spectrum say we need more childcare.
There are two books which illustrate this
very well: The Selfish Society and The
Mind Object.
Sue Gerhardts book, The Selfish
Society dissects the negative effect on
society of what she calls in her subtitle,
How we all forgot to love one another
and made money instead. She highlights
the concept that children are being
forced to grow up too fast so that they
can be as little trouble to their carers as
possible. Everyone is supposed to be
emotionally self-sufficient, even babies,
who apparently just need company and
stimulus, it doesnt matter from which
source. She also argues that politicians
are limited by their own childhood
experiences, and if these are negative in
any way, that limits their ability to form
good parenting policies. Sue Gerhardt
cites research which finds that the brain
itself is reshaped by social conditioning
so the materialistic society we live in
may be having a major impact on the
neurology of infant brains.
What a healthy early childhood
involves is love, stability, consistency,
reliability, good quality attachment,

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

low stress and feeling appropriately

valued. A 1995 book, The Mind
Object: Precocity and Pathology of
Self-Sufficiency, outlines a pattern
that therapists have discovered in
children whose early environment
isnt emotionally good enough: they
turn inwards to their minds and seek
to develop their minds above all else,
negating the value of the body and
emotions.
Whats the hurry? Why are
children being coerced into becoming
independent beings as soon as possible?
It is very difficult in the academic world
to mention love. And it is not antifeminist or anti-women to advocate the
importance of family live and its stability
for the well-being of young people [See
our article on Feminism on p4,
ed.]. The Left in particular feels
women should have all the same
career paths as men, but fails
to acknowledge the differences
between men and women.
Our society is extremely
unequal. This is having a massive
effect on the life chances of our
children. What is society going to do
about it? It is in good quality early
attachment relationships that a child
learns to love, so we should maximise the
quality of those early relationships. We
need to focus resources on building local
caring communities.
The Government pours resources into
early education, trying to make up for
the deprivation of good quality early
childhood care, but it cant. All theyre
doing is introducing children from
deprived backgrounds into education
they arent ready for. Ninety percent of
the worlds countries have school starting
ages of six or seven. A starting age of
five in the UK (its rising five now) dates
back to the 1870 Education Act, and was
introduced to stop child labour at a time
when many parents couldnt live without
their childrens income. Therefore, it
has nothing to do with the well-being
of the child. However, it has remained
because it is economically expedient, as it
makes it easier for mothers to work and,
as we all know, society is obsessed with
working mothers.
Dr Richard House is the MAHM
Advisor on Child Development and Early
Learning.
Claire Paye

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Motherhood - the Essential Role

We are constantly finding out
more about the importance
of mothers and their children
spending time together.

others at Home Matter draws

on this research to justify our
campaign to enable mothers and their
children to be together, in the face of
politicians and journalists suggesting
that mothers can easily be replaced by
childcare workers.
Further details about the research
outlined here can be found in the
links given, or by reading the Research
pages of the excellent, science focussed
campaign group, What About The
Children? or on the research pages of our
own website.
Children born into poverty thrive most
when they have been cared for well by
their mothers.
A new study has found that the quality
of childrens early maternal caregiving
experiences has an enduring and
ongoing role in promoting successful
social and academic development, not
only during childhood and adolescence,
but into adulthood. If children receive
responsive love from their mother, they
are much more likely to form better
social relationships and perform better
academically.
The study used information from 243
individuals who were born into poverty,
came from a range of racial/ethnic
backgrounds, and had been followed
from birth to age 32. Sensitive caregiving
is defined as the extent to which a parent
responds to a childs signals appropriately
and promptly, is positively involved
during interactions with the child, and
provides a secure base for the childs
exploration of the environment.
According to Lee Raby, postdoctoral
researcher at the University of Delaware,
who led the study, This suggests that
investments in early parent-child
relationships may result in longterm returns that accumulate across
individuals lives. Because individuals
success in relationships and academics
represents the foundation for a healthy
society, programs and initiatives that
equip parents to interact with their
children in a sensitive manner during the
first few years of their childrens life can
have long-term benefits for individuals,
families, and society at large.

MAHM comment: this research questions

the focus on putting children from poor
backgrounds into day care so that their
mothers can work. It is difficult for
mothers to offer sensitive caregiving to
children if they arent actually with them.
Rather than removing children so that
mothers can work, there should be more
focus on helping mothers to mother their
own children instead of paying others to
do it for them.
K. Lee Raby, Glenn I. Roisman, R. Chris
Fraley and Jeffry A. Simpson. The Enduring
Predictive Significance of Early Maternal
Sensitivity: Social and Academic Competence
Through Age 32 Years.

Children who have been nurtured by

their mothers have brains with a larger
hippocampus
This research, from the Washington
University School of Medicine in 2012,
shows that the love and care given by the
mother makes a difference in the childs
brain development, specifically in the
size of the hippocampus, the area of the
brain which is key for learning, memory
and stress response. Joan Luby, MD,
professor of child psychiatry, commented
on her research we should pay more
attention to parents nurturingbecause
clearly nurturing has a very, very big
impact on later development. She also
commented that good quality nurturing
from any primary caregiver, including
fathers, grandparents or adoptive
parents, would be likely to have the same
response.
MAHM comment: So the focus on
encouraging toddlers into childcare
settings ostensibly to help prepare them
for school is possibly misguided. They
would do better being with their mothers
and working on their hippocampus at
home!
Luby JL, Barch DM, Belden A, Gaffrey MS,
Tillman R, Babb C, Nishino T, Suzuki H,
Botteron KN. Maternal support in early
childhood predicts larger hippocampal
volumes at school age. Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences Early Edition,
Jan. 30, 2012.

Babies smiles and tears affect mothers

brains
Mothers who were shown a series of
photos ranging from their own babies
smiling or crying to unknown babies
smiling or crying. Brain imaging
revealed that the areas of mothers brains

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

involved
with
emotion
processing,
cognition and
motor/behavioural
behaviours were stimulated by pictures
of their own children smiling. These
areas were not affected by their childrens
neutral or sad faces, or by other childrens
smiles, or neutral or sad faces.
All crying infant faces had an effect on
mothers, but they were more significant
where their own baby was in the picture.
The report suggests that when a mother
sees her child smiling, this stimulates
the release of dopamine (associated with
reward and pleasure) in the brain, which
in turn may promote responsive maternal
care. In other words, this means she is
attentive to the babys needs in a way she
wouldnt be with a non-related baby.
MAHM comment: Seeing her baby happy
encourages the mother to repeat the
behaviour which caused this happiness,
which creates a virtuous circle. If nonrelated children dont have the same
effect on adults, childcare professionals
will never be able to respond as naturally
as a mother would.
Whats in a smile? Maternal Brain Responses
to Infant Facial Cues

Levels of maternal care in rats linked

to the amount of time spent with their
babies.
In a fascinating study into the role of
oxytocin in stimulating maternal care
in rats demonstrated as licking and
arching their backs to make it easier for
the babies to suckle researchers found
that when baby rats were separated
from their mothers for short periods
(15 minutes once a day), their mothers
respond by increasing their maternal
care. But rats who are separated for three
hours a day receive less maternal care.
The rats that receive more licking and
arch-backed nursing demonstrate more
of this when they themselves are mothers.
So the mothers nurturing behaviour
has a long-term effect on rats oxytocin
receptors and ability to love their babies.
MAHM Comment: Rats are considered
similar enough to humans to make
studying their behaviour relevant. Could
the separation of mothers and babies
through work and childcare make a
difference to how (not whether) human

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

mothers love, and have long term

implications for how their babies love
their own children?

The First and Forever Bond, Angela Spivey.

Emotional Needs of the Under 3s

I have reproduced this list from the
excellent organisation, What About The
Children? www.whataboutthechildren.
org.uk, which focusses on the needs of
the under threes.
To be touched, have frequent cuddles
and warm physical attention To feel
loved To have a secure base To be able
to fully trust To receive a high level of
responsiveness from adult carers To
have constant sensitive attention To
be talked to in an interested attentive
manner To have total absorbed
individual adult attention as much as
possible To have real communicative
eye contact when adults speak to them
To be allowed to move at their own
pace and not be rushed To have
companionship with both familiar adults
and children To be allowed to develop
peer friendships where they happen
naturally To have fun To experience
joy To experience no fear To receive
encouragement and praise To receive
reassurance To experience consistency
of care To experience continuity of care
To have a genuine close relationship
with their regular care giver To be
protected from constant changes of
care giver To have carers who know
their experiences and are in tune
with them To be allowed down time,
personal mooching To be allowed
to explore and take a few little risks
To be valued as pleasurable to be with
To be known To experience respect
and acknowledgement of their range of
emotions To have freedom of movement
To have activities that are appropriate
to their own personal development level
To be kept informed of what is going
on To have a level of predictability, as
well as flexibility, in the day To have
realistic expectations for their level of
development from adult carers To
experience the comfort of having their
own personal and developmental needs,
rather than their age, considered as the
benchmark for assessing their emotional
and practical requirements.
MAHM comment: This list was formed
from contributions from professionals
interested in childcare issues. As

mothers,
many of
us will meet
these needs
instinctively, in a
way that childcare workers
may struggle to do consistently given
the number of children under their care.
Adolescents benefit when they spend
time with both parents together
A new study, Does the Amount of
Time Mothers Spend with Children or
Adolescents Matter? has found that
for children over three, just spending
time with their mothers doesnt have an
impact on their emotional or behavioural
outcomes. But for adolescents, more
time spent sharing an activity with
their mothers resulted in slightly fewer
delinquent behaviours, whereas time
spent with both parents together was
linked to fewer behavioural problems,
improved academic results, less
substance abuse and less delinquent
behaviour.
MAHM comment: The authors of the
study are at pains to point out that the
study didnt measure the warmth or
sensitivity of their parents, or the actual
activities engaged in, and as such did not
suggest that time with mothers was not
important at all. Rather, that time with
both parents together was very beneficial
for adolescents.

home
as a
result
of the cash
for care subsidy
given to parents of
under 3 year olds in Norway
who didnt use publicly subsidised
daycare. The research focussed on the
educational attainment of any older
siblings while their mothers were funded
to look after their younger siblings.
They found that school age childrens
grades improved significantly if they
were at home with their mothers after
school rather than in after school
care. Dr Bettinger concluded, our
study indicates that parental care is
not easily substituted. This suggests
that the increases in female labor force
participation in Europe and the USA
may affect child development. At least
in Norway, the after school care that was
available to the students in our sample
does not seem to be of sufficient quality
in scholastic terms - to be an adequate
substitute for parental care with respect
to educational achievement
Eric Bettinger, Torbjrn Hgeland and
Mari Rege Home with Mom: The effects of
stay-at-home parents on childrens long-run
educational outcomes

Milkie, M. A., Nomaguchi, K. M. and Denny,

K. E. (2015), Does the Amount of Time
Mothers Spend With Children or Adolescents
Matter?. Journal of Marriage and Family, 77:
355372. doi: 10.1111/jomf.12170

Older children with stay at home

mothers have better educational results
Eric Bettinger, Associate Professor at
Stanford Graduate School of Business,
carried out the research into the effect on
school age children of having a mother at

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

by Claire Paye

Some reflections upon infancy in the 21st Century

n 2008, UNICEF published the

Child Care Transition report, which
reflected:
A great change is coming over
childhood in the worlds richest
countries. Todays rising generation is
the first in which a majority are spending
a large part of early childhood in some
form of out-of-home child care..
Whether the child care transition will
represent an advance or a setback for
todays children and tomorrows world
will depend on the response (UNICEF
2008, p.1).
The report was prepared in the midst of
cultural change for families throughout
the western world. In both England and
the US from the mid-1980s onwards,
increasing numbers of families began to
rely upon both parents working full time,
added to a steady increase in parents of
young families working many miles away
from their home locations. The emergent
result was that increasing numbers of
infants were routinely removed from
their homes and sometimes their local
neighbourhood between 8am and
6pm during the working week and
placed in commercial care facilities,
frequently day care settings structured
to house large numbers of children.
Such a culture of child care became
increasingly at odds with Bowlbys theory
of infant attachment (Bowlby 1952). The
theory proposed that a lack of bonded
attachment to the mother in early
infancy creates psychological problems
for human beings on a lifelong basis; in
particular, their abilities to create healthy
relationships with others.
The fundamental significance of
attachment
Bowlby laid tremendous emphasis on the
role of the mother within attachment,
proposing that the attachment process
between the human mother and baby
was innate, implying that this was as
automatic as the imprinting process
in birds. Bowlby took into account
subsequent attachment research,
notably by Schaffer and Emerson
(1964), and shortly before his death
in 1990, he expanded his core thesis
to take in the possibility of forming a
secure attachment with someone other
than the mother. When childrens
first experiences of interactions with
significant others within an intimate
family circle communicate to them
that they are lovable, and that other

people are interested in and sensitively

responsive to their attempts to
communicate, they are provided with
a secure base from which to venture
out and to which they can subsequently
return for help (Bowlby 1988). If such
attachments are not securely formed
in infancy through experiences of
relationships where affection is both
given and received, Bowlby reiterated,
this would have lifelong consequences.
Behaviour problems associated with day
care
With the growth of developmental
neuro-biology, additional
neurophysiological evidence has emerged
to support the importance of secure
relationships in infancy. A range of
studies discovered abnormally raised
levels of stress hormones in young
children placed in situations where they
do not feel secure in the care that they
are receiving, particularly young children
spending full days in collective daycare.
Several research projects found that
when care at home was compared to care
in collective settings, children showed
less physiological signs of stress at home
(e.g., Dettling, Gunnar and Donzella,
1999; Watamura, Kryzer, and Robertson,
2009). Developmental researchers Raikes
and Thompson (2008) additionally found
that children with poor attachment
security before 36 months suffered
problems with peer relationships and
social problem-solving skills, while Lowe
Vandell et al. (2010, p.751) argued that
a consistent finding in the literature is
that more hours in child care and more
centre-type care are related to higher
levels of behaviour problems in young
children [and that] more hours in
child care and more centre-type care
are related to higher levels of ...problem
behaviours at age 15.
Instinctive responsiveness of mothers
Whilst it would be naive to argue that all
home environments are inevitably less
stressful than all day care environments,
the indication seems to be that to be
cared for within the average home is less
stressful for an infant than to be cared
for within the average day care centre.
Why might this be? Zeedyk (2006, pp.
322323) described the human infant
as a creature who arrives in the world
prepared to swiftly tune into the rhythms
of the main carer, who in turn responds
to the childs noises and movements to
the point that parentinfant interactions

have been likened to a jazz duet, given

that the two partners are not dancing
to someone elses tune but are creating
one of their own. As any jazz musician
will understand, it is far easier to jam
with a person with whose rhythms one
is comfortable and familiar, and what
we currently understand about infant
interaction indicates that this is a highly
salient analogy for the ways in which
infants initially learn the most important
human skill- how to communicate with
others.
Commodification of children
Bowlby (1988), writing at the beginning
of the cultural slide towards mass
daycare argued:
Man and woman power devoted to
the production of material goods counts
as a plus in all our economic indices.
Man and woman power devoted to the
production of happy, healthy and selfreliant children in their own homes does
not count at all. We have created a topsyturvy world (Bowlby 1988, p.2).
It can be argued that one of the core
reasons for our cultures slide into this
situation is the dominance in both
England and the US of the free market
economy, where the links between
business and education are vast and
complex. However, this is not compatible
with human psychology, as Bowlby
(1988) intuited; rather than working to
live we now live to work. All that young
children have to offer to such a society
is as a commodity within the child care
system, making money for the economy
through the tax paid through the wages
of professional child care practitioners.
This is not a situation into which we
as a society should be sleepwalking;
UNICEFs (2011, pp. 8-9) warning: there
is a clear danger that the child care
transition may follow a course that is
determined by the needs and pressures of
the moment, uninfluenced by long term
vision or choice. This is one of the most
important issues that we need to discuss
and deeply consider. The time has come
to break free from models of human
society that are narrowly predicated
upon human beings as economic capital,
and to consider our responses to the
child care question from a position
rooted in initiatives which, above all,
seek to nurture the social and emotional
resilience of our rising generations.

Dr Pam Jarvis

Published with permission from Dr Pam Jarvis - A longer version of this article, and full references, can be found on our website www.mothersathomematterco.uk/
viewpoints. Dr Pam Jarvis is a historian and graduate psychologist, and her key research focus is that of well being in education across all ages and academic levels

Book Review

Toxic Childhood How the Modern World is

Damaging our Children and
What We Can do About it
by Sue Palmer
Published by Orion
My response as I devoured Toxic
Childhood in record time alternated
between oh dear and phew. The
oh dears were related to the many
challenges facing children and their
parents in the world we are unwittingly
creating today. The phews were that
many of the solutions suggested are
much easier to carry out when there is a
parent around for the children a lot of the
time, which I am.
There is some good news in this
book. There are fewer TVs in childrens
bedrooms than when the first edition
was published in 2006. The bad news
is that this is because of the increase in
handheld devices which children are
using in their bedrooms, having eaten
their individually microwaved meals on
their own, after being driven home from
school and kept indoors. The subtitle
of the book, How the modern world is
damaging our children and what we can
do about it, sums up the content of the
book brilliantly. It is worth reading for
the suggestions alone. Reading through
the life skills for children to learn by
the age of 6 or 12 made me realise that

actually I could expect a bit more of my

children.
Each chapter is designed to be read
on its own, so it is a brilliant book for
dipping into, although many of the
issues raised are interconnected. In the
chapter on school, The Best Days of
their Lives, Sue Palmer, a former head
teacher, explores why more and more
children are behaving badly: diet, lack
of sleep or outdoor play, inadequate
attachment or opportunities for reallife communication, family problems
.[the] national obsession with selfish
materialism.exposure to screen-based
violence and bullying behavioura
culture that has forgotten the essential
elements of successful child-rearing.
All of these elements are explored in the
book. As well as a recap of suggestions
made at the end of each chapter, there
is a case study examining what is
happening in the lives of children from
disadvantaged backgrounds.
I was particularly interested to read
the chapter on Whos looking after
the children? As a working mother
herself, Sue Palmer does not flinch from
suggesting that what babies and young
children really need can be found in their
normal environment where that is a
happy family home. She also endorses
the value of teaching all parents about
the importance of attachment and
attuned parenting and questions how
far an institution [can] duplicate the
security and stability of home and the
sensitive, personal, human engagement
of a single familiar carer? These are
such important questions, but so rarely
debated for fear of upsetting families who
cant find a way to have a parent at home
most of the time, that it is refreshing for
them to be raised by someone who has
researched the topic at great length and is
a neutral observer.
Moving onto less emotive ground, the
book highlights a number of areas which
all parents need to focus on, whether
they work outside the home or are full
time carers for their children. The book
opens with a chapter on the importance
of the family meal, both in terms of its
content and of the importance of time
spent eating together for communication
and the passing on of manners. I was
reminded AGAIN not to have my mobile
at the table, a fact which is picked up at
length in the chapter on communication:
Its good to talk. Sue highlights the

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

importance
of face
to face talking
in developing babies ability to
communicate and express themselves.
She explores why it is that technology can
never replace communication with a live
human and suggests ways of developing
a conversation with a child although
she doesnt cover why it is no child can
ever answer the questions what have you
done at school today? or what was the
most interesting thing you learnt today?
or who did you play with at breaktime?
or any number of open questions
designed to elicit information about that
days activities at school! In spite of this,
Sue states that the best way we can help
our children do well at school is to talk
and listen, or rather, listen and talk
I think Sue sums up what children
need and why they arent getting it in
todays society in these words: Our
consumer society leads us to believe that
the more costly and complex an item is,
the more its value this is not the case
with children. (Although in a way it is
true: human beings are complex and
these days their time is costlyand time
with the human beings who are most
special to them is what children most
need and crave.)
So, the primary weapon against
the toxic childhood our children are
experiencing is time with us, their
parents. But we need to use this time
wisely, being fully engaged with our
children, providing for their physical
needs for food, play and sleep, providing
a safe haven from which to explore the
world and to which they can retreat when
the world gets too much.
There are so many more words of
wisdom and warnings about the age our
children live in that I cant recommend
this book highly enough. The book
confirms the vital role all parents play
in our childrens lives and it equips us to
recognise and confront the challenges
that our children face so that we can
detox their childhood.

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Claire Paye

Letters & Messages from Supporters

There are many ways you
can get in touch. We love
hearing your comments
and supporting you through
Facebook, Twitter, emails and
letters.
Here is a selection of the
comments we have received.
By email

info@mothersathomematter.co.uk
Hello,
I am a stay at home mum having
happily left my successful career to be
with my daughter of now 14.5 months.
I have no regrets and am enjoying every
minute. I am pretty disheartened by the
way women or men are penalised by the
current government financially because
they choose to stay at home to look after
their children and do not want to find
work. I find it crazy how far the other
way parenting has swung and I
question whether its really
the answer to safeguard
the future of our society
and future generations.
Thanks,
Joanna McFarlane

By Twitter

@mumsdadsmatter
or #valuecare
@Platform505
Mothers Day card
delivered to #No10 @
mumsdadsmatter addressing
major issues concerning stay at
home parents (with link to article)
@SheffieldMummy
#Labour candidate leafleting at the
schoolgate - didnt know about
@mumsdadsmatter - does now :-)
#valuecare
@MRS_SRM
@mumsdadsmatter @PTAUK - Not
only do my 3 benefit from me being
SAHP, but others do too. I volunteer in
sch and local clubs #volunteerarmy
@AnnaBramble
@mumsdadsmatter Fab debate on the
Big Questions re discrimination against
stay at home mums, about time it was
properly discussed - go Lynne!
@DanielsDenUK
@mumsdadsmatter This article reminds
me of how I find all parties policies

10

troubling - stay at home parents so

undervalued.

Through Facebook

Mothers at Home Matter Too

We have two main pages, a public
page: Mothers at Home Matter Too
and a closed group page specifically
for members: MAHM Members
Community.
Here are some comments from the
public page following in response to a
post about Chitra Ramaswamys article,
I love being a housewife and that doesnt
make me any less of a feminist, which
had 352 likes, 24 comments and 55
shares.
I am very proud to say I gave up a
career (as a doctor ) to bring up my 4
children - best decision I ever made and
happy to shout it from the roof tops
Ditto. Gave up being head
of English in secondary
school to have and
raise family.
Havent looked
back since. In
fact, I will go
as far to say
Im more
fulfilled
now and
have more
satisfaction in
being a stay at
home mum than
I did in teaching
I do miss aspects of
my job (as a clin neg lawyer) but
I certainly wouldnt change the decision
we made that I would become a mum at
home. I have no regrets and Im sure Ill
have no regrets in future years, whatever
Im doing during the working week,
when I look back on being able to spend
these early years with my wee boys!!
Id be a stay at home mum in a
heartbeat- wouldnt care whether it was
sexist or not- I love being off with the
kids.
One of the biggest misconceptions
with being a stay at home mum is that
your life is entirely menial. Mothers in
the past were extremely active in the
community both socially and politically...
they didnt just cook the dinner, do some
dusting then sit in front of the t.v.

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

I have
done a
tremendous
amount of
studying since I had
my
children and have acquired many useful
skills from carpentry to traditional
cooking to biodynamic farming. I simply
do not understand where the idea of
the brain-dead house wife comes from!
In fact it is typically people married to
their jobs who are the most tedious and
politically ignorant.
There is so much feminism about the
Right to Work and the Right to a Career.
But not enough feminism about the
childs Rights to his own parent.
A mothers Rights to her children is
a luxury, not many can afford. That is
feminism for the rich only. A childs
Rights to his mother are ignored.
Women choose to stay at home with
their kids and give up careers because
that little person becomes the most
important thing in their lives and they
want to experience every one of their
childs experiences ..a luxury these
days? maybe ..a duty?..not really..an act
of selfless love?..yes ..a risky short term
career break?..Unfortunately and sadly in
todays unfair times ..yes.
I am sick and tired of this career
choice, fulfilling ambition and wasted
potential speak. Fact is we are not all
high earner career women. Some stay
at home mums like me have no degree,
few qualifications and didnt earn a great
deal before having our children. Do I
really want to return to the mundane
daily routine of an office and waste my
potential of being there to raise my kids.
Big fat No. At the end of my life I will
not be saying I wish I had been at work
more. It annoys me that all the talk of
women going back to work is of women
who have careers to go to in the first
place. I find more fulfilment in reading to
my kids or cooking their tea than I ever
did at work. However society has made
me feel worthless and invisible. Like I
dont count. I still paid my tax for 11
years before leaving work and have never
had any benefits so why am I classed as
a drain on the system and targeted by
policymakers to get back into work?

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Letter to MPs

Mothering School Age Children

How can YOU help?

This is clearly a time when MPs are likely
to be receptive to being informed that
the vast majority of the female electorate
would rather look after their children
themselves than be offered subsidised
childcare.
Please take a minute to email your
MP to mention this. There is lots of
information in this newsletter which you
could include, but you could ask your MP
to adopt this policy:
Introduce a transferable tax allowance
for single income families to reduce the
discrimination in the tax system and
allow children to be looked after by their
parents.
The reason they should consider this is:
It is cheaper for the Treasury to enable
mothers to look after their children
themselves rather than subsidise external
childcare.
Only 13% of parents at home full time
cited the cost of childcare as the reason,
87% of parents would not be influenced
by subsidised childcare.
A recent study found that it cost 65,000
in free nursery places for each parent
helped back into work as a result.
Children (and, therefore, society) benefit
from being looked after by their mother
or father.
Long hours in childcare are not ideal
for many children as their stress levels
increase and they are left with a care
deficit ie they arent spending enough
time with the person they need to be
with the most, which has implications
for their long term ability to form
relationships and perform well at school.
MPs have to take into account all
correspondance they receive. The more
letters we send them, the more theyll
realise that if they dont sit up and listen,
we wont get up and vote for them.
A growing number of MPs can be
contacted by email. You can check
the list of MPs email addresses at the
Parliamentary website by following this
link www.parliament.uk

The role of a SAHM is clear

during the early years, but
once children start school, the
pressure to return to work
increases. Mother and MAHM
member Poppy Pickles
explains how this feels.

am a mother of two children, a son

aged 10 and a daughter aged 7.
I have not been in any form of
employment, full, or part time since my
son was born, now ten years ago.
This makes me a kind of non-person.
I am not a housewife.
I am not an employee.
I am not a business owner.
I am not unemployed.
I am nothing.
It is even excusable to be a stay at home
parent of pre-school children. The reason
for my opting out of society is clear as I
breastfeed, hold my toddlers hand in the
playground and parade my mothering.
But now my reason for being at home
is bizarre and inexplicable. It is lazy, or
even worse, a waste.
Im genuinely curious patronised one
of my full time working mother friends,
what do you DO all day? Its this kind
of question that actually hurts the most,
makes me desperate for a job, not for the
benefit of myself or my family, but purely
so I have an answer to that question.
So, for the benefit of those that are
genuinely curious I will explain what it
is that I do all day.
Since having my children nearly a
decade ago, I have been busy.
Within the first 6 months of
my sons life Id set up a
book club, re-painted
our first little flat and
taken my son to see
his dying grandfather
twice a week.
I became an
involved member of
the organisation Mothers
at Home Matter, writing
articles and eventually becoming a
committee member and editing their
newsletter.
When my children started school I
became the Chair of the PTA and ran
that for three years. I am still an involved
parent, going on school trips and helping
out at fundraising events.

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

I set up a
retro singing
trio called The
Frockettes and
we perform at private
functions and at local events.
I have done a freelance writing course,
run 2 half marathons, begun my training
as an Iyengar yoga teacher and overseen
building works on our house for the last
4 months.
I manage the household, which
involves: cleaning, laundry, minor diy,
paperwork, birthday organising, family
appointments and the family social
calendar.
But none of these things are really what
I do, they are things that fit into the 6
hour window in the middle of the school
day or at the weekend.
I am a mother first, and everything else
second. I have sacrificed my own career
dreams - what there were of them - to be
available and active in my primary role
of mother whenever it is needed of me.
There is no conflict about who will look
after my children if theyre ill or during
the school holidays. We walk and talk
to school. They practice the piano every
morning (while I offer encouragement
from the kitchen where Im making their
packed lunches). I collect them from
school every day, pick them up off the
floor where they collapse to from hunger,
take them to clubs. I am present and
permanent, and it is where I want to be.
This doesnt mean Im a perfect mother
- far from it.
Nor am I a 50s housewife, waiting for
my husband to get home to his perfectly
clean and tidy house. I do do
all the cooking because my
husband has a total lack of
interest in food and would
eat pasta every single day.
He does the clearing up in
the evening though.
My husband and I are a
team of equals and always
have been. I work hard at home
and he works hard at work; the
money that he brings in is our money.
I know what I do all day and why I am
doing it.
I look forward to a time when society
and the government recognise me for
who I am too.
Something.

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

11

MAHM delivers
Mothers Day
card to Number 10
Downing Street

Membership of MAHM

The card stated simply, We

love mothers, do you?. The
card was the public face of
the letter, which was backed
by a significant number of our
supporters and was included with
the card.
Dear Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg
Its great to honour mothers on this special day of the year, but dont
forget
ALL mothers work hard, ALL year round.
Mothers at Home Matter is calling for the proper recognition of the work
done by parents who care for their children at home. The ONS calculates
the value of informal childcare as 343 billion per year - 23% of GDP.
Children, their families, communities, society and the economy benefit
from our care. Yet our contributions are ignored and our needs sidelined
in policy after policy. Polls consistently show that more parents want more
time at home caring for their own children.
In 2015 were calling on all political parties to properly value care, to
overturn the economic penalties paid by single earner families, and to give
parents real choice about how they raise their children.
Last year the Prime Minister announced that every domestic policy would
be examined for its impact on the family. Time and love are the gifts all
parents want to give the next generation. Time for parenting should be
affordable for everyone. Can you help ensure it will be?
Sincerely,
Mothers at Home Matter

MAHM Committee

Chair

Marie Peacock
07722 504874
info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Vice Chair

Anne Fennell
annefennellmahm@virginmedia.com

Treasurer

Pat Dudley
info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Secretary

Lynne Burnham
secretary@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Membership Secretary

Sine Pickles
sine.pickles@btinternet.com

Committee Members

Heather Ticheli, Kerry Hedley

www.mothersathomematter.co.uk
P.O. Box 43690, London SE22 9WN
@mumsdadsmatter #valuecare

12

MAHM Media Team

Media & Communications

Imogen Thompson
07913 464323
imogenthompsonmedia@gmail.com
Media Enquiries
Claire Paye - 07972 727544
Lynne Burnham - 01737 768705
Mel Tibbs - 07929108586
Anne Fennell - 07957 232504
Imogen Thompson - 07913 464323
MAHM Blog
Mel Tibbs
mel.tibbs@redapplemedia.co.uk
Research Officer
Alex Payling
bassingbournbelle@hotmail.co.uk
07791878653
Newsletter Editor
Claire Paye
media-claire@mothersathomematter.co.uk
Newsletter Design Editor
Poppy Pickles

web: www.mothersathomematter.co.uk

Thank you to everyone who is a

member. Your membership fee
helps us:
Print and distribute this newsletter
to members
Lobby MPs and have a presence at
vital meetings
Organise events such as our Who
CARES for the family? Houses of
Parliament event in January (details
on p2) to make our case for family
time.
If you arent yet a member, please
consider joining us. The cost is
12.50 p.a. for individuals or 15
p.a. for couples, and you can join
online through our website.

Media Requests
The media often contact us for
case studies. If you would be
happy to talk to the press, please
do let Imogen Thompson know on
imogenthompsonmedia@gmail.
com. We are happy to give you
some pointers or advice.
If you would like to help in any
other way, wed love to hear from
you. Please email
info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

Subscription Renewal
If youve already organised payment of this
years membership subscription or have
joined in the last 6 months please ignore the
request for membership renewal. However,
if youre a long-standing member, please
dont forget to increase your Standing Order
at your bank to 12.50 for single members
or 15 for couple membership.
If you have changed your address or email,
please let us know. If you would like to set
up a Standing Order please print out and
send us the Renewal form and Standing
Order form together with your cheque
payable to Mothers at Home Matter to our
PO Box. Alternatively you can pay online
using Paypal.
For any additional information, including
our bank account details so you can set up a
standing order yourself, please contact
info@mothersathomematter.co.uk

email: info@mothersathomematter.co.uk