There is so much wrong with the approach to child care–or the baby grant programme–adopted by the Government in the 2015 national budget.The Prime Minister is reported in the Guardian newspaper of September 8 to have said, "the household income ceiling would be $3,000 a month and the provision required the mother to attend parental outreach workshops hosted by her ministry, as it would be tied to the babycare programme."
This thinking disempowers women. It invites misogyny and ridicule of women.It demonstrates a disdain and total lack of understanding of women's lived experiences. It is intolerant of the needs of women and children as citizens.The babycare programme undervalues women's contribution to the economy and compromises the rights of working-class women. It also encourages tensions between social classes of women.
The Prime Minister and her advisers have managed to extract an element of social policy which has worked reasonably well in other countries and made it a burden on working-class women to defend their right to citizen benefits from the State. This is wrong. Equally important is the message of this measure. It reinforces gender norms which place the full burden of childcare on the shoulders of women.
In so doing, this measure does not promote family friendliness by maintaining the important role of fathers in the lives of their children.This approach also legitimises the notion of male breadwinners and women's unpaid work at home.The reference to parenting classes for women is an obfuscation of a widely-held view that it is women living in poverty who are making poor choices which result in the high level of criminality in the society.
Who will be teaching these classes? What is good parenting? Who gets to decide what is good parenting? Will our approach to teaching these classes first begin with an acknowledgement of the positive parenting practices of the students before we demoralise them? How will we know that they are now able to parent better than before they attended these classes?
This measure is offensive on many levels, but whilst the assumptions with regard to social class are entirely evident, the undercurrent with respect to ethnicity must be unmasked.
The Women's Institute for Alternative Development (Winad) believes that family-friendly policies are critical to our country's development. Family-friendly policies favour children–well designed and delivered childcare services, good nutrition and healthcare, and the best possible education. Family-friendly policies support the well-being of parents as well as children.
If the Government is serious about family-friendly policies, then we suggest that the babycare grant should be offered as an element of a package that includes increased paternity leave, significantly improved childcare services, and training and sustainable employment for the women targeted ... as a start.The babycare grant is neither family-friendly nor woman-friendly and should be revisited.
Women's Institute forAlternative DevelopmentBelmont