Changes to Parenting Payment

I've just been down at Centrelink, learning about how my parenting payments will stop. Yes, I'm one of those people caught up in the 'grandfather' clause. And yes, I'll receive a pay-cut next year - right when there are more expenses and not as much income.

But this isn't a self-pitying post. If anything, I feel lucky. I feel lucky that I am working, so it won't make as much of an impact on me as other people. I feel lucky that I work from home, which gives me greater flexibility. I feel lucky that my children are relatively old (11 and 13), which gives me more ability to find work, without having to limit it necessarily to school hours. And I feel extremely lucky that I was able to be there for them in the afternoons up until now.

Many people aren't so lucky. For a parent who is not working, the changes to parenting payment mean a cut of $130. That's an awful lot of money for someone who isn't earning very much to begin with. And it comes at a very expensive time - right after Christmas and just before back-to-school buying.

Plus, it's during school holidays. If someone is lucky enough to get a job straight away, by the time they pay for holiday childcare, they may end up with less than they were receiving on parenting payment. Some parents may decide they have no choice except to wait until after school holidays to look for a job. And school holidays often involve plans to do things with the children - plans that may now need to be changed. And as any parent knows, changed plans often mean disappointed kids.

Furthermore, many parents (usually mothers) will be forced to take whatever job they can find. Well that's all well and good, you might say, don't we all have to do that? Yes, but single mothers face more barriers in getting work than other people. Firstly, they need to find work that fits in with school hours and available childcare. Also, if they have been raising children for at least the past eight years, they won't have the same recent experience and relevant skills as other people. This makes them less employable.

Many current recipients of parenting payment may be using their 'child-rearing' years to study and/or do volunteer work to help them get the job they want once their children are older. Now, they will be forced into getting whatever job they can. And if they're working full-time, and raising children by themselves, that doesn't leave much time ever to improve their skills or study until the children are older.

Plus, some of that re-training is in the form of volunteer work. Many of our schools would not function if it were not for the volunteer work done by parents. We need volunteers. What happens to school if there isn't the same base of 'volunteer mothers' to draw from?  

And that's not even the most important impact that the changes to parenting payment will have. The most important impact is that many parents will now be forced to spend less time with their kids. And quite honestly, I think that's ridiculous.

I said up above that I am extremely grateful that I have been able to be there in the afternoons for my children. It has often put a strain on the budget. But that time is so valuable. I wouldn't exchange it for anything. And honestly I think the loss of the income I could have made if I was more prepared to put them in childcare and work full-time was a small price to pay.

And that's not saying that everybody should stay home with their kids. I'm lucky. I could work from home - so it's not like I wasn't working at all. Plus the fact that I'm very introverted means I can cope with working alone in a study a lot better than other people could. I don't think everybody can make the same choice I did. But I am so glad I was able to make that choice.

And isn't it better for kids to be with their parents rather than stuck in childcare - if that's what the parent wants to do? The government spends money on making sure childcare is available, when there's expert childcare providers right there in the kids' own homes - who are forced to leave the home to work. It just doesn't make sense to me.

And the kids like being with their parents too. Let's face it, wouldn't most people prefer to be with someone who loves them rather than someone who's paid to look after them? My youngest child is now 11. So he's three years' older than the age at which parenting payments stop. But he's still not too keen on me working in the afternoon. I am looking for another job now. After working from home for so long, I think it's time. And it will mean more money. But I think my youngest child still isn't quite prepared to not see me as soon as school finishes.

And now many, many kids will be denied that opportunity to spend that time with their parents. As soon as they turn eight, mum (or dad) needs to go out and get a job. And I think that's sad. I really do. I think if kids want their parent at home, and if the parent wants to be at home, then we should be doing everything to make sure that can happen - not saying, too bad, your kid's eight, go out and get a real job.

Raising children is a real job - and an extremely important one. We should be valuing the people who do it - not telling them they should be doing something different. Or do we only value childcare when it contributes to the economy?

I do need to point out that many parents have been in this situation for a while. The grandfather clause applies to all people who started receiving parenting payment before 2006. In 2006, the time at which parenting payment stopped was changed to when the youngest child turned eight. Everyone who started receiving parenting payment before then could keep receiving it until their youngest child turned 16. They've now changed it so that everybody on that 'grandfather clause' now stops receiving parenting payment if their youngest child is older than eight.

It makes it more fair - which I suppose is a good thing. But if we do want everybody to be paid under the same rule, I think we should change everybody to 16, not change everybody to eight. (I told that to the guy I was speaking to at Centrelink and he said, no, 18!)

And now that I've mentioned him, just a word on Centrelink workers before I finish. The guy I spoke to was brilliant. He was compassionate and understanding. He didn't like the changes anymore than I did. And I felt really sorry for him, because it sounded like he's been copping a lot of criticism. I think Centrelink workers in particular often receive a lot of criticism for things that aren't their fault.

Anyway, now that's said. This new policy is ridiculous. We should be rewarding parents who want to stay home with their kids. Once upon a time, women had no choice except to quit work once they fell pregnant. That was stupid too. And it needed to be changed. But instead of giving women more choices, it seems now that mothers have no choice except to work. And that's stupid too.

I am lucky. And so are my kids. I am so thankful that I was able to be there for them. I love afternoons when they come home from school. I love the opportunity to play and laugh and talk and occasionally do nothing. I love just the fact that I'm here with them. And I know they've loved it too. Everybody should get that chance.  

And yet so many kids will miss out on that. I don't think that's fair. I don't think it's right. And I think it will be detrimental to kids, to women, to families and to society.

Definitions of God (and how our own definitions change)

Everybody has their own definitions about God. Even if your definition is “something imagined by humans that doesn’t really exist”, that’s still a definition. Those who believe in God may have more complex definitions. They have their own ideas about who God is, what he does and how he has acted throughout history.

There are no doubt some people who have never had those definitions challenged. They go their whole lives believing certain things about God and never experience anything that might suggest those beliefs may not be completely accurate. However I would think that these type of people would be few and far between. Most people have had their definitions of God challenged – sometimes on a fairly regular basis. On a minor scale, it might just be a slight disturbance on the faith radar – a minute or two when you wonder whether you definition of God is really right. On a major scale, it could mean a complete overhauling of your entire belief system.

In Christian circles, we hear a lot about doubt. Everyone has doubts occasionally, we are told. But doubt is not good. When a person has doubts, they should just keep believing anyway. Keep pressing on and our doubts will disappear.

I have spoken to many Christians who have had lengthy periods of doubt – what might be called a time in the wilderness. Their definition of God has been challenged so much that they begin to doubt what they know of him. Does he really love me? Does he answer prayers? Am I really saved? I’ve had times like that myself. As someone who constantly questions and challenges, my definitions of God seems to be under constant attack.

When I’m in this position – or when I am talking to someone who has gone through a similar thing – the presumption is made that a person having those kind of doubts wants to have those doubts removed. They want to leave the wilderness and get back to the faith and belief they once used to have. They want God to fit their old definition again.

But what if he can’t? What if God has failed to do the things we once believed he would do? What if the church’s teachings fail to work out in our lives? What if we can’t reconcile the bible with what we know to be true? What if our definition of God just doesn’t match up with reality?

Some people choose to pray and get prayed for until their doubts go away. Others spend years in the wilderness, never seeing an end in sight. Perhaps on the surface they appear to believe all the things they’re meant to believe, but underneath it all they know that their definition of God no longer makes any sense. Others refuse to acknowledge the doubts the continue to have – even to themselves.

Then there are those who simply leave – whether it’s church, religion or even God. If they can’t believe in a God who fits their definition, then they won’t believe in God at all.

Not that long ago, I had my definition of God challenged in a big way. God failed to act in a way I thought he would. God’s love, compassion and control were all question-marks in my mind. The God of my definition no longer seemed to exist.

But just because the God who fit my definitions didn’t exist, doesn’t mean God didn’t exist at all. And just because I was questioning God’s love, compassion and control doesn’t mean that they were no longer there. It’s just that my definition was wrong. I needed a new definition.

I no longer think of God the same way I did when I was a child. Nor do I think of him the same way I did when I was a new Christian. God hasn’t changed. But my way of defining him has. In another ten years, my definition of God may have changed again. I don’t want to go back to my old ways of looking at God. Doubt, in a way, has been good for me. It has moved me onto new ways of looking at God. And I would prefer to do that than simply have my doubts prayed away until God fits my definition again. 

I don’t imagine I will ever get to a perfect definition of God. In a way, God cannot be defined – even though this doesn’t stop us wanting to define him. But that’s okay. For as long as I am prepared to redefine God – instead of expecting God to fit my definition – then I will continue to grow. And maybe my definitions of God will get closer and closer to the truth. 

Moments of Beauty

A young boy trips over and skins his knee. He takes a big breath, fuelling himself for a very long cry, gives his mother a quick glance to make sure she’s watching – and then spots a butterfly. He stares at in wonder, as his pain is forgotten and the opportunity to get attention is missed. He is having a moment of beauty. The mother has her own moment of beauty. On her way to comfort her child, she stops and simply enjoys the look upon her son’s face.

Moments of beauty are like that. You are so caught up in something beautiful that you forget your own worries, your own fears and your own desires. All the thoughts that were fighting with each other inside your head simply disappear. You forget about ‘me’ for a while. You forget about everything. You simply enjoy the beauty.

The best example of a moment of beauty is the mother who looks into her newborn baby’s eyes. Regardless of how many moments of beauty I have in my life, nothing will ever compare to that experience. In fact, I doubt very much whether anyone is ever captivated quite so much as a woman who first looks into her child’s eyes. The pain of labour is completely forgotten. The worries and fears about how she will actually raise her child no longer seem that important. To say you lose yourself is a cliché, but sometimes a cliché best expresses the truth. The new mother really does lose herself. When a mother looks at her newborn, she doesn’t think of who she is or what she wants. There are no thoughts at all, well not in words. Just an overwhelming feeling of love and wonder.

Moments of beauty don’t have to be centred around some amazing experience, like giving birth to a child. They happen all the time. They can be big or small. Sitting on the beach watching the sunset. A flock of birds flying overhead. Looking at a waterfall. Attending a school assembly and hearing children sing. Listening to the solo of a classically trained singer. A moment of silence at the end of a hectic day. Walking into an old church and feeling the impact of awe, magnificence and wonder.

The other day, I was standing outside the shopping centre, when a young couple walked past. I can’t remember what I was thinking about at that moment, but I’m sure I considered it terribly important at the time. But as soon as I saw them, I stopped thinking. Now they were attractive, but I wouldn’t say they were stunning. But there was something about their faces and their body languages that really moved me. There seemed to be an ease there that you very rarely find. They looked at each other as if they really understood the value of the other person. Not stunning, no. But definitely beautiful, even if it’s not the kind of beauty that can be captured in photographs.

I have been calling them moments of beauty, but I most often think of them as moments that touch the soul. Because that’s what I think they are. When something captivates you with its beauty, I believe it’s felt more with the soul, than with the body. They are the times when our spirit finally gets our flesh to shut up for a moment. And it’s when our flesh is quiet, that I think God is mostly likely to tap us on the shoulder and remind us that he’s still there.

There is a passage in the bible that always makes me think of moments of beauty. It is found in 1 King 19:11-12.

Then He said, “Go out, and stand on the mountain before the LORD.” And behold, the LORD passed by, and a great and strong wind tore into the mountains and broke the rocks in pieces before the LORD, but the LORD was not in the wind; and after the wind an earthquake, but the LORD was not in the earthquake; and after the earthquake a fire, but the LORD was not in the fire; and after the fire a still small voice. 

I’m not quite sure why it makes me think of beauty, because there is certainly nothing in there that is beautiful. I think it’s that still small voice at the end. When we do have a moment of beauty, or a moment that touches the soul, we can sometimes hear that still small voice. It’s like God’s gently whispering in our ear. But we have to pay attention or we miss it. And most of the time, we’re not paying attention.

Whether we’re paying attention or not, I think moments of beauty are God’s way of reminding us that this life and this flesh are not all that matters. When we ignore our flesh, we can begin to pay attention to our spirit. When we lose ourselves, we may just end up finding God.