I’m the CEO of a non-profit for moms. Here’s what you should know about the proposal to pay stay-at-home parents
Photo by Bethany Beck on Unsplash
Table of Contents
There’s a simple truth about problem-solving that I fear we’ve forgotten: If you want to know how to solve a problem, ask the people facing it what they need. That’s the ethos behind our work at Chamber of Mothers, the U.S.’s largest non-partisan nonprofit fighting for paid leave, affordable and accessible childcare, and historic investments in maternal health.
It’s also why the federal government’s latest reported childcare proposal—which would let some married families with a stay-at-home parent receive payment—isn’t the solution to American moms’ struggles. Now let me start by saying this: In our work at Chamber of Mothers, we’ve reviewed numerous policies from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers that include stipends for parents who are working full-time inside the home. Parents are, of course, critical childcare providers, and they should be compensated for their time to care for their children immediately after having a baby (what’s referred to politically as “paid leave”) and beyond (at-home “childcare”).
And on its face, the latest proposal, which was first reported by The New York Times on September 5, sounds like an expansion, a recognition even, of the deep value of caring for babies and children. It is not.
What is the proposal to pay stay-at-home parents?
This plan would tap an existing fund built to cover childcare costs for families earning below 85 percent or less of their state’s median income, depending on the state, where all parents are working or in school. The proposal would not grow the pot of available funds by a single dollar, but instead reroute funds to some married households where one parent isn’t working. The problem? The subsidy program is currently so underfunded by Congress that it can only reach 1 in 7 eligible families.
In short, this plan forces working and stay-at-home parents to fight over the same meager pot, instead of making the pot big enough to feed everyone. As The New York Times reported, 80 percent of the 870,000 families currently receiving these subsidies (about $9,000 per child per year) are single working parents, most of them mothers.
It’s also worth noting that enacting this proposal falls outside the administration’s purview. As my friend and director at Chamber of Mothers, Elliot Haspel explained, “the executive branch can’t issue a rule that contradicts a Congressionally-passed law.”
What parents really want is time with their kids
Despite divisive rhetoric, despite the doubt that’s been sown between neighborhoods and communities, despite moms being used as political pawns, most parents in this country want the same thing, and it’s something really simple: According to the largest-of-its-kind nongovernmental survey of U.S. parents of kids under six, 72% of parents just want more quality time with their kids.
What isn’t simple is getting there, and for half of parents, money is what makes it hard to spend quality time with their kids.
In America in 2026, 60% of people can’t afford the basics, 37% of parents can’t afford the activities they’d like to do with their children, 27% say they’re working more hours than they’d like just to keep their families afloat, and 74% of American mothers work for pay—many of us because we can’t afford the alternative. That’s why proposals offering hollow promises, without substantially increasing the government’s inadequate investments in what we need to stay afloat and care for our children, are so devastating.
Voters support more funding, not feuding
This is all to say: When mothers who want and need the very same things are pitted against one another, it’s a deeper kind of injury than not receiving the support we all need in the first place.
It’s also a distraction from what moms in this country are actually demanding from our leaders: more funding. We’re aligned on it, too. So are most people in this country: Across the political spectrum, more than 80% of voters support federal investment in paid family and medical leave, affordable and accessible childcare, and maternal health.
In fighting for the change we all need, we cannot afford to be divided anymore, and we have the power to unite and make the change we want to see. I’ve seen it happening all over the country. Moms in our local chapters have passed laws at the state level, helped mothers in their communities better understand their rights at work, and, by coming together in community, formed a deeper understanding of the roots of our struggles.
Together, we can demand that this country listen to its mothers and invest in flexible, reliable, affordable childcare that isn’t determined by what you do or don’t do for work. We can demand that this country invest in paid leave to heal from birth and to spend time with our children, and we can demand that our country invest in the health of its mothers so that all mothers, babies, and families can be well.
This country has the resources to fund real, whole support for every family. Most of us agree on what that support looks like. We know how to build it, too, and we won’t stop insisting that we get it.
Erin Erenberg is the CEO of Chamber of Mothers, the largest nonpartisan nonprofit dedicated to winning paid leave, affordable, accessible childcare, and historic investments in maternal health. We take your stories and experiences and turn them into policy to improve motherhood in America. Join 100,000 other members and one of our 50+ local chapters across the country.
Related articles
