I propose that a proposal be made to treat single-parent families differently, because by some balancing act you cannot equate us with those families where 2 people look after the child and here one person looks after the child 24 hours a day. Given that we classify families according to the sum of all incomes divided by the number of members in the family, the calculation does not even hold water mathematically, because the cost of, say, an extra person in a 3-person household is negligible, and their contribution to the total coffers is large. If, say, a family of 3 has an income of 1500e (3x500) and has 750e of basic costs, they are still left with 250e per person, but if a family of 2 has an income of 1000e (2x500), they are left with 125e per person, exactly half, given that both families have the same income per family member. (E.g. they drive in one car, the housing costs, which are the same everywhere, are divided by 3, and the difference in rent is also minimal). And they also have 2x more possibilities to get extra income, because if the single parent works extra, he has to cover the costs of the nanny, and then he is financially almost on the same level, only 2x more tired, whereas here one parent can work and the other one watches him. Also, the cost of extra care is such a necessary living expense if you have no other (free) option and if the absent parent has no contact. I think we all agree that it makes no difference whether a one- or two-parent family gets the 30e allowance, and we are all on an equal footing in terms of covid measures, but no one thinks that you have to work from home alone with your child when it is already the one-parent families who are complaining. Single-parent families are also entitled to 30% more child benefit, which in practice means in my case 9e more a month, with a nursery bill of 247e, rent and a below-average salary.