Well she is a ‘single mum’ in that she is a mum who is single. She is not in a romantic relationship and has children. Their father, her ex, stepping up and parenting his kids 50% of the time (as arguably he should) does not detract from her status as their mother or a single woman. Though obviously yes, it does reduce her parenting burden 50% of the time (or however often he has them) and no, not every parent (single or otherwise) gets that. But it’s not a race to the bottom, who can be the biggest parenting martyr. Surely we should be encouraging fathers to take equal responsibility for custody, post split rather than nitpicking women over definitions?
I get that a lot of this stuff has come about with Helen specifically because she sort of made herself the poster girl for single parents when she separated. She’s kind of dug her own hole by talking about it all the time etc and failing to acknowledge that she was in a privileged position with a secure home in a nice area, a flexible job, a present ex and lots of other support around her.
As for ‘monetising the divorce’ we have no idea what went on. They were married a long time, financial negotiations in divorces are complex. He may well have signed the house over to her in exchange for her not being able to access his pension funds or other asset, or she may only be able to live there until the youngest turns 18, or she may have bought him out of his share.
I know this post makes me sound like a Helen fan but honestly, sometimes the posts on these threads are reaching beyond reality.