To think it is ridiculous that a woman with 11 kids is getting a £400,000 house for nowt

(1000 Posts)
angelos02 Tue 19-Feb-13 09:59:59

Especially when most working people couldn't never afford to live somewhere costing that much?
Link: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2280385/Home-fit-dole-queen-Mother-11-gets-BRAND-NEW-400-000-house-built-council-shes-struggling-current-homes.html

seeker Tue 19-Feb-13 10:01:11

Where would you suggest she live?

SmiteYouWithThunderbolts Tue 19-Feb-13 10:03:07

I know, let's bring back the workhouses and REALLY make those kids pay for their mother's lack of work ethic. hmm

EstherRancid Tue 19-Feb-13 10:03:43

how is it for nowt?

are the family not living in it then?

i'm not opening that link, i think it contains stretching, bending and dramatisation of the truth hmm

HeySoulSister Tue 19-Feb-13 10:04:11

Are you trying to cause trouble op?

Lottapianos Tue 19-Feb-13 10:05:08

Just heard Nick Ferrari having the time of his life riling people up about this on LBC. People like him and the Daily Fail do love these extreme stories and use them as example of the whole of society going to hell in a handcart.

I do think that having 11 children is shockingly irresponsible behaviour and that applies to the men who took part in creating those children just as much as to that woman. Absolutely no-one, not even Brad and Angelina, could possibly have enough time, energy and enthusiasm (never mind enough money!) to give enough love and attention to 11 children. I fully agree it's not behaviour that should be encouraged or rewarded, but then again, these children do deserve to grow up in a safe, healthy, comfortable environment and apparently their mother can't afford to provide that independently.

I don't know what the answer is TBH

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 10:05:15

it isn't her childrens fault she doesn't work and keeps having babies is it. councils build houses now and again for bigger families and disabled people this is 1 of those builds why does it matter to you

fergoose Tue 19-Feb-13 10:05:36

do the Daily Mail continuously print these type of articles to incite hatred towards anyone on benefits I wonder.

SomethingProfound Tue 19-Feb-13 10:06:25

Of course she shouldn't be given a house like that, they should top and tail and the little ones should go in the sock draw!

BlackAffronted Tue 19-Feb-13 10:06:28

It does seem unfair that they are building a custom house for her because she has so many kids. I would love more kids, but have no room and we cant afford bigger sad Because we work, we cant have more kids it seems like. Also, her attitude stinks - "If i dont like it, I'll just insist they build me another one!"?

HeySoulSister Tue 19-Feb-13 10:07:18

Those Eco houses are being built everywhere now anyway nothing new there

And I have a 5 bed HA brand new build 'eco' house myself!!!

Wise up op and educate yourself!

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 10:07:32

they won't build her another house she has a house and her words mean nothing really she will be next weeks chip paper

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 10:08:24

Those Eco houses are being built everywhere now anyway nothing new there

the eco houses are legislation now ( i think) most new builds have to comply

GooseyLoosey Tue 19-Feb-13 10:08:57

I am ambivalent about this.

Clearly the children need to be decently housed and we as a society should ensure that they are. However, I read about this woman in another paper this morning and her attitude was calculated to cause offence. She said that if she did not like the house, the council would have to build her another one. If that is really her view and not the product of selective editing, then I do have a problem with that.

Welfare should enable you to have a decent life, it should not leave you believing that you are entitled to whatever you want at the expense of other people.

HollyBerryBush Tue 19-Feb-13 10:09:18

I'd suggest she lives in a Victorian 2 up- 2 down, with a tin bath for good measure. And possibly a coal bunker too.

Dear god, a grandmother at 37, first child at 14; if each of her 11 have 11, thats well over 130 dependents that will never work and bleed the state. Hardly got any positive role models in their lives. Bloody sad really. I wonder how many fathers were involved with the making of that family and whether they have any financial input?

drjohnsonscat Tue 19-Feb-13 10:10:13

lottapianos is right. It isn't fair, especially when you read on here about people struggling with overcrowding and having to manage the needs of children with disabilities without enough space for carers etc.

BUT. It is an intractable problem. We have decided, as a society, that children must not suffer for the foolishness of their parents. We have decided it's not for the state to decide who can and can't have children and we also don't want children roaming the streets, barefoot and dying of hypothermia. There is also evidence that even in failing families, children on average do better with their own families than in care. So the options are very limited. It makes me frustrated too. But it's hard to know what else can be done.

Ashoething Tue 19-Feb-13 10:10:31

YABU op-this is mn where you are allowed to have as many kids as YOU want-never mind if you have no means to feed,house or clothe them. Thats someone elses problem clearly. To suggest anything else is to be accused of benefit bashing and a whole load of people will pile in wittering on about goats. Mark my wordsgrin

lougle Tue 19-Feb-13 10:11:46

1) She isn't being 'given' the house. She is being allowed to rent the house by the council.
2) It's a 6 bedroom house and she has 11 children and two grandchildren. That still means that at least two bedrooms will have 3 children in them.
3) The move frees up two 3 bedroom houses for other council tenants.

EllieArroway Tue 19-Feb-13 10:12:07

Do you understand that it's not about the woman? It's about her children.

She does indeed sound like a self-entitled cow - but we can't make her children suffer because she's a less than pleasant, responsible person.

The LA have a duty of care & they are meeting it. I, for one, am bloody glad that we live in a society that actually gives a shit about how other people live - even the children of feckless idiots.

I bet myself that there was a daily fail link contained within when I read the thread title. I win.

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 10:14:08

She does indeed sound like a self-entitled cow - but we can't make her children suffer because she's a less than pleasant, responsible person.

^ ^ that, I work with some unpleasant people but I am there for their children so you do get entitled unpleasant people with children ,

drjohnsonscat Tue 19-Feb-13 10:14:25

don't know about goats ashoething. But I agree it does seem to be hard to discuss this properly without being accused of benefit bashing. It's obviously not ok to have 11 children and no means to support them. But it's almost as if we are reluctant to say that for fear of accusing everyone on benefits of being feckless.

As I say, I don't know what the answer is. We can't take control of her womb - that's not the society we choose to live in. We choose to live in a free society and this is one of the outcomes.

eminemmerdale Tue 19-Feb-13 10:15:37

Why do people on MN defend these people? She is putting herself in the public eye and will get slated. the Dail Mail may be a hideous paper, but it is clearly a fact that this is being done for this woman - why shouldn't we all be a bit pissed off with her attitude??

ImNotDrunkIJustCantType Tue 19-Feb-13 10:15:58

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MorrisZapp Tue 19-Feb-13 10:16:15

I read the article. It continually referred to her new home as an 'eco home', and said that by using the latest in design, energy bills would be slashed. To me, that's the only positive part of it. All council new builds should be eco homes, its nothing for DM to sneer about.

I don't think that the mother in question will get another new house by moaning if this one doesn't suit - that's not how social housing works and total red herring there by DM, surprise surprise.

It's a tough one. Nobody wants children to be inadequately housed, but getting your own home built because you have 11 kids you can't support is obviously going to grate with people who limit their families and/or pay for their own housing.

I don't have any answers. Presumably families this size are relatively rare.

CSIJanner Tue 19-Feb-13 10:16:29

The Radford family in Morecombe put her to shame. All they claim is CB and they've got 16 children.

comfysofas Tue 19-Feb-13 10:17:06

It is unfair and should not happen, but you won't get much support on here.

Most people on here are ''very politically correct'' not like real life at all.

Rhiannon86 Tue 19-Feb-13 10:17:28

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Catchingmockingbirds Tue 19-Feb-13 10:17:35

Her youngest is two, isn't she then a stay at home mum rather than unemployed?

germyrabbit Tue 19-Feb-13 10:18:14

feel sorry for her new neighbours

tabulahrasa Tue 19-Feb-13 10:18:33

How can they call the father of her first child her boyfriend? She gave birth at 14...he was 23, that's not a boyfriend, that's a paedophile..

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 10:19:24

I am not pc at all Infact I think women who have baby after baby are irresponsible and selfish but where are her children supposed to live for her being so irresponsible

EllieArroway Tue 19-Feb-13 10:19:47

It's ludicrous to suggest (as that article is trying to) that she rolled up at the council offices and demanded they build her a house and them agreeing to. It doesn't work like that.

The LA would already be aware that the family were inadequately housed, and a property would have been earmarked for them. If she genuinely said "If I don't like it, they can build me another one" then she's showing off for the papers because that simply wouldn't happen.

MoodyDidIt Tue 19-Feb-13 10:22:10

hmm i wondered when this would make it to MN

as it made front page of the Scum this morning

she is not being GIVEN a house for FREE ffs

she will be RENTING it (even if its paid for by hb)

and when her dcs have grown and flown the nest she will be forced to move somewhere smaller

just another way for the media to benefit bash

Catchingmockingbirds Tue 19-Feb-13 10:22:57

She gave birth at 14...he was 23, that's not a boyfriend, that's a paedophile..

I agree with this.

foxache Tue 19-Feb-13 10:23:08

The story is written as a comment piece, designed to wind people up. A lot of their information seems to come from 'neighbours'. The first version of this, published yesterday kept referring to her 'brood', and then her daughter starting 'her own brood'. And now they've named all her children.

We don't know all the facts, just what the DM has told us, and I doubt they will correct any inaccuracies.

But discuss away.

Sallyingforth Tue 19-Feb-13 10:23:18

I think both views above are correct. The children come first and deserve to be decently housed. If that means allocating a large house then so be it.

But we can still criticise the mother. She has been breeding continually since she had her first at 14, and that is just irresponsible. I was relieved to hear that she cannot have more for medical reasons.

I also read elsewhere that the house was not specially built for her. She was allocated a house from a development of similar properties.

HollyBerryBush Tue 19-Feb-13 10:23:27

Nothing agains t large families, per se, provided you can afford them. Generally, the type of person can be assumed by the neighbours comments. Not nice in this case. But I'm sure rent-a-crowd would all love to go and live next door to her, along with her derelict cars, rubbish shrewn back garden, and out of her mouth "other mums think I'm a slut" the incessent trail of random blokes staying the night. Which of course is her right to a healthy and productive sex life.

Totally and utterly failed by the system.

nokidshere Tue 19-Feb-13 10:23:42

Of course the children should be cared for, and of course they should be able to live in decent housing.

But she should absolutely be made to stop having children until such time as she (and her partner/husband) can support them all themselves.

Its one thing taking care of children that are already here but quite another to carry on having children at the governments expense.

pictish Tue 19-Feb-13 10:24:09

What MrsJay said.

Is she irresponsible? Yes.
Is she an entitled drain on resources? Yes.

Is that the kids, fault? NO!

Where does the OP propose that they live??
They need to be housed, and it is as simple as that! It's for the welfare of the children, not for the sake of giving this idiot of a woman a posh house!

I certainly don't grudge them it.

quoteunquote Tue 19-Feb-13 10:24:30

First fell pregnant at 14 to a 23-year-old boyfriend who ended up in prison

so raped then?

fergoose Tue 19-Feb-13 10:25:50

Nokids - she can't have anymore children. But if she could, how do you suggest her having more children would be stopped?

MorrisZapp Tue 19-Feb-13 10:26:12

Moody, it will be a very long time before all her kids and grandkids have flown the nest.

It's hardly a temporary home.

SuckingDiesel Tue 19-Feb-13 10:26:39

Why is this news? This sort of thing happens all the time. I work in social housing and it is not at all uncommon for particular properties to be developed or acquired to meet the needs of certain individual families.

AndBingoWasHisNameOh Tue 19-Feb-13 10:27:06

Sorry but arf at this in the lead in
Neighbours say "She treats her womb like a clown car'

HollyBerryBush Tue 19-Feb-13 10:28:22

Miss Frost may be less than impressed with her impending move, but some of her current neighbours can’t wait. One said of the family: ‘They’re hell. When they finally go, we’re having a street party.’

Now, that did make me laugh!

whiteandyelloworchid Tue 19-Feb-13 10:28:31

i bet the houses on that development will have dropped in value overnight

i'm certainly not into benefit bashing, but to have that many children when you don't even pay for them is outrageous.

surely everyone has some sort of moral obligation to not take the piss

she certainly sounds very entitled.

mind you she won't be able to stay there when the kids grow up and move out

Dahlen Tue 19-Feb-13 10:29:36

I think we need to look at what sort of society we have where a woman has her first child at 14 and thinks that the only thing of value she can do is have more. Her actions and behaviour now may be selfish and entitled, but they are borne of sexual exploitation in her youth and a society that throws young mothers on the scrapheap.

I've never claimed benefits or housing benefit, but I don't begrudge her this house. I'd rather see her children given the opportunity to break the cycle of deprivation than condemned to live in inadequate housing where they don't get the supervision they need or the surroundings necessary to complete homework in peace, etc.

fergoose Tue 19-Feb-13 10:29:36

so if someone is on benefits does that mean they should be sterilized so they can't have any more children?

Catchingmockingbirds Tue 19-Feb-13 10:30:04

white they are all housing association properties are they not?

DreamingofSummer Tue 19-Feb-13 10:30:23

Evan Davis interviewed a councillor from Tamworth Council this morning on Today. David tried to stir things up asking about "mansions" and multi million pound houses

The councillor simply asked "What would you do with the children?" and pointed out that it was a 6 bedroom, affordable home.

That shut the smug bastard up

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 10:30:30

It is very difficult. Yes she is an irresponsible and probably rather stupid woman and yes she has had far too many children - how on earth can she care for them adequately? But as others have said, we are supposed to care for inadequate people such as her with the welfare state and that is what she knows and has always known as she kept going. The men involved are likely to be absent I guess? I can't bring myself to click on the link to find out.

This is not what the welfare state was set up for however and I can fully understand the disgust and upset of others who cannot afford more children but would love them and who work bloody hard to support the ones they have. Endless benefits for endless children (has she stopped now?) is not sensible - stoppng benefits after two would make people like this think twice.

These poor children are disadvantaged in so many ways - it is very sad - and are statistically likely to become benefit claimants themselves and continue the cycle.

Viviennemary Tue 19-Feb-13 10:31:00

She has been irresponsible and selfish. And is being rewarded. There is no other way of seeing this.

KatoPotato Tue 19-Feb-13 10:31:16

...Using her womb as a clown car...

landofsoapandglory Tue 19-Feb-13 10:31:23

Well in theory she is being given the house for free, because there are five of them in that family over 18 and not one of them works! Don't tell me there are no jobs either, because I come from that area, have 2 nieces who are single parents and both have just gone back to work, one as her DS went to school, the other when her DS turned 1!

I agree they should have somewhere to live, but it is unfair. I don't know what the answer is though.

Branleuse Tue 19-Feb-13 10:31:41

the army had to do the same for my nana and her 10 kids

Chattymummyhere Tue 19-Feb-13 10:31:44

Why can the 19 and 18 year old not move out?

I want more children but I'm waiting as I will need a bigger house and bigger car.. It's a joke! That she gets given an affordable home paid for by housing so really is free, when the rest of us fork out £100's/£1,000's a month for homes which are not big enough.

I'm glad she cannot have more children since she said if she could she would still have more her attitude stinks! If she really wanted 11 children and wanted to look out for them she would of got a job brought bunk beds for every room hell you can buy triple beds. If you had a 3 double bedroom house you could put 12 kids in two bedrooms.. Leaving a double for mum and dad or mum and dad have the livingroom and then its 4 kids per room.. Many people lived like that when they have no options. Benefits should not cover people's stupidity.

Cheaper to keep them in 1 3 bed with loads of bunk beds.. You no they will never leave that house the kids will have kids and stay at home and demand bigger and bigger homes.

tabulahrasa Tue 19-Feb-13 10:32:03

Well it can't be consensual if she was 14, even if he groomed her - she' was still a child.

I read it as coincidentally went to prison for something else, but as they didn't say what I'm now cynically wondering if it was for sex offences against her, if he was a thief or a drug dealer surely they'd be sensationalising that too? If he was convicted of something relating to her they'd not mention it in case it elicited sympathy for her.

This story is just being used and slanted to get morons all fired up about social housing. The Fail obviously hunted for the 'worst' example they could find; completely ignoring the fact that lots of families get houses built and adapted for them because they are working poor/have one or more family members with SN so need particular adaptations. But let's bash the poor instead of all the greedy bastards snapping up buy-to-let and wrecking the social housing market...

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 10:32:46

I always smirk at these people who are up in arms about new houses for large single parent families oh its terrible but suggest they apply for a council house and I bet some would clutch their pearls at the thought of a council house

whiteandyelloworchid Tue 19-Feb-13 10:32:58

and as for litter on here own back garden sorry but theres no excuse for that, ok maybe they can't get the fenced fix, yes it cost money, or time to get the council round to fix it

but ffs dont leave litter lying round your garden

Rhiannon86 Tue 19-Feb-13 10:33:02

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

DowntonTrout Tue 19-Feb-13 10:33:10

I have nothing against people being on benefits. I have been on benefits myself.

Unfortunately it is extreme examples like this that get people's backs up and provoke the view that those on benefits are scroungers. This woman is irresponsible at best, there are all sorts of issues going on.

While I agree the state must ensure the children are adequately housed it makes a mockery of genuine people who have limited themselves to 2.4 children or whatever as they only have the means to support that size of family. People are struggling on benefits but working families, taxpayers, are also struggling and just keep getting stung for one thing after another and seeing stories like this just makes me think that it is abuse of the social system at its worst.

Dawndonna Tue 19-Feb-13 10:33:41

Yeah, the Mail always print the exact truth of the matter, don't they.
biscuit

I don't understand how people can get aerated about this.

There are statistically very, very few families like this - they are at one very tiny end of a bell curve.

Stories like this just bring out the pious, judgemental bitch in all of us.

Rhiannon86 Tue 19-Feb-13 10:35:49

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

JassyRadlett Tue 19-Feb-13 10:36:25

Honestly? The article can't decide how old she is or how many grandkids she's got. I wouldn't give anything else in there much weight. It sounds like a sensible solution by the council - affordable homes built as part of a development, two three-bed homes freed up while this family moves into a more suitable house.

She may not sound pleasant, but the welfare system doesn't get into who's deserving and who's not. The 'deserving poor' is an outdated and abhorrent concept when used to determine who gets help, because it's inevitably based on external value judgements. And it's pretty breathtaking how comfortable people are to punish children for the perceived sins of the parents, then moan because generations are stuck in a poverty trap.

Increasingly the label 'politically correct' seems to mean 'giving a shit about other people'.

catsmother Tue 19-Feb-13 10:36:46

Not surprisingly housing is a very sensitive subject.

And of course, if this has been reported correctly, that woman's appalling attitude is a scandal.

Make no mistake, she disgusts me, but IMO the larger scandal that people should be up in arms about - as opposed to criticising (albeit rightly) a minority of people who take the piss - is why there isn't a wholescale programme designed to ensure that all families - whatever their size - are housed in adequate properties. I wish I had the answer to the housing crisis but that is where people's fury should be directed. If everyone could afford a basic, properly maintained and secure home then I doubt this story would have caused quite so much outrage.

TheSecondComing Tue 19-Feb-13 10:36:54

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Rhiannon86 Tue 19-Feb-13 10:37:46

Message deleted by Mumsnet for breaking our Talk Guidelines. Replies may also be deleted.

Chattymummyhere Tue 19-Feb-13 10:38:19

She's not single she has a partner living with her. Surely one could work and still claim part benefits. Of course these stories get people's backs up there are 5 (6 if you include the 16year old) who could be working you can't tell me 4 working adults could not afford to support and provide for the whole family

frustratedworkingmum Tue 19-Feb-13 10:38:29

<yawn>

angelos02 Tue 19-Feb-13 10:39:21

It seems I am being unreasonable then. Ah well. I'd best get back to work. Sure as hell she won't.

MajaBiene Tue 19-Feb-13 10:40:09

Is she even a real person? Don't the Mail have form for using actors in these kind of stories?

I'm confused about several things in that article to be honest - does the house have 5 bedrooms or 6? Is she 36 or 37? Does she have 1 grandchild or 2?
Typical Daily Fail - so bus trying to blow a story out of proportion that they can't keep the little details consistent hmm

It is irresponsible of her to have continued to have children when she had no means of supporting them at all by herself (by that I mean no income other that state support), but as has already been mentioned, she is unlikely to be the only person in the country having a house built "for" her. These developments are happening all over - council tenants are simply being allocated houses in new developments that are more suitable than the ones they are currently living in.

RedHotRudieParts Tue 19-Feb-13 10:40:24

Blimey, she's gonna be screwed when the benefit cap comes in.

Well, these children need a home. I think the needs of these children far out-weights any ill thoughts people may have about their mum.

They are building homes for large families, 6 bedrooms, not 12, her children will still need to share. And I suppose when she no longer needs such a large home, she will have to downsize.

She is just a poor ignorant mum (thinking the house is built especially for her, it may seem that way, but I reckon she is just offered a large house that suit her needs) with poor judgement and possibly lacking in education and opportunities. She should be pitied, not scorned. Her children should have the same right as everybody else, to decent housing and as good a start in life as the rest of us.

Apparently our neighbours house can sleep as many as 10 people, as it is classified by the council as a 4 bed (3 beds, 1 dining room).

Most of our problems in society (jobs, adequate housing, the fucking economy ) can be solved by a MASS social house building programme.

But of course property 'fake' 'values' will then fall and the Tories want to protect their own interests so they won't do it.

Instead we get piece meal projects to protect voters.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 10:42:58

'I don't think 11 kids is ideal' must be the understatement of the century thesecondcoming! Have a pop at others who find this behaviour appalling (did she think about how she was to care for these children properly as she kept on having them?) but try and be a little more honest yourself.

And wtf is a clown car....?

Branleuse Tue 19-Feb-13 10:43:01

she could have a bloody castle and i still wouldn't want her life.

Lovelygoldboots Tue 19-Feb-13 10:43:45

I would like to see far more investment in social housing. Everyone should have a decent place to live and bring up their family. The fact that this isn't happening is down to years of piss poor govt policy. What really makes me angry is families living in terrible conditions in b&b, costing thousands when that money should be used to build houses and communities. Get angry by all means, but it is pointless getting angry at this woman.

Lottapianos Tue 19-Feb-13 10:44:01

' I also wonder abut how she came to have 11 kids... First one aged 14... That makes me sad, not angry.'

Agree TheSecondComing

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 10:44:20

she could have a bloody castle and i still wouldn't want her life.

^ ^ that

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 10:45:03

I do find it difficult reading threads like this sad

As soon as somebody, anybody, dares question the benefit system as being too generous then sarcasm and flinty accusations start flying.

Bring back the workhouses somebody said ironically over the page. How we jump from "I think it's unfair that ONE family gets an 11-bed house" to "Put them in a workhouse" God only knows.

so if someone if on benefits does that mean they should be sterilized so they can't have any more children?

No. Here's a shocking idea though - why don't the people who HAVE the children, the mother and the father, take responsibility to feed, clothe, house and provide for them?

Someone always brings up a hard luck tale and rightly so. I am pleased we have a welfare system. However, and respectfully, I wonder what the majority of you laying into the OP earn? I earn just above the threshold (£40,000) - no benefits, no help, no tax credits. I have to work full time and nursery fees when the time comes means that the majority of people on benefits are taking home a lot more than me (single parent.)

Fair enough if you've got two working parents on a solid salary, fair enough if you've got one on a good salary, fair enough if you're on a low salary as then you do at least get some help. But people like me lose out time and time again and I am sick of it and sick of being accused of being a Nazi, a Mr Bumble character or whatever when I say it's unfair. I say it's unfair because it bloody well IS unfair.

Lottapianos Tue 19-Feb-13 10:45:25

What Lovelygoldboots said. Such absolutely rubbish management of the whole situation.

NopeStillNothing Tue 19-Feb-13 10:45:33

I agree with others who have said that YES, she has been irresponsible and selfish to have 11 children with no means of support but what the hell can she do now? The children need a roof over their heads for goodness sake and £400,000 to house 12 people is not that ridiculous.
My issue is the fact that this woman was raped by a paedophile at 14 years old and yet the media has chosen to ignore this outrage completely. The system seems to have failed on many levels here!

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 10:46:01

I also think that this story has been covered by more reputable papers too so perhaps wise to read another 'version'. I am guessing that the bare bones of it are true.

cherrypez Tue 19-Feb-13 10:47:09

Really mixed feelings about this...I have 'lots' of kids, but work full time and own my house. Have people assumng I must be on benefits etc and it does piss me off. But the thing that REALLY upset me about this article was the arsehole who commented underneath that he was glad this 'rat' got cancer. She's a mum ffs, just a mum like the rest of us, what a wanker sad

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 10:49:15

Never ever read the DM comments under an article - the will to live will be lost shortly afterwards.

lockets Tue 19-Feb-13 10:49:23

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

germyrabbit Tue 19-Feb-13 10:50:02

yes will be really set off by a skip and a broken robin reliant out front wink

lockets Tue 19-Feb-13 10:51:13

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheSecondComing Tue 19-Feb-13 10:51:46

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

EllieArroway Tue 19-Feb-13 10:52:09

That this woman is an irresponsible, work-shy, seemingly rather unpleasant piece of work is not really in doubt. Of course she shouldn't have had so many children - you could argue that she shouldn't actually have had any given that she's never been in a position to adequately support a single one of them. Does she deserve a lovely big house? Nope.

But there's the little matter of her children - who have done NOTHING wrong by being born and who do not deserve to live in squalor, and face all of the difficulties that we know being inadequately housed often brings.

I don't care two hoots about her. She's only getting that house so that her children have a decent place to live. Do they deserve that? Yes. And I would be ashamed to be part of any society that didn't feel the same.

pashapasta Tue 19-Feb-13 10:53:08

In the MINUTE world, YABU. People can have as many children as they want without thinking how they will have sufficient funds to finance their lifestyle. We must not judge, just pay.

In the real world, YANBU. Of course it is not the chuldren's fault, but how, as a society have we got the the position where her lifestyle is acceptable. Awaiting flaming.

pashapasta Tue 19-Feb-13 10:53:08

In the MINUTE world, YABU. People can have as many children as they want without thinking how they will have sufficient funds to finance their lifestyle. We must not judge, just pay.

In the real world, YANBU. Of course it is not the chuldren's fault, but how, as a society have we got the the position where her lifestyle is acceptable. Awaiting flaming.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 10:54:38

I am pleased we have a welfare system. However, and respectfully, I wonder what the majority of you laying into the OP earn? I earn just above the threshold (£40,000) - no benefits, no help, no tax credits. I have to work full time and nursery fees when the time comes means that the majority of people on benefits are taking home a lot more than me (single parent

Thats just not true.

This won't just be the decision of the council, other agencies must be involved.

The house is for the Mother and her adult children/grandchildren, so there has to be reasons why there is that need to be housed together.

If there is they are probably saving the country a fortune by supporting each other, practically speaking.

I would not criticise any family who are supporting each other without the involvement of services, because working in SS, i know how much Social Care costs.

The movement of people under the "bedroom tax" away from family, will make SS costs soar, it is cheaper to have a level of unemployment and family care on hand.

TheSecondComing Tue 19-Feb-13 10:55:40

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

EllieArroway Tue 19-Feb-13 10:57:01

Here's a shocking idea though - why don't the people who HAVE the children, the mother and the father, take responsibility to feed, clothe, house and provide for them?

Yes. But what if they don't/won't? Do you consign the children to living in slums or being homeless? Let them go hungry & cold?

You seem to be under the impression that some of us are quite happy supporting other people's children. We're not - but we're willing to do so when necessary because - and here, in fact, is the shocking idea - we are human beings who give a shit about other people, particularly those who have done nothing wrong, like this woman's children.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 10:57:03

Ive not even read the article, Im sure it will be no different from all the others like that.

Shocked that her first child came when she was 14 after being raped by a 23 yr old, not shocked that the mail chose to gloss over that.

Morloth Tue 19-Feb-13 10:57:06

Because it is the lesser of two evils.

The alternative is forced contraception/abortion/adoption or watching children be homeless.

Better to float the occasional chancer IMO.

pinkhalf Tue 19-Feb-13 10:57:06

This story can also be found in the Guardian and the Telegraph. The basic facts are true.

Plainly she is stupid, irresponsible and feckless. I hope her children do better than she. While it looks like a privilege to some, its just a way of staying put, and never going anywhere. I wouldn't want her life.

And the benefit changes to come will really make it unbearable, so let us think of those kids. It will not be good for them, will it?

pashapasta Tue 19-Feb-13 10:59:12

If that was aimed at me, TSC, I am not angry at all with anyone. I am amazed that people can have so many children with means of supporting them. We would have liked another one but couldn't afford it, so we didn't.

Inertia Tue 19-Feb-13 10:59:41

She isn't being given it, she'll be renting it.

It isn't a mansion being built to her specifications- the plans in the article clearly show that it's part of a development, and presumably the council are matching families to appropriate housing. It won't have cost £400,000 to build - that's just the value that the DM have decided to use, perhaps based on valuations of other similar sized houses, probably houses that were never social housing stock. And it makes sense for councils to build houses to meet their housing obligations, especially as housing stocks have been depleted since the 'right-to-buy' came in. And TBH it makes sense to have a programme of building social housing during a recession- it provides housing, it provides jobs and keeps construction firms and associated trades in business, and it is a way of getting public money back into circulation.

No matter how irresponsible we think the parents are, as a society it is our responsibility to provide for children in need. It's much more cost-effective to have these children brought up by a parent than to place them in care. And by the way, why is it only the mother who is expected to carry the responsibility? Why isn't the DM castigating the fathers of each of these children, if they are not contributing financially or socially to the children's upbringing?

The 'first falls pregnant at 14 to man who ends up in prison' headline is a disgrace; she was a legally a child, legally she couldn't give consent - so how can it be acceptable for the DM to use this is a stick to beat her with? Perhaps that's actually why he went to prison?

If she genuinely think she gets to veto the house design she's deluded- however I always take DM reports with a pinch of salt.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 10:59:46

No one is angry at her for being poor thesecondcoming.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 10:59:52

What I find interesting is people who throw around words like 'politically correct' etc fail to offer an alternative solution

other than 'pay for your own kids' which is hardly an effective remedy since it wont happen

either she is housed - and her children live in safe uncrowded condition or what?

I get that people get very clenchy about it but it is what it is - social housing exist and people are allowed to use it - regardless of their personality faults or number of children

and I agree 100% with the comments about rape victims - this woman was pregnant at 14 to a 23 year old - I am guessing she didn't have the greatest start in life - I wouldn't swap with her for any sized house

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 11:00:21

Amber - they bloody well do sad (the 'bloody' aimed at my frustration of the system, not yourself.) The cost of nursery fees means that I am afraid they do. Income support, CTC, council tax benefit, housing benefit.

Sorry, just knackered and it's a sore spot for me.

Inertia Tue 19-Feb-13 11:03:04

Oh lots of cross posts but especially with TSC who has put it much more succinctly than me.

Viviennemary Tue 19-Feb-13 11:05:14

Perhaps if the law did something about 23 year old men who think it is perfectly OK to have sex with an underage girl, this woman would not be in the situation she is today. There is a law against underage sex though you wouldn't think so. As it never seems to be applied.

AmberSocks Tue 19-Feb-13 11:06:08

I dont think it matters she has 11 children,its her attitude towards it really,and theres a good chance her kids wil be similar,the apple never falls far fromm the tree and and all of that.

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 11:07:08

I like how they managed to get a photo of a trampoline to complete the 'council house' scene.

As others have said, I wouldn't like her life either.

As an individual she is selfish and entitled. I feel sorry for her children if this is the attitude she will educate her children with.

As sad as the circumstances are I too think it is good that she can no longer have more children. I say this for the sake of the children she has already. She has been blessed with as many as she has already got. Bringing more into the world just wouldn't be fair.

ChairmanWow Tue 19-Feb-13 11:07:34

YY Elllie. What would other posters have the system do with all her kids? They're here now and deserve a roof over their heads.

Am a bit fed up of the moany 'well I had to work for it' brigade. Yup, me too. Child care costs a fortune, yadda yadda yadda. But you know what, this woman's case is an extreme, focussed on by the DM to scapegoat benefit claimants. The typical benefit claimant (esp housing benefit) is actually in work, usually low paid and part-time. The subsidising of low pay by the taxpayer is a much bigger problem than the odd person who has never heard of contraception. You want to get pissed off, get pissed off at Tesco and friends who pay poorly and let the taxpayer top up the rest while paying their shareholders fat dividends.

issimma Tue 19-Feb-13 11:07:56

really should learn my lesson about clicking on DM links. What a piss poor non-story. Love how the family getting lots of natural light is presented - how very dare they? grin And 'dole queen'? What about her partner? Gah.
And what pretty much everyone else upthread has said - what other options are there?

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 11:08:30

She may well have been 'blessed' but those children cannot be described as 'blessed'.

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 11:10:50

Exactly country which is why she shouldn't have any more. Nature has taken care of that as no one else has the right to.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 11:11:45

Yes - thankfully.

manicinsomniac Tue 19-Feb-13 11:11:55

This is a woman who:
* at 36, looks more like 46
* was, if not raped or sexually assualted, at least groomed into sex as a child
* went through pregnancy and child birth 3 times before most children have even left the classroom behind them.
* almost certainly has no qualifications, educational satisfaction or job prospects.
* may never have experienced going out to work to a job she enjoys
* probably has nothing to do all day except clean the house and look after a toddler
* is potentially passing on that sad lifestyle to many or all of her children.
* lives in run down, overcrowded accomodation
* probably has very low self confidence and self belief
* has probably been expolited and had her words twisted for a seedy newspaper.

so she gets a new council build with just about enough space for all her kids in a nicer area. Good for her.

She'll have a better house than me but everything else in her life ... hell, no. I wouldn't swap my life with hers for anything.

issimma Tue 19-Feb-13 11:13:53

The children being housed adequately - warmth, space, etc - is probably a key step in ensuring they have a more blessed future. Somewhere they can feel safe, do their homework, not be surrounded by shit as long as they don't start littering the garden wink.

somebloke123 Tue 19-Feb-13 11:15:39

I don't have an answer either.

It's highly irresponsible to have children that you can't support, just assuming that the state will step in. (I'm not talking here about people whose circumstances change through no fault of their own.) I have little sympathy for the woman.

But what's the alternative? Put them out on the streets? I guess some of the children could be put into care but (a) it's highly likely that they would fare worse there than living with a loving - if highly flawed -parent and (b) this might well cost the taxpayer more anyway.

It's easy to pick on extreme cases like this and also easy to characterise benefits dependents as feckless. No doubt some are, but benefits dependency is really a culture that has to be changed rather than an easy opportunity for preaching about the "undeserving poor".

kimorama Tue 19-Feb-13 11:17:51

It would be if it was true. Councils have an obligation to house parents with children (If it was just adults it is rather different) I get more upset by the rich than the poor.
Our set up is so unequal do be barely credible.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 11:18:35

I do agree with that last post Amber - the amount of children are to an extent immaterial.

The problem is that as far as I can see money has been flung at this problem for years now and it has made very little difference: if anything, the problem has excaberated. I am not actually a believer in the old "they had a baby to get a house" stereotype, or that most families on benefits set out to spend their life on benefits.

I think a "typical" case is a teenage girl who does moderately well at school, probably with quite a lot of pushing from teachers (magic 5 A*-C targets) and goes on to do some form of further education. In many cases, the spoon-feeding environment of school has meant the students are ill-equipped to deal with the more independent attitude demanded from them from college and after meeting a boy at college, becomes pregnant, often at the age of 17/18/19. The pregnancy isn't planned but it is celebrated. A second child often follows the first fairly promptly and it seems that it's that second baby that pushes most couples to their limits and the relationship falls apart, leaving the girl with two tiny ones. Obviously, she didn't plan any of this and nor does she plan to be on benefits forever and makes plans to go to college or university after her youngest is at school. Only by then she's met someone else, or she realises that the job she had such hopes for actually doesn't pay that well.

I have a lot of friends who that exact story applies to, give or take a few changes. They are all "nice" girls. None of them meant to end up on benefits long term, but they all have. They all, from time to time, get fired up with something and start at college or university but then lose interest. And the truth is, they have nice lives. There isn't a LOT of money, sure, but there's certainly enough and they live close to each other, and to their mums and sisters and cousins. The fathers stay in touch: child maintenance is touch and go as the father's work is touch and go but they'll give the mums £50 when they can afford it and take the kids to McDonalds when they can't.

I have wished many times I'd made different choices, and I really do mean that. If I could live my life again, I know I'd do it "their" way.

pashapasta Tue 19-Feb-13 11:19:57

Maybe a better OP would be AIBU to wonder how as a society we have got to the position where it is acceptable for people to have many children which they can not support and ask what is being done to break this cycle.

pashapasta Tue 19-Feb-13 11:19:57

Maybe a better OP would be AIBU to wonder how as a society we have got to the position where it is acceptable for people to have many children which they can not support and ask what is being done to break this cycle.

TheSecondComing Tue 19-Feb-13 11:20:01

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

FellatioNels0n Tue 19-Feb-13 11:26:17

I don't have any comment to make on the story itself but I did have to laugh at the neighbour's comment 'It's a disgrace - she treat her womb like a clown car.'

I'm not entirely sure what's that's meant to mean but it's hilarious. grin

KobayashiMaru Tue 19-Feb-13 11:28:23

I don't get why the adult children are counted, along with the grandchildren? They could all move out, then she would have 7 to be counted, and only need a 4 bed.

My cousin is one of 13, they had a 4 bed house. no-one needs a massive house.

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 11:30:22

I earn just above the threshold (£40,000) - no benefits, no help, no tax credits. I have to work full time and nursery fees when the time comes means that the majority of people on benefits are taking home a lot more than me

Can you provide some evidence to back up that BS rather extraordinary assertion? Also, I don't think people take home housing benefit, it just goes straight to the landlord, doesn't it?

As a single person earning well above the average salary, your post reeks of self-pity.

Sallyingforth Tue 19-Feb-13 11:32:11

Kobayashi
The adult children are staying until they have each produced sufficient children of their own to qualify for their own houses. Then the cycle will repeat.

(yes I know that sounds bitter, but it's what does happen)

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 11:32:53

mable I think that is a little harsh. The poster has said that they are frazzled and that this hits a nerve.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 11:34:06

sallyingforth this does seem to be what happens in situations like this, sadly. Low aspirations breed low aspirations.

Flatbread Tue 19-Feb-13 11:34:51

Why isn't this woman and her grown-up kids working? Ok, if the council gives her a house, why isn't she asked to do a job in return? It coukd be a volunteer-type one, such as picking up dog-shit from the streets or picking up litter from parks in-between normal council cleaning?

ElliesWellies Tue 19-Feb-13 11:34:59

It's just another Daily Mail rant article. As far as I know the council do not build homes to order for families. If they know a family is moving into a new-build house then they will consult them over choice of kitchen cupboards, flooring etc. before fitting. Also don't like the snide comments, e.g. the family 'claim' the partner is unemployed (suggesting he is working cash-in-hand), the woman 'says she is married' (suggesting she is lying).

Having said that, she sounds over-entitled. They are not going to just build her another house if she doesn't like this one.

Isityouorme Tue 19-Feb-13 11:35:09

Councils should not be building 6 bed houses .... I can't afford to live in a big house and I get sweet FA help so why the hell should she get a brand new house for free .... It takes the piss.

Mumsyblouse Tue 19-Feb-13 11:36:57

Although people assume that having this house will be the start of a better future for the children, it's not very likely, in our local council estate where I grew up, we are now on third-generation families who have never worked, and having an ok council house doesn't stop that unfortunately.

PeneloPeePitstop Tue 19-Feb-13 11:37:55

Still some arseholes around here who believe that children should be made to pay for the actions of their parent, then.

They didn't ask to exist. They have had four years of being I adequately housed, but they need punishing still more, yes?

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 11:38:13

Also, I don't think people take home housing benefit, it just goes straight to the landlord, doesn't it?

No, it doesn't. And in the case of my ex tenant she claimed it and spent it for three months. HB will not address the issue until the claimant is in 8 weeks arrears. Only then do they start making investigations into the issue. F**king nightmare.

sashh Tue 19-Feb-13 11:39:16

Did anybody actually read the article?

The council are not paying for the house, it is a housing association house.

Don't worry, once the bedroom tax comes in she will only be entitled to a three bed.

currentbuns Tue 19-Feb-13 11:39:53

The woman's attitude seems designed to rile. I can certainly see why many people, especially those who struggle to find adequate housing, or who cannot afford a second or third child, would find this galling. But I doubt many people really envy her- who would honestly want to be in her position, living her life?

Presumably the woman's benefits will be cut under the new cap, and her children are likely to suffer as a result - irrespective of their nice, new Eco-home.

CogitoErgoSometimes Tue 19-Feb-13 11:39:55

I'll be very disappointed if, when finished, it doesn't look like a shoe ....? grin

No one is angry at her for being poor

The DM are, otherwise we would be seeing the same caliber of reporting about another extended family living for free in Central London and they get private transport, holidays etc, all provided for by the state.

In the words of John Bishop "Being a scouser, i excuse the unemployed, doing a bit of cash in hand, for extra's, but i'm glad there's no royality sitting in the best seats for free, cos, that lot totally take the piss".

I don't get why the adult children are counted

It is no-ones business why they are, accept the agencies involved, but there will be reasons.

Glad to see that ITV was taken off the air for the second showing of this report for breaking guidelines.

People may not want the workhouses back, but many would like the stocks, so that they can be even more public in their condemnation and mocking.

KobayashiMaru Tue 19-Feb-13 11:42:15

Are they inadequately housed though? They have 2 3bed houses knocked together...how are they not housed well enough already?

Isityouorme Tue 19-Feb-13 11:42:59

Why should people have kids which they have no means of providing for, and I am talking 11kids, not struggling with 2or 3. This woman probably gets every benefit under the sun yet contributes nothing towards society. Having two houses knocked together might have been a pain but if you ave a large amity which you are incapable of supporting then deal with it. I want 3 bathrooms and more bedrooms but no one except me and DH is going help us get it.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 11:43:02

mable - you're right, I earn above the threshold but the key is, there is only me.

If I earned £20,000 and had a DP who also earned £20,000, perhaps you'd see what I meant? That sounds really arsey and challenging and I don't want it to grin it was meant in an inquiring sort of tone, not an aggressive one.

HB doesn't go straight to the landlord - or it doesn't in our area, I know that because my brother rents out his flat and hasn't been paid rent for weeks.

Anyway, that is beside the point. Trust me, I DO count my blessings and I am grateful for what I earn. However, I do work very hard for it and it would be nice to reap SOME rewards for it rather than endless doom-and-gloom, life will be like this 'til you're 68 then the house you've paid the mortgage off on will be sold to pay for your care leaving your beloved DCs to build up huge debt if they go to university.

Meanwhile, other people don't have these cares, or at least so it seems, and I know nobody knows quite what someone else's life is like and so on but I'm knackered, I'm lonely, as I feel like all I do is work grin and I am being a bit self pitying, yes, I'll admit to that charge. I'm not trying to be a pain in the arse, it's just I do feel at the moment that I work very hard for very little.

Thanks countrykitten smile I'm not a bitch, I promise, I'd never see children starve, but ... you know!

Flatbread Tue 19-Feb-13 11:44:03

they will consult them over choice of kitchen cupboards, flooring etc. before fitting

Why? My tenants who pay out of their own pocket to rent don't get a choice on flooring etc. when I refurbish.

Why should council tenants, many of who are not paying rent out of their own pocket, get to choose cupboards and flooring?

You cannot get the fun part of home ownership (choosing flooring etc.) without the painful part, e.g., working, earning and being responsible for the mortgage.

lougle Tue 19-Feb-13 11:46:30

Flatbread, because that's standard. They won't get carpet - it'll just be floor tiling. New builds always consult the tenant and give a choice of 3 worktops/cupboards,etc...it's not luxury, just a case of 'which of these do you want'?

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 11:47:06

they are NOT COUNCIL TENANTS ...just saying. Most people in social housing provide their own flooring

"they will consult them over choice of kitchen cupboards, flooring etc. before fitting"

That is standard in HA house, you pick your choice of colour and the finish, when getting new kitchens and bathrooms.

I have a HA house, but i "pay out of my own pocket". Some of us in Social Housing do work, you know.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 11:48:33

HoHo - that's happened to my brother as well, and you're right, it is a nightmare. Hope you manage to get it sorted x

That was to flat.

SuckingDiesel Tue 19-Feb-13 11:54:04

Not all tenantes get a choice of kitchens etc.

For new build social housing or planned refurbishment of old housing stock, the tenant will be presented with maybe 3 or 4 choices of kitchen type/floor covering to choose from. They are not given free reign to choose whatever they choose.

If you are not the first tenant of a new build, or are not the tenant at the time of refurbishment, you take what you get when you are allocated a property. Kitchens are expected to last around 20 years. If you are allocated a property with a 10 year old kitchen then you're living with that kitchen until the next planned refurbishment

SuckingDiesel Tue 19-Feb-13 11:55:04

Sorry for nonsensical typing.

Hoho, same happened to us, it was an absolute fucking nightmare.

tabulahrasa Tue 19-Feb-13 11:56:39

They don't get some sort of bespoke kitchen, it's a case of - which of these three finishes do you prefer? Do you want a cupboard over here or would you prefer to leave it empty for an appliance... That's about it and it's what all councils and HAs do if they know who the tenant will be.

Hoho, sorry meant to say, we made them pay it back at £20 a week, it took forever.

SoWhatIfImWorkingClass Tue 19-Feb-13 11:58:57

God these stories are so boring. The fact is her children are here now, living and breathing and need somewhere to live. I'm not going to get all pouty about it and say things like, "My taxes pay for that. Boo hoo hoo."

Catchingmockingbirds Tue 19-Feb-13 11:59:09

Of course it is irresponsible of her to have had so many children despite not being able to provide for them. I'm only now in a position where I can afford another child, 6 years after having dc1. I could have kept on having children though just like this woman, and rely on the benefit system but I didn't want to.

Anyone here could have went down her path and done the same, have child after child with no means to provide for them aside from relying on the government. Then after 5 years of being very inadequately housed in overcrowded and unsafe accommodation, hope the council will invest in building more social housing so you can move into more suitable housing. Then once your youngest child reaches the age of 5 (I actually think this age has drastically been reduced but am not sure of the amended age limit), be moved from income support onto job seekers allowance where you may be told to go on volunteer work placements and will be encouraged to get a job despite having little or no qualifications or work experience due to spending the majority of your life having and raising a large number of children. Then have the threat of bedroom tax as the children get older, and other benefit caps, as you skrimp and save to get by on benefits and find it extremely difficult to escape the situation as you've not much to offer an employer.

It doesn't sound like a situation I'd like to live in, even if I was offered a big affordable house to rent, and it's no wonder that extreme stories like this are in the minority.

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:00:02

have a HA house, but i "pay out of my own pocket". Some of us in Social Housing do work, you know.

^ ^ this,

angelos02 Tue 19-Feb-13 12:00:35

So the message being sent out is, work hard, struggle to cobble together enough money for a mortgage for a 2/3 bed. Or, don't work, knock out a load of kids and you'll be handed much better than this, for doing nothing.

Flatbread Tue 19-Feb-13 12:00:49

Well lougle, why?

I don't provide luxury worktops or cupboards to my tenants either, but it would never cross my mind to ask them which ones they want...?

And I am pretty sure most other private landlords don't either.

It is strange that a tenant who works, pays market rates, has to go through hoops of credit reference checks etc. to secure a rental in the private market has less rights and choices than a person who rents from the council.

In my opinion, a council tenant who rents should be no better off than someone who rents in the private market.

And yes, private rental regulation needs to be improved to protect tenants, rather than reducing council tenancy security. But no one will argue that private tenants should be offered a choice of fittings when a place is built or refurbished. So why offer it to council tenants?

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:02:24

Luxury worktops PAH yes cos HA and social housing has fantastic worktops and cupboard in their houses yep all marble and granite going on there grin

I dont think you have to want those children not to have what they need at all, they need a large house so they should have one absolutely.

I also think its fine to say that it is irresponsible of anyone to have so many children if they are not paying for them, and many people have to stop at one or two because they simply cannot afford anymore so if they want to be somewhat pissed of by that thats fine. Its certainly not benefit bashing at all and its not black and white, of its fine, its not fine.

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:04:30

and why dont you offer your tenants a choice out of interest you could say I am thinking of this or this which one do you prefer

Flatbread Tue 19-Feb-13 12:05:15

To make it clear, I might be choosing between three cheapo worktops, but would not ask a tenant which one they would prefer.

I am fairly sure that majority of private landlords are like me, and our tenants are not given the choice when we refurbish.

So why should a council tenant get a choice?

It is a bit of a non-issue, but it does bug me grin

I dont think people are saying that angelos, but you also need to bare in mind how many people are squashed into inadequate housing, lots of people are in far too small housing just having normal size families.

littlemisssarcastic Tue 19-Feb-13 12:07:44

angelos Do you really envy this woman her lifestyle?
Haven't you heard about the benefit cuts which are going to be implemented shortly?
FWIW I feel dreadfully sorry for this family. When the benefit cuts begin to affect her, her life will be nothing more than existing and her children will have to bear the brunt of their mothers choices even though the children didn't make the choices the mother did.
If i was in this woman's position, i would be terribly worried about how I was going to manage in the next few years. sad

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 12:07:54

they aren't council tenants ...again

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 12:08:42

In fairness, and despite my earlier rant, I do think we need a lot more social housing and I don't see the issue in people wanting a home they pay to live in to look a certain way (obviously assuming they aren't trashing it or similar.) I get a lot of pleasure (saddo!) in choosing wallpaper, carpets and flooring i like - why should people be denied this because they rent?

squeakytoy Tue 19-Feb-13 12:11:03

social housing is the current terminology for council housing, it all boils down to the same thing..

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:11:52

I dont understand if a private landlord is putting a new kitchen in the house people are renting why wouldn't they give them a choice or 1 or 2 work tops or cupboards they live and pay rent afterall, it is all to do with giving people choice just because they dont pay a mortgage doesn't mean they dont have personal taste on things, <shrug>

gordy yes we understand they are not council they are HA it really is the same sort of thing it is all social housing

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 12:12:02

they are housing association tenants

lougle Tue 19-Feb-13 12:12:43

Flatbread because Council/HA tenancies are not like private rental. They are secure tenancies which means that they have the right to treat the house as their home for as long as they live there.

I have a Council tenancy. I have lived here almost one year. Once my tenancy becomes secure next month, I have the right to live here until I die. I have the right to improve the property. That means that (as long as I inform and have permission from the council, which cannot reasonably be refused) I can:

Extend the property
Add a conservatory
Have a loft conversion
Change the internal layout of the house
Change the kitchen, bathroom, etc.
Add or remove features

The only proviso is that the council can ask us to revert it to its original state prior to ending the tenancy. Having said that, they would only do that if someone trashed the house.

Not only that, but if I choose to do those things, then for each improvement, the council will pay me up to £3000 per improvement.

angelos02 Tue 19-Feb-13 12:13:12

I don't envy her. But sitting at work, snowed under with stuff to do, while struggling to buy a house within my & DH's means, I find it a bonkers system.

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 12:13:51

I have no comment on the story other than to re-iterate what most other people have said about not punishing children for their mother's problems and that I find it impossible to feel either envy or anger towards her. It strikes me as a pretty miserable existence, I doubt a new house is going to change that for her.

And can I just add that as a lone parent (not through choice) I can assure you that I earn far far less than £40k a year, despite the fact that I do actually work as well. I'm sorry you are feeling so down about your situation but please don't peddle this kind of crap to make yourself feel better. It does more damage than you know.

(I went back to work when my DS was 9 mo, wonder if that deserves an exclamation mark hmm )

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 12:13:51

I stand corrected about the HB, thanks.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 12:14:10

so rent - you have the same choices as her - if your income is low you can claim housing benefit

PearlyWhites Tue 19-Feb-13 12:14:37

Maybe you could buy her a goat as a housewarming gift.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 12:14:39

mrsjay what a weird suggestion! Tenants may change over time - is flatbread to refurb every time this happens? Her property, her choice I would have thought.

This debate is simlilar to those over immigration - voice any concern and one is automatically branded a racist. I do think that political debate is 'growing up' with the immigration thing and it can be mentioned in public now without the debate being shut down completely. Maybe debates about the benefit culture will follow suit but on MN it appears that one cannot express concern about the way in which this person lives funded by the state whilst also caring about what happens to the children involved. Express concern and be branded heartless. It is a bit juvenile really.

Catchingmockingbirds Tue 19-Feb-13 12:16:30

flatbread because social housing tenants will be in their property for longer than someone in a private let as it is a secure tenancy.

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:16:47

mrsjay what a weird suggestion! Tenants may change over time - is flatbread to refurb every time this happens? Her property, her choice I would have thought.

I dont think it is so weird i cant imagine refurb every year or so if you have a secure tenant then why not ask for their input

slug Tue 19-Feb-13 12:16:52

Ask yourself what choices a woman who had her first child at 14 has? This is someone who, by virtue of her age when she had her first child, was a victim of sexual assault. She was a child. And she continued to have children while still a child.

Rather than blame her for choices which, in retrospect, she didn't actually have, should we not be questioning the system that allowed a 14 year old to have a baby then keep on having babies? I don't imagine she had much in the way of an education, nor I suspect, many employment prospects once you get to 18 with 3 or more children already. But I guess it's easier to blame a woman who was pregnant repeatedly before she was at the age of consent than to blame the "men" who took advantage of a vulnerable girl.

<<dons feminist hard hat and exits>>

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 12:16:53

no people are asking for alternative solutions - no sensible ones are forth coming - ergo housing her 11 kids in decent accommodation seems fair ...

thebody Tue 19-Feb-13 12:17:02

Joey Maynard managed 11 children and added one adopter and 4 wards.

Easy peasy!!! Sorry in the chalet school again!!

alemci Tue 19-Feb-13 12:17:17

she is a silly irresponsible woman with badly dyed hair. I feel sorry for her children with a role model like her. Her only 'talent' seems to produce children.

Yes it is unfair on people who cannot afford to have a bigger family due to rent/mortgage concerns but I don't think I would want her lifestyle and small children under my feet.

she is being given her moment of fame and is saying stupid things which make her look big, worthy and important which she certainly isn't.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 12:17:26

But chatty

" She's not single she has a partner living with her. Surely one could work and still claim part benefits. Of course these stories get people's backs up there are 5 (6 if you include the 16year old) who could be working you can't tell me 4 working adults could not afford to support and provide for the whole family"

There are NO jobs, not anywhere, not at all, not ever. FGS, how can you not KNOW this?? * wring hands and weeps for the goats*

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 12:18:11

people with silly hair get free goats shocker hmm

MrsDeVere Tue 19-Feb-13 12:18:35

I went into a supermarket today. The first thing I saw was a bank of screaming tabloid headlines about this woman.

I mean ffs. Front page news? Really?

My taxes are paying the housing costs for bigger scroungers than this woman. People who live in real mansions. Real luxury.

And they aint council tenants.

Bloody Daily Fail.

I am sure it will change very soon though as benefits are going to be capped to 3 kids.

I really worry about these families when this comes in as it's the children who will suffer.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 12:19:42

There are plenty of people about with badly dyed hair...relevant?

EllieArroway Tue 19-Feb-13 12:20:53

Express concern and be branded heartless. It is a bit juvenile really

Quote the post where anyone has been "branded heartless". You've been asked what your alternative suggestion is to giving this woman a big enough house for her children to live in.

It's all very well going off on one about the benefits culture (and/or immigration) but unless you're suggesting viable alternatives then it's nothing more than a rant, is it? Now that is what is juvenile.

angelos02 Tue 19-Feb-13 12:21:24

Schro well the families will have to, shock horror, provide for their OWN kids.

squeakytoy Tue 19-Feb-13 12:22:35

"so rent - you have the same choices as her - if your income is low you can claim housing benefit"

Do you really think it is that simple?

Most private landlords do not accept Housing Benefit.

My stepdaughter and her child have been living in a shithole of a DSS bed and breakfast for nearly a year now because she is not classed as a priority for being housed. No doubt if she got pregnant again she would go higher up on the list for getting a place, but she is capable of using contraception and would rather not bring another child into the world for someone else to support.

Also, how many of those 11 children that the woman in the article has will go on to put much back into society? My guess would be none. They will follow in their mothers footsteps and keep the ever increasing drain on the economy going.. perhaps if being rehoused every time you recklessly have another child was stopped and you had to live in an overcrowded house, some people might think twice before having more children than they can afford.

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:23:37

I was a wee bit bored so I read the article it is hardly a mansion is it, there is houses like that near me normal 3/4 bedroom houses hers just has another few rooms and bathrooms can you imagine 1 bathroom for 11 children shock

Flatbread Tue 19-Feb-13 12:23:48

Bloody hell, Lougle, that is a sweet deal indeed!

I would love to have someone pay me to extend my property and add a conservatory...

I am happy for you though grin

Angels What kind of job do you think you would need to support 11 kids? A fucking good one and there's no way this person will be able to do that.

Can you imagine the childcare costs of working?

It's not the kids fault she can't keep her legs shut.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 12:25:35

As a social housing tenant she wont have housing benefit paid to her directly.

secretofcrickleyhall sorry, are you saying you actually don't yet have children/nursery fees to worry about? I read it at first as you being weary and fed up with the expense?

squeakytoy Tue 19-Feb-13 12:26:05

"Rather than blame her for choices which, in retrospect, she didn't actually have, should we not be questioning the system that allowed a 14 year old to have a baby then keep on having babies?"

Contraception?

Of course she had choices. She could have chosen not to keep getting pregnant.

angelos02 Tue 19-Feb-13 12:26:21

schro I couldn't afford to have 11 kids, so I don't have them. Odd that.

RedwingOnFire Tue 19-Feb-13 12:26:44

And why can't working people afford something costing that much? Because we're getting squeezed for every last penny by the rich and powerful time and again, but yes, let's focus on the little things that are used as a smokescreen.

But the damage is done, she's had all those kids in a system that will support them. If the cap had been there before she might not have had them but now it's the children who will suffer.

littlemisssarcastic Tue 19-Feb-13 12:28:19

Well either the mother or her partner are going to have to find work before long.
I'm not sure it's possible for this family to live on £500 a week without the DC suffering a lot. sad

RedwingOnFire Tue 19-Feb-13 12:28:39

We can't afford a house, so what. I know exactly why we can't and it's not because of what the RICH & POWERFUL media owners want us to think it's because of.

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 12:29:31

I find it a bonkers system

so if you found yourself unemployed, you would do what exactly?

LittleMiss Exactly. sad Some of her children will be grown up though, going by the age she had her first the oldest should be around 22.

ksrwr Tue 19-Feb-13 12:29:54

its not for the woman though is it, its for the kids. personally i'm happy for them to have that house, anything to improve the quality of life for children is a winner in my book

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 12:30:22

Also, how many of those 11 children that the woman in the article has will go on to put much back into society? My guess would be none

Thats just a guess so doesn't mean much in real terms, who knows with good teaching and decent living conditions, those children may do reasonably well at school, unfair to write them off at such a young age.

I know people who have grown up in difficult circumstances who have gone on to do ok for themselves, in fact Ive read lots of posts from people on MN saying similar.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 12:30:22

countrykitten - completely agree.

Randall - I'm not going to apologise for having a well paid job. I am grateful for what I have, but on the other hand, I haven't always had it and have had to work very hard to get to where I am and I still do have to work very hard. I haven't always been on £40,000 - have obtained a few promotions to get to that position.

In the meantime, my pay is frozen. Pension contributions are up. I'll have to work until I'm 68, and given we aren't a long lived family that's a scary thought. Fuel costs are rocketing, and all in all Britain just looks bleak from where I am standing.

I'm not moaning about my own circumstances, exactly, although I would love to work a little less in the future and spend more time with children - that isn't an option though so just got to grin and get on with it - but can you not appreciate that (it feels) I am making sacrifice after sacrifice as (it feels) as if to fund people like the person in this article, the government are coming after Middle England time and time again, and as someone who is in Middle England by the skin of her teeth - well, it is depressing.

lockets Tue 19-Feb-13 12:30:31

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsDeVere Tue 19-Feb-13 12:31:03

Innit hmm

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:32:00

because if the adult children are living with their mother then the council or HA wouldnt need to rehouse them . so they stay on as dependants so it saves money,

Lockets It's not mysogynistic. hmm I would say the same about her partner(s).

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 12:32:30

I have not ranted neither have I 'gone off on one' about immigration or the benefits culture EllieArroway. I have noticed though some rather cutting and sarky posts which have been intended to close down any debate and make people who feel that there could be an issue here to discuss feel uncomfortable about doing so.

Perhaps you should read the whole thread including what I have posted to gain more of an understanding.

dashoflime Tue 19-Feb-13 12:33:25

‘It is a nightmare because you can’t keep an eye on the children in the other house and there’s only one door between them which is a fire risk.’

This is the reason she has to be moved

Seems reasonable enough. The council have a duty to house in safe conditions.
Its good they are building larger properties as there is currently a shortage of these in the housing stock.

As others have said she has not been "given" the house. She is renting it. Someone else will rent it when her tenancy ends.

Flatbread Tue 19-Feb-13 12:33:30

Redwing,

I think the squeeze is on both ends. Bankers, useless twits like David Nicholson etc. need to be publicly scorned and preferably jailed.

This baby-factory woman and others like her that are milking the benefits system need to be publicly scorned and put to work.

In general, whether you are rich or poor, anyone who 'plays' the system egregiously should be punished.

I won't excuse her from public approbation just because others have gotten away with it.

lougle Tue 19-Feb-13 12:34:18

Nooo they don't do that, Flatbread grin

IF someone adds a conservatory to the property, they may get up to £3k towards it if they then leave the property.

Not paying for it to be done grin

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 12:34:52

I agree with countrykitten (again) and with Flatbread

RedwingOnFire Tue 19-Feb-13 12:35:16

It's the politics of resentment. Why resent those with LESS than you. It makes no sense. Why not resent those who don't pay living wages for their workforce and yet award themselves big bonuses? etc. etc. etc. But no, be resentful of someone without the same opportunities. Makes perfect sense hmm

So has anyone come up with another solution that isn't "bonkers" that doesn't rely on time travel so she can go back and have less kids?

" Here's a shocking idea though - why don'tthe people who HAVE the children, the mother and the father, take responsibility to feed, clothe, house and provide for them"

Given that she was a child herself when she had her first child, my thoughts would be she never stood a chance. Yes she's made bad decisions since I'm sure but she presumably had to grow up very quickly.

RedwingOnFire Tue 19-Feb-13 12:36:47

"baby-factory" please, reduce her to an object hmm

There are very FEW "milking the benefits system" and for FAR FAR less than those at the top who milk the tax system.

^"So has anyone come up with another solution that isn't "bonkers" that doesn't rely on time travel so she can go back and have less kids?
"^

^^That.

bequiasweet Tue 19-Feb-13 12:37:07

I'm sure this is a stupid question, but I've never been able to get my head round how people with lots of children can afford to rent even a housing association property. I know they're a bit cheaper than private accommodation but can't be that much cheaper.

ClimbingPenguin Tue 19-Feb-13 12:37:48

Systems should be/have been put in place to help her when she was a lot younger. It is not fair to attack her for the way things have turned out years down the line, it is society's fault as well.

FWIW my mum had 5, me at 14 and three children by the time she as 18, 'given' a council house i.e. the single mothers the daily mail hate. My youngest sibling is 19, none of had children when we were in our teens. Only two of us currently have children, apart from the youngest (who is working part time and looking for more work) we all work full time and never relied on the state. Oh and I have a PhD. Don't write off the children.

Flatbread Tue 19-Feb-13 12:37:53

Disapprobation, I meant.

Agree with country kitten (on lots of threads, it seems) smile

Redwing You might think differently if you had known someone exactly like this.

The one I know definitely does milk the system.

squeakytoy Tue 19-Feb-13 12:38:52

bequia, because they get their rent paid by Housing Benefit..

dashoflime Tue 19-Feb-13 12:40:43

On the wider issue:

Yes, it is a problem that council housing is only available to a minority and that it is sometimes better than housing available on the private market.

Yes, it can lead to a contradiction where very poor people who the council have a duty to house- end up living in housing that meets a good basic standard, whereas workers who "should" be better off are living in slum conditions in the private sector.

This is of course, caused by the selling off of council housing under Thatcher.

Council Housing was originally intended to be a widely available alternative to the private sector for working and lower middle class people. The availability of decent housing would not only be good for the tenants but would also act as competition for private landlords and (along with rent caps) and improve conditions for private tenants as well.

Stories like this are a measure of how much we have lost sad

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 12:40:50

I genuinely don't see why she needs an eleven bedroomed house, for one thing. Children can share rooms and surely you expect that to happen if you are having a family that size!

I think the other point that perhaps some people haven't thought of (I don't mean that accusingly either) is that there just isn't a limitless supply of money and some children, and elderly people, and ill people, will be missing out because of this woman's poor choices.

mrsjay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:41:43

it has 6 bedrooms not 11

Secret It's only a 6 bedroom.

olgaga Tue 19-Feb-13 12:41:56

It's way too late to moan about this! The 11 children need adequate housing - that's the only issue.

Yes it's irresponsible to have that many children with no means of supporting them or housing them, but what do you suggest we do?

Start sterilising the poor - male and female - especially those with badly dyed hair?

Or take their children away from them? Hardly a cost-effective solution at a cost of around £2,000 per week per child.

BoneyBackJefferson Tue 19-Feb-13 12:42:37

tabulahrasa
"She gave birth at 14...he was 23, that's not a boyfriend, that's a paedophile.."

Actually its not a paedophile.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 12:43:06

Oh For gooodness sake.

Clearly the children are following in their mothers footsteps as several are now adults and don;t work or have already had kids. It's hardly a leap of imagination to assume the rest of 'em won't be any different.

You want solutions? Here are mine :

1) Abolish ALL CB and provide free hot breakfasts and hot lunches for ALL school children.
2) Free nursery places for working parents run by the state, like schools.
3) Community work for anyone unemployed long term.
4) TC that are added to every hour you work so the more you work, the more you earn. Ensure that EVERY working person is better off than those not working.
5) Abolish income tax for those earning under 15K a year.
6) All the caps and welfare cuts currently being implemented.
7) Basic welfare that does not increase with more children, a bit like our salaries don't.

I'm so relieved to see this Govt. doing something about scroungers like this, at last!

Flatbread Tue 19-Feb-13 12:46:24

But no, be resentful of someone without the same opportunities

What opportunities did she not get? The country provides free schooling, shelter and ensures children are not starving.

She did not avail of the opportunities available and chose to get pregnant multiple times. It is her choice and she should be held responsible for her decisions.

I think that she should be made to volunteer work, at the very least. Clean homes for the elderly who might need help. Remove litter from the streets in-between regular cleaning. Learn to give back to her community, for the housing and security provided to her children.

So, calculate how much it costs to house and feed 11 children. Translate that into working hours at minimum wage. And make her volunteer for that length of time. No free ride.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 12:46:26

Apologies - I still think that's large!

Olgaga, I think there is probably a solution betwixt and between "sterilising the poor" and "not making it quite so easy to have large numbers of children you cannot pay for" !

I think if we go back to basics - very very basic needs for children, then what do they need? A home, certainly. A 6 bedroomed home? I don't think that is a need.

I would like to see the minimum wage raised so that it 'pays' people to work more. I would like to see more value placed on certain jobs. I would like some of the benefits currently only accessible to those on benefits raised to include those on a low income (FSM for example.)

I would like some benefits paid in vouchers to ensure that it goes towards what it was intended for - to feed/clothe children.

There's a start.

lockets Tue 19-Feb-13 12:46:31

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Isityouorme Tue 19-Feb-13 12:46:34

Benefits shoud be there to SUPPORT GENUINE people in need, NOT to sustain a lifestyle.

She chose this lifestyle so I have no sympathy for her. Her kids now have an increased likelihood of having similar values to the reckless mother and what is achieved? A vicious Circle of people sponging of the government. I hope her kids step up and do better than the parents.

dashoflime Tue 19-Feb-13 12:47:39

AuntMaud: "I'm so relieved to see this Govt. doing something about scroungers like this, at last!"

Why? Your proposed solutions are waaayy more progressive than anything the torys are doing right now.

Free breakfasts and lunches? Increased Tax credits? Ha!

You realise that Tax Credits are taking a massive hit under the Welfare Reform Act?

So presumably you don't really want to see "all the caps and welfare cuts currently being implemented" then?

The problem with forcing people to "volunteer" is that it's an oxymoron.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 12:50:30

so people who can't work shouldn;t have children or if they do they will be removed - or if you suddenly break your neck or get terminal cancer you will be on a bare minimum for survival and no more

people who claim housing benefit and people who live in social housing do work you know

there are more people unemployed than there are job currently - so what should those people do

what about providing free education rather than forcing people into community slavery - so people can gain the skills for work?

what community work should people do - that wont put people out of work?

the issue is far more complex than shouting 'get a job' at people - that is a hopelessly simplistic stance

FanjoForTheMammaries Tue 19-Feb-13 12:51:07

Wow.

I was lurking on MN having been away for a bit, and deliberating whether to come back (no I don't expect anyone to give a shiny shite).

Then I read this thread. Someone actually posts a Daily Mail link and loads of people pile in agreeing like its the Daily Mail comments page.

And there's the thread with someone chucking the word retarded around.

What has happened to MN , it's gorn to the dogs. (wink@scottishmummy)

Fanjo! I was wondering where you had went last night. confused

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 12:51:56

Lockets - there are jobs. They may not be jobs that people desperately want, but they are there.

That said I do realise the economic climate isn't easy at the moment and I really do have nothing but sympathy and compassion for people made redundant or who are looking for work - it's awful. However, there is a big difference between them and people like the woman depicted in this article!

Like I said earlier in the thread, I know a lot of people like this - not as extreme, but long term benefit claimants. They aren't "scroungers" exactly, they claim what they're entitled to. The problem is that what they are entitled to is really rather generous!

FantasticDay Tue 19-Feb-13 12:52:29

AuntMaud. I'm a bleeding heart liberal, but I really like your policies. (Except 6 - I know of several families with both parents working, who are suffering through losing tax credits which take them just over the £26K threshold).

Secret Most of the available jobs are commission based and work out way less than NMW.

CoalDustWoman Tue 19-Feb-13 12:53:06

All new social housing has to meet eco criteria.

She didn't get pregnant on her own.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 12:55:09

Schro - round here there are a lot of jobs available in nursing homes, in factories, and so on. OK, they aren't great jobs but they are there. Commission jobs are crap I agree.

I like AuntMaud's policies smile

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 12:56:23

dashoflime all education IS free confused.
The tax credits are being cut to non full time workers, which I agree with if you read. You only get a top up of TC if you work, in my plan.

I do wonder how millions of eager and hard working immigrants are finding work all the time when there are no jobs? confused

Pigsmummy Tue 19-Feb-13 12:56:32

I don't understand why the grandchildren are living with them when they are struggling for space? Surely the 21 year should have moved out with her off spring? I am relieved that she can't have more children although (may not be true as quoted in Daily Fail) she says that she would have more if she could. Best thing that can happen is the adult children and their children leave home, get jobs and support themselves. That would be 5 less people needing accommodation in this six bedroom luxury home.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 12:57:01

Secret My DP would happily work in any of those jobs and even has experience in factories and a couple of forklift licenses. He really cannot get a job, he applies to hundreds and goes to the JC courses.

His SIA license ran out a while ago and the JC are refusing to help fund it, it's £240. If he had that he would get a job easily and the government would save money. Weird system.

RedwingOnFire Tue 19-Feb-13 12:57:38

She first got pregnant at 14 FFS, what kind of opportunities do you think she had or could take after that?!? What do you think her social circle was like, her in his twenties boyfriend of the first pregnancy ended up in prison.

Where is the fucking COMPASSION?!?

kimorama Tue 19-Feb-13 12:57:52

Why would anyone not wish to defend 11 children in that predicament?
Attacking children is still a criminal offence.

We should stop playing goodies and baddies and get the family housed sensibly.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 12:59:27

I meant for adults - sorry

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 12:59:46

I like my policies. grinI'm not a liberal, I'm a liberal Tory but I believe in helping people to help themselves through education, skills, work. To see healthy people languishing for years out of work is soul destroying and needless. Community work - all work - gives purpose and dignity and raises self esteem.

The present system DOES reward poor choices and is seen as horribly unfair. We need to protect children whilst empowering their parents through work, paid or otherwise.

Redwing I am biased, honestly it's a touchy subject and my words about it may be offensive, I don't mean it to come across like that.

I do have compassion but mainly for the children, she would have had many opportunities over the years to train/have family planning advice/psych therapy.

I completely defend the children though.

D0oinMeCleanin Tue 19-Feb-13 13:00:39

where is the father(s)? why is the woman taking all the flack? it takes two people to make a baby. i would imagine with 11 children childcare options are pretty limited, the father(s) should be working to secure these children a decent life.

i would like to say i am surprised at so many supposedly intelligent women falling for daily fail clap trap so easily, but sadly i am not.

this woman had her first baby when she was a child. there should have been a system in place to ensure that, as children, she and her first born were properly cared for and educated and given the same opportunities as any other child. society failed her on this and now we are vilifying her with no thought for the subsequent children and the effect this will have on them. i wonder if we will ever learn?

of course her children should be housed safely. they should also be given extra support and educational opportunities or else history will repeat and no one will gain anything.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:01:15

there are not loads of jobs btw

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:01:54

redwing of course she scuppered her opportunities by choosing to have a baby at 14.
She may very well NOT have chosen to become pregnant but she did choose to have and keep a baby. Thousands of young girls make different choices to enable them to HAVE opportunities and a future. She then continued to have child after child after child.

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 13:01:55

Again, Secret, please can you clarify exactly what benefits are really rather generous? I work for a local council and worry that my job might not exist in the not so distant future. I would like to know what these generous benefits are so I can make sure I claim for them all.

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 13:02:06

secret at no point did I ask you to apologise. What a bizarre thing to say. You've worked hard and earn a decent salary, good for you. Nothing in that reply to me is even slightly relevant to the point I made. The fact is LP's do not bring home anything like the equivalent of £40k and it's extremely damaging to say they do. Simple as that.

The economic situation in this country at the moment is frankly terrifying, but I can assure you it wasn't caused by people like this poor woman. Everyone in the country should be bitter about the situation we are in but buying into DM and government propaganda just plays exactly into their hands.

Divide and rule. Keep the people at each other's throats and they'll completely miss the reality.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:02:42

Schro, really sorry to hear that. You're right, it is an absolutely bonkers system x

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:02:44

so the system is 'rewarding' her 11 kids for being born? maybe any civilised society would rather house children than have them living in shanty towns or on the streets

Mable None are generous, even for people who are disabled.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:03:37

ah so should she have been forced to terminate her pregnancy?

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:03:45

Divide and rule. Keep the people at each other's throats and they'll completely miss the reality

Yes. It always amazes me so many fall for it tbh.

dashoflime Tue 19-Feb-13 13:03:55

Aunt Maud:

You might not be aware but under Universal Credit (which replaces Tax Credits) the taper (the amount of benefits reduced per £1 earned) is increased from 37p to 65p. This absolutely will effect full time workers.

Its a real myth that Universal Credit will remove the benefit trap and help people who want to work.

Also- I don't think I mentioned education- you might be thinking of another poster there.

In general I do agree with your policy suggestions though.

slug Tue 19-Feb-13 13:03:55

I'm just stunned at the victim blaming on here.

This is a girl, a child, who had her first child at 14. Most likely she was pregnant at 13. To a 23 year old.

Just stop for a second and absorb that little fact.

Then consider how a child who had a baby at 14 was so let down by social services, her family, the police and society at large, that she was not removed from that toxic situation or protected from the paedophile who got her pregnant in the first place. How did a child who had her first baby at 14 come to the conclusion that having more babies was a valid, if not the only, path available to her. What happened to her schooling? What happened to the father(s) of her babies? Did they support her?

Yet nothing in that article leads me to assume she is a bad mother in any way. She's done the best with the only real option she's ever had. Those children deserve a home, somewhere they can be safe. Would you deny them that?

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:04:09

gordy now how did I guess that would be a Guardian link ? grin

Secret It's fine, I just don't like it when the parents of these children are completely defended, they do have choices and they make bad ones. Even if that is a bit later in life.

I would defend the kids to the end of the world though.

soverylucky Tue 19-Feb-13 13:04:32

You can't let children suffer for their parents stupidity. What we can do is discourage that others won't make the same mistake. When I think of how my great grandmother suffered because of the lack of contraception meaning she was bringing up 8 children with an unemployed husband - it gets me cross. That was totally not her fault. We have access to medical care, contraception and free sterilisation in this country. Most women take whatever steps they can to ensure that they don't have too many pregnancies that is right for them and their circumstances. I think that this women should be rehoused because of her children but others should not be able to copy this. Having said all of that - how many women really do have lots and lots of children because of the benefits? Very few I suspect.

"ah so should she have been forced to terminate her pregnancy?"

I do not agree with that. Proper help should have been in place to get her on her feet and support her as much as possible.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:06:59

Auntmaud does that make is lies then - seems fairly fact based and truthful to me regardless of source - unless you know otherwise it seems an accurate reflection of job seekers V job vacancies by area in the UK

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:07:48

Mable:

Income support
Housing benefit
Child tax credits
Council tax benefit

Plus:

Nursery placements (I'm not talking about the 15 hours free for children 3 and over, I mean nursery placements paid for so the parent can study)
Free school meals
Free prescriptions
Maintenance for all white goods if you live in a council property (that's true around here, not sure about elsewhere.)

I didn't say it made anyone rich, I said it was generous, adequate. Which it is,

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:07:59

gordy where did anyone suggest termination? She made a choice. With that choice came one way of life, with a different choice another. But why should those who have made very different choices have to pay for hers?

I believe that everyone should support their own children but I'm aware that makes me a Workhouse loving right wing bastard around here.

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 13:08:24

I know, SchroSawMargeryDaw, but Secret keeps repeating that people on benefits are loaded.

Narked Tue 19-Feb-13 13:08:28

Are we not on plasma goats yet?

Whatever you think of the woman, do you think her children, all 11 of them, bear any responsibility for her life choices?

Are her children responsible for how many siblings they have?

Are her children responsible for her employment history or who their fathers are?

Are her children responsible for the welfare system?

Do her children deserve to live in a warm house in the winter?

Fakebook Tue 19-Feb-13 13:08:45

The whole article is just sensationalised! Typical DM. I'd rather my tax money is used in this way than be spent on the "conquering" of oil rich countries and killing innocent people.

It sounds like a lot but really it's hard to live on.

I am on disability benefits (only stopped working when the disability got unexpectedly worse due to pregnancy), I am now pregnant again after a contraception failure (not the pill before I am accused of not taking it) and I am terrified of how we will manage on the money that we will get.

DP is being sterilised.

The current chairman of the Daily Mail, Jonathan Harmsworth is a billionaire who pays no taxes in the UK.

Why is hatred being directed at the wrong people? The tax dodgers at the top could pay the benefits bill several times over if they paid their fair share.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:10:49

you seem to think a child, who continues with a pregnancy having been abused deserves to be condemned - nice smile

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:10:49

Nursery placements (I'm not talking about the 15 hours free for children 3 and over, I mean nursery placements paid for so the parent can study

No that is certainly not standard and in fact the childcare budget was cut by the tories.

White goods maintenance? thats a new one.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:10:52

It is generous secret you are correct. Plenty of people live quite happily permanently on benefits and can manage to have meals out, days out etc and a decent life. If they didn't, they'd work. It's hardly rocket science.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:11:36

*childcare budget for students

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 13:12:27

I didn't ask for a list of benefits, I just want to know which ones "give more of something than is strictly necessary or expected", i.e. are generous. Which is not the same as adequate.

Caoimhe Tue 19-Feb-13 13:12:33

I wonder if it is the size of the house that gets to people? So she gets a big house because she has so many children but a bigger house is simply not an option for private renters or owner occupiers.

I imagine that if the woman had to live in a 3 bedroom house then there would be fewer objections.

Perhaps the answer is for council houses to be no bigger than 3 bedrooms?

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:12:47

Auntmaud you talk nonsense.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:13:01

there are not enough jobs in the UK for every unemployed person - or are you ignoring that because it's a 'Guardian' link smile

this is whose pockets you are lining when you buy the mail/click on the links to the mail.

Dahlen Tue 19-Feb-13 13:14:40

Maintenance for all white goods if you live in a council property? I've never even heard of that before. I've lived in a lot of places and known a lot of people on benefits, and I have never encountered anyone who gets maintenance for white goods. The vast majority have to rely on donation, buying second hand, buying new on credit, or, in emergency situations, applying for a crisis loan that has to be paid back.

I actually think maintenance payments for white goods is a good idea, because it's things like that going wrong that can push people on benefits and other low incomes into a cycle of debt, and that benefits only the likes of Wonga, Bright House and Provident.

Benefits are adequate for day-to-day living expenses, but it's the extras that screw people up, such as when the kids need a new coat and shoes in the same month, or the fridge stops working. Of course, the longer you're on benefits, the greater the likelihood of that happening.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:14:59

bet he has a whole room full of goats

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:15:20

gordy you assume, naively at best, that every unemployed person wants a job.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:16:00

well the ones I work with do

but keep dodging the question

"you seem to think a child, who continues with a pregnancy having been abused deserves to be condemned"

That wasn't to me was it?

kimorama Tue 19-Feb-13 13:16:42

In broad terms, in the last 70 years haven,t successive governemnts made
an absolute ballsup of housing policy.?

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:17:09

Gosh akiss that article isn't in the slightest bit hysterical hmm.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:17:10

and it's nothing to do with me 'belief' it's an answer to your assertion that everyone should get a job or be forced into slavery community work

how do you propose people get jobs that don't exist?

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 13:17:17

I have to ask. Jut how many of these families to people think there actually are, in reality? Does anyone honestly think it's common enough to have even a slight bearing on the national economy?

Compare the cost of this tiny tiny minority to, say, MP's expenses, tax avoidance, wind farms.....

It really is the biggest of non-issues.

It's simply a nice easy way to stir things up and detract from the fact that every day everyone except the very rich is getting poorer. How can people be so blind to how they are being played? It genuinely frightens me and I honestly don't know where it's going to end.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:17:20

my not me!

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:17:28

Schro - I really hope it works out for you. Sounds incredibly difficult and congratulations on the pregnancy smile

Amber - Those benefits will vary of course, it depends how many children you have. The more children you have, the more you will be entitled to. The nursery placement is certainly what three of my friends have: their toddlers (under the age of 3 so not the free hours) have 3 days at nursery paid for by the local council so they can go to college. I'd have no real problem with this if it wasn't for the fact this is the third time in one case they have tried a college course.

It's like someone said over the page - being concerned about the amount of money spent on welfare payments does not make you some sort of fascist who wants to implement forced sterilisation and introduce the workhouse hmm It concerns me, and I used to be very liberal.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:17:53

No Schro

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:18:10

Kimo - YES!

squeakytoy Tue 19-Feb-13 13:18:42

"this woman had her first baby when she was a child. there should have been a system in place to ensure that, as children, she and her first born were properly cared for and educated and given the same opportunities as any other child. society failed her on this"

" consider how a child who had a baby at 14 was so let down by social services, her family, the police and society at large, that she was not removed from that toxic situation or protected from the paedophile who got her pregnant in the first place"

some of you must live in a nice cosy middle class bubble if you think that getting pregnant at 14 is so shocking and she was groomed by a paedophile.

you assume she was "let down".. I come from an area where teenage pregnancies was high in the 80's and is still, 30 years later, very high. Many girls then and now would go out with older boyfriends, they would lie about their age, look older, and would quite often get pregnant on purpose.. it isnt a myth, it happened, and I saw it happen time and time again.

I know girls who got pregnant in their mid teens who went on to get qualifications, stayed with the same boyfriend, and did make a reasonable success of their lives, but equally I know a lot more who didnt, who went on to have a few more kids, normally with different fathers, and by the time they were 30 they were grandmothers themselves..

Education, contraception and opportunities are available to everyone. Some girls make a choice to live the lifestyle of the woman in the article because they know that there is a massive system of support in this country, and they will not be put out on the street or go without.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:18:47

gordy do you think this woman and all her adult children want a job? Really?

JenaiMorris Tue 19-Feb-13 13:19:31

I would be interested to hear of any LA or HA who provided let alone maintained white goods as a matter of course. In hostels with shared facilities, yes. But not in your average family council house.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:20:18

that is irrelevant - you want to force her into work - that doesn't exist - that is the point - do keep being obtuse though

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:20:50

Jenai - they do here! I am constantly hearing "my washing machine isn't working, I need to ring the council." I did acknowledge I didn't know if it was everywhere or not.

BoneyBackJefferson Tue 19-Feb-13 13:21:01

slug
"protected from the paedophile"

the father of the first child may be many things but he is not a paedophile

Secret It will be fine. smile We're working on saving for DP's SIA renewal and remploy are going to help me find a suitable job once the baby is born. I am optimistic.

And btw. I worked from age 14 until I had to give up at 20, I desperately want to work even though I have constant pain and dislocate joints when I move wrong...

I am a product of one of these families, I do not actually know how many kids my Mother had had, last time I counted it was about 12, she's also a drug addict and let her kids be abused by her bfs, I luckily got out but my Dbro didn't.

Don't write the kids off.

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 13:21:24

Dear god - meals out shock days out shock a decent life shock shockshock where will it end! No wonder the global economy collapsed.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:22:31

Amber - Those benefits will vary of course, it depends how many children you have. The more children you have, the more you will be entitled to. The nursery placement is certainly what three of my friends have: their toddlers (under the age of 3 so not the free hours) have 3 days at nursery paid for by the local council so they can go to college. I'd have no real problem with this if it wasn't for the fact this is the third time in one case they have tried a college course

I wonder what level of qualification? because it being your first 'go' at a certain level can be a prerequisite of you getting funding.

I think you have misunderstood some of it tbh. I wont say you are making it up, but I think you have got the wrong end of the stick somewhere.

dashoflime Tue 19-Feb-13 13:22:55

Did anyone else notice the quote from the LA, going on about green building standards and all the progress the council have been making.

Gives you an insight into the kind of article he was told he was being interviewed for doesn't it?

Wish I knew where they were getting the money for days out and meals out!

I took DS to softplay last week as a rare treat and ended up totally skint!

PeneloPeePitstop Tue 19-Feb-13 13:23:28

Okay and you utter geniuses who want to only make work pay what about those who can't? Disability? Carers?

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:23:44

having babies at 14 is not common at all - I work with teenage parents in one of the most deprived areas of the UK - teenage parents aren't as common as people believe either

a 13 year old having sex with a 22 year old should shock all of us - it's abusive

olgaga Tue 19-Feb-13 13:23:54

For heaven's sake the only issue here is the childrens' welfare.

This bitter invective directed at the mother, the shocking intolerance and resentment on this thread are not just shameful, they're completely irrelevant.

noddyholder Tue 19-Feb-13 13:24:25

I am always accused of being too liberal on here and while I do feel the children are paramount in this. Most people who keep having children have to consider how they will house them or work with what they have. It just sends out the wrong message I mean why would she ever work? And what will her children be learning about responsibility for your own life etc

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:24:28

Thank you squeakytoy absolutely true!

Some years ago I had a lovely pram that I didn't need so rather than sell it I offered it to the local Sure Start. The lady there looked at me and she said, " The young mums here won;t take it love, they all get grants and all want brand new " I didn't believe her so left it there ( it was a lovely 3 wheeler) for three weeks and no one wanted it.

In the end a full time working friend was delighted with it.

Some of you that see all the poor or young mothers as victims really need to wake up. They are most likely laughing at your bleeding hears whilst enjoying your taxes.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:25:09

Schro, don't worry, I'm not writing the kids off smile It DOES concern me, yes, and I do think that the system is very unfair, not least because people like you and husband are disadvantaged by it just as much as other people are advantaged by it. My brother ended up in a nor entirely dissimilar situation where he couldn't do the line of work he was trained in due to sustaining an injury and nearly lost his flat when trying to find other work - it was the old "you've no experience in ..." line. Thankfully it's all sorted now, although he earns less.

Randall do you really think that irrespective of working or not, everyone should be entitled to the same life? A basic standard of living, I can see, but does that include meals/days out?

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:25:11

Good point dashoflime

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 13:25:16

I know, Randall, it's almost as if we were treating these people as - human.

Thunk!

You do not get grants for stuff like that Aunt, take it from someone who is in that position.

You get the surestart grant with your first child, nothing more.

Habanada Tue 19-Feb-13 13:26:23

I loved the neighbour's quote about her treating her womb like a clown car... what is that meant to mean? Clown cars are tiny and operated by feet, they have a squirty flower on the front... I'm not a gynaecologist but I can't equate that with a womb no matter how hard I try.

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:26:38

Penelo - one of my major concerns is that women like this mean there is LESS in the pot for carers and for people with disabilities.

Secret I am glad it worked out okay for your Brother in the end, it's a horrid position to be in and could be sorted easily with proper access to training and not stupid courses telling you how to use the internet.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:27:29

penelope surely it goes without having to be said that carers, the elderly, the sick and disabled and those fallen on temporary hard times are precisely for whom the welfare state was conceived?

Narked Tue 19-Feb-13 13:27:36

'The current chairman of the Daily Mail, Jonathan Harmsworth is a billionaire who pays no taxes in the UK.'

That sounds like a worthy campaign AKiss. Lets get some tax off Mr Harmsworth - who incidentally sounds like a Dicken's character - and offset the cost of the house.

Dahlen Tue 19-Feb-13 13:27:41

Just because someone is greedy and entitled does not make them any less a victim. No young female child brought up in a loving family that places a high emphasis on her physical and emotional wellbeing and encourages her to do well at education is going to grow up with the ambition of getting pregnant at 14 just to get a council house.

ASmidgeofMidge Tue 19-Feb-13 13:27:48

Squeaky - those 'choices' made by teenaged girls were likely to be the product of grooming

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:28:00

secret it is NOT because of women like this that there is 'less in the pot' for carers or people with disabilities!

That is what they want you to think.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:28:06

there are free places for some under 2's from deprived social backgrounds - which is designed to tackle social deprivation through early education

There is also Care to Learn which provides free child care to under 21's who are parents to enable them to continue in education - again designed to address the disadvantages faced by many young parents how have not had access to 'normal' pre and post 16 options

Narked Tue 19-Feb-13 13:28:19

Dickens'

slug Tue 19-Feb-13 13:28:41

BonyBack, a 23 year old having sex with a 13 year old is in no way abusive? Really?

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 13:28:52

Yep, the clown car comment threw me until I read A common example of such a routine involves an implausibly large number of clowns emerging from a very small car, to humorous effect

Amber You are completely right. If there was less families like this then there would be no difference to what other people recieve.

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 13:29:25

Oh for crying out loud. If you honestly think people on benefits live the life of luxury try it for yourself.

These scroungers, I don't know, they'll be wanting clothes next.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:30:50

So do some of you think the Welfare state should provide meals out, days out, a car? fags? Really? You actually think that's what it is for? You think that supports and encourages healthy people to make good lifestyle choices, to work, to better themselves? To create a role model for their children, to raise their self esteem?

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:31:07

There are actually very few families like this.

Impossible to blame them for all the cruel and unnecessary cuts. But the right wing media will give it a go anyway.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:32:19

meals out, days out [that cost] cars? no sorry not in my experience.

The welfare state does not provide for those at all.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:32:32

no the children of people on benefits should go up chimneys to but clothes obviously

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 13:32:35

The thing is some people on benefits do live the life of luxury. Not most, but some. Unfortunately I know of some such people and it narks me. I'd be lying if I said it didn't.

squeakytoy Tue 19-Feb-13 13:32:50

"Squeaky - those 'choices' made by teenaged girls were likely to be the product of grooming"

hahaha... yeah ok... if you say so..

I went to school with plenty of them.. believe me, they were not groomed.

I grew up in a deprived northern working class town, a world away from middle class suburbia and pony clubs or tennis lessons. By the time they were 14, the only interest most of the girls had was to be out on the pull, no fake id needed back then to get into the pubs.. and they didnt want to be with boys their own age who had no money, they were after the older lads.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:32:55

buy - bleeding fingers

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:33:45

HOHoho No one on benefits lives the life of luxury, if you think that then your standards are sadly very low

PeneloPeePitstop Tue 19-Feb-13 13:33:50

Yes secret. We're still being screwed, though.

McVey herself freely admits that even in the case of Carers work should still pay more.

I'd like to see her work around my care responsibilities then say that. They KNOW Carers save the taxpayer money but still want to screw them.

Back to the OP. The woman in this article has made incredibly poor choices for whatever reason. I do not feel that punishing her offspring for existing is the solution. As I said earlier.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:34:04

randall do you live in a £400 000 six bed house for free ? No? Does anyone here working full time live in one? hmm. Because that's not AT ALL luxurious, is it? confused

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 13:34:07

I'm just wondering where families who are housed in B & B accommodation with no cooking facilities, are supposed to eat, other than out.

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 13:34:42

I think I must have grown up with Squeaky

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:35:01

Amber - but there is a limit to what is in the pot, isn't there? Maybe there wouldn't be a massive difference to what people receive as individuals, but I am thinking more in terms of things like waiting lists and nurses and midwives and the like.

Randall - again, major difference between "lap of luxury" and "more than adequate." Of course clothing is going to be needed but designer clothes and shoes aren't (for example.)

I keep saying it but ... I agree with Maud!

EnjoyResponsibly Tue 19-Feb-13 13:35:15

11 kids! shock x million

I have exactly 10 fewer kids and I'm EXHAUSTED!!!!

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:35:28

So you think its the sign of a normal healthy 14 yr old to be out seeking sex with men?

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:35:39

wonder how much it costs to house 14 people in B+B - compared to renting them a housing ass house? lots more I expect

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:35:52

I agree with you on the carers thing Penelo - can only imagine how knackering that must be. x

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 13:36:17

I have all of those things, except for the fags - gave up 3 years ago, damn me and the shitty example I set for my son. Showing him how we have to save really hard to buy things, swanning around in my 12yo car, taking him and my Nanna to a soft play centre for a jacket potato because she loves watching children play and can't really get out on her own what with being 86 and all.

I am suitably ashamed.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:36:28

gordy godwin;s law! grin

Yes, it is quite reasonable to extrapolate that if we disagree with someone who has and never and will never work having 11 kids and a 400K house we naturally want to stuff those kids up a chimney.

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 13:37:14

Then Amber I suppose you then have to define luxury.

BoneyBackJefferson Tue 19-Feb-13 13:37:36

slug
"BonyBack, a 23 year old having sex with a 13 year old is in no way abusive? Really?"

I didn't say it wasn't abusive, I said that he wasn't a paedophile.

PeneloPeePitstop Tue 19-Feb-13 13:37:55

In my local authority B&B is £800 a week per room.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:38:00

still not answering the point then grin grin

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:38:03

but there is a limit to what is in the pot, isn't there? Maybe there wouldn't be a massive difference to what people receive as individuals, but I am thinking more in terms of things like waiting lists and nurses and midwives and the like

Again, it is not the fault of women like this for the cuts in those areas.

only a fool would believe that, only a fool would believe that and not bother to research it themselves and find the truth of the issue.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:39:07

hohohoho you said luxury, so why dont you define it in this instance?

PeneloPeePitstop Tue 19-Feb-13 13:39:19

A solution then, Auntmaud? There's not been a viable alternative put forward by those disagreeing with these children being adequately housed that doesn't actually punish the children for existing...

Pigsmummy Tue 19-Feb-13 13:39:20

Why are there 14 of them though? Surely the grandchildren and adults there could be living elsewhere? Then they can live in one of the two houses that they have currently and the whole "brand new six bedroom house" argument doesn't have to happen?

AuntMaud Trust me, they don't provide for any of that stuff.

DP and I get:

£460 a month (disability benefit (ESA) and I have been assessed by Atos).
£240 CTC
£80 CB
-----
£780 a month
-----

And that's on disability! JSA is £75 a week, could you live on that, or have days out?

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:40:16

the pot is seriously low due to tax evasion, cuts leading to fewer tax payers and a recession - not due to the odd large family on benefits

Lueji Tue 19-Feb-13 13:41:38

It's probably cheaper to house them all in one home than different ones.

And anyone capable of giving birth 11 (!) times deserves a house. wink

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:42:21

I didn't say it was her fault Amber but the fact is we have a system that has allowed her to do that.

I can assure you that I am no fool and I dislike the insinuation that I am. I can see all around me, from friends, and from acquaintances, just what some people get. Lap of luxury - no. A life on a par with, and in some cases better than, those who work - yes.

I don't think objecting to that makes me a fool.

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 13:42:37

No, I don't have a 6 bedroom house. I pay extortionate rent on a tiny two-bed terrace because contrary to what people think they don't actually throw council houses at single mums.

I also don't think we can blame this woman for the extortionate price of houses either can we? Or did she cause the property boom as well.

Designer clothes? There really isn't a reply to that.

Again, does anyone honestly think that this situation is common enough to make the slightest bit of difference to anything?

squeakytoy Tue 19-Feb-13 13:42:55

"So you think its the sign of a normal healthy 14 yr old to be out seeking sex with men?"

It was perfectly normal then in that town, and still is. Unless you grew up in that environment, I imagine it is hard for people to understand. It doesnt make it right, but it is the way of life and is highly unlikely to change very much. If a girl is having sex, she could get pregnant by a boy her own age just as easily, but he would be less likely to provide financially.. (hollow laugh, because in reality the older boys/men are just a unlikely to be a responsible father).

You think Jeremy Kyle is far fetched... it really isnt.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:43:09

life of Luxury my arse - honestly I had a very 'Tory' friend who ended up on benefits and she was OUTRAGED by what she got - she had believed the hype and could not work out who she was supposed to feed herself and her family on £100 a week

benefits give you enough to get by but no more

We're still relying on that time machine then are we?

somewherewest Tue 19-Feb-13 13:43:18

I wonder if it is the size of the house that gets to people?

I think what gets to people is that a fair number of families have fewer children then they might wish because they just can't afford the housing costs. For example I would theoretically like three children, but there isn't a snowball's chance in hell of us ever being able to afford a four bedroom house, so it isn't happening. Thats just how it as.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 13:43:22

gordy the welfare bill is £200 bn a year. It eclipses education, NHS and defence. Our entire income tax revenue as a country is LESS than this alone annually.

Surely you can see that you can both support closing tax loopholes ( Labour never did, though) and condemn allowing the welfare state to be abused by people like this?

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 13:43:36

You cannot buy designer goods if your only source of income is benefits. If people on benefits possess these things, then :

- they might have bought them before they fell on hard times
- they might have been a gift
- they might have borrowed money from a loan shark
- they might have stolen them
- they might be fake

None of these scenarios mean that the benefit system is generous or more than adequate. Is it really so hard to understand?

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:45:32

I think that not attempting to find the truth of the matter makes you a fool.

But it seems you prefer to believe what you want to believe so you can continue to direct your ire at someone.

But yes, you did imply it was women like this fault that there are cuts and shortages, that is very short sighted of you.

You are free to believe what you want though, I just prefer to go on facts and not anecdotal 'evidence'

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:45:37

Schro the problem is, you would probably be better off financially if you didn't have a partner. Obviously I'm not suggesting you boot him out grin - I'm well aware the benefits system is generous to some, not so to others. It was the period when my poor brother was on JSA when he nearly lost his house - even so it took WEEKS to come through and he had to pay for his prescriptions during that time as well, pain in the arse (as he ended up crabbing off me wink that was a joke, BTW!)

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 13:45:44

Amber to me a holiday is a luxury.

squeakytoy Tue 19-Feb-13 13:45:58

It is very well known, and true that many single mothers have also got partners whose income is not declared because they know the loopholes.. that is why they can so easily live a luxury lifestyle while on benefits.

Anyone who tries to deny this happens is burying their head in the sand.

Nancy66 Tue 19-Feb-13 13:47:12

Can people honestly not see why things like this hugely hack off a large number of working families?

There are so many working families barely keeping their heads above water at the moment - and then they read about families like this - families who don't put a penny into the system and in all likelihood never will being handed a £400k house on a plate. A house that they'll probably trash and then demand another.

I agree that the kids can't be blamed for the parents' fecklessness - but it doesn't make it any easier to stomach.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:47:39

That didnt really answer my question squeakytoy

I do know of girls that were having sex at 14 and younger, it was NOT a sign of a healthy we rounded young person at all.

moondog Tue 19-Feb-13 13:47:42

'gordy the welfare bill is £200 bn a year. It eclipses education, NHS and defence. Our entire income tax revenue as a country is LESS than this alone annually.'

Maud is this so? I was asking about this the other day on MN. Do you have a reference for those figures?

somewherewest Tue 19-Feb-13 13:48:35

What also bothers me is the inconsistencies of the system. I have friends, both disabled and dependent on benefits, who are trying to raise a baby in a tiny one bedroom flat and will have to wait at least a year for somewhere with even one more bedroom. They would probably be pretty pissed off by this story.

I wouldn't be better off, honestly. He didn't live with me before as we didn't have the room (I am living with my Gran as she helps care for me sometimes).

We still get the same tax credits and a negligible amount less in ESA.

HoHoHo I bloody wish I could afford a holiday!

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 13:48:39

So they are defrauding the system.

Again, not a valid criticism of the level of benefits.

noddyholder Tue 19-Feb-13 13:49:10

If this was a working family saying they had 11 kids and not enough room we would be advocating better storage and bunk beds!

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:49:17

Amber - we're not going to see eye to eye on this one, clearly. I think what this woman is doing is wrong for everybody and in no way condone it. I also feel the system is hugely at fault and dislike it. At no point have I directed ire at anybody: I expressed frustration early in the thread but even said quite clearly that I was frustrated at the system and not at individuals.

I am trying very hard not to sound sarcastic or acerbic in my replies, but I know what I get, I know what those on benefits get, and I know the difference is relatively little given that I work full time in a well paid job and others do not work at all.

But I am not going to carry on arguing it as I dislike being called a fool when I know I am anything but.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:49:51

what have Labour got to do with it?

8bn could be saved by stopping privatisation of education via the back door

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 13:49:52

Not strictly true Maud uk public spending

I'm also sure you're aware that the majority of the welfare budget goes on in-work benefits.

HoHoHoNoYouDont Tue 19-Feb-13 13:49:58

It is very well known, and true that many single mothers have also got partners whose income is not declared because they know the loopholes.. that is why they can so easily live a luxury lifestyle while on benefits.

Anyone who tries to deny this happens is burying their head in the sand

Totally agree Squeaky - A friend of mine was in this position enabling them to take the luxury holidays I so often dream about but cant afford on my full time salary.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:50:48

hohohoho yes holidays are a luxury and certainly not something that people whos only source of income is state benefits can afford.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:50:54

and this woman is claiming what she is entitled to btw she is not cheating the system or doing anything illegal

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:51:31

aah secret partners yeah so that would be benefit fraud then and not your typical single mum on benefits

I went on holiday last year to Disney Florida with a friend, thing is though she had a spare ticket that was paid for as her partner couldn't go due to an emergency. My family gave me some spending money.

I suppose from the outside though people might have thought I paid for it.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 13:52:57

I am trying very hard not to sound sarcastic or acerbic in my replies, but I know what I get, I know what those on benefits get, and I know the difference is relatively little given that I work full time in a well paid job and others do not work at all

If you think its very little difference then you dont know as much as you think you do.

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 13:53:56

the cost of benefits is 159BN and the majority is to PENSIONERS

www.guardian.co.uk/news/datablog/2013/jan/08/uk-benefit-welfare-spending

yes it The Gaurdian but it's also fact based information

secretofcrickleyhall Tue 19-Feb-13 13:54:44

Head and brick wall grin

I'm hiding this thread now, it's just really upsetting me. Schro - all the best, and I really do mean that.

Okay Secret, thank you.

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 13:56:38

secret the only reason I singled you out is for your allegations about income. You are as entitled as the rest if the country to be resentful of the current economic climate but unfortunately the government are playing you like a pawn. They are the ones to blame, no one else.

I am an LP, I also work part-time, my entire income is not quite a quarter of yours. I'm afraid I don't think you know as much as you think you do.

'If this was a working family saying they had 11 kids and not enough room we would be advocating better storage and bunk beds!'

They'll probably still need bunk beds. A 6 bedroom house for 14 people will still be a squash. According to the Guardian it's still 2 semi's knocked together

RedwingOnFire Tue 19-Feb-13 14:01:01

No-one is denying system playing goes on. But it is MORE HARMFUL to EVERYONE when it happens at the top, but for some reason people are whining about THIS?!

You know those at the top don't see you guys as fully human either, just as units of production.

RivalSibling Tue 19-Feb-13 14:02:08

People who work while children are young may not have more spare cash than people on benefits at the time bit in later years they will have better paid work, no child care costs and more than likely a pension. I know where I'd rather be!

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 14:02:32

yes it goes on - but not at anything ear the level the Fail and it's counterparts would have you believe - most people don't want to be skint an worry about money

JakeBullet Tue 19-Feb-13 14:04:39

I have met very rare families like this. Generally they live in an overcrowded manner and incidences of councils knocking two properties together in this way are not common.

I can only thibk of ONE family that had this in 25 years of community midwifery practice. All the rest remained overcrowded.

Chattymummyhere Tue 19-Feb-13 14:07:46

Benefits do seem to pay to much..

I personally know of a family 2 adults 3 bed house all rent and council tax paid for... Fags,booze, eating out, massive tv package £100 per month, 2 dogs, 2 pcs, 2 laptops, multiple games consoles, days out to Alton towers the beach etc... On benefits for two adults.. They are not claiming anything they shouldn't be but it seems too much.. Oh and no this was not brought before being on benefits this is all while being on benefits for the past almost 10 years.

Although I've just reported a "single" mother on benefits for having a man living there..

RivalSibling Tue 19-Feb-13 14:10:04

People who work while children are young may not have more spare cash than people on benefits at the time bit in later years they will have better paid work, no child care costs and more than likely a pension. I know where I'd rather be!

Chatty Bullshit, they are either getting money from somewhere else or that is a load of crap.

LeftMeInSuspenders Tue 19-Feb-13 14:13:01

SqueakyI agree with some of what you say but why do some girls have such low aspirations that all they want is a baby/house/not be kicked out on the street?

Why do they not want to take charge of their own lives and forge a career and their own stability? Surely that's in part, upbringing? (not always the case, I know)

JakeBullet Tue 19-Feb-13 14:13:36

Have you seen their Sky package to know they are paying this? I am on benefits and there is no way I can afford £100 for a TV package like that. Nor could I fork out for Alton Towers or any othrr theme park....and I only have one child. confused .

If she is doing all you say then there is extra income from somewhere she is not telling you about.

RandallPinkFloyd Tue 19-Feb-13 14:15:38

chatty you seem to be awfully interested in other people's lives. I don't even know that much detail about my sister hmm

Jake Exactly. I have a family member who pays for Netflix for us as we can't even afford that!

JakeBullet Tue 19-Feb-13 14:18:44

The aspirations debate is a good one. Some girls have no self esteem and can only validate themselves by being mothers.

I have seen 15/16/17 year old girls as new mothers. I contrast that with my 18 year old niece...just passed her driving test and just got her first job in London and so excited about life.

Its not always about upbringing. ..my sister was pregnant at 19 while I haf my first baby at 36 (late developergrin ) .

seeker Tue 19-Feb-13 14:19:49

No you don't, Chatty. You might have read about them in the tabloid press, but you don't know them.

And yes, I am calling you a liar, since you ask.

MoodyDidIt Tue 19-Feb-13 14:19:53

wow, you sound lovely chattymummy

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 14:22:37

gordys I have to take issue with your claim that asking some benefit claimants to do community work is akin to slavery. It is such an offensive remark on so many levels.

squeaky I taught for 10 years in a Northern town similar to the one you describe and saw everything that you speak of. These girls were not victims of paedophilia but they were victims of low self esteem, poor upbringing and poverty - not necessarily in the financial sense but a sort of cultural poverty which mc people cannot readily understand. They and their families placed no value on education but lots of value on 'things' and it was the older boys they looked to to provide these things for them. t was and is very sad.

And Chatty before any speculations are made about my internet use; I am using an old laptop that I have had since I was 18 and got for Christmas. DP uses a laptop he was bought for his birthday by his Mum a few years ago.

Our Xbox is second hand and I bought it when I was working, I have a tablet that I got free with a very cheap phone contract that worked out better priced than having a home phone.

Things are not always as they seem.

SandCastlesGoSquish Tue 19-Feb-13 14:24:19

Or see it as 11 children being given a 5 bedroom house rather than living seperatly in 2 houses.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 14:24:53

I should say 'some mc posters on here seem not to be able to readily understand' as that was otherwise rather a sweeping statement!

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 14:25:02

Chatty, the key word in your post is seem.

Funny how people know so much intimate detail of others' income. And use this "information" to justify their argument that the benefit system is too generous. The same benefit system that they would use if unemployed/ill/disabled.

As others have said before, if it's so great on benefits, why not give it a go?

Country I believe it was me who said that first. It is, there is no choice and would likely work out below minimum wage with no access to childcare and no time off if you are very ill.

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 14:26:14

countrykitten, amazingly not all of us here are even mc!

gordyslovesheep Tue 19-Feb-13 14:27:58

why - being FORCED to do any work without min wage is akin to slavery - or are you being professionally offended CK ;)

MrsDeVere Tue 19-Feb-13 14:28:21

Load of rubbish Chatty.

there is a set amount you can get in benefits. It won't pay for all that.
Anyway. You will be happy to know they will have to move out of their three bedroom house if its only them in it.
How did a couple with no kids get a three bedroom house anyway?

My friend just got reported for living with her boyfriend.
She isnt living with him. She hasn't even seen him for a few months.

Still, she will be dragged infront of an interviewer, during half term, in an inaccessible job centre so she has to leave her disabled child with us. And she is terrified.

Even though she hasn't done anything wrong. She is still incredibly stressed.

Someone reported her and I know why. And you wouldn't believe it if I told you the reason. Well maybe you would.

Would people being forced to do community work get the same tax credits as people choosing to work?

Because people on Workfare don't, even though they are considered employed.

seeker Tue 19-Feb-13 14:30:54

Did you know, everyone in prison has a massive telly in their cell, and 3 course meals cooked by Jamie Oliver every night? And immigrants get given a car the minute they set foot on British soil. Two cars if they are illegal immigrants.

LtEveDallas Tue 19-Feb-13 14:33:15

seeker grin But what about their goats?

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 14:33:57

So the idea of people being asked to do a couple of hours in their community a week is slavery? Then really I do feel that some of you have completely lost the plot. Do any of you actually know anything about history and how offensive that comparison truly is?

gordy once again you bring up comments from posts on thread other than this. It's a bit pathetic but whatever makes you tick.

The goat I have only eats 50" tellys.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 14:34:56

gordy it's hardly slavery if they are working for benefits, is it? They are getting at least :

TC
Free prescriptions
HB
Free school meals
All other benefits.

But you ARE right about it not being minimum wage. Most benefit claimants, all benefits considered , are on considerably more than that.
Everyone else has NO CHOICE but to work. It's what civilised society expects of most of its citizens. Are those of us who HAVE to work enslaved?

Chattymummyhere Tue 19-Feb-13 14:35:47

I no this because its my own parents!

And I have lived on benefits because funny enough I lived with them!

Because they moan about the cuts and how its their right to this and their right to that just because the law says they need a minimum of X to live off.. 2 weeks all inclusive for a holiday on a 8 hour flight twice in two years.. I would love to afford that and that was for them and two children..

Also in regard to the reporting of a single mother this man has been there everyday for the past two months over night I know this from my CCTV and the council are welcome to the copies for proof

"A couple of hours in their community"

Do you know anything about workfare? It's not a couple of hours, it's full time and over time with no childcare, no help if you're ill and below NMW. You are considered employed in the statistics but unemployed when it comes to tax credits and such.

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 14:37:17

seeker grin and some single mothers get a £400K 6 bed house for free too!

Honestly, some folk'll believe anything, eh?

Auntmaud Tue 19-Feb-13 14:37:58

Sounds pretty much like real life for most of us then, Schro.

The money she will get for HB wont fully cover that massive house.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 14:38:29

seeker sarcastic comments like that are the very ones I was referring to in an earlier post. Why try and shut down a debate and imply that others are foolish Mail reading types who believe everything they read just because you disagree?

seeker Tue 19-Feb-13 14:39:20

You had your CCTV trained on her? Wow- a nosy, busybody liar. Worst kind. Yes, it's you I'm calling a liar.

mablemurple Tue 19-Feb-13 14:39:26

So now we have yet another claim for benefits being "considerably more" than minimum wage, but no figures to back that up.

And now, as an additional bonus, everyone on benefits has apparently CHOSEN this state of affairs. You do realise that a lot of working people claim benefits, don't you?

seeker Tue 19-Feb-13 14:40:19

I'm not trying to shut down the debate. It's a fascinating and important debate. I am trying to shut down the liars.

Really? Do you work for below NMW? If you are gravely ill (people with more than 3 months to live and have cancer are expected to take part in workfare) would you expect time off for illness?

Plus, if you work by choice you are entitled to tax credits as the government realises that the pay isn't enough.

Not the same as workfare.

Chattymummyhere Tue 19-Feb-13 14:42:04

No seeker my CCTV is to protect my property but funnily enough it does catch parts not on my property.. I can assure you I would love to never have to see the vile women next door again. I go out of my way to avoid her. Unfortunately I am not currently in a position to move from this hell hole of an area I happen to live in as it was the only affordable house the right size at the time we needed to move.

countrykitten Tue 19-Feb-13 14:43:04

Workfare is not perhaps the best example of how to go about this but you seem opposed to the very principle of the thing. Would that be fair to say?

AmberLeaf Tue 19-Feb-13 14:43:44

auntmaud, you work for below national min wage do you?

So the idea of people being asked to do a couple of hours in their community a week is slavery? Then really I do feel that some of you have completely lost the plot. Do any of you actually know anything about history and how offensive that comparison truly is?

If you knew anything about workfare, you would understand the comparison.

It is far more than 'a couple of hours in their community' unless you consider tesco their community