Ending Widowed Parents Allowance after a year

(40 Posts)
myfriendflicka Sat 18-Aug-12 07:11:31

The Government is proposing to stop Widowed Parents Allowance after a year. Those who receive it now will not be affected, but people whose partners or spouses die in the future will be.
At the moment it is paid monthly, and is a lifeline for bereaved families. It is based on the partner who died's national insurance contributions, and it is also taxed. It is certainly not enough to live on on its own, and most people who receive it work too.
It helps to pay bills, including childcare for a working parent who has lost their partner and their income. Partners will have paid many years contributions towards their state pension which they will never collect, so the least that should be done is that their partners and children get help at a terrible time.

Anyone who thinks that you are over a bereavement after a year is deluding themselves. Please write to your MPs about this. I have written to Lord Freud, the architect of these changes, as well as my MP.

Please see link below to Telegraph article. The debate contains very offensive language about saving bereaved parents from dependency and how receiving this benefit will discourage people from remarrying. Words fail me.

www.telegraph.co.uk/journalists/rowena-mason/9392768/Widowed-parents-to-lose-up-to-80000-in-benefits.html

NoComet Tue 28-Aug-12 22:43:54

Remarry?

Where if, heaven forbid, DH was to die is a SAHM living in the middle of no where suddenly supposed to find a new husband from.

I'm 44 all the men I know are married with families of their own.

I have two beautiful DDs, I'd be very very wary of getting involved with any man I didn't know well.

Any way I married my first proper BF and we fell straight in to living together at weekends. It's a standing joke that we've never been on a date. I would have a clue how to find a BF.

Honestly what planet do these idiots live on.

exoticfruits Wed 29-Aug-12 07:27:41

The money has nothing to do with whether you marry again or not. I was in a very similar position to you StarBallBunny but after 6 years I did meet someone out of the blue - someone who hadn't been married before and now have 2 more DCs. However it is insensitive and cruel to even mention it - I don't know which planet they are on, but one thing is for sure- they don't have personal experience of being widowed.

fossil97 Wed 29-Aug-12 07:51:22

This is staggering. I will write to my MP as well. I wonder if the bereavement charities are involved?

When DH's best friend died leaving a large, young family without a breadwinner, it was about four years before the mum was in a position to work (having been a SAHM for over a decade so not exactly ready to walk into a job). It was a full time job trying to hold the family together and get the children through counselling, etc. And TBH widow's benefit is so small it doesn't sway the decision one way or the other, jobseekers allowance when the youngest child turns 5 has forced that. It is just a bit of help that for once, doesn't come off your other benefits.

Penny pinching from a benefit that only effects a few people anyway

A 5 year review might conceivably be more appropriate.

TheBlackShiksa Mon 03-Sep-12 11:49:31

I am SO upset by this, when my dad passed away unexpectedly my mum a 36 year old widow with 4 kids, school fees, a huge mortgage and bills coming out of her ears racked with bills this benefit was a lifeline for her. Even though she couldn't pay the mortgage she could put food on the table, because in the depth of grief, when the well wishers are gone, and you're all alone, bills still have to be paid. These Fing Tories,

SisyphusDad Sat 08-Sep-12 21:25:54

So let me get this right...

In less than one year, as the parent of two youngish (5 and 8) children who lost their mother to cancer and leukaemia, I'm expected (with no family support - we haven't got any) to:
- sort out all the admin - funeral, will, probate, all the other rubbish, associated with someone's death;
- completely restructure my life from being sole breadwinner to all-round adult and parent;
- negotiate a complete change of role with work to fit around the fact that I'm now a totally lone parent as opposed to someone who's available 24x7;
- arrange childcare to enable me to continue to work sufficient to keep my family going (see above).

That's on top of...
- Managing my life, that of my children and a cat all day, every day;
- Being a classic introvert;
- Coping with clinical anxiety and depression anyway;
- Grieving for my loss (-es - throughout my life there have been several).

And the Government's expecting me to have the time, energy and motivation to go out and find and marry a partner who I like (love would be nice), who works for my kids and who likes me!

And this same Government thinks I'm being deterred from getting married because they (hopefully - I'm still waiting) pay me a bit of money every month? Ground control to brain cell, come in!

exoticfruits Sat 08-Sep-12 22:17:27

You have it right SisyphusDad - they are on another planet- as said earlier.

stargirl1701 Sat 08-Sep-12 22:36:05

I am appalled by this. I truly believe in a contributory system and thought the Conservatives did too. Shocking proposal and offensive language. Dreadful.

KFIB Sun 30-Dec-12 12:33:40

I am outraged and near to tears by the mere suggestion that, after a year a bereaved parent is ready to stand alone, and is not deemed entitled to any benefit beyond 12 months.

I lost my husband in 2010 and have been treated like a criminal. My late husband had worked all his life, was older than me and retired in 1997 receiving a small pension and state pension.

We were led to believe in the DWP booklets sent to us, in the event of his death before mine, I would be entitled to widows pension, as the rules were then in 1997. That all changed, yes I get WPA at the moment, but, if I lose the £100 per week when my 15 year old leaves education, I will face poverty. I have worked all my married life, to help keep my children fed and clothed, I have never been able to save for a pension. Never been on out of work benefits.

When the WPA ceases I will have an income of £56 a week. I will not be able to keep my car, living rural, I would have to stop my job after 22 years. Not to mention how I would be able to continue with caring for my mother who lives some distance from me.

I look after my mum, along side my daughter, job, house etc....alone.

My husband's full NI contributions will be meaningless soon, and I am worried this government is stripping the innocent people of this country naked, financially.

The crux being the country has been left to get into debt by the ''leaders in power'' and now we are all being targeted and hounded without a care from the current government as to what affect that will have on people's mental and physical well being.
If we rob someone we go to prison, if the banks in the UK and powers that be misappropriate money, they get bonuses. Something is VERY wrong.

I am scared witless as I don't know what to do. I have suffered grief, loss, and now severe depression brought on my the removal of what my late husband paid for, widows allowances via his NI contributions over 40 years.

Somehow we need to stand up to this treatment as it is archaic and no way to encourage and help bereaved people cope. It is punishing those in grief, and putting a deadline on when grief ends this is outrageous. Time for the people in the UK to make a stand! Form a petition against being deprived of what has been contributed to in the first place, NI contributions to pay for widows support.

IcanandIwill Fri 11-Jan-13 14:32:48

As I said earlier it feels like an insult. It's been a few months since I originally posted on this thread. Life has moved on and in reality it's getting more difficult to cope. I have a baby and two other young DC. If WPA was to end in 3 months (12 months since DH) died, it would compound an already impossible situation. At the moment I get little sleep, am carer 24/7 for three young DC. The WPA helps make life more manageable. To withdraw support from young bereaved families at this stage shows no compassion or understanding for the tough, tough challenges we face every minute if every day.

meditrina Fri 11-Jan-13 14:37:42

As it's a while since the thread began, has the consultation period closed? And did any actual proposals result from it?

noddyholder Fri 11-Jan-13 14:41:41

I am sickened by this govt Every day another nail in the coffin of human decency.

angryman1 Tue 12-Feb-13 08:10:55

I have just found myself in the position of losing this pension that my late wife paid for because I have had the gall to meet someone. The wpa was paid for by my late wifes NI contributions and I feel ad though I am being robbed by the government why should my new partner bear the financial burden of me losing nearly £400 per month just because we fell in love she by the way is also widowed with grown up children my son is 11 and I believe should have the right to his mothers pension

dippymother Fri 15-Feb-13 11:50:29

WPA used to be paid up until any "dependents" were 18. I was widowed in 2009 and received WPA for my youngest child for two years until she was 18. The rules were that, because I was too young to qualify for a pension, and I had a child under 18, I would receive this support. When your children were 18 or older (technically adults), you didn't get the benefit anymore because you were then able to return to work etc and support yourself and your family. The benefit was always paid gross, although it is taxable if you receive other income which would take you above the tax threshold. I was never able to claim a widows pension, so assume this was discontinued many years ago.

Like the other posters on here, I am outraged that, in future, WPA may only be paid for a year - although the Bereavement Allowance (in place in 2009) which was paid to bereaved spouses with no dependents was only paid for 1 year anyway.

If my DCs had been young when my DH died, I would have struggled enormously and feel very strongly that spouses left with young children should have this lifeline until, at the very least, their dependents are old enough not to need childcare etc.

Grahamalone Wed 06-Nov-13 08:27:53

My Mandy died in April and I was led to believe that the WPA ended after 52 weeks. My son is almost 14 and I have no intention of remarrying. i have my own one man business which I haven't really focussed thus I've not made much money due to the grief, depression and extra responsibility. The WPA has helped us a lot and kept the wolf away from the door. Can anyone verify how long this benefit will stay available. thanks

deskjet3070 Mon 03-Feb-14 15:34:13

I only found out about these proposed changes by chance about 3 weeks ago.

I am a 41 year old married father of 2 young boys & I am terminally ill with cancer, therefore this change will have a significant impact on my family.

Therefore I went to see my MP (Conservative) about it as soon as I found out. He was very sympathetic & knew nothing about these changes.

Anyway, despite his initial apparent support I have drawn a blank as today I received a fob-off letter from Lord Freud (the unelected 'Minister for Welfare Reform' who following a morally dubious career in the City is now busying himself in the aftermath of the financial crisis by making the poor pay for the risk-taking of the rich).

What I can tell you based on that letter & the other documentation I have received from my MP is as follows:

- Bereavement Support Payment (BSP) will replace Widowed Parents Allowance (WPA)

- According to Freud's letter, BSP will be introduced 'after the introduction of the single tier pension'

- According to the policy documents I received, BSP will come into effect from April 2016 for new claims.

- Those already in receipt of WPA 'will be transitionally protected & will not be affected by the change'. (So as long as I die before April 2016, then my family should still receive WPA).

The key differences between WPA & BSP:

1) Bereavement Payment: the one off Bereavement Payment will be increased to £5,000 under BSP, from £2,000 under WPA.

2) Reduced period of payment: WPA is paid whilst the child is eligible for Child Benefit (i.e. potentially up to 18 years). BSP will be paid for 12 MONTHS ONLY.

3) Amount paid: BSP will be capped @ £400/month, whereas depending on circumstances WPA could be more (e.g. if deceased had a perfect NI contributions record, then a widow with 2 children could receive approx £468/month).

4) NI Contributions: BSP will have relaxed NI contributions criteria, whereas the amount of WPA paid was dependent upon the deceased's NI contributions. Therefore BSP completely erases the contributory principle of National Insurance payments & benefits.

5) Benefit Cap: BSP is to be disregarded in full for Universal Credit & the household benefit cap, whereas WPA counts towards the household benefit cap & is taken into account when establishing eligibility for means tested benefits. Therefore further severing the contributory principle.

In Summary:
The biggest winners under the new system are widows who are already in receipt of means-tested benefits & where the deceased had made minimal NI contributions, as they will now get more under BSP than they would under WPA.

The biggest losers under the new BSP (compared to the old WPA) are widows with young children that don't qualify for means tested benefits & whose dead husbands have made substantial Income Tax & NI contributions (i.e. my wife & children).

So, having now been given the brush off by my MP I'm not sure what to do next.

The bill has already been passed by the Commons & is now in the House of Lords.

Does anybody have any idea whether anything can still be done?

I was interested to see that when The Daily Mail reported on the proposals it was very hostile to it (even though the DM usually approves of any sort of benefit cuts).

I guess even the DM thought that widows & bereaved children were a soft target:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2348637/Widows-left-abandoned-snatch-vital-benefit-changes-pension-system.html

Now the details have been published, including the destruction of the contributory principle (the very foundation of the Welfare State) I'm sure they would be even more against it.

Does anybody have any ideas how to go about getting a newspaper involved in an issue like this?

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now