To find this universal credit situation unfair

Exactly this! You’d probably get help them too! If you’re both professionals your DH should have a good waste to support you and two DC.

Op life isn't fair but you can make the same choices as your in-laws if you prefer and have your 2nd child sooner. Comparing yourself in this way will only cause you unnecessary upset.

It's hard to compare really. They're probably not as well off as you think.

We had 2 DSs 15m apart. We used a childminder when the 2nd came instead of nursery due to the price difference. It was still a fortune but not as much.

Personally, I wanted to go back to work, pay in to a pension, show my sons that mums can work hard too, and knew the struggle would only be for a few years.

Same posting pattern too. Thread started first thing in the morning, OP posted 3/4 times early on in the thread then never returned.

It is fair in that the rules are there and these are the rules.

One day you will own a property. They won't.

There was none of this when I raised mine so I was dirt poor even though I had my children as half of a couple and now rent at 61.

Is that fair? No. Have times changed? Yes.

I appreciate that but you said £60K in benefits, for that to be the case there has to be mitigating factors. Unless their rent is fully accommodated and it’s 5k a month which seems unlikely. To give a ‘they get 60k’ without context just feeds into the wrong information that life on UC is a gimmie. Yes there are some who are not financially struggling on benefits (I’m one) but context is everything and most people who claim are not living a gilded life. UC in particular exists because pay doesn’t equal cost of living.

Absolute cringe. Exact same post just wondering differently.

When the kids get to school age, won’t she be expected to get a job? At that point you’ll be further on in your career and will be way better off.

This

A friend is currently panicking as her landlord isn't renewing her tenancy. Both her and her DH work but the private rental market is so competitive at the moment. It's not easy finding somewhere especially as some landlords don't want tenants with DC.

If my friend and her DH were on benefits they'd be in even more difficulty, as so few landlords take benefits. (I haven't read the whole thread but my first thought was OP's in laws have a social home,as she says they get their full rent paid. In private rentals there's a LHA benefit cap, often falling short of market rents).

We're so grateful to have a mortgage. It's a struggle sometimes but we were so glad to escape the worry and stress of renting. Had to move too many times and hated the insecurity and panic.

I totally with you op . Benefits should not be to support a lifestyle choice of being a SAHM .

Tufton Street must be working overtime just now. It’s relentless.

Universal credit constrains you in various ways. It is more generous to those with children and I think that's the right approach for the welfare of the family. She will be expected to find work after a certain time. If you're not entitled to UC overall you will be financially better off than your SIL over the course of your life times. What I take from your post is childcare needs to be more subsidised not that UC should be leas generous.

Your choices now should pay off in the future. Pension contributions, mortgage free, career progression.

Living on benefits is hard and risky. They are really always at the whim of political policy anything could change at any time. Being on benefits is far less secure and you aren't really in control of your own fate.

I'm sure anyone on benefits now worries about what political parties will do to the welfare state.

I completely agree op @happypickle it is not fair at all and nothing anyone has put here has convinced me otherwise.

as a low income, working single parent without financial support from my ex partner, I was always baffled when my friends with mortgages and secure housing seemed miffed that I was getting help with my rent through benefits. Given the choice I would much rather have a secure home and not be throwing money at a landlord. Even if it meant a difference in my spare money each month! I would give my all to have a safe home, mortgage and be able to change my horrible carpets. (And before I get attacked for this (as is so common on MN) yes I am doing my best to change my situation!).

Kindly - get over it and focus on what you do have. You could always sell your house and rent privately, with all the benefits of horrible carpets, landlord inspections, woodchip wallpaper and lack of living security. Fancy it? Thought not.

Nothing like working the system🙄

Rishi's team busy starting another benefits thread. Stop falling for it people.

@Flopsythebunny I think what the OP is asking is whether it's morally fair for some people to decide to stay home and live on UC, when others have to go to work and miss out on spending that time with their children. To pay the tax to enable some to choose to stay at home. And the numbers of people on UC are a large %

She's a stay at home mum, which you could be if you wanted to

Why can't you aim for a 2 year age gap? Either take the 2 year old out of nursery while you are on mat leave or use a funded place for reduced nursery hours? Aged 3 they would be entitled to mostly funded hours while you return to work and pay for the 1 year old's nursery with your tax free childcare?

Would you prefer to swap place with your in-law's? All sorts of people have all sorts of different situations, some of which seem unfair. Plot your own course through life without making comparisons to those who you perceive to have it better than you in some small part.

I work part time around the kids and on UC. We aren't entitled to free childcare. You do realise how low the threshold of entitlement is don't you?

@SpeedyDrama I thought the same, however if you see here, it can add up to quite a lot with the various components cpag.org.uk/welfare-rights/key-topics/universal-credit/universal-credit-basics

If you or your partner earn over £793 a month, the benefit cap doesn't apply. On the previous table I linked to, some people can earn £84k a year before UC stops altogether. I live in the south east so know there will be some high rent costs in there, but this just seems a huge amount to me and not really fair

Have you ever actually been on a low income or lost your job and had to rely on UC?

Someone getting 60k in benefits would have extenuating circumstances in some extreme. That suggests higher rental and other factors such as disability for themselves and/or others in their home. That isn’t a typical amount of benefits by a long shot and I’d imagine that even with money coming in that their circumstances wouldn’t be the easiest.

The benefits system is ridiculous. Especially that lots of people people work
part time “to spend more time with their children”, get their wages topped up by the UC and get free childcare hours too, whereas “high” earners who pay for all of that party, cannot afford to go part time to spend more time with their children (and very often their jobs don’t allow for that anyway).

basically the system encourages working less and being paid less and discourages earning more.

which is pretty bad because if the high earners will manage to reduce their hours and go part time there will be much less tax money available for UC, child benefit, and all other government expenses.

the same system also encourages for example GP and doctors and dentists to go part time, making worse the current NHS crisis

completely unsustainable