To think the level of state involvement many posters expect is bonkers?

If you are comparing you having to sleep on the sofa because you have kids and my DH having to sleep on the sofa due to his disabilities having kids is a choice. Disability isnt.

The reality is most councils don't have spare houses to give out, nor is there a supply of private rent availability either, as LLs leave the sector or refuse benefit tenants.

So women with kids will either end up in a B&B or a hostel.

Plymouth Council allocates approx 150 3 bed houses per year, the waiting list is over 11500.

The costs of temp housing is so great that they are borrowing 10s of millions to buy private property as its cheaper.

Give women better economic prospects and they will chose not to have fewer children later.

Yes I’m sure it’s that too, for sure.

‘No one is having children to get benefits and housing I can assure you’

Thats just not true. As an example, there will be many more, I know Of people who did just that. Ended up with 7 children as ‘had to backfill’ when one got too old for CB. Couldn’t do that now. Though when if Labour come on it’ll start again.

@ChishiyaBat DLA is for extra costs associated with teh disability. If all 2 year olds need that level of care then there are no extra costs.
Your housing situation is terrible though.

Thank you, she has been told this and I said when we were filling out the form that the question were stupid because all 2 year olds need that level of care. I don't want to go into details which is understandable.

The thing with DLA is that it goes off how the disability impacts you not what the disability is so it is often very difficult to claim for a very young child as they all needed high level of care
So to be successful in a claim you need to clearly evidence, what care your Granddaughter needs above and beyond that of a typical child of the same age
I obviously don't know how the cerebal palsy affects your Grandaughter ,but your daughter might find a claim is more successful as your Grandaughters needs become more apparent.

I don't think the state should support people who have many many many children; if you want more than a few you need to be really quite rich, afaics. Bad luck, children are expensive in money and time. I don't think the state should pay for children deliberately conceived by singletons for the same reason. You shouldn't bring kids into the world on the basis that they are somebody else's business to provide for. It's shitty for the children as much as anybody else. Also why would you want your baby to be 50% irresponsible selfish man who doesn't want them?

It's a tricky problem because what society needs is men who want to be husbands and fathers and can earn enough money to provide while women do baby rearing, and as a society we don't succeed in encouraging that ambition or the decent living wage that would help achieve it, noticeably in the poorer sector of society.

Rant over. I'm off to get ready for work now, have a great day everyone.

Oh and to add insult to injury he was claiming carers allowance, he didn't declare it to uc, but the first my daughter knew about it was when they tried taking it out of her uc payments, apparently because they had a joint claim when they were together she is now liable for his debt despite her current uc claim only being for her and my granddaughter. She has suffered horrendously and is now paying for gis crime on top of it! It makes me sick! What also makes me sick are the people on this thread who thinks anyone claiming benefit are nothing but scroungers who need to just take responsibility for themselves!

But who decides who is genuine and who isn't? No one is having children to get benefits and housing I can assure you! My daughter is living on a bed setee in my 2bedroom house with my granddaughter in a cot in my bedroom, along with her brothers in the 2nd bedroom, she didn't choose this, she was abused in every way you can think of, then she found out when the police knocked the door tgat on tip of all her suffering he was a paedophile who is now thankfully in prison. He is allowed no contact with his children or anyone else's thank fuck. My point is she has been living with me for 14months despite being in the emergency housing bracket! Her and my granddaughter with cerebral palsy who has been denied disability payment, too young apparently, are living on £500 a month hardly milking the system is it?

EilonwyWithRedGoldHair · Today 09:49

Not being deliberately obtuse, but I don't see the connection. I'm only suggesting that social housing in central London should be prioritised for key-workers - not elsewhere. London is eye-wateringly expensive and way beyond the means of many health, refuse and other vital staff. I'm not suggesting people should be forcibly removed from their homes - just that it should be phased in as people move out or...pass away.

I don't think other UK cities have the same problem. When low-paid key-workers have to commute long distances into central London, it would seem daft to allocate homes to people who don't really need to be there. And these people don't need to move to Siberia...just a less central zone of the capital.

£200 per day is actually not that much for someone self employed who won't be getting paid holidays, employer pension contributions, sick pay, nor other benefits of employment such as security of hours, redundancy rights, etc.

If Sure Start centres were so good, why do we still have ever increasing numbers of parents who seem completely incapable of looking after their children, after all, today's young parents should have enjoyed the benefits of the sure start centres of 15-25 years ago!

Damn I need to retrain as a brikie then!

But not as cheap as means testing OAP benefits which really would be very cheap and easy, especially as HMRC already have most of the data such as state pensions and income details of those with property rentals, large investment portfolios etc who will already been submitting self assessment tax returns each year!! After all, it's clearly cheap and easy enough for them to means test child benefit for those earning over £50k, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it!

This. The 'deserving' and 'undeserving' thing gets me every time. It's all luck, of birth, of personality, of neurodiversities. Rich people make as many bad decisions as anyone trust me but they have the money and support to mean it doesn't ruin their lives. Or they don't need to make bad decisions in the first place because they are rich and privileged. Some people really need to read Katriona O' Sullivan's 'Poor' - her story shows how easy it would have been for her to end up destitute and addicted instead of the lecturer in Trinity university she became. And she's intelligent enough to know that choice and free will is a very small part of her journey compared to the societal forces at work.

Any country facing higher numbers who processes quickly will become more attractive and find it politically and socially straining.

Even if Ireland speed up processing it’ll be tough in those ways

The linked thread is typical of the naive entitlement of many people

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/other_subjects/5072066-council-forcing-to-private-rent-when-homeless

None of the political parties can magically provide the catch all in terms of housing and benefit support that increasing numbers of people in the UK are demanding.

@MistressoftheDarkSide
The majority of parents are happy to have more support, whether it be with dental care or literacy or whatever. However, as previously mentioned, health visitors and social workers used to do that; now what they seem to do is visit people to curtail abuse. Most of us pay little attention to exactly what social workers do because most of us have nothing to do with them. The time that social workers are noticed is when a child dies, and then they are vilified.

I just wish more people understood the economic situation in the UK. The title of this thread refers to entitlement. There is such entitlement from some people who think it is the Government's job or their LA's job to sort out their life. Many councils are now facing bankruptcy. There is a scary documentary about Havering Council and the overwhelming problem of the huge increase in the number of people needing social care. It means budgets for Early Year provision, Sure Start Centres, Libraries etc disappear. It isn't fair and neither is it sustainable.

www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m001xgql/panorama-paying-more-for-less-councils-in-crisis

Tbf any country that sees higher numbers will struggle. Wherever the end of the line is, which seems to be shifting to Ireland and maybe NI after court decision

Same will be true for entry points to EU, ie mostly Italy atm

The two aren’t comparable. But thanks for supporting my argument that processing asylum claims would be considerably cheaper than shipping a few people off to Rwanda.

The UK allows such high immigration because it keeps wages low as there's more competition for jobs, that's also one of the reasons rent is so high. That's not "blaming " the migrants because of course there will always be millions of people in other countries looking to move somewhere better can't blame them but it is blaming the government because they allow such high immigration despite it obviously not being good for the country.
Also for the posters saying more houses should be built that only goes so far where I live towns are literally joining up because of the houses being built. There will be no countryside round here soon