Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Don't have kids you can't afford!

895 replies

user793847984375948 · 25/10/2025 10:57

Hi all, this is meant to be an interesting discussion.

I keep seeing people say, “Don’t have kids if you can’t afford them.”

But in the UK, if someone works full-time on minimum wage, the state ends up paying thousands for childcare so that parent can work.
If that same parent stayed home, they would receive less support overall, yet they would be raising their own child hands-on. A single mum can work part-time and get rent and living costs for kids, around 500 a month in support if she works.

Nursery is about 1K a month usually. Then there's the wraparound care before and after school that could also be funded by UC.

So why is one scenario seen as responsible and the other as “sponging”?

Further, do people who say “don’t have kids you can’t afford” actually think only those earning £60k or more should have children, since that is roughly what it takes to cover childcare or a single income? That eradicates the above two scenarios and it's just those with independent wealth

If so, what would that mean for society long-term, both economically and socially? There would be fewer poor people over all and I think this would have an impact on our monetary system and menial jobs getting done.

And if you believe that only the wealthy should reproduce, you are effectively asking rich, white, powerful men to police women’s reproduction.
That is exactly what is happening in parts of America right now.

Genuinely curious how people justify this way of thinking.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
ChikinLikin · 25/10/2025 15:40

Sooner or later we will have to pay women to have and raise children, which will be fair, as it is very hard work and society needs them.

shuggles · 25/10/2025 15:39

@user793847984375948 Do you support, in theory, any legal routes to preventing the poor from having children?

I think you're misunderstanding where me, and many other people, are coming from. I do not have an issue with poor people, and I suspect that the average mumsnetter would consider me poor if they saw my salary.

I do not think there should be legal barriers to prevent poor people from having children. On the contrary, I think more work should be done to bring down the cost of living (especially housing) which may indirectly encourage people to have children.

My specific issue is that I, as a single person with no children, am being asked to pick up the bill by parents who likely do not consider me to be a person, and would prefer me to be dead if they ever thought my mere existence was inconveniencing their children in the slightest way.

So in that regard, I think I would be fine with financial support to help poor families with children, so long as there was a way for single and childless people to opt out of paying that tax money.

Given that it's an established fact that single living is more expensive than living as a couple, why is there no tax relief for single people?

Original poster
user793847984375948 · 25/10/2025 15:39

@twistyizzy I don't get this because surely the reason you're working at your career is because it's rewarding? You get pension, satisfaction, and other things that people who are lazy and not working don't get.

You could also be on benefits if you wanted.

I don't understand why you're angry at those people when you obviously choose not to be them because you believe being them must be crap, right? So I guess I'm wondering why you're envious of them? Or why you're feeling like they're getting something you're not?

OP posts:
Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:39

Hortesne · 25/10/2025 15:36

And whenever I leave my own home I wear two condoms and carry a menstrual tracking device.

Maybe we could just live in sex segregated societies and then the able bodied amongst us that have acquired enough money to have a child without any support can migrate to live in a mixed sex society where they can reproduce to save any accidents.

Hortesne · 25/10/2025 15:36

And a UK tax tabulation manual.

Hortesne · 25/10/2025 15:36

And whenever I leave my own home I wear two condoms and carry a menstrual tracking device.

Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:35

FrangipaniBlue · 25/10/2025 15:25

I’ve never said the state shouldn’t pay for children in poverty - please do quote where I have?

Do I judge people who choose to have children knowing the state (me) will pay for them? You bet your ass I do.

Show quote history

Well that includes a lot of poor and disabled people so they're just not allowed children lest you judge them?

Hortesne · 25/10/2025 15:34

Ubertomusic · 25/10/2025 14:24

Have you not dutifully planned for everything? Shame on you!

Show quote history

Of course I have. Right down to an entire spare house filled with tinfoil, for when the aliens come to fetch us.

Original poster
user793847984375948 · 25/10/2025 15:30

To be honest @Newmeagain I think having more than 2 kids is irresponsible anyway in a few ways. Not sure how you can mentally provide for so many kids. I know someone who has 5 and UC doesn't even increase for 3 of them! I think she's just a very broken person and there is a group of people who live like this and it's really sad. I don't think they 'should' have kids but I wouldn't want the law to ever get involved in that. I think we need to uplift society instead.

OP posts:
Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:30

FrangipaniBlue · 25/10/2025 15:29

Again, please feel free to quote where I used those words!

Show quote history

If they’ve already gone to the effort of using 2 condoms and the MAP then I think it’s highly unlikely that a termination would be “against their wishes”……

There you go, HTH.

Ubertomusic · 25/10/2025 15:30

FellowSuffereroftheAbsurd · 25/10/2025 14:50

As a PP said "The message has been heard and received. Don't sweat about a few outliers. Sweat about the abolition of the state pension and social security system as we know it in the near future."

Society isn't coping because successive governments have successfully divided us enough that we dehumanise each other, see the worst in each other, while government leaders actively works to benefit themselves and line their own pockets and those of their wealthy sponsors. It isn't struggling because a shrinking number are having kids, and some of them have those kids while on Universal Credit.

As shown, different people mean different things when they say "don't have kids you can't afford". The kindest is that it's a harsh platitude towards those already in very difficult situations shouldn't make it worse; however, for some it's anyone who doesn't fit their idea of comfortable are selfish to reproduce.

Despite UK teenage pregnancy rates have dropped significantly to less than half what they were just over a decade ago and the latest ONS data I can find showing little difference in number of children by household income (cause really, when people say 'uneducated and undereducated' they mean poor), people will shout from the rooftops confidently that those at the bottom are to horrible animals to blame for everything from the country going bankrupt to climate change. That we have billions unaccounted for and its well documented that the vast majority of climate change causes come from corporations and governments that act like corporations. The institutions are at least succeeding in keeping the ire so many clearly have off of them.

Edited

Society isn't coping because successive governments have successfully divided us enough that we dehumanise each other, see the worst in each other, while government leaders actively works to benefit themselves and line their own pockets and those of their wealthy sponsors. It isn't struggling because a shrinking number are having kids, and some of them have those kids while on Universal Credit.

Absolutely this. And 'twas ever thus.

KimberleyClark · 25/10/2025 15:30

Theunamedcat · 25/10/2025 14:41

My friend got pregnant with condoms so went on the pill pregnant again so had a coil got pregnant again used a different coil began having major medical episodes they believed were connected to the coil so they eventually removed it and were going to put another different coil in or implant put her on a different "better" pill in the meantime and she got pregnant again

These days she lives like a monk with a copper coil just in case before people scream she should have her tubes tied they won't do it because she is too young

And yes she works

Show quote history

Did she ever try combining the pill or coil with condoms? Or did she only ever use one method of contraception?

FrangipaniBlue · 25/10/2025 15:29

Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:21

When you said using a condom presumably means you've consented to an abortion if a pregnancy still occurs?

Show quote history

Again, please feel free to quote where I used those words!

Original poster
user793847984375948 · 25/10/2025 15:28

CopperWhite · 25/10/2025 11:12

Because one is an expensive luxury and the other is making some effort to contribute to your life and society.

Sorry people think this is fake. I overshare then change my username frequently.

I am genuinely curious.

I agree that giving no thought to how you will provide for kids (though I do believe that emotional input actually means more than financial in this regard) shouldn't have them.

I don't think awful people should have kids, but that’s not really what I was asking.

It is more what do you want to happen? Would you put any laws in place?

I understand that the lazy mum who refuses to work costs less but is taking the piss.
I get that the working mum costs more but is ‘trying’.
@popcornandpotatoes this is the thing, the rent and bills are not sustainable for people. But if Karen and Pete work in Tesco and have no career ambition outside of that, and want to have a child, it's going to cost the taxpayer 1-2k/month.
And for what? So Tesco can make profit?
@ScholesPanda OMG this. Do I think mothers should be paid to raise our kids? Well yes actually. I cannot think of a better way to spend money really.

@RealPerson yes some do think this. I work part and do get UC but it means I raise my kids hands on. I could go into full-time work and see my kids loads less, bring in possibly a bit less (tax and student loan liabilities would mean I'm worse off if I went to minimum wage. And I'd be more tired and not as good a parent and I'd cost the taxypayer more via nursery fees.

Not everyone has the capacity to earn upwards of 40K. And our economy actually rests on poor people using debt and spending constantly.
If no one on minimum wage had kids again I think things would crash really quickly actually.

OP posts:
Hons123 · 25/10/2025 15:28

GelatoForMe · 25/10/2025 14:09

Genetical pool replacement or not, what has to be done particularly in the UK is finding the cultural balance, because international multiculturalism has failed ....we are talking of real children being born....they are not animals....they will have to live here and each and every humans wants to live well -

  1. Secure the borders to some reasonable standard
  2. Deport all criminals
  3. Start paying fair wage to everyone who wants to have a manual job, these jobs are needed
  4. Start defending the Christian roots of this country and make all Muslim slogans and cultural behaviours accountable as to what fuels them
  5. Make everyone who gets benefits but used to stay home do community work

Spot on

Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:28

FrangipaniBlue · 25/10/2025 15:25

I’ve never said the state shouldn’t pay for children in poverty - please do quote where I have?

Do I judge people who choose to have children knowing the state (me) will pay for them? You bet your ass I do.

Show quote history

They wouldn't be moving in poverty if benefit caps were lifted and were adequate. Do support benefits being lifted to raise children out of poverty?

Zavettimexico · 25/10/2025 15:26

No5ChalksRoad · 25/10/2025 14:53

No, the batshittery is excusing and indulging teen pregnancy with maudlin claptrap.

Decent parenting is a major preventative. No one in my school 45 years ago gave birth in her teens. It wasn’t culturally acceptable, and those of us who were sexually active were laser-focused on preventing it.

Show quote history

I’m not telling anyone else to live their life like me, the world was different 45 years ago there probably were pregnant girls you just didn’t know because they were sent away.

I had a baby at 16 and we have a good life now the only valid argument against what I did was the waste of tax money but like I said I didn’t know about taxes when I was 15. So it’s pretty strange you’d dislike me because of what I did almost ten years ago when I was in secondary school

Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:26

twistyizzy · 25/10/2025 15:24

We haven't said it because we don't mean it 🤯🫣

Show quote history

Well you don't want to say what you mean then , because you can't say that people shouldn't have children they can't afford and they shouldn't be supported by the state of they do, without that actually meaning they should be prevented somehow, how else exactly can you mean that?

Ubertomusic · 25/10/2025 15:26

twistyizzy · 25/10/2025 14:48

I have no idea, what does research tell you? I know nothing about Hungary so I'm not the one to ask but maybe they don't continually spaff taxpayer money on vanity projects eg HS2/Digital ID etc?
Maybe they don't have as much debt to service or as big a benefits bill?

Look it up as I have no clue

Show quote history

I don't need to look it up, I'm just offering you some food for thought.

FrangipaniBlue · 25/10/2025 15:25

Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:14

Yeah so implying it's a moral failure if they don't, judging and dehumanising them if they don't, advocating that the state shouldn't support their children if they don't, is all advocating forced sterilisation or abortion. Coercion isn't consent.

I think the person, like yourself, shrugging their shoulders at a child living in poverty and basically saying it's their parents fault - sorry you have no dinner Timmy Mummy should have been more responsible and I don't want my taxes going there- is INCREDIBLY selfish.

Show quote history

I’ve never said the state shouldn’t pay for children in poverty - please do quote where I have?

Do I judge people who choose to have children knowing the state (me) will pay for them? You bet your ass I do.

No5ChalksRoad · 25/10/2025 15:25

user793847984375948 · 25/10/2025 15:14

So it puts the income requirement up to around 60K a year then.

Show quote history

Assuming two working parents, that’s not unreasonable.

Or, couples on lower wage can save for a few years before TTC, like my parents did.

Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:25

twistyizzy · 25/10/2025 15:20

Ah but you didn't give them the answer they wanted so they will claim you haven't answered

Show quote history

Nope just not given an answer on what you or PP mean by personal responsibility once a pregnancy has already occured.

vivainsomnia · 25/10/2025 15:25

OP, you are asking whether posters think poor people should never have children.

Do you think that parents reliant solely on benefits, with little to no prospect to better their income should have the moral rights to have as many as they wish, knowing they will be supported, albeit minimally, by tax payers?

twistyizzy · 25/10/2025 15:24

Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:23

No I'm not actually given exactly what posters are advocating here (but don't want to say explicitly) HAS been enacted on poor and disabled and native or migrants populations in various eugenics programmes over the decades. It didn't happen at your school so you may not have heard about it.

Show quote history

We haven't said it because we don't mean it 🤯🫣

Unrulyscrumptious · 25/10/2025 15:23

No5ChalksRoad · 25/10/2025 15:20

You are repeatedly misusing the term “eugenics.” Unless you’re arguing that the choice to produce offspring one cannot afford is driven by biological genetics.

Either of which makes you sound ill-informed and unable to conduct a rational discussion.

Show quote history

No I'm not actually given exactly what posters are advocating here (but don't want to say explicitly) HAS been enacted on poor and disabled and native or migrants populations in various eugenics programmes over the decades. It didn't happen at your school so you may not have heard about it.

Swipe left for the next trending thread