Tax credits rape clause

"justnowords Thu 27-Apr-17 16:31:51
Sadly, i think this is an issue than many men and women are happy to turn a blind eye to in order to keep in line with their politics, "

YY justnowords. I have seen posts that prove this point on election threads already.

Bumping again...

Bumping

I do get what you're saying but I'm not sure the form being 8 pages long or not is the problem. The sorting of deserving women who have been able to leave from undeserving women who for the many many reasons why women can't, haven't left is part of it, but the main problem is the arbitrary benefits cap.

I'm aware that I will probably get shot down in flames, but the focus on this "8 page" form is misdirected.

The whole form/booklet is 8 pages, yes. But:

• Pages 1-4 are all information and notes.
• Page 5 is where claimants have to fill in their name, address, NI number and signature. Claimaints don't need to do anything else.
• Pages 6-8 is a similar declaration for the third party professional to complete, + some tickboxes.
• All of it is widely spaced and spread out to fill an 8pp printable booklet. It could easily all be on a single page, with supplementary notes. You have to provide more info than this form requires to get a Tesco clubcard.

Yes, the reasoning behind the implementation of the form should be discussed and argued. But let's not act as if it is 8 pages of closely packed, trip-you-up questions demanding hugely personal detail about your entire sex life, because that doesn't help the debate.

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/606978/nnc1.pdf

Assassinated, it depends on the police force, but yes, SS should be informed so as to undertake a risk assessment both for the woman and her children. SS regularly put enormous pressure on women to leave abusive relationships, even when there is no where else for the woman to go.

Signed the petition. Bloody horrendous.

I'd prefer to pay more in tax than put anyone through this.

I'm surprised there hasn't been more in the media about this - though I know The Today Prog covered it briefly a while back.

Clearly the ppl who knocked this together have never been exposed to DV or rape.

Another reason I won't be voting conservative...

Do social services get informed by the police if a woman reports she was raped/sexually assaulted/physically assaulted by her husband or cohabiting partner, and they are aware that there are children in the house?

Assassinated

If a woman was still living with someone who raped and abused her, and is bringing a child into the mix, that is not a healthy environment for a child, and wouldn't a 3rd party have an obligation to report such a set-up due to the possible harm to the baby growing up in an abusive relationship?

If they could tick to say they still lived with the abuser that is.

Exactly theonlylivingboy. And when you also factor in the shortage of social housing and the fact that when Universal Credit is paid it goes into one bank account (usually the mans) women (especially poorer women) will have an even lower chance of being able to leave.
As well as being too petrified to do so.

Why would social services become involved?

TheOnly

I do agree that part is badly thought-out. My mother was in a DV relationship for years and coerced to stay, it doesn't mean she wanted to be there. Although say she was living with the father who raped her and coerced her, and she admits it on the form, and then it would only be a matter of time surely before social services became involved?

It is indeed, theonlylivingboy.

I think what seems to be being overlooked, and what makes this clause even more disturbing, is that women can only claim for their third child if they are a product of non-consensual sex and if they are not still living with the father of the child.

Because as absolutely no evidence ever shows, it's so very easy for women in coercive relationships to escape those relationships

From the article linked to earlier:

"Furthermore, a woman may not claim the additional benefits if she lives with the other parent of the child, a policy which effectively undermines the very principle of coercion. The message here is loud and clear – if you fail to escape your abuser, you are somehow complicit or even responsible."

*some kind

DJ

I wouldn't need evidence for this form no.

But if I wanted a criminal conviction surely I need evidence of some kid that something happened to me? Confused.

What I'm trying to say is I wouldn't expect people to believe me just because I said I was raped. I don't see why they should believe my word because I could very well be lying. I'm just commenting on this idea I've heard lately that all rape victims should be believed full stop, which is a load of crap imo. Therefore, I see no issue with this form. Yes, you don't need a conviction to get this exemption and that's a good thing. I was talking about the idea that every person should be believed just because it came from their mouth. That means I could accuse someone right now and have people believe me with no evidence? It doesn't seem right to me and I thought it was innocent until proven guilty. Unless I personally had a rape-kit done after the event I probably wouldn't even bother going to the police as why should they believe me with no proof a crime has happened?

The form itself doesn't require much, I'm just not sure why it's so disgusting. They aren't asking you to get a conviction and do a rape-kit, it's just a few tick boxes?

LilacMarin19 Its not your job to provide evidence. You might not have any at all. Its a shame that you work in law but dont have any contact with Rape Crisis. They could set you straight on a few things.

Lilac you specifically said

'As a rape-victim who never went to the police, I would not expect to be able to turn around and say "so and so raped me" without any evidence of the attack'

The first four words being key. A rape victim. You didnt mention a false accuser, so not sure what relevance your reply has.

Rubbish Lilac. One of the ways of getting this exemption without having to use the form is if you have received criminal injuries compensation for rape. Criminal injuries compensation can be paid to victims without there being any conviction, prosecution or even arrest of a suspect. It can be paid even if you have no clue as to the identity of your attacker, as long as you have reported to the police and cooperated with any investigation.

The forms don't actually need much detail at all. The woman writes the name of the child and signs, then the third party ticks the appropriate boxes and signs. The forms and guidance are here.

It's still a disgraceful policy though. Another issue is that in Northern Ireland the third parties often have a duty to inform the police if a woman discloses abuse. That will understandably put a lot of women off.

Mims - It is only a statement of fact if it is true, if not it is a false accusation. If we accept all rape claims as facts then that goes against everything I have ever been taught about law. Yes, had I gone to the police then I would be stating a fact that a rape happened to me - but if I had no evidence then how can I expect everybody else to treat it as fact and not an accusation?

Saw this in the news and felt sick.

Lilac I disagree. Evidence, or lack of, doesn't mean a rape victim cannot state what happened to them as fact. It's not an accusation, it's a fact. Whether there's evidence, a conviction or nothing at all doesn't change that fact.

"Inside the online community of men who remove condoms without consent"

Apparently its called "stealthing" BASTARDS!

www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/inside-the-online-community-of-men-who-preach-removing-condoms-without-consent_us_58f75eb2e4b05b9d613eb997?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

It's a very problematic thing, either we believe all women who say they were raped... or we withold judgement until we have evidence that supports the claim. There's no in between.