Is our society heading towards the point where having children is an unaffordable luxury for the average couple?

[MamaLlama123]

Is our society heading to the point where having/ raising children is becoming a luxury?

Thinking about my family as an example - My grandmother had 5 children - she was working class and a SAHM. Despite not having much, my grandparents were able to house, feed and raise their children well. They were not in poverty. They had small treats like fish & chips every Friday and a few days at the seaside every year etc. I don't think family size for this generation was any kind of luxury but children was just an inevitable outcome of life

Comparing this with today, I read so many threads on mumsnet about women who are in a much stronger position than my Grandma. They are not SAHM but actually have extensive qualifications/ careers and resulting in 2 incomes within the household. Despite being so much better off, women seem unable to confidently go forward in planning even a small family 1-2 children (comments from a recent thread about delaying 2nd child due to nursery fees comes to mind)

Are children becoming disproportionately more expensive compared to previous generations? and do you think that having children will be an unaffordable luxury/ unrealistic goal for todays children?

Only rich people can really afford kids

It's a known fact that if you have an educated mother they generally don't have big families.
If a girl goes to university for 4 years they get a job. Most entry level jobs at this stage can have long hours or the expectation that you do masters part time to move on your career. Most women I know as well want to have a job, travel and build up savings. Then most couples would like to own a house or apartment before or soon after having kid's.
It hard going to buy a house even in so called cheap housing areas without financial help from parents or grandparents.

I know several woman who before or after they had children changed jobs or careers to places with more family friendly hour's, better benefits, better paid maternity leave ect. In most cases the couples I know worked long hours, moved jobs, did post grad courses at night to get a better job and money. They waited to have kids in their late 20's to mid 30's when they had a house and were in established careers and were earning a decent amount.
I know 2 woman as well that supported their husbands when they set up their own business and worked long hours to keep the bills paid when this happened.

Most couples I know with children are both working, paying for childcare and don't have support from grandparents with child minding. So after 1 or 2 children they are not willing to have more from a financial or time point of view. The reality is that with the cost of living and bringing up children why would people keep having children and put themselves in financial hardship and stress when conception is available.

We were only able to afford our kids because we spent years working around each other. I used to work nights and weekends and dh 9-5. I would frequently go and work a grueling 12 hour nightshift in a terribly stressful environment after looking after toddlers all day. It was unbearable but necessary. It would not have been feasible to pay 4k in nursery fees like some recent threads suggest. Now they are all late teens/ early twenties and the cost is never ending as we now have to help with Uni fees. I compare my life to my mums and there is no resemblance, she barely worked yet had a comfortable life, my parents managed on one moderate wage to buy their own home, have an annual holiday etc. They paid nothing towards my Uni fees because it was all paid for by a grant. Life is a lot more expensive for parents these days for years on end.

They wont get that much as they will be benefit capped on UC.

They don't need the help though?

Exactly.

If people really want to be parents, they should be prepared to work toward it and save up for it, just like any other big-ticket goal. Not expect everyone else, including those of us who think there are too many humans as it is, to fund their lifestyle choices.

They are the people limiting number of children though. If society decides that is a problem and the government wants to increase the number of children born, they way to do it is to target the people who are choosing smaller families.

the middle class are making a rational choice to limit the number of children given their economic situation. They simply won’t have more children if the choice lowers their economic status significantly.

@LaurieStrode You do realise that children are crucial to the well-being of society. There may well be too many people on the planet but they are not all located in the UK.

If you look back on this thread all most people are asking for is affordable childcare and affordable accommodation. No one is asking anyone to pay for the keep of their children.

In my humble opinion the problem is that all the basics have been subject to rampant capitalism, which has now resulted in normal people with normal lives being 'priced out' of normal expectations.

@WithACatLikeTread

We don't get child benefit.

We don't qualify for the 30 hours.

We pay full costs of £2000pcm per child nursery bills.

We work full time and pay 40% taxes (often more).

We get 6 weeks paid maternity leave but then it's a HUGE drop in our salaries so have no choice but to go back to work.

More needs to be done to encourage educated, working parents.

We don't need benefit mums with 5 children who will all go on to be benefit parents.

Utter nonsense. There is zero shortage of human beings; about 8 billion on this poor burning, used-up planet, killing off other worthy species every day. Most humans are young. If countries feel they need more for labour or consumption reasons, all they need to do is change immigration policies.

Also, please define "normal expectations."

People these days expect incredibly cushy lifestyles, demand home ownership like it's some sort of basic human right, don't want to sacrifice any amenities or comforts in exchange for having kids and otherwise are entitled beyond belief.

I think the poster I was replying to said they should get help instead of those really struggling. They are less in need.

I don’t think it’s fair to say that wanting a secure place to live is “entitled”

Only way of getting that these days is through home ownership for most people.

Of course, the government could fix the private rental market to allow secure, affordable long-term / lifetime tenancies, or build a tonne of social housing, but I don’t see that happening any time soon…

Thank you, @Hatty65

All of those people who gripe that "you can't raise a family on one income like our parents did..." forget or don't bother to examine how different life was.

I recall in the 70s my dad came home with an electronic calculator, it was the only time I can ever recall him splurging on anything for himself. It was the talk of the entire street, people literally came to our home to marvel at it! It was the type with push buttons and red numeric readout, not the advanced digital type you can get in any poundland today.

Believe me, anyone who wants to lead the lifestyle of those "one-income families" of the 50s-70s can readily do so today. But they wouldn't like it very much. So stop griping and get on with it.

Seriously are you aware of the two child cap? The benefit cap that limits how much you can claim? You are very out of date with your stereotypes. Nobody is pushing out kid after kid nowadays.

You don't think that also affects parents on a lot lower wage than you but you think you should get more help than them?

@Sdpbody Also if you don't qualify for the hours you must be on £100k at least as a household. You are preaching that you need help to someone who has about a fifth of your income. It is a bit tone deaf.

This is all about housing.

No governments, Labour nor Tory, will build enough new housing due to vested interests in keeping house prices artificially high. Thus there is always a shortage of housing and prices are inflated accordingly.

It's not hard to build more houses but there is no political will to do so, as illustrated by the fact that this has been an unaddressed problem for decades now. Political Parties pay lip service to the issue and that is all.

I think this is very individual - partly area based as to cost of housing , child care but also around expectations and lifestyle. Also perhaps class based.

Looking at friends with DC in their late 20s/early 30s - these young people are still having a family on lowish / average wages but they are doing it before marriage ( no expensive wedding) and are mainly renting property (one set living at parents' home with partner and baby). But a big thing here in all cases is that they have family support with childcare . Friends who have recently lost their parents after spending a few years in a care role there are now looking after grandchildren at some point during the week. Mostly they are still working but doing part time hours or shifts and looking after grandchildren on their day off .

This scenario is a lot harder for those who have moved away from the area they grew up, initially for university but later with a further move for promotion so although on paper they are earning a lot more, they may live where property costs more, child care is astronomical and career and lifestyle wise they have more to lose .

There is nowhere to build housing. Certainly not in the county I live in. We have very very few green spaces left, we don't need to build new homes we need compulsory purchase of empty properties to be a thing. We need to resolve the issue of more holiday let's than affordable local rentals in tourist areas. We do NOT need to build more!

You can raise a family on one income, if you couldn't how do single parents manage?

My Gran had 4 children. The children slept two to a bed until they left home. My grandparents were farmers so both of them worked on the farm and the children had to help out after school. The children walked to and from school by themselves from a young age.

After working on the farm my gran still had to do all the work to keep the house and bring up the children. They heated one room and didn't always have hot water.

They grew their own food and nothing was wasted, the children certainly couldn't be fussy about their food. Meals were either meat and veg or bread, cheese and salad from the garden.

The children didn't have extra curricular activities never went abroad, a treat would be a trip to the beach and this would be maybe once a year.

The children had a very different lifestyle to my children and my grandparents had a very different life to me. It would have be a long hard slog. If people were happy to have this lifestyle I think they would be able to afford a large family but most people expect a better standard of living these days.

Agreed that for many middle class professionals the structure is not working. I see those in their early 30s at work having a child in a small flat, and then needing both parents to go back to work full-time. They have university degrees, and great jobs but the pay is eaten up by housing and childcare costs.

We need to build more housing. People are living a decade longer than in the 1980s, so those family homes are occupied by those in their 80s, when previously they would have been available for their grandchildren.

It is somewhat ironic that most of those on this thread telling you that kids can share a bedroom until 18, will insist on their right to have several spare rooms in their own house.

It may surprise you to know that working class women also work, pay taxes, sometimes own their own home and absolutely contribute to life. These women also have DC who are doing this.

You don't need to be a 40% tax payer to 'contribute to life'. Strangely enough, health and social care staff, teachers and TAs, shop and delivery workers and public service admin staff also do this .

My children share a room so I would like to sit outside of that group you allude to