15% of households skipped meals last month because they couldn't afford to buy enough food

[cakeorwine]

‘Health emergency’: 15% of UK households went hungry last month, data shows | Food poverty | The Guardian

"Millions of people – including one in five families with children – have gone hungry or skipped meals in recent weeks because they could not regularly afford to buy groceries, according to new food insecurity data.
According to the Food Foundation tracker, 15% of UK households – equivalent to approximately 8 million adults and 3 million children – experienced food insecurity in January, as high food prices continued to hit the pockets of low-income families.

Expects warned the persistence of high levels of food insecurity among low-income families was a “health emergency” that would drive the prevalence of conditions linked to poor nutrition, such as malnutrition and rickets.
Nearly two-thirds (60%) of food-insecure households reported buying less fruit and 44% bought fewer vegetables as they struggled with the ongoing cost of living crisis. By contrast, just 11% of food-secure households bought less fruit and 6% purchased fewer vegetables"

This is awful data - and something that should be being talked about. Being in work does not protect you from this. Life is just very expensive for some people - and costs are still going up.

That's a really good explanation

I'm really looking forward to hearing from @2dogsandabudgie

Also perhaps @2dogsandabudgie could provide a breakdown for how they would apportion a budget of £75 a week for food, bills, clothes and travel as that what a single person? (or £60 for under 25).

Why are people having children they can’t afford to feed. They get benefits to feed their children. My friend is a single parent to two children ( partner ran off) she claims the same benefits everyone else does, her kids are never starving.

Well in my case I wasn't really planning on their dad dying of sudden unexplained death when he was only 42, but that's just me.

I could say "or kids". Everyone not having kids just in case they lost their jobs would have the Govt going full Ceausescu within two years.

I refer you to my immediately previous post. In simple terms: sometimes people wait until they can afford kids, then they have kids, then something bad happens and they can't afford the kids any more.

If we all stopped having kids just in case that happened, the Govt would force us to have kids because the Govt wants new citizens to be born.

This may be a surprise to you, but housing isn't the only way to turn a profit on land.

They tie themselves into expensive contracts for non essential items without a thought for how they will continue to pay for it if they become ill or lose their job.

Like what non-essentials? Smartphones are essential now. I've seen care workers expected to install monitoring apps on their personal smartphones.I'mexpected to install a multifactor authentication app on mypersonalsmartphone for work. I'm lucky enough that my skill set is rare enough that I could push back and insist on a fob. A NMW care worker on zero hours can't use a fob to be tracked and if she insists that her employer buy her a phone, she'll mysteriously get zero hours forever from that point, because that's how zero hours employers fire people.

Well exactly, I need my smart phone for similar reasons and have been told when my £10 a month PAYG deal runs out 3 days before payday it's 'unacceptable' that I haven't got access to what they need me to have access to, but don't want to pay for.
Add to that the one uniform top provided, and the policy it must be freshly laundered for each shift at 60° and of course dried and ironed in the 8 or so hours between shifts and then the trousers and shoes that must be this and that, to promote the company image, and of course you're dealing with bodily fluids and quite often they end up stained (so more money for stain remover and that doesn't work) so you need a new one at your own expense because you've had your one from the company. And you get minimum wage as well, so not even compensated in the wage for those outgoings that the company stipulate but won't pay for lest it cut into profits.

So many low waged workers are subsidising services in this way, enabling profits and struggling to pay the ever increasing costs of living but nope, they're just lazy and stupid and buying non essentials whilst they moan they're hungry and can't afford food, so much easier to think that than face the uncomfortable truth that you condone doing this to someone else as long as the services you want and need are available when you want them.

I don't have kids but if someone had in my situation then:

Several years ago I became disabled in an accident. Overnight I could no longer do the job that I had spent years building a career in. I went from a decent income to being on disability benefits. My income nosedived but my bills etc stayed the same because you cannot instantly change your life to meet your new commitments overnight. We burnt through our savings and ended up massively in debt that took years to claw our way out of.

I ended up retraining and now I have a decent salary which is awesome but a different disability might have made that impossible. If I had been single on disability benefits it would have been impossible. My DH worked overtime and weekends for years to pay for my retraining. If he had had to become my carer this would have been impossible.

If I did have children I would have gone from being comfortably able to feed them to being unable in a very short space of time. And Im not alone in this story by any means. And I have no doubt if I had had kids at some point I would have been that person being sneered at for having kids I couldnt afford as if I should have had the foresight to know I would be in an accident

Or you could go to Farmfoods and buy one pack of sausages and several packs of frozen veg. Still quick and easy to cook.

Don't apply to 99% of the population? Do your homework before asserting "facts".

The global prevalence of food allergies is 7% and climbing.

I would imagine from the level of empathy displayed from some of the posts on these threads theres probably an underlying thought from some that the poor shouldn't be allowed allergies and they are just being weak and lazy but catering to them

Oh, aren’t sausages processed any more?

A 99p pizza isn’t a filling or nutritious meal for more than one person either.

This is a fantastic explanation.

But getting rid of the pets can be heartbreaking

I have suicide plans for when DCat dies. I left home without him for a year and Mum says that he pined. When I went to visit, he sulked but then searched for me and cried after I left. He refused to go near her, but he will sit on me. I could not ever rehome him, I couldn't put him through being separated from me again. And I wouldn't survive it myself. I would go hungry, sell my car, sell my trumpet, sell my TV, even sell blowjobs to keep him.

(particularly when they are an emotional anchor, especially for children)

Research paper about how having cats benefits autistic children.

Or who may be so used to spending all their mental energy trying to feel safe, managing the behaviour of those around them, managing their own issues etc that there's nothing left over for planning food prep or a long term strategy for getting out of poverty.

See also: existing whilst autistic.

If you’d read what I wrote I also said about my friend. You know very well the people I meant but just had to try and vilify me anyway. Next time read it all and if you have a problem understanding me just ask 😘

They are, but a couple of sausages with lots of veg is a reasonable meal. I know very few people who will eat unprocessed chicken, pork or beef every night.

😂

I’ll reiterate, if you had read and understood my post I also mentioned my friend whose partner ran off. You know the type of people I’m talking about. I also said she manages to feed her children very well on the benefits most are entitled to. The post is about feeding children.

I suspect an underlying attitude that the poor aren't allowed to be disabled either and they are being weak and lazy by catering for those as well.

And as for mental health problems, well, the Daily Mail frothing will commence if you mention those.

I’d already clarified that I meant two young children.

So what does the parent eat?

Nothing. That's the whole point of the thread.

15% of households have skipped at least one meal last month to reduce costs because they could not afford to pay for everything they needed to pay for.

Talk about a wilful misreading.

If a parent is feckless and spends all their money on lotto tickets in the vain hope that they will win and all their troubles be over, and then they go to the food bank, which is worse: giving them a food parcel so that the kids get fed, or not giving them one and the kids going hungry?

If someone asked me if I was "happy" to see the former, I'd say "yes" too. "Happy" is relative and in this context we are looking at "least worst".

You do know that not everyone on benefits have exactly the same circumstances? LHA allowances differ wildly. Some people will have 80% of their rent covered by housing benefit, but in another area it won’t cover 1/3, meaning you have to make up the difference yourself from your UC. Some
parents get a decent chunk of maintenance from exPs, others get nothing. Some have lots of debt, others don’t.

Just because your friend managed on benefits, doesn’t mean that everyone can because every case is different.