Why have so many kids if you're struggling so much already?

[AmusedTaupePlayer]

Not sure where to post this, but I know someone who I'm really trying to understand. She has autism and a number of serious mental health diagnoses. She's estranged from her abusive family, can't work due to disability, and her relationship with the kids' father has ended.
She now has four children, at least one of whom is also disabled (epilepsy), and I just can’t wrap my head around it. Raising even one child is hard enough, let alone four, and with so many challenges already stacked against you — why bring children into that?
I'm not judging her as a person — I think she’s doing her best — but I keep wondering whether it's fair on the kids when you know you can’t offer stability or support, especially if you’re also navigating trauma yourself.
Is it naive of me to think people should try to get themselves into a stable place before bringing children into the mix? Am I missing something? Genuinely open to different views.

You can't seriously be trying to argue that feckless people pumping out large families has no detrimental impact upon society? That their kids aren't more likely to end up dependent upon the state?

How are they feckless? This lady might be a great parent. Nothing about the OP said she is not. Nor does it say she is feckless. Just that she has chosen to have 4 kids.

What you meant to say was that you think disabled people shouldn't have kids, right? At least own what you are wanting to say.

What is the data saying kids of disabled parents are more likely to end up on the state?

🙄

I think you might need to go back and read what's actually been written, rather than the things your brain has concocted.

How is she financing the 4 dc would be my question?

I gather she isn’t working and then her partner is not on the scene

most people limit their families as they cannot afford 4 dc, so irresponsible of her and she obviously isn’t the only one

I have and the OP has written 4 posts about her. 3 of them a sentence long and the main OP. So basically not much.

She is entitled to PIP clearly due to disabilities and then she will be entitled to the same child benefits that everyone else entitled to gets. She won't need some benefits that you might claim like free childcare or vouchers.

So you think that having any kids that you cannot afford is irresponsible and we should cut child benefit, universal credit, free nursery places, free breakfast clubs, free school lunches, childcare vouchers etc? I mean they are being irresponsible if they cannot pay for nursery or lunches right?

4 dc in this situation, yes I do, irresponsible

I'd go further and label it selfish.

I'd call most parents irresponsible. Most are. Most cannot afford their kids and most do not parent.

Why is this one the issue and not the majority who are irresponsible?

As are all parents.

If people can't afford to feed their children lunch, they can hardly be considered stellar parents can they.

So that is most parents then?

Parents now get free breakfast for their kids and half the schools get free lunches. I mean who pays for that? Irresponsible to let others pay if you can afford it, right and irresponsible if you can't. So all are irresponsible.

That's the problem with universal benefits. To stop the poor feeling stigmatised they end up trying to treat everyone the same, which is basically pissing money up the wall.

Stigmatised by who and what? Who is stigmatising anyone and how would that happen?

If you went to school in the 80's everyone know who the "free school meals" kids were. They used to collect in the lunch money from those who paid and skip over the poor kids. There was definitely a stigma to being one of them.

That is 40 years ago! We still have free school meals for poor kids and free school meals for some and paid meals. Three different types of meals so how has anything changed?

Also this was not brought in 40 years ago. It was brought in about 10 years ago long after the lunch money stopped being a thing. So that is not the reason.

ok then no one is stigmatised at school for being poor, if you say so. Happy now?

How does anyone know what dinners anyone is on? How does someone know if they are on FSM, UFSM or paid meals? Often the staff don't even know so how can the kids know?

So please explain how kids can stigmatise other kids for something they do not know. Kids do not know lunches are paid for!

They can know

If their parents tell them but some parents do not know the difference between UFSM and FSM.

It isn't really anything exciting to discuss with a child and given that they all get free lunches to begin with and some have extra free school meals on top of the universal free school meals no one knows who is free school meals!

When staff in school do not know how would Billy's mate know who is and who isn't? They talk about dinosaurs and minecraft not who is on what dinner! ha!

Not necessarily just the subject on this post

Some parents send their kids to private school

Derailing the thread really but I'm not in the UK and free school meals or otherwise don't apply here, but we all still know who are the poor kids in school. No, it's not nice and it's not right and I make a point of not discussing it with my children, but we all know. It's always been the case. I was at school in the 80s and I don't remember who paid or didn't for school meals but still, we all knew who were the poor kids. That's just the way it works.

How does this add to the conversation? I suppose free lunches make it even more obvious in the UK? We wear uniforms so clothing-wise it may be hard to tell.

I don't understand why so few of your posts seem to have any nuance in them. There is clearly a world of difference between a family with two children where both parents work and claim CB and help with childcare and the family setup described by OP. The amount of financial support required from the state will be incomparable, not to mention the difference in general resource and non financial support that the latter type of family will need.

As a teacher you should also know that children are alarmingly capable of working out who is rich or poor and who is on FSM. At my child's school only the children with FSMs have school lunches every single day. Other families tend to pick and choose based on preferences as the meals aren't cheap. It's also true that during school trips the school will only provide packed lunches to those on FSM whilst everyone else has to bring in their own.