Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

David Cameron welfare reforms-no family will receive more than £25,000 a year.

748 replies

Hammy02 · 11/06/2011 16:12

Good idea? I think so. I can't believe a single family receives this much already in benefits. It is about the same as the average income so it would be ridiculous for any one family to have more in benefits than someone that works?

OP posts:
Portofino · 13/06/2011 00:26

RobF - I have been reading this thread and have to agree with you. I have one child. We probably could have afforded one more but decided not to for various reasons. Children are expensive, housing is expensive, the employment market is fickle.

My dad was one of 7. My GD was a postman. They had a roof over their heads and food. Otherwise it was pretty stark. We are more educated these days and have a raft of contraception available. To me, when you plan your family, you don't think just - oh yes we are OK at the moment - you have to think of what might happen in less good times.

xstitch · 13/06/2011 00:26

Being made redundant is is not the only way to fall on hard times. When speaking about fitting into bedsits and I mentioned a family of 5 I was referring to 2 adults and 3 children not 5 children.

I can't afford to have my dd tbh. Should I give her up for adoption? Or should I just kill myself and get it over with? Will you object to your taxes paying for the disposal of my corpse?

RobF · 13/06/2011 00:28

What reason is there for people to have 4 or 5 children in 2011 in a Western society, other than selfishness? We don't have high rates of infant mortality, people don't rely on their children to provide for them in their old age, or to work on the family farm, and we have affective contraception and abortion. There's no reason. People can have as many children as they want, as long as they are prepared to pay for them. If they are relying on the government (ie, other people) to provide for them, it is absolutely right that we have a say over it.

adamschic · 13/06/2011 00:31

Will add Rob how do you want to police this. Should everyone have a financial check before they are allowed to have sex?

Portofino, you and me too, we made our educated choices to have one child. Not everyone lives by our rules though and sometimes when your life isn't about choices and holidays and things money can buy people hit back at that by having more children.

xstitch · 13/06/2011 00:33

Can you answer my question please rob?

BooyHoo · 13/06/2011 00:35

"What reason is there for people to have 4 or 5 children in 2011 in a Western society, other than selfishness? "

what reason is tehre to have any? why do you permit 2 or 3 at a push?

adamschic · 13/06/2011 00:35

So Mr and Mrs unemployed have a child they cannot afford as they have to rely on the state, what do you suggest Rob! Drown the baby in the birthing pool, provided they use it, or perhaps force them into sterilisation once they have 2 children already.

Listen to yourself, and whilst I can see what you are saying I think you need to realise that your opinions are just that and other people will never live their lives to your code. And breathe!!!!! phew.

xstitch · 13/06/2011 00:37

I haven't had an answer to my question yet either but will add another. How was I supposed to know what was going to happen?

Portofino · 13/06/2011 00:38

It's a hard one! But benefits have been round such a short time in the scheme of things. Before that, you just bloody managed/starved.

adamschic · 13/06/2011 00:41

Xstich, hope you are OK and less of this talk, please. Not many people think the way that Rob does, honestly, some people are capable of realising that changes need to be looked into but can see the bigger picture.

xstitch · 13/06/2011 00:41

Yes I have done that, if you had read my other posts didn't claim for over 2 years managed by skipping meals and doing without other stuff. Then there was nothing left at all.

adamschic · 13/06/2011 00:42

Porto, this is true but I would like to think my taxes are being paid so that people didn't starve.

BooyHoo · 13/06/2011 00:46

i also struggled along for aslong as i could before applying for what i was entitled to. TBH i'd rather not live in a country where chidlren were starving on the street while bankers and politicians were snaking through every loophole possible to avoid paying their thousands of pounds of taxes

Portofino · 13/06/2011 00:55

Me too. I don't want anyone's child suffering. But surely there should be SOME line drawn somewhere. When you start your family you are aware that xxxx is the max you will ever get in benefits if it all goes tits up. You are free to take out personal insurance....

In Brussels last winter, I walked past a woman, begging in a doorway with a newborn baby. It was snowing. I was Sad and Angry . I like to think that in the UK such things would never happen. I am still shocked that in the eu capital they can. We can't make life perfect overnight. But people also need to take responsibiliy for their decisions. Women in the UK do have that much more than some.

xstitch · 13/06/2011 00:58

So can you answer my questions porto? In what way can I take more responisbility, what more can I do?

Portofino · 13/06/2011 01:04

I looked back -which questions did you mean? Abour killing your dd or putting her up for adoption?

Portofino · 13/06/2011 01:05

I was talking about having 4 or 5 children. Not one child.

xstitch · 13/06/2011 01:08

That and How was I supposed to know what would happen. I asked you because Rb seems to have gone without answering. Also it is myself I consider killing.

xstitch · 13/06/2011 01:08

I mean Rob.

Portofino · 13/06/2011 01:13

OK - so thread was discussing a cap on benefits. My "point" is that you can plan a large family if you want to, but you have to know that there is max you can get from the state if it all goes wrong, Rob seemed to be saying that there is no reason to have such a big family any more - that's not quite what I would say - but there is a risk attached to it.

xstitch · 13/06/2011 01:19

I referring to comments about living with my means, not claiming benefits at all, working hard, not having children if you can't afford any, about how I should be ashamed.

My point is I could afford things when I had dd, I did try and live without benefits, I did and do work hard so what am I suppose to do no as without a top up from benefits we would starve. I also definitely am ashamed. I sobbed for hours just handing in the forms even though legally I had been entitled to these benefits for over 2 years and didn't claim. I regularly feel suicidal and am in complete despair at ever finding more work yet I keep trying.

What am I supposed to do? Also how does people like rob pointing out that I am scum help?

Portofino · 13/06/2011 01:28

You seem to be reading to much into this. No=one said you should be ashamed! Benefits are there to help people when they need it. You have one dd - go get what you should. Did rob say you were scum Hmm

xstitch · 13/06/2011 01:30

Implied it the way I read it. I was ashamed of myself before I read the thread.

TheHumanCatapult · 13/06/2011 06:06

Rob F

There is a differance between dla and incapcity .and the latter is the one that is more easier to get as only requires a Dr to sign you of so is abused ( my xh for one ) but DlA requires backing from lots of proffesionals .think the fraud rates for DLa is 0.5 % .Infact a lot can not get it that do deserve it .

TheHumanCatapult · 13/06/2011 06:11

I could afford all my dc , what i did not bank on was becoming divoiced or having adisabled child or becoming disabled .no one can predict them .

xstich do not feel ashamed of it ever .I am now getting pretty thick skinned about what others think and it is their opions and lets be honest Rob are in a minority

Swipe left for the next trending thread