To wonder why all benefits are not limited to two children only

[SuzysZoo]

Ok. I know that this is going to be a bit contentious. I don't mean retrospectively either. I just wonder why, in these cash strapped times, the government doesn't just say that all benefits, child benefit etc should be limited IN THE FUTURE, IN AT LEAST 9 MONTHS TIME, to 2 children per family only...... My point being that if you have more you should support them yourself. AIBU?

I meant that too but just generally. If someone disagrees they say you are talking shite and crap, and so on. Can't people artilculate an emotion or a point of discussion without it? It's like a tsunami.

ironic sunshine - I hate fecking also

free speech - if I grow to dislike it so much I will leave

Which comment Blue? If it's the one about Porritt, I stand by it. If its the one asking you if you are my mum, I am past the age where I'm going to censor my language because someone else might not like it.

Well yes, the one about your mum. But really karma it's ok, don't go getting upset. It's so unimportant. I can tell you will not mind what anyone else thinks.

A nice condescending response there Blue.

Would this be a bad time to call everyone a bunch of cunts....?

I can come back later...

I was just paraphrasing you. But I think you're getting worked up too. I really don't want to upset anyone - just forget it. You use bad language, I don't like bad language, we are both free to express ourselves, we'll all be dead in two hundred years. There are more important things to get exercised about. It was just an observation.

That's what I mean tethers: It does seem childish to me but there we are.

Blueberties I agree that sex education as it is at the moment isn't working. We need something more. I just don't know what else to suggest.

You big bunch of cunts.

Too soon?

I admit I'm in a grouchy mood. Events of the last few days have left me more snappish than I might otherwise be.

lol tethersend

I think the suggestion that at least some of the incentive is removed is a good one Sharney.

Fair point Op.

not soon enough, tethers

I did not fall pregant at 16 to get a council flat, or for any other reason than the fact that I had a regular boyfriend, we had a sexual relationship - which is legal at 16, and my anti-histimine injection interfered with the pill. Which my GP didn't tell me could happen. I was expecting to get my standard grades, do my highers, then go to university. Not be a 16yo Mum. I knew at 16 that abortion was something I couldn't do, as to me, once an embryo has a heartbeat, it is a person, therefore to kill it would be akin to murder. So I ended up a teenage mum. I was on benefits until my DD was 15 months old, when I went back to work PT, was working FT by her 3rd borthday.

When I fell pregnant with my second DC, both I and my Ex-H were working FT. Then he kindly thought it would be ok to shag my mate in my bed, and couldn't understand why I might be angry enough to divorce him. . So I was back on benefits.

Then I was with ex-DP, who had a good job, and free acommodation, when he was running a pub. So we thought nothing of conceiving my third DC. His pub got taken over, and got rid of all the old staff, including ex-DP. So we were homeless and out of work by the time I was 6 motnhs pg. Ex-DP took agency work for a while, and when DS2 was 9 weeks old, I got a PT job.

Since then I have variously been working FT in one job, got sacked for too much time off due to my disability, so was on benefits till I found someone willing to employ me. I worked PT until that shop closed down. Then have been out of work (But with Ex-DP working in a permanant job for the last 3 yrs,). I accidentaly conceived dc4, granted, wasn't planned, but my epilepsy meds interfere with my contraception. Ex-DP's now left, so I have gone full circle and am back on benefits until I can find a job.

Does that go some way to explaining why contraception being free will do fuck all to cut birth rates? I know of at least 7 of my friends that have fallen pg whilst on benefits because the GP did not advise them that taking AB's for a throat infection or chest infection would lower the effectiveness of the pill. Some of them CAN'T read - so how the fuck are they meant to read the bloody patient information leaflet. You don't get taught in your lessons at school that some medications lower the effectiveness of the pill. You SHOULD BE.

The ONLY one of my dc that wasn't conceived whilst either me or my partner were working was my DD, dc1. What do I do with them now they are here? Give them to a foster carer? Stop feeding them because, in your world, no benefits will be paid after the second child? Kill them so they're no longer a drain on the taxpayer? I don't know of ANYONE that has 'had a baby to get a council flat and benefits' and I know a lot of families in receipt of Income support/JSA. I also know a lot of people whose partners work VERY long hours, have to travel a long way by public transport, work FT, yet even with only 1/2 dc, STILL have to claim Working Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit, A percentage of council tax benefit, A percentage of housing benefit, and child benefit, just to keep a roof over their heads and food in their dc's stomachs. Living hand to mouth because their hourly wage is £5.93 an hour and their rent on a 2-bed house here is £850pcm if you can't get a council house. Which is most people.

Loudlass - are all of your friends thick - can they not look on the web and take notice of the leaflets that come with their birth control - do they really need the doctor to sit their hold their hand and spell it out to them.

This bloody country has got to change and it has got to be with people taking responsibility for their actions - if you can't afford to have ther kids then take contraception seriously.

I had to go to an all night chemist in London one day for some medication and it was pretty shocking to see the queues of girls outside witing for the morning after pill.

You can bet your bottom dollar too if young girls had to go home and tell their dads they were pregnant and that as their family they were going to have to support them fathers would stop letting their girls go out at all hours of the night, they would make sure they took birth control seriously and bahved in an appropriate manner.

Someone has to take responsibility and it is not your felloiw man, the government or the NHS it starts with the person who you see when you look in the mirror.

I agree with the op in some respects. In the case of new babies though rather than punishing ones that have already been born.
Take the case of my dsil, she has accidently become pregnant, so has promptly given up her job so she can claim full benefits and a council house.
We need to start loooking at the effects that these "meal ticket" kids are going to have on society in the future. Most will be dragged up and then go on to perpetuate crimes the like of what we have seen this week . Yes some single mums on benefits will bring up responsible and law abiding kids, but we all have to admit there are so many who don't .

Truth is that going forward we can't afford the levels of benefits we have, so they will have to be cut and then the only question becomes where.

I suspect it will initially be by reducing rather than limiting things, child benefits after X kids is an obvious area if it is popular with the majority, so you will probably find ( in this example ) reducing benefits for say the 3rd, 4th etc.

Interestingly in France they are looking at nudging working parents to have more kids by paying mothers up to e500 a month when they are not working, for a 3rd child. They are also increasing funding for child care so mothers can keep working.

Contraception has never been more readily available and is free, most teens have access to the net and library if they want more info and there are docs/nurses. No excuse for not using it correctly. If you dont want a child, double up on methods to ensure it doesnt happen - not exactly rocket science.

If there were no child related benefits, then more would use it correctly if they knew that they couldn't afford a child. Some do it intentionally to get the house/benefits/way out of not working and some may be "unplanned" but they still chose to have children knowing that they cannot affford to do so.

Those that work have to factor in costs and many dont have the desired number of children they want as they simply cant stretch finances enough yet it must be galling for them seeing their taxes go to people who breed with the intention of letting others support that child.

Whilst everyone would agree that the state should support those physically unable to do any form or work or short term after a job loss, letting people use having children as an excuse not to work simply encourages people especially as when you add up everything they are given its more than salaries.

We need to curb population growth or we are going to start running out of water, space food.

This means everyone should be encouraged to have fewer children. I dont think the benefits system should be singled out for special treatment but should be one of the things changed to encourage people for have fewer children.

Anyone who is responsible already makes choices about when, how and with who we have children. This change would be an additional consideration.

If we keep global population growth at its current rate, people are going to suffer terribly. Better to apply some pressure now to everyone and avoid larger pain in the future.

I have teenage boys, which I think can be more of a worry than teenage girls because when a girl gets pregnant the parents can guide them to make a sensible decision, as the parent of the boy you are unlikely to have any influence over the decision.

Dh and I have discussed this at length, within the next year we will be placing a huge amount of condoms in the boys bathroom, out of the box, read to use. Dh will show them where they are and hope that because they have ready access to them, they will use them.

I don't care if they use them as water balloons initially, as long as they are confident about using them when the time comes.

My aunt and uncle have six and as far as I know have never taken a penny from the state. (Although their youngest does have Down Syndrome so there maybe some sort of disability payments there) Not sure what my point is there, just sayin'.

I think having less children would be good for everyone, but I strenuously object to abortion being used to further that end. It's not working out well for China, and I cannot imagine the trauma of an unwanted termination.

I actually think paying people to be sterilized or implanted isn't a bad idea, as long as it's offered to EVERYONE, not just the poor to "keep them from breeding."