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

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

425 replies

SuzysZoo · 10/08/2011 13:59

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?

OP posts:
Ephiny · 10/08/2011 14:21

Two would make sense as presumably it's approximately the replacement rate for the population. On average, given that some people will have one or no children, and some would choose to have more.

I don't think it would work though. People don't seem to make very rational decisions about having children (and often people in the worst circumstances have the most children, for various reasons, maybe something we've evolved to do!) and of course your circumstances can change - just because you can support a third or fourth child at the time you decide to have them, doesn't mean you'll be able to indefinitely.

Nice idea, but there are all kinds of problems with putting it into practice! And it would all to often mean children being punished, rather than irresponsible parents.

CogitoErgoSometimes · 10/08/2011 14:21

Child benefit used to be only available for the second and third children as a way to boost the birth rate. Social engineering at its finest. If we're saying we've got too many children now then it would make sense to do the opposite. However, I think the birth rate is dropping fairly naturally... and we need more rather than fewer babies to be born so that they can pay tax and keep all us coffin-dodgers in Werthers Originals. :)

Original poster
SuzysZoo · 10/08/2011 14:22

Yes, I can see that this original plan has lots of flaws. I am not really sure what my point is. I think it is just, there are too many people (I know, I know, I am guilty of having more than 2 children). Too many people claiming benefits (I know, it's hard to get a job and I know that most people on benefits would rather have a job - but let's face it - not all of them do). Too many old people who will need looking after in the future plus all the people who are 40/50 now. Where is the future going, because, the country won't be able to cope if things carry on as they are now....

OP posts:
bubblesincoffee · 10/08/2011 14:23

Oh, and families that have lost jobs after having children is not the same as having a third child whilst on benefits.

It's a pretty clear distinction, it wouldn't be hard to prove.

In much the same way that you can't claim JSA if you have voluntarily walked out on a job.

LolaRennt · 10/08/2011 14:24

NO one would deny a SN child benefits ILT, daftpunk hasn't been on mumsnet for ages.

If dh lost his job and we had more children, we'd cut back. We still eat better than we need to, and we could have more spaghetti. DH could eat vegetarian (like me) I'm not saying this is ideal, don't get me wrong. I just see all these young peopel out there rioting and wish their parent had been in a position to look after them. If you have generations of people with no job, no self respect. What kind of life is it for them?

2 kids are managable, more than I think you should show you want them and that they aren't a meal ticket

DioneTheDiabolist · 10/08/2011 14:25

Since I only have one, can I pass the unused 2nd child benefits to someone who wants three?

Original poster
SuzysZoo · 10/08/2011 14:25

Yes - I would give up my child benefit for anything in excess of 2 children if that was universal. That would be fair.

OP posts:
twinklypearls · 10/08/2011 14:27

As someone who doesn't claim CB and has waited 10 years to concieve a second child that I can care for and afford I have moments when I think like the OP. I recognise such thoughts are not my finest and fuelled by a rage and jealousy that needs to be put to bed.

turquoisetumble · 10/08/2011 14:27

Wow - the benefits culture is really strong on Mumsnet, isn't it?

The OP isn't telling anyone how many kids they can have. She's just saying that if you choose to have more than 2, then maybe you shouldn't expect anyone else to help pay for their upkeep. It's your choice. The idea that this makes her a fascist, is pretty ignorant (the Fascists normally want their own population to breed as much as possible).

On one hand I'm all for it. I think you should have kids when you can afford to look after them and not expect other people to help out. After all we have free health care and education (and contraception) already. However, as some of the other posters have pointed out, I fear that the only people who will suffer will be the children, which is pretty hard to stomach.

The balance between providing a safety net to stop child poverty/or abject poverty full stop and to make a fairer society, whilst still enabling a sense of independence, ambition and responsibility, is incredibly difficult.

LolaRennt · 10/08/2011 14:27

In much the same way that you can't claim JSA if you have voluntarily walked out on a job.

Exactly

GypsyMoth · 10/08/2011 14:29

'NO one would deny a SN child benefits ILT, daftpunk hasn't been on mumsnet for ages.'

if it was a third child,they would have to by op's reckoning!!!!!

alemci · 10/08/2011 14:30

How about 4 children. That is a reasonable amount for most people and stop giving child benefit to children who do not even live in Britain.

Pootles2010 · 10/08/2011 14:30

Of course it's not ideal, but you're tarring all people on benefits with same brush!

Did you know what of first people to be charged with rioting was a graphics designer?

I'm very glad for you that if your dh lost his job you could fix it by eating spaghetti, but in our family we would be ruined.

Fifis25StottieCakes · 10/08/2011 14:31

People can not just go on benefits and stay on them now. I know somone with sever MS who has been put onto JSA as he is capable of getting a checkout job

He would be ok until he has an episode and really how many people are going to employ him. He runs a flat on £60 per week. £8 water rates, £10 gas, £10 electric, £7 tv licence and a bit shopping and some bus fares.

I myself am on benefits and the Job Centre have bent over backwards to help me find work. Unfortunately what jobs there are everyone are trying to get them. I have 3 kids born whilst in employment

TheMonster · 10/08/2011 14:32

OP, YANBU.

zukiecat · 10/08/2011 14:32

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

joric · 10/08/2011 14:33

TiffanyBecause what happens if you have children from a previous relationship and enter into a new one where there are more children, or you decide to have more children with your new partner?

If you yourself can't afford to pay for more, don't have more.

ThisIsANiceCage · 10/08/2011 14:34

Your fundamental, originating flaw is to see children as some sort of asset or perk belonging to their parents, like a car or flat-screen telly.

It's a model that seem pervasive in England (or at least the south) and very different from, say, the Scottish model, where young people are seen as the whole nation's asset, to be developed by all.

BooyHoo · 10/08/2011 14:35

but truquoise why pay for anydcs at all then ifyou are saying people should be in a position to support their children? it should go for all their children. why should they get money for any?

BooyHoo · 10/08/2011 14:36

sorry for my terrible spelling.

GypsyMoth · 10/08/2011 14:37

joric,was that quoting me??

Original poster
SuzysZoo · 10/08/2011 14:37

I'm sorry. I think I am feeling a bit depressed actually. I have just read an awful post on the news about how some poor Amazonian Rainforest tribe has been slaughtered by drug dealers. Can you imagine how awful for all the mothers and babies and how terrified they must have been? I am sobbing into my computer now, more than i usually might.

OP posts:
joric · 10/08/2011 14:38

You wrote it!

bubblesincoffee · 10/08/2011 14:38

Lola, what do you mean by that? I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Do you think someone should be able to claim JSA if they have walked out on a job?

GypsyMoth · 10/08/2011 14:41

joric.....show mw where i wrote that?????

scroll back and see if it was me....or not!

Swipe left for the next trending thread