AIBU to think people shouldnt be getting money for having children?

[normality]

i know it is is controversal but i dont understand why some people feel the entitlement to get money for having children and aibu to think it should stop?

I think that if people want children then they should have them but they should not feel they are entitled for some kind of monetary hand out for having them

I especially feel like getting money for being pregnant like the sure start grant, maternity grant, healthy start vouchers ect should not happen because if you cant afford to have a child why should the goverment pay you to do this? what about the people who do not have any children and choose not to or can not why should they miss out on multiple grants and vouchers when they are paying more and more taxes to support the people who choose to have children and then choose not to work?

• i have a dd and although i wanted a large family i could not afford to have more than one child so stopped but never claimed any grants ect because i did not want to be paid for being pregnant as it was my choice

from en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_national_debt

It may seem unfair, but the numbers of people doing this are so small it is not really significant in the bigger scheme of things.

Flip it around. Many people with very large incomes have big families. Say someone is a successful commercial lawyer, charging hundreds of pounds an hour to big companies for advice, and has several kids. Fair enough, you say, they are earning it. They can afford their children. Only down the line it's the little people who have to buy products from the big companies, and those products cost more than they need to because legal bills and so on have escalated dramatically over the past two decades as lawyers seek to bill as many hours as possible, as expensively as possible, to prop up desirable lifestyles. So ultimately the apparently privately employed lawyer is able to afford a large family with all the trimmings because the rest of us are propping him/her up indirectly.

I think the moral is that it is nobody else's business how many children people have, and that it's better to argue about why wealth is getting so polarised in this country.

www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/#ukgs302a
Alternatively this may be slightly more accurate than wiki.

Why would there be less disability than there used to be

Ok, less rickets, less scurvy, a sharp drop in cases of plague..but less disability?

When children who would have died at birth now live longer because improved medical facilities.
Babies who would have been left to die at birth are now allowed the chance of life
Children with conditions and disabilities who are more vunerable to serious illness are now able to access better care and nutrition.
Antenatal care that can identify conditions that would cause death because of the stress of birth so those conditons can be treated in utero.
Disability is more visable due to people being allowed to live in the community and not being shut up in institutions and forgotten about.
There has been a fair amount of war and conflict in the last few decades which accounts for an awful lot of young amputees.
People are living longer and with old age comes greater risk of disability.
People are surviving serious illnesses eg cancer, meningitis which leaves them with disabilities
Adults with disabilities are allowed to get married and not sterilized (in this country anyway) anymore. Therefore you are probably more likely to come across MNers who are parents and have disabilities.

Is that enough to be getting on with?

HTH

Tilly, bear in mind that the 28% will include social security benefits for working people, such as Maternity Leave, Statutory Sick Pay, etc, so not just handouts.

Thanks for the link about the national debt, I actually feel a bit less sick about it now!

Dawndonna yours is for 2012 - a forecast after the cuts - thats why welfare costs are down. mine is 2009-2010. historical figures, responsible for the current debt.

BoffinMum i love a good pie chart

I don't understand Dawndonna.

How was your point not about money, when you are saying things like 'it is unfortunate that your family feel they can't afford another child, but the fact is that should benefits be changed, they would have a choice not afforded to those with disabilities. That is morally wrong.'

Surely that entire post is about money?

I do not expect people who are too disabled to work not to have DC, although I wonder how on earth they can cope with a baby if both partners are so disabled as to be unable to partake in any work....but my point is that if people who are working full time cannot afford to have DC, then why should anyone who is not working, be able to afford to have as many as they want??

Are you saying that if someone is disabled, then their desires for children should trump working people's desire to have children?

If people are interested, the Office of National Statistics is a good place to pootle about for accurate info.

Office of National Statistics

TheRealTillyMinto no, as it isn't safer
just the after care is better

Off to bed now but if I have time tomorrow I will sniff about for some juicy data from primary sources for everyone. Night night.

Little Miss.
You need to take the money out of the equation. It is a moral issue.
Whether or not your family can afford or not afford to have children, they have the right to should they so choose. That is the point and that right should be extended to those with disabilities.

OhDoAdmit i have no idea why you think i am 'against' people with disabilities. i disagree with what other posters have said.

i am discounting people beyond working age but you really think people under 65 are less healthy than they used to be?

And why do you think disabled people do not have that right atm?

They do, but there were people on this thread stating that anyone on benefits should limit the amount of children they have. I was trying to point out that those with disabilities should be afforded the same rights as all, and the benefits in that particular case should be taken out of the equation.

Dawndonna yes of course everyone should have the right to choose, but that does not equate to getting someone else to pay for them, when they cannot afford as many as they want.

Oh Blimey! It's about time I got out there and pregnant, then, if they are giving away free money!

wow so someone see's something on tv about a DISABILITY and whoom they are an expert.
I know this is mn, BUT DISABLED PEOPLE ARE PEOPLE TOO NOT ALIENS.

i will limit the number of children i have to 1 or 2 because i think population growth is too high in the UK & globally.

People with disabilities are afforded the same rights as everyone else as far as I can see.
They choose how many DC they will or will not have based on many factors, one of which is their income....just like everyone else has to.

I don't honestly see how you can seperate the two issues of morals and income when it comes to having children, since income is a major factor for the majority of people when deciding when and how many children to have.

Everyone has to consider how or who will pay for them to have DC, whether they are disabled or not, so I can't see how disabled people would be treated less favourably than anyone else.

littlemisssarcastic - I'll tell you why IMO. Because the amount of income required before you can "afford" to have a child is a moving target that is almost entirely controlled by factors that a family themselves cannot change. The cost of food, fuel, taxation rates, interest rates, etc. At the drop of a hat, without making any choices themselves and through no fault of their own, a family can go from having a comfortable income to struggling to support themselves. By your logic if that family had their time again they should not have children. Shifting circumstances based on the whims of big business and the Government - hardly sounds like an issue of morals to me.

I think the sensible approach is to just kill all poor people. Lets say anyone earning under 35k a year, obviously they're all just not working hard enough or contributing to the big society. Then nobody would need to claim benefits and we'd all be better orf.

Monetary incentive to have children? Where? I pretty much work for free after childcare, then there is the small matter of shoes, nappies, food, toys, books, days out..

Please, where is my handout? I was well off when I was single!