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

Normality - my children too are incredibly advantaged. They also have a healthy sense of awareness that they are incredibly privileged and express concern for the unfairness in society and are very aware of treading carefully and being sensitive to the needs of others - far more emotionally intelligent than me. I am very proud of them.

So, going back to Glasgow, what is very very small and what is the overall number of families who have never worked. I honestly dont know the answer but I suspect higher than very very small, its certainly not one or two!

What is Child Benefit exactly? Do we have it here in the US?

The system should be Tax breaks for families, subsidised childcare if both parents if a couple or a lone parent works more than 20 hours and help for short periods of time when in need but again not for a extended period of time but cut child benefit/child tax credit and all grants

It would surely cost the government less money which could be spent on different items to improve the nhs ect

Child benefit is money received for having a child

Does everyone get it, though?

We don't get money here, but you do get a certain amount off your taxes.

Child benefit replaced what used to be the married man's tax allowance. In about 1975 it was decided that this allowance should be taken from the man and paid directly to the mother to ensure she actually got it - paid to all mothers too - not just married mothers. It is not a benefit at all (not a lot of people remember what it replaced) but a redistribution of a tax break originally given to married men. It is not means tested and is payable for every child in the UK. It it being phased out but nothing is to replace it.

Which the op is claiming!

Didn't they bbring in CB so women still paid their stamp re pensions,too?

what happens to those children when the benefits are cut in the way you describe OP - do they just stop eating until the family circumstances improve?

x posts with married...I think

We are now entitled to child tax credit for the first time since me and dp have been together. This is because government cuts seriously effect the industry dp works in. Less work means more unemployment and company's are paying less to sub contractors like dp. We have lost £250 a week take home pay in the last year and it is still dropping.

In this instance the government cutting funding in the construction industry is to blame for us needing to claim benifits

Op yabu you should count your blessings that you don't need financial help at the moment but believe me it doesn't mean that you won't in the future. We never thought that dps wages would drop to a point where we would be able to claim anything.

What about families on minimum wage op?
What about free school meals?
What about EMA?

I am not saying the number is very small. What I am saying is that it would be a very stupid thing to say that 20% of the adult population of any British city has never worked. I mean just think about that for a second.
Then again going by your posts you are the lethal combination of thoughtless and ill-informed.

I think you may be right crazynanna but I am tired and this thread is beginning to irritate so I am off to bed now. I will dream about all the children I would have liked to have had and how life might have been.

OP you are very lucky to be able to afford the golden steps that led you up to your high horse.

when i unexpectedly fell pregnant both me and dh were working bringing in together about 30kpa. then whilst pregnant i was made redundant i got MA and tax credits and cb and sure start grant as our only income was DHs 15k.i had initially wanted to work again a few months after the birth but developed severe PND after a year i was in no fit state to work even if i wasn't in hospital. under your "ideals" after one year we would have had no help whatsoever so i would have been unable to work trying to pay bills and a mortgage of 113k on 15k a year?? it was bad enough losing MA after nine months but if we had lost ctc and cb we wouldn't have ate!

OP read up on John Rawl's veil of ignorance and then decide your policy

Well something's wrong somewhere if you don't need cb have private hc and a private pension but can't afford another child.

Hang on, this can't be right.

We worked out the other day that our 2 have cost us about half a million so far.

I must be doing it wrong.

How does one go about getting paid to have children as opposed to spending lots on them?

People don't get 'money to have children', it's a contribution, not the full financing but I agree that it must the absolute responsibility of the parents to provide for their children - helped by the available allowances

There ought to be no escape or respite though for fathers (or mothers) who fail to provide financially. It's not the government's job to step in and support existing children whilst allowing these reckless people to continue breeding more children they won't support.

I'm glad that we have a benefits system in place to help during hard times, I'd never want to go backwards to the old 'workhouse' mentality. I think though that there are some people who find themselves in poor circumstances for raising children and I think there are also some who don't mind having children whilst they're already in poor circumstances, knowing that the government will step in. I think that's what's wrong with the system. If as a society we have to 'tighten our belts' then that's what we have to do, not some decide to carry on regardless. In whose best interest is that?

I have never said anything about free schools meals or ema so please do not get on the whats next train of thought just because i am advocating that benefits need to be cut and replaced with a system where money is thrown at families until the child is 16 sometimes longer does not mean that i think libraries need to be closed either

I am also of the belief that if you are on jsa for longer than a year in order to keep receiving this you should be forced to volunteer for 5 days a week for at least 4 hours a day by doing something to benefit the community but again this does not mean i advocate cuts to the nhs or schools just because people should volunteer

I am aware people will be angry because the thought to the system being changed where it is harder to get money from the government for having a family but you also complain when the three year old funding is compromised or sure start centers close, libraries hours are restricted and the nhs can not afford certain items and hospitals go into debt

The whole country in under a mountain of debt but as soon as benefits and monetary handouts from the government stop you call it the government targeting families but in fact it is the benefit system where billions of the gdp is spent so it needs to be reformed into something better so that the country wont collapse

Well, cometh the straightened times ahead I am sure this money will be looked at very carefully. The argument is already being made that it prompts people to have babies they shouldn't - but then another issue is UK women are just not having enough babies

Of course people used to have to manage without any benefits for children. But that meant OP that some families were incredibly poor and often didn't have enough money for the basics. As a country we give these benefits so that children get a reasonable start to life.

whatmeworry - I think people worry more that the "wrong type" of women are having babies i.e. single mum living on benefits.

Lesley33 I know, but at least they are having babies. Many Developed countries are now panicking over the dearth of middle class babies (while not being able it seems to work out that if you tax them heavily and reduce job security they hold back on families)

What lesley33 said. UK tax paying women are needed to have babies.