If you can't afford children you shouldn't have them.

[MrsArchieTheInventor]

"If you can't afford children you shouldn't have them" [and] "child benefit and tax credits should be abolished" with the mantra that if she choses to be childless she should not be forced to pay for the 'breeding' choices of others.

A Facebook friend of mine. I didn't retaliate.

Oohlordy - do you think you may be generalising?

The parents I know who are on benefits and those who are working, all put their children first and do not expect the state to pay up for extra children.

People try to deal with what happens in their lives the best way they can.

littlemisssarcastic - I am glad you think like that, but unfortunately I have encountered on here and in other places that people shouldnt have them until they are on a totally self supporting wage, which unfortunately in this day and age is unrealistic.

I dont agree with people choosing to be on benefits and not working and do know a lot of peopl like this, however since teh recession there are a lot of genuine people that do want to work but through no fault of their own cannot do so. However as other posters have said its impossible to distinguish between the two and its not the childrens fault.

The same as what happens when working people don't budget!

"....then they are probably the sort of parents that should have SS onto them anyway."

So- the third fourth and fifth children of feckless parents should be taken into care because their parents don't have enough money to feed them? Are you sure?

I'm not sure the children would starve. As I already mentioned, we have the situation you describe tethersend atm, where in thousands of families on benefits the parents are alcoholics, drug addicts or gamblers, the DC don't eat regularly, and are not adequately clothed.

What has happened to those DC? Were the parents of those children given extra top up benefits, above and beyond what other parents with the same number of DC were given..because they had spent all the money on booze, gambling or drugs?? I don't think so.

How can you be so horrified that a child of a feckless parent who has not worked for a substantial amount of time is possibly going without food although I tend to think this would not happen regularly tbh yet are quite content to know that for years, alcoholics aand drug addicts have been encouraged to keep their DC living with them by SS and the govt, even while the DC have had their needs neglected.

Children are children to me, regardless of whether their parent is feckless or an alcoholic. Either we give them all enough money to make sure they can feed their children, or we don't. Why should the DC of gamblers, alcoholics and drug addicts go without adequate food and clothes because of the choices their parents make too?? Yet they have done for many years. Sad fact, but true.

"The same as what happens when working people don't budget!"

Which is what, Rhino?

What everyone (apart from tethers) is forgetting is that it's CHILDREN who will suffer.

Sure, encourage accountability. But don't generalise and for God's sake let's stop bashing people on benefits.

There, someone said it.

No Crystal I don't think I'm generalising, because I wouldn't class anyone who was on benefits (i) but wanting and trying to get off them (ii) on them because of low paid work (iii) on them because of redundancy / change in situation as someone who was playing the system.

I'm really meaning people who have children without any consideration of the consequences.
I do appreciate it's almost impossible to police / implement, but we can dream.

Yes I'm sure! What sort of decent parent would go on to have a third, fourth and then fifth child when they are already having to budget carefully with two and neither parent has got a job in all ten time it takes to have that many children?

oohlordy, I was referring to the comment about alcohol. Sorry, should have been clearer.

Oh dear tethers, do you need a lesson in economics.

If anybody doesn't budget they end the week/month with no money. They then have to consider how make changes to their budgeting so this doesn't happen again. In the interim you have to go without/ go to get an overdraft, or in the case of benefits with a low credit rating a social fund loan, to ensure you can buy the basics, and re-evaluate your income and outgoings so it doesn't happen again.

I reiterate, this is called personal responsibility.

"Yes I'm sure! What sort of decent parent would go on to have a third, fourth and then fifth child when they are already having to budget carefully with two and neither parent has got a job in all ten time it takes to have that many children?"

Oh dear- so you would bring in a law which saw children who can currently stay with their family put into care because their parents did not have enough money?

Do you have any idea how much it costs the taxpayer to keep a child in care?

Hilarious.

Great plan.

Rhino - you are being very patronising. Is that necessary? Do you think that the equivalent of an overdraft is the social fund? Have you applied for a loan there?

I think the problem is, that under New Labour, the benefits with regard to CB/working tax credits etc was quite generous when compared with other countries, and the wage threshold for being allowed to claim was reletively high.

Now these things are being withdrawn, people are (rightly) angry.

However, is it sensible to rely on a variable? I'm not saying that having children should be the preserve of the rich, but I think that relying on the state provide for you if you choose to have a large family is a bit much.

We are not rich in any sense of the word. And even though we would like a larger family; we can realistically only afford one child. We won't have another because we wouldn't manage well enough. It's all well and good saying 'the tax credits will pay for xyz', but as I said before, that would be silly IMO because what happens if they disappear? You're relying on a variable, controlled by the state, which they can retract at any time to pay for your children. It isn't a road I'd want to go down!

sorry to say this but if you are a child born to feckless parents then you are probably aleady suffering. i have seen kids playing in their school uniforms at the weekends because the parents want to spend their benefits on things that benefit them not simple things like new clothes for their kids. these are not isolated incidences but very common ones. these parents do the bare minimum not realising how badly the kids suffer

Yes I have had a social fund loan actually crystal.

I used that becaus tethers would have said, what if someone on benefits hasn't got enough credit rating to get an overdraft etc. so just per-emptying the obvious, sorry if it sounded patronising, that was not my intention.

This is not against people on benefits, but those who irresponsibly continue having as many children as they want, with no thought as to how they can be supported.

I find it incredulous that people seem to think its ok to have as many children as you like, without any means to support them, and the state can pick up the tab! It is unsustainable, and a perpetuating cycle.

It really is as simple as:

Person 1: You cannot tell me I cannot have a child

Person 2: You cannot tell me I have to pay for it.

End. Of. Argument.

love it

Arf at my 'lesson in economics'

Do you do Critical theory too?

Rhino - I see what you are saying. It didn't come across that way, however. I don't think you can draw a comparison between the two.

"I used that becaus tethers would have said, what if someone on benefits hasn't got enough credit rating to get an overdraft etc. so just per-emptying the obvious, sorry if it sounded patronising, that was not my intention."

This thread is brilliant- now you're arguing against stuff I might say but haven't

Bit unfair to pre-empt what someone might think, Rhino. Bit smug too, IMO.

As I said earlier, this thread is going far too wide and I've got sucked in too.

Tethers! Hello! What are you doing responding to this silly guff? we appeared to have drifted into some fairly amazingly right wing policy here - stuff that not even this current government are considering! And that saying something!

we appeared to have drifted into some fairly amazingly right wing policy here...

Expecting people to take care of their own shit?????????????

Alright, Shirl- how's things?

Sometimes it's just too easy, innit? The reason the Tories aren't considering such a policy is because the consequences of it don't make any economic sense. They may be evil, but they're not idiots