to think capping benefits at 2 children is a good idea

[moogstera1]

Child-related benefits may be 'capped' at two children"
*Iain Duncan Smith said the current system, where families get more benefits the more children they have, was among changes being considered.

Families on benefits were often "freed from" the decision of whether they could afford more children, Mr Duncan Smith said, and must "cut their cloth".*

yes yes, before I get jumped on, if both your arms fall off and a previously hard working wage earner is jobless, there should be ( and I imagine would be)a safety net for those who then need benefits and have more than 2 chidren; but, in principle, I agree that working families seem to have to make much more difficult decisions regarding how many children they have than long term non working do, and it's mostly about finance.
The suggestion is that this would not be happening till 2015 and then only to new claimants so no comments about which children should be sacrificed, please.
The idea seems to be to only factor in 2 children wrt tax credits, child benefit

No, I'm ignoring the sexist in the room...

Why is it a vile statement? You said, "how hard is it to say no?"

Many users here know a) exactly how hard it can be to say no
And b) that "just say no" statements rest on the assumption that a No would have been obeyed, as opposed to merely cueing another beating.

Men could choose to keep their dicks in their pants. How hard is it to say no?

So are we now saying that people on benefit are wife beating rapists? Got a little off track I think.
I think there are very few people in this country who genuinely have no access to contraception and are also raped on a regular basis.
Let's have a hands up from everyone who personally knows someone in this situation.

It is a horrible statement simply because it takes two to create the baby, actually you might just as well speak Jeremy Kyle and say "why don't men put something on the end of it".

I have met families where the poor woman left holding the baby has been told by the idiot of a father that he is not giving her any money as she "gets money off the Government". Until ALL start thinking responsibly (both those n work and out of work) this will not go away.

I only had one child as it was all we could afford, my friend had three which she could afford until her wanker of a husband and ran off with his secretary....and had to be chased everywhere to get a minimum of manintainance money. She eventually met a widower with two boys...hey presto they were a family with five children. In fact they earned enough NOT to need benefits but they could have met the threshold if their jobs paid less.

This is a tough one.

Think of the millions of children growing up in households where no one has ever worked. Poor blighters.

It would clearly be a good thing if people were responsible for the size of their family.

But how do you encourage that without punishing the kids?

Why do women choose to have children with deadbeat fathers?

Again you are assuming that mothers on benefits are '4x4' types . You are conveniently forgetting that most children of mothers on benefits will have been born to fathers for whom these are their only children and therefore there is no proven track record.

But even if we address the small number of women who do have children by deadbeat dads, the reasons are very human and complex. A belief that this time it will be different because he really loves her and wants these children unlike the others. Yes, terrible naivety, but not necessarily recklessly irresponsibility. You don't have to look very far to see similar reasoning played out among all human relationships including people who work. Take away those benefits and you won't stop that kind of behaviour. You'll just have poorer mothers and children.

God I hate the Tories. For q moment they almost had me with this one as there is a certain twisted appeal. Because of course there are legions of benefit scrounging families out the with hordes of children and no tax payer in sight.

But really its just a nasty policy that will affect all those accept the rich.

Sorry moog, but you're wrong there. I can think of far too many women in my acquaintance who have been forced or coerced into sex. Luckily many had access to the morning after pill, but it isn't always the case.

Capping benefits to two children makes so much common sense that I cant understand why it hasn't been done before.

I think you will stop a lot of 4x4 bahaviour.

It's not as if we are dogs on heat. We have an intellect to compete with physical urges - and sometimes win.

It's like being punished for procreating/marrying someone with children/losing your job or getting ill with children. Stupid stupid idea.

moogstera I don't think that anyone is saying that all people on benefits are wife-beating rapists. And no-one is saying that loads of women are raped on a regular basis. But there are plenty of people in this country who do not have access to contraception, whose religion or culture frowns upon contraception, or who are in controlling relationships and are not able to stand up and say "no more children please" for one reason or another. A lot more than people who plan how many babies they are going to have around how much cash they can get out of it.

"I think there are very few people in this country who genuinely have no access to contraception and are also raped on a regular basis.
Let's have a hands up from everyone who personally knows someone in this situation."

I can't decide if this is nastier than it is idiotic.

I mean sure, it's a totally cunty thing to say. But it's also deeply fucking stupid.

Lots of the people who should have their hands up wouldn't even know that they should.

But then there is the spiteful need to make life harder for a perceived underclass that is uninterested in rational policy.

It's so tricky.

1 in 9 women has been raped. 1 in 4 women experiences domestic violence. Most women have experienced a sexual assault of a greater or lesser degree. And take a look on the relationships board and among your own acquaintances to register the number of women regularly having sex to 'keep the peace' or 'because he gets a bit moody if we don't do it for a while'. They may not be being held down at knife point, but it's still coercion and therefore very ugly indeed. The number of women who don't have complete autonomy over their bodies and therefore their reproductive choices is still shockingly high in the UK.

I despise anyone who uses the term "spread their legs" about women having sex. It is a truly hateful and graphic description that means you hate women. Know that about yourself whoever said it.

You Hate Women!

"Capping benefits to two children makes so much common sense that I cant understand why it hasn't been done before."

Classic illustration of the difference between common sense and good sense.

Fakebook Thu 25-Oct-12 16:32:30
It's like being punished for procreating/marrying someone with children/losing your job or getting ill with children. Stupid stupid idea.

It's sort of like being punished, but through the meduim of being given other people's money.

No-one is saying all benefit claimants are wife-beating rapists. I am saying that some benefit claimants are in their situation because they are or have been in relationships with abusive men.

That's quite a different statement.

So, no one with their hand up then?
The vast vast majority of pregnancies are either planned, ill thought out, or the result of being pissed ( I include mine here!)
. I still don't believe this means countless children should be subsidised
I would love to know the stats. for children born as a result of rape and subsequent inaccess to contraception because I bet it's a tiny number.
If having a large number of children and not using contraception is part of someone's religion, again, I don't think that should be subsidised. It's a lifestyle choice. I grew up in a very catholic family yet made the choice to use contraception.

I thnk it suffices to recognise that some people will find themselves with 3 or more children and no means to supoprt them through no fault of their own.

Going into the details of why is just a big distraction.

moogster, are you just choosing to ignore those who put their hands up?

Punished?

What a ridiculous statement Fakebook.

You can't punish someone by choosing not to give them free money that they aren't entitled to.

I always planned on stopping at 2, DH and I had spent years scrimping and scrapping to get to the stage we are at now. I unexpectedly fell pregnant with my 7 month old twins, a shock but a lovely shock, this was after using the coil for 10 years (Oh and to the poster who was banging on about women who have twins should know they are at risk of having twins due to family history, there are NO twins in my family history at all).

We really had to crunch the numbers. We don't get tax credits etc plus we couldn't go to our bosses with cap in hand asking for a pay rise to fund our new babies. I decided to give up my job, no way can we afford childcare for two children plus my husband works overseas. I have had to set up a small business to bring in extra money as we have to get a bigger car. It does make me angry when I see people around us not having to worry about what cloth to cut when they have another baby.

My SIL has just had her 5th baby 8 months ago, shes 2 years younger than me, hasn't worked since having her 1st baby 13 years ago. Fell pregnant with this baby after being with the father (who is married) for a month. She got a community care grant and spent it on going to a music festival. I took her my travel cot as she didn't have a cot for the baby, he has been squashed in a moses basket since the day he was born. She has seems to have plenty of money to go on nights out every week and music concerts, spray tans and false nails. Her house is a shit hole, filthy, disgusting. Her mum (who is recovering from cancer) cleans her house for her once a week because SIL is 'too tired' . She gets more than enough money to feed and clothe her children but the latest mobile phone and xbox game is priority in her house. Her eldest came to our house one night, he seen the fruit bowl and asked what that was. It was an orange. She owes us hundreds of pounds as she has came begging for money for electric and gas. She got a school clothing grant and spent it getting her hair done then sat panicking that she hadn't got the boys any uniforms for school. There are some people who even if you gave them a million pounds their children would still live in squalor and the parents would still plead poverty.

I really do hope she is a minority case and that the actions of people like her are causing the majority of families on benefits to be punished. One day any one of us could end up relying on the state, its people like her who make it so difficult for others.

For this reason I don't think there should a cap. I would hate for genuine people to have to suffer because of the feckless few. I am quite happy to pay tax for her to squander if it means other children can have a roof over their heads, food in their bellies and clean clothes on their backs.

Also moog, I'd really like to see your data on pregnancies, whether planned, ill thought out or pissed.