To feel a little sorry for the 7 children benefits Mum.

[MilgramsLittleHelper]

www.itv.com/daybreak/hottopics/benefits-mum/

Is just seems like another bit of benefit bashing to me.

I know she shouldn't have had children she couldn't afford, but what hope of improving her lot???

agree with helliebean, wasnt that how the larger families in the old days worked?

Yes, OTTMummA - very very true. I doubt some people care about any of that though. They prefer to believe she is some sort of scheming criminal who is laughing all the way to the bank whilst they live such hard lives paying for her.

cory In countries like that there is no easy, freely available access to contraception like we have here.

OTTMummA thread moved quickly, I was refering to your first post!

I think having a tidy house with 7 children is going to be hard work, that's not even considering how she probably has depression, even low level.
Like I said, people from loving, caring homes do not choose to live like this, most people have been set an example by their parents, if you were lucky enough to have a good set then your chances of being a stable well rounded person are much higher.

And who's to say she was able to access contraception?

ItsallFeegle contraception is incredibly easy to access in this country...

davsmum - you argument about upbringing would surely support the argument for capping benefit payments though? Surely we would want to discourage large, single parent families where no-one works?

also, she is only in the paper cos the Daily Mule gave her £500 or something so who can blame her for that?

Why wouldn't she have been able to access contraception, Feegle?
Give us an example.

Is it? What if her husband refused to allow it? What if he attended her every HC appointment with her to ensure she wasn't able to access contraception?

Ensuring your partner is continuously pg is the way some abusers maintain control.

but who would help her into work given she's someone who's never previously entered the employment market (I think)? It would be great if someone showed a degree of philanthropy so she could at least prove herself and of course the prat of a ex husband hasn't helped!

I'm actually quite shocked how many times the word 'scrounger' has popped up on this thread, it feels as though I've somehow stumbled onto the Daily Mail site.

All the posters saying how they would have loved to have more children, but stopped at 2 as that's all they could afford- is that worked out on having £20 per week per child for food, clothing, school trips, etc? Because that's what this woman will be left with once she has paid her rent. I don't envy her in the slightest, and can't believe anyone really thinks she has chosen an easy life, where she can lounge about doing nothing all day. She is a single parent looking after 7 dependent children, one of whom has SN- that sounds like a very full-time job to me!

Obviously it isn't an ideal situation, but we don't know her reasons for being in this situation. Even if it does just come down to 'poor life choices' (ie no abuse or any of the other reasons suggested), she has a hard enough life living with those choices now without being set up as a hate figure on TV and judged- surely constructive help with getting into and maintaining a more comfortable situation would be more humane?

In Victorian Times, if a father deserted his children and wouldn't support them, his details would be circulated around the country via newspapers and he faced jail under the Vagrancy Act.

That is one Dickensian practice I would like to see returning.

I have every sympathy with any parent who finds themselves in situations beyond their control. She mentions a mortgage once, so she must have had a partner / husband in employment at one stage, and presumably did not presume her relationship would end. Let's face it, circumstances change for all of us.

However, I do take issue with the comment that a family of four 'round the corner' have the same benefits as herself with seven. Name me an employer who increases wages when you expand your family. You have cut your cloth according to the pattern, as hundreds of thousands of working families have had to. I think this is what puts people's backs up, the fact she seemed to think she was hard done by from the benefits system, glossing over the fact that working parents don't bring home that kind of money and go on national tv moaning about it.

A very part time cleaning job whilst older children held fort would entitle this lady to working families tax credit which would at least give out the impression of trying to improve her lot in life by a slight contribution. Seemed a bit too entitled for my liking.

The benefits overhall being introduced now will not save money.

We will be paying for this ignorance and disregard for years to come.

Tories are looking to punish people who are a symptom of a bigger problem, I think it is well established that this type of reaction is never successful.

There will be more cases of child neglect, children put into homes/care/up for adoption, illness through malnutrition, crime etc,etc.
How are we going to pay for all these new symptoms that will inevitably come to surface?
These children will suffer, they will continue the cycle, in what way is this desirable?

Please enlighten me as to how things will change for the better by taking money away from uneducated parents?
Their children will not aspire to much more than their parents, not without intervention and who is willing to pay for that?

I can't believe your shocked Wishing.

MN is full of people who like to condemn, judge and practise their armchair psychology on.

I could bloody kick myself for opening these threads. Why do I bloody do it?

Absolutely what hellibean says.

It looks like here cometh the next generation.

And so how do we tackle that Beau?

By keeping our judging foot on their face in the dirt or by trying to support the next generation by supporting them and showing them they have potential to be more?

"by trying to support the next generation by supporting them and showing them they have potential to be more?"

Yes I agree totally

itallfeegle - by discouraging people who can't look after their own kids from having more would be a start - limiting child benefit to 2 kids in future. OK so this wouldn't affect her 7, but it might make her think twice about having any more.

This is a genuine question- how do you support a family and show their children that they have the potential to be more?

I'm still fairly new to MN Feegle, so haven't read a benefits thread before this one. I maybe won't next time!

Dreaming- what about struggling families who still have more than 2 children? Let the 'extra' ones suffer to teach their parents a lesson?

Do those excusing her really believe that she would have had so many children if the benefits system was less generous? There won't be a huge rise in neglect just hoprfully a fall in thd number of children born into abenefits lifestyle.

ItsallFeegle.

Mother gets off arse and starts doing some form of employment. Or get's on course to re-train.. Thereby setting examples to the 7 offspring.

Eldest offspring 'mind' younger offspring whilst mother is working.

Eldest offspring also starts to look for work. Eldest offspring contributes financially to family income.

I cannot tell you how many times my eldest has minded the siblings whilst I go out to to work for a few hours whilst dh is at work. From the age of 15 she did this.

Mother and eldest sibling could work different hours. Father should be found and made to assist financially. By money deducted from his wage or his benefits stopped.

As I have said before on this thread, when one is forced to take action, it is surprising how resourceful one can be.