Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

to think that when there is a schools place crisis perhaps the government should think of ways to reduce birth rates?

647 replies

jellysandwich · 04/09/2013 10:27

In my area (London) there is already a huge shortfall in places because there has been a baby boom. They are constantly opening new schools or creating bulge classes but this is often at the expense of other children who lose their playing fields and there is just not enough room in London to keep opening new schools and there is already a housing crisis because the country is so overcrowded.

I think perhaps it is time the government thought about limiting child related benefits to 2 children (which is the replacement rate) and those that want to have more can do so but not with taxpayers money. It would go some way to stopping some of the problems that rising birthrates create such as the school places crisis, overcrowding, pollution, increasing struggles for resources such as food and water and in an already overpopulated world I think the government is being negligent in not putting some sort of limit on child related benefits, especially when it seems to be counter-intuitive (if you work you don't get more money each time you have another child).

OP posts:
Dawndonnaagain · 05/09/2013 17:26

Asking for empirical evidence of your assumptions is not ganging up on you, and yet you still haven't provided it.
I have strong opinions, if I place them on a public forum, I usually have facts to back my assertions, I'll make an allowance, I am not sure anyone who uses the term 'selfish breeders' should be allowed to foster or adopt. I'll make another assertion, I bet you've never used that term in front of your social worker.

Your ideas, by the way, are ill informed and unworkable.
You are not helping yourself by using the term Devere.
Anywhere that has a longstanding personality who has always posted in a relatively calm, even handed and well informed manner is going to gather to protect that poster from attack when they perceive a threat, eg. somebody being rude and actually, a little preposterous.

FrigginRexManningDay · 05/09/2013 17:27

Dysfunction just don't get it MrsDeVere. My mother fostered children for years. Lots of people try and fail at fostering.

Lilka · 05/09/2013 17:28

That's good - and I wasn't suggesting that you didn't know any of that. I was saying that a large majority of families with one birth child (who want more children) wouldn't be comfortable with what adoption means - therefore we shouldn't be telling families who want more than one child to adopt. It's too different from giving birth to a second child

MrsDeVere · 05/09/2013 17:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

morethanpotatoprints · 05/09/2013 17:36

I also haven't reported anybody and would have the courage to say if I had.
I also know that nobody said a child was better with any parent than in the system, but to suggest that because there are children to adopt we should be encouraging more parents to adopt imo suggests this.
Sometimes if the right parents can't be found a child is better off in the system.

FrigginRexManningDay · 05/09/2013 17:36

No reporting from me.

Lilka · 05/09/2013 17:37

I haven't reported anyone either

LtEveDallas · 05/09/2013 17:41

to reiterate: i have already given you an example of what i consider to be a selfish breeder - the kind of person who chooses to have more children because it allows them to stay at home and have their lifestyle paid for by others

Good job in that case that there is only a miniscule amount of those "selfish breeders" actually in existence then isn't it - and actually, taking their benefits away would be a drop in the ocean, wouldn't make any difference to the welfare bill, and only the actual children would suffer. Good job.

Have you told your SW your views?

hobnobsaremyfavourite · 05/09/2013 17:43

no reports from me either.

filee777 · 05/09/2013 17:45

I think it is really sad that people can't see past the end of their own nose.

It is quite possible to have a political stance that society and the economy is not able to continually fund more and more children and not be a terrible person. Adopting and fostering takes dedicated and compassionate people who cannot be pigeon holed on an Internet forum based upon one persons view, blinkered or otherwise.

It is quite possible to have a discussion about this stuff but not while people are purposefully misreading posts or stamping their feet rather than actually discussing something.

filee777 · 05/09/2013 17:47

Again Lt, your 'studies' only show out of work benefits, not income based benefits. There are lots of people who have children with the knowledge that tax credits will support them and make no moves towards a better or well paid career because they simply don't need to.

LtEveDallas · 05/09/2013 17:50

Filee777, out of work benefits are what dysfunctionallynormal was talking about when she posted about "all the selfish breeders having babies so they didn't have to work" which is why I have posted about, erm, out of work benefits.

Hth

dysfunctionallynormal · 05/09/2013 17:52

reading back through the posts i can see why people have misunderstood what i'm saying. certain individuals have removed their verbal attacks that i was responding to - and it seems then reported me so that my posts explaining what i mean and where i'm coming from are not visible for others to read and make their own informed judgement. no wonder they are now deliberately twisting my words (and making some up) in order to character assassinate me! lmao! Very mature!

hobnobsaremyfavourite · 05/09/2013 17:54

erm paranoid much???

morethanpotatoprints · 05/09/2013 17:57

Dysfunctional

This is so ironic. I believe I am one of the selfish breeders you refer to and have just realised this.
I have just started working for the first time since the birth of my ds who is 22. We have had cb and tax credits since 1995 in one form or another.
We have 3 dc and only my dh works and up till now whenever I have had a job briefly I have had to quit.
The reason for this is because I am adopted and have silly stupid bloody mental issue that I found it hard to leave my dc.
I have sought help for this over the years and usually keep it in check before it borders real mh issues.
You see I have tremendous guilt because my birth mum died and I was born in the first place. Adopted people have issues that can carry on throughout their lives and there is only one attitude towards adoption that is right and I hear this from MrsDeVere
It isn't a case of disagreeing with somebodies opinion it is having the right attitude.
So as a selfish breeder what do you think should have happened to my dc when I refused to go out to work?
Please don't tell me I should have sucked it up because you don't know the horror, panic and stupid stuff I went through to get out of the door.

Dawndonnaagain · 05/09/2013 17:59

dysfunctional Use a valid argument, dear. I've explained what the problems are, stop crying bully and misrepresentation and use a valid argument backed up with research and facts. That is what empirical evidence is.

filee777 · 05/09/2013 18:02

We are discussing our points of view on an Internet forum, not writing a peer referenced essay. The 'evidence' from the other side has consisted of a guardian article for fucks sake.

alemci · 05/09/2013 18:04

morethan your dh has been working so fair enough claiming tax credits etc. wish you well with your new job.

LtEveDallas · 05/09/2013 18:04

Disfunctionallynormal. Posts are removed by MNHQ for being personal attacks or goading, both of which are against the MN guidelines. All the posts on this thread that have been removed, including yours and including mine, were personal attacks or goads against other posters. No posts can be removed by posters, only by MNHQ.

dysfunctionallynormal · 05/09/2013 18:05

LtEveDallas - i was NOT referring to out of work benefits - i was ONLY referring to CHILD BENEFIT in cases where a parent has more than 1 oe 2 children already(that is NOT an out of work benefit!). i also made it very clear that i did not expect for it to applied retrospectively; i also made it clear that in situations concerning multiple births/failed contraception should be judged on an individual basis. Of course people would be able to read that for themselves had my posts not been removed......

also, just wondering, why did you remove your original post in which you verbally attacked me? i notice some of your other posts have been removed by MN but that particular one was removed by you.....

i told you before i'm not a nasty person. i have strong opinions and i'm not afraid to voice them nor am i afraid to stand by them. perhaps if you had grown up where i did and seen what lengths some people will go to in order to live a work-free, funded life and the damage caused to the kids and communities, then you would understand why i feel so strongly about this.

dysfunctionallynormal · 05/09/2013 18:07

twistyfeet - i have no problem fostering/adopting a child with special needs or disabilities - provided i have received the right training and support to manage it.

LtEveDallas · 05/09/2013 18:07

Fileee, it was a guardian article that referenced the Joseph Rowntree Foundations Study, the full study was also there to be read if you didn't like the abridged version. I linked to the article rather than the study as it perfectly referenced, in one simple paragraph, the truth behind the myth regarding women having numerous babies simply for the benefits.

LtEveDallas · 05/09/2013 18:09

LtEveDallas - i was NOT referring to out of work benefits - i was ONLY referring to CHILD BENEFIT in cases where a parent has more than 1 oe 2 children already(that is NOT an out of work benefit!)

Way to backtrack. If that was true, why did you refer to the 'girl you know' who has 5 children, had her first at 19 and her second as soon as the first wa as school age, because she "didn't want to work"

filee777 · 05/09/2013 18:11

You appear to be the only one talking about out of work benefits alone Lt, as I've stated at least three times now.

dysfunctionallynormal · 05/09/2013 18:11

speak for yourself hobnob!