Big families

[ActionA]

Before I begin, I want to make it clear that I DON'T think only rich people should be allowed to have big families. In my ideal world, benefits would be more generous, there would be a massive SH building programme, rents would be capped etc. etc. I think the austerity rhetoric is bollocks and believe this ideal world is actually possible.

However. We sadly don't live in this ideal world at the moment and I'm surprised at the amount of threads by people complaining that they can't afford to get by and yet are still planning on having a 3rd, 4th, 5th DC. Again, I understand that sometimes the unforseen happens and a family that was previously doing well hits hard times. But that isn't the case in a lot of scenarios: the family has been struggling for a long time and continues to do so. I'm wondering what makes those families carry on having DCs. They know there isn't much help out there, and know that they are going to have trouble supporting those DCs. So why do it?

I'll repeat again before the people who don't like reading what's actually been said chip in: in my opinion there should be MORE help that makes it possible for the less well off to have big families if they choose. But that help just ISN'T there, so why insist on having a big family when you can't support them? Seems a rather selfish way of making the point that everybody should be able to have a big family...

People seem to take this very personally. I have friends and relatives with big families (3+). I still think its a ridiculous number of kids to have nowadays.

It is hard not to take it personally when people are telling you that you are selfish and damaging your children. I have 7.

Who are these rich people that you want taxed more?
No people shouldnt be able have as many children as theyvwant on benefits.
We claim no benefits, dh works f/t and i have just gone back p/t.
I find it very sad that people chiose not to have even one child because they cant afford it.

formerbabe just because you are frazzled with inly 2 children that doesnt mean we are.

I don't think you are damaging your children, you are however taking up 7 places in a GPS surgery, 7 school places...7 homes in the future etc. Its not a personal attack, its a fact.

Exactly formerbabe

It isn't rocket science.

angelos02 so poor people just should not have children, full stop? The entire working class population would be wiped out if we lived by your rules. Everybody is entitled to have children. If people can't afford to support their families without help from the state despite working, then the problem is with the state, not with those who are trying their best.

But also 7 (god keep them safe) adults paying taxes back into the state.

Its the pressure on resources that bothers me the most and just general over crowding. One thing we definitely don't need in this world is more people.

Nothing wrong with having a couple of kids. I was referring to people not being able to see how having loads of kids takes up resources.

I would tax the very rich a fuck of a lot more.

I don't think there are enough rich people to keep on subsidising a poor people breeding programme. I'm just chucking your words back at you.

It's never 'the rich' who pay tax, they keep their money in trusts and off shore. And if you decide on a ridiculous taxation programme, you lose all investment in this country like, ah yes the 3 day week and super-taxes of the 1970's.

So these rich people, who are they? The odd Russian or Arab who buys up football clubs and race tracks?

The world is over loaded with people - the problem is the elderly I'm afraid. Advances in medicine have cures common ills and people are being kept alive long past their usefulness . Again with medical advances, natural selection of the best has almost stopped human evolution.

www.theguardian.com/science/2002/feb/03/genetics.research

If you haven't read Dan Browns 'Inferno' it's a bloody marvellous idea

They may be paying taxes which covers the societal impact but environmentally it's several more footprints

If steps aren't made to reverse the population explosion that is taking place, gawd knows what state the planet will be in 50 years time.

I think if you choose to have seven children in today's world, then you must also accept the fact that people will question your judgement about that decision, whether it is religiously motivated or not. Maybe not to your face, but they will question it.

Example 1:- My niece, under £60 p/w JSA (not full amount because of her age), entitled to £75 p/w HB, which in her area meant she had a 5 x 6 room in a shared house with 10 other people, all sharing kitchen and 1 bathroom. Manny of them junkies and quite violent. Very frightening for her.
She had a child. Then her income jumped to £190 p/w (does it really cost an extra £130 p/w to feed and clothe a young child?). She was then entitled to (in her area) to £230 HB, enough to get her a nice 2 bed flat in a nice area.

Her quality of life life greatly improved.
I know this is not the same for everyone but it in a lot of cases this is a fact.

Example 2:- my other niece, 2 DC in a 2 bed 6th floor flat in a tower block on a rough estate. She has 3rd child, her income jumps to £360 p/w and increased LHA/HB, enables her to move to a 3 bed house in a nice area.

Just 2 examples of how having another child can vastly improve the quality of life for your whole family.

Like PP said, this is better in the short term, not ideal long term plan.

I am not making a judgement on the rights and wrongs of this system, and it is not the same in every case. I am just pointing out that in some (a lot of?) Cases, having an extra child can be very beneficial for your whole family and a valid choice to make for your own personal circumstances.

Christ on a bike.

One thing we definitely don't need in this world is more people.

I live in Scotland and all this week it hasn't stopped about how we need immigration because there aren't enough young people.

I think if you choose to have seven children in today's world, then you must also accept the fact that people will question your judgement about that decision, whether it is religiously motivated or not. Maybe not to your face, but they will question it.

I can still be hurt by it though. What use is questioning me? My children are already here, I can't do anything about that.

I have 3 dcs. I would love another one but we cant afford it. I do have a couple of friends who have bigger families-6 each-I don't know how they manage tbh.

I can't understand why you think that ideally benefits should be more generous in order to facilitate people having large families. Our population is huge and getting out of control. We have far more people than we can provide services for. Nhs waiting lists, oversubscribed schools (across an entire county) etc...this doesn't make sense to me. Benefits are so that people can eat/manage with their existing families.

Yes I know. But then you did decide to have them.

Please don't think I'm attacking or criticising you. I just remember you from another thread in which you said that you and your husband had made the decision not to use contraception. Seven children are the logical result (though it was six at the time :) )

You did share that info, so it's not like you didn't think it was anyone else's business. It was a thread about overpopulation, and someone asked what if everyone had that many children? You didn't think it was an issue.

I have not been searching threads by the way. I'm not some mad, stalky nutter. I just have a good memory.

The thing is I thought OP was making the point about affordability of large families aside from benefits ?

I think some people forget that it isn't like putting an extra pint of milk in the shop to have a baby. Yes ok under current policy there are XY and Z financial benefits for each child but someone has to actually give birth and raise said child too which is no small thing

My view is as it's perfectly legal to claim financial benefits per child then that's fine and if you don't agree then fault policy not those making the claims. That said I would have little sympathy with anyone planning a large family and then bleating that they have less money than they would like . You make your choices.

I don't think I've ever said that. Number 7 was actually adopted, if you must know.

I don't think everyone wants 7 children, so it's not an issue.

I know a girl who had two children, living with her husband in an over crowded council flat, neither of them working and they have a third child. Why oh why?!

People saying benefits are generous enough - please come and live with my family for awhile.

I have 3 dc, I was 'dumped' (for want of a better word) back in April. I had been with ex for 19 years - it was out of the blue, so we are not an example of having more children than we could afford, before anyone jumps on that.

He's been out of work for ages now, so no money coming from him, and I'm struggling. We just about make it through each week. At present I have just under £6 in my bank account. That's until Tuesday. I did an online shop earlier this week so most stuff is covered (we will eat), but I only have a touch of milk left and DS2 is out of pyjama pants (which were on offer in Tesco, but have now gone back up to full price).

I'm very lucky in that I have my parents living 10 minutes away - they're on pension credits so we help each other out when needed - but not everyone has this.

I don't drink or smoke, I don't drive (so no car costs to factor in, but it's putting a lot of jobs out of reach), we don't go out (apart from the occasional Saturday morning £1 cinema). The boys have one pair of jeans each and no winter clothes otherwise - they're still in summer clothes mostly. I buy a lot from charity shops, but the choice isn't great where I am.

It's not really a life, it's just existing, getting by, until I find work (and I'm trying desperately, but it needs to be reasonable or what's the point).

Threads like this always turn nasty - and here I am justifying my single-motherhood yet again

One point worth making - generous welfare benefits do NOT encourage people to have more children if you look at the population as a whole.

Look at the stats by country - Norway, Finland, Sweden - great places financially to have loads of DC, great welfare benefits, parental leave, the whole lot. Yet they have fewer children per family on average than the UK. The USA has a minimal welfare state, yet a higher birth rate

I never understand why people get stressed about the family here or there with 6 kids - patently it is balanced out by the tonnes of other couples with 1 or none.

In fact I have (almost) been moved to point out to tactless friends asking why I have an only that I am the statistical balancing act to their 3 child family