Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Big families

256 replies

ActionA · 13/12/2013 11:57

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...

OP posts:
Takver · 13/12/2013 16:27

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

^^ this

soverylucky · 13/12/2013 16:28

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsDeVere · 13/12/2013 16:29

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

HappyMummyOfOne · 13/12/2013 16:37

People should have the number of children they can afford, both when conceived and if things should change in the future.

Sadly, mainly have large families as for every extra child more money is given to them. Take away the benefits and our teen pregnancy, "accidental" pregnancies and large families would mainly stop. Increasing benefits would be sheer madness, people already choose to live on them as they are generous.

The argument that we need children for the future is not very valid. We need future tax payers but given that many children raised on benefits go onto claim themselves many will not pay in but simply take.

Its not just money re large families but the environmental impact and the effect on the children. Being one of a number comes with many disadvantages.

WooWooOwl · 13/12/2013 16:40

Heartbroken, you don't need to justify being a single mum. I was a single mum too for a while. It's not about justifying having three children, or being on your own, but it does beg the question of why both of you are out of work.

The reason I think benefits are generous though is that you have three children, with two parents, neither of whom work, and you are able to live a pretty comfortable life.

It's unusual, although not unheard of, for two people in a couple to both be made redundant at the same time, and I would agree that if that unfortunately does happen to a family, then that's exactly what benefits should be there for.

What is your idea of 'reasonable' work?

MrsDeVere · 13/12/2013 16:47

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsDeVere · 13/12/2013 16:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Heartbrokenmum73 · 13/12/2013 16:51

I'm out of work because I got made redundant a few years back. There was nothing around that fitted with the childcare I had (and no other childcare available). We were also financially in a position where I didn't actually need to work, so we stuck with that.

Then we split and I've found myself in that horrible place where I've done the SAHM thing and now have a big gap in my CV. I don't mean 'reasonable' work (sorry, I wasn't clear there). My JSA agreement at the Job Centre includes how many hours I have to work (part-time) and weekends are out because of the kids.

I've had two interviews and my CV looks good apart from the gap. I'm experienced and qualified in my line of work and might have some work from home in the New Year. I also have a key-worker (met her this week) at the Job Centre who has contacts all over for volunteer work, extra training, etc, so I'm hoping that will help.

My ex is out of work because he's self-employed and his line of work (at the moment) are treating people like shit and promising work, then pulling the rug after a few weeks. He has work lined up for the New Year too, but it's just a bad situation at the moment.

I can't help my situation - it wasn't planned. When we had the dc our relationship was secure. The thing is, my dc are here now - it's not their fault their Dad did a u-turn on a long-term relationship. I paid enough in (and will pay plenty more in once I'm working). The dc will also pay into the system when they work.

We're not second-class citizens just because we've ended up on benefits.

Annunziata · 13/12/2013 16:52

The argument that we need children for the future is not very valid. We need future tax payers but given that many children raised on benefits go onto claim themselves many will not pay in but simply take.

Why are you linking this to big families?

Its not just money re large families but the environmental impact and the effect on the children. Being one of a number comes with many disadvantages.

Being an only comes with many disadvantages.

MrsDeVere · 13/12/2013 16:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

MrsDeVere · 13/12/2013 16:53

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Heartbrokenmum73 · 13/12/2013 16:53

People should have the number of children they can afford, both when conceived and if things should change in the future.

Utter nonsense. How can anyone predict the future? How many relationships break down and women end up on benefits?

I really need to get my crystal ball back from the pawn shop, don't I?

Heartbrokenmum73 · 13/12/2013 16:53

Thanks MrsD Flowers

formerbabe · 13/12/2013 16:53

Big families and families on benefits are two separate issues. I have an issue with big families regardless of whether they fund themselves or not.

Annunziata · 13/12/2013 16:55

I really need to get my crystal ball back from the pawn shop, don't I?

Grin I hope things get better for you soon heartbroken, but you are not second class at all.

MrsDeVere · 13/12/2013 16:55

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

comingintomyown · 13/12/2013 16:55

heartbrokenmum I hope things look up for you in the New Year

WooWooOwl · 13/12/2013 16:56

Actual hard evidence as to why someone would choose to conceive another child they can't afford is going to be very hard to come by, as you well know. But the fact that no one has asked the question doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.

There are parts of the country where it's completely the norm to get yourself pregnant around your youngest child's 4th birthday so that you can maximise the time time you spend on benefits before you are expected to look for work.

I'm related to someone who has done exactly that twice now, so she has three children and has never worked a day in her life. Not one. Her boyfriend hasn't held down a job for more than a couple of months either, but then he doesn't need to as he gets what he wants from his own mum and other people pay for his children. This relative of mine is an expert on the benefit system, as are all her friends who are doing pretty much the same thing. They talk about this stuff as if it's normal. It does happen, and even when it's a minority it's still too much. Anyone who doesn't believe this happens is being naive.

formerbabe · 13/12/2013 16:57

Someone wearing cross doesn't affect society or the world as a whole.

The number of people on this planet affects us all.

Resources/environment/over crowding etc

formerbabe · 13/12/2013 16:57

Typo...crocs

WooWooOwl · 13/12/2013 16:57

Heartbroken, then the system is working for you, and it's a system that should be appreciated.

Heartbrokenmum73 · 13/12/2013 16:58

I'm sure they will. I'm just having a bit of a down day today. It usually doesn't bother me, tbh, I've been trucking along marvellously the past four months because I'm just delighted to be near my family, near the sea (it really does make a difference) and the kids all settled into new schools so well.

I realised last week that I haven't had any anxiety attacks since I've been here, which can only be a good thing Grin

Heartbrokenmum73 · 13/12/2013 17:00

Sorry, WooWoo, I don't know what you mean by that last post (having a 'dim' day today). Could you elaborate a little please?

MrsDeVere · 13/12/2013 17:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

WooWooOwl · 13/12/2013 17:05

What I mean is that if the system is working for you as a temporary measure, and that it isn't judging you for having been out of work for years, then that's generous.

The original post of yours that I responded to suggested that you don't think that benefits are generous, and I disagree with that.

When couples choose to have only one person working, especially when they also have three children, they are taking quite a big financial risk. They are lucky to live in a country that will pick up the pieces if that risk doesn't pay off.