Being devil's advocate - should there be a cap on the number of children a family can claim benefit for?

[ReallyTired]

Flame throwers ready - play nicely everyone.

I feel uncomfortable about further cuts to the support that families already recieve. Young families have suffered enough. It would be interesting know how other developed countries help their young people.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31743031

There are plenty of people who think we don't have room for people fleeing for their lives from Islamic State. If Britain is full up then surely we should be discouraging people from having any lots of children. I think the labour policy of being more generous to families with child tax credits, pregnancy health grant, generous childcare subsidy has increased the birth rate. Maybe there is an arguement for discouraging people from having more children. I don't know. Many migrants are intelligent, hard working and frankly more of an asset to the country than many native born British people.

However capping child benefit combined with the loss of child tax credits will plunge families into poverty. Children have no choice in being born and should not be punished for the lack of responsiblity of their parents.
The child benefit/ child tax credit system is broke and does not help to allievate poverty.

I don't know where I stand on this.

I live in an area where people do have lots of children to avoid work. My cousin quite happily admits it. So sometimes I think that can skew my view.

There will be people this will effect who aren't doing this or are in anyway to blame for the situation they find themselves in.

However I also don't think the benefit system should be keep paying out because 'what if my husband dies and I am left penniless with 3 kids' argument either. Surely that's something you consider when having the third child.

I couldn't cope looking after 3 children on my own. I know plenty do, but I find 2 more than enough. With dh here we could cope. But I wouldn't have 3 because we may split, something may happen to one of us and die or become disabled etc. it is just too much risk to my mental health. Surely I am not the only one that thought of all these things while deciding about whether to have a third or not.

If I could stretch my finances to protect us and the children in the future, I wouldn't have anymore.

It's like buying an expensive car you can't afford to run or unsure from my point of view.

If I couldnt stretch

OK PigletJohn I can accept that but please give me some examples . Because other than the monarchy being overthrown and the Queen being forced to relinquish everything and go and live in a council house in Milton Keynes, I'm not clear how that could happen.

If you want to have 9 Children then fine, but make sure you and your partner can afford them.

There is a difference between having 3 or 4 children and having 9. This cap is basically saying that unless you have independent wealth or vast amounts of savings you don't have the right to have more than two children.

Tax credits are supporting the lowest income families to live in a high living cost society. If the govt don't tackle the factors that are creating the need for tax credits in the first place, high rents etc, then it is not reasonable for them to punish families in this way. The people affected by these changes have no say or control over the things affecting the cost of living. And please don't bring up any crap about the right to vote. The voting system is as fucked as the rest of the "systems" in this country.

Yes, it should be capped for all future families at two children. The one thing I would add though is that child maintenance must be a legal requirement and far more watertight than uot currently is, with big penalties for evasion, particular focus on self employed workers too so there are zero loopholes.

With child maintenance covering relationship breakdown, insurances available for death or disability anyone wanting more than two children (discounting multiple births) make an informed choice to do so.

If you financially are in a place where no child related benefits mean you will be condemning that child to a life of poverty or hardship, you might need to make difficult decisions in relation to abortion/sterilisation. Your circumstances are your responsibility, it's time people really considered what they are inflicting upon their children, who as people like to say,did not choose to be here.

No, there should absolutely not be a cap because it will punish the children in larger families, who have absolutely no choice about how many siblings they have.

I know that when people pose these questions they are imaging large families where the parents have no intention of working but though they do exist they make up a small minority.

What about families who are perfectly capable of providing for their own children but who then get made redundant or suffer some other unforeseen change in circumstances? They happen to have more than two children, who they absolutely could have afforded to look after when they made the decision to have them. They should be punished somehow?

If you watch poverty porn shows like benefits street or read the daily fail you may well believe that everyone claiming benefits is only out to get the most they can for as little input as possible. But that is not reality. It's propaganda.

so if very few 'breed for money' once the 'pull factor' of money for breeding is not there the impact of the cap will have very little effect. and hopefully no children will suffer as a result - I assume child benefit would still be paid?

This cap is basically saying that unless you have independent wealth or vast amounts of savings you don't have the right to have more than two children.

I think that's an exaggeration tbh. We are talking about cutting child benefit here, not denying 3rd/4th children the right to education/free healthcare, DLA etc

I think that if the only way you can afford a 3rd is by the government paying you £13.70 a week then you really can't actually afford a third.

I am confused about how this cap would work for fathers?

I mean if the father has two children with his first partner, then they split and he meets someone else who has no children - would the new wife be "allowed" child benefit for two children?

Could it mean that men could father lots of children who would qualify for child benefit but women would only be allowed two?

"so if very few 'breed for money' once the 'pull factor' of money for breeding is not there the impact of the cap will have very little effect. and hopefully no children will suffer as a result - I assume child benefit would still be paid?"

Are you being deliberately obtuse? What would you suggest to families whose financial situation have drastically changed for the worst? Suggest they have a couple of children put down so that they reach the desired threshold?

having googled this I see it applies to child tax credits not CB which will still be paid?

I think it should be capped at 2 dcs in the future.

The tax credits are capped too, so much more than £13.70 per week. But actually, the figures aren't what bothers me so much as the principle.

I agree with your last sentence in terms of current claimants, but the lack of an adequate safety net for families currently above the thresholds for tax credits is the real issue.

I wish I could remember where I saw this quote...

The only effective contraceptive is a glass of water. Not before sex, not after sex, but instead of sex

There seems to be strands in our society that insist that women do not withhold sex, but then bitterly object to paying for it.

Ever seen some of the threads where women are unable to get CSA because of former partner playing the system?

There is also the issue of coercive reproduction.

The numbers involved aren't massive, but they are there and some women are going to find life a lot harder if this happens. Less men will be affected.

misnomer that was unnnecessarily aggressive
I was not being deliberately obtuse or suggesting anything
I suggest you read my post again
someone up thread said that 'very few families' breed for money so ergo (if you are intelligent enough to follow my logic) from 2017 the 'pull factor' to keep having more and more children to get ever increasing amounts of CTC will disappear
anyone is free to have umpteen children if they wish - my only fear was that I hoped those who did were able to ensure no children suffered in poverty.
clear enough for you !

Cap it.
I grew up on an estate where having large families for the money was the norm. I'm desperate for a family and approaching the age where this will become difficult.
I won't do it until I can afford it. Why the hell should they?
Keep maintenance and widowed families separate. Redundancy can be insured against.
People need to take some responsibility for themselves.
As for no contraception for religious reasons. Abstain. Normally if your religion disaproves of contraception it's because sex is seen as a baby producing act. Don't pick and choose what bits to believe.

Could it mean that men could father lots of children who would qualify for child benefit but women would only be allowed two?

Child benefit and child tax credits are usually paid to the primary caregiver, which in most cases is the mum. (WTC is paid to the person who is working.) So in theory, yes. Women are allowed two children. Men are allowed to sow their wild oats with abandon if it pleases them.

*paying for it - paying for the results of it

Oops!

Abortion is a free and legal valid choice within the uk slight barring Northern Ireland I should add. I could accept an argument for why their legislation should differ to our own.

Ditto.

There is a massive assumption, from a big proportion of these posts, that benefits are for people who don't work and don't want to work as some kind of lifestyle choice. So that capping benefits will discourage these people from having more children. That it may.

But most people claiming benefits do not belong to this group so the benefit cut will adversely affect a whole load of families who do want to work and did work and made their decisions about contraception and the size of their families under different circumstances.

Don't agree with the cap because children don't choose to be born.

No sorry baby number three...you have to starve.

How many huge families (4-5+ children) families are claiming? Does anyone know? Or have we just blindly accepted the views of Shiny Dave and his pals?

Most people don't have children for the money. I didn't sit down and think "ooh if I have a child the Govt will give me X amount of £"

Most people have children which are wanted and loved. As a society we have a duty to the vulnerable and that includes children.

I am firmly in favour of capping benefits in general and for number of children.

Maybe temporarily higher rate for people newly out of work as a safety net but only for say six months so it can't be a long term solution.

I'm not fully understanding of the current system and proposals - but I think child benefit should only be available to those on low incomes, is it currently that you get it as long as neither parent earns over £50k?
It should be given to those genuinely in need and be part of the overall maximum amount that anyone can claim

Yes can't feed them don't breed them
It's not always like that though, is it. There are cases of abuse etc. so in effect you're depriving children and abused women.
Nice.