To think the current benefits system sets single parents up to commit fraud?

[Littlefluffyclouds81]

I am a single parent, I'm currently a student and earn a small amount from self employment, so receive some housing benefit, CTC, WTC and CB.

Let's say, hypothetically, my bf moved in with me (there is no real danger of that happening for a very long time, but let's pretend). He earns £50k a year. If he moved in, as far as the system would see it, my children are his children, and therefore he would be jointly financially responsible for them. I would instantly lose all of my benefits, leaving me around £1100 a month worse off. This would leave me in a position of being no longer financially independent, and feeling like I had to go to him, cap in hand, to ask for money. Money, which often would be spent buying things for my kids.

My bf is a very nice chap and all that, but I doubt he'd cough up a grand a month to provide for me and my children. I doubt there's many blokes that would. His dd would also lose out, as through suddenly having gained two extra children, the maintenance she is entitled to would go right down.

Bearing all this in mind, I can see why many single parents are tempted to move their partner in 'on the sly'. Of course this is very risky, but only for the single parent (usually the female). As the benefits claimant it is the single parent who will be prosecuted, the partner they'd moved in would have no repercussions, even though no doubt they'd done quite well in terms of their own living costs, probably chipping in a token amount towards food and bills.

I think this makes it very hard for single parents to ever have a serous relationship, unless they happened to be a high earner themselves, so benefits weren't an issue. Or I suppose if both adults were on benefits, as they wouldn't lose out there. I'm not sure what the answer is, other than a citizens wage (which will never happen).

That's true, Gibbous. Wage sounds better though and as everyone would get it in some form, then there might not be as much angst about it.

Or maybe I haven't thought it through!

The few bits I've read about citizen's wages sound great, but they still shouldn't absolve absent parents from their responsibilities towards their children.

The few bits I've read about citizen's wages sound great, but they still shouldn't absolve absent parents from their responsibilities towards their children

It is amazing to me that we are so bad at the whole CM thing in this country. It is 23 years since the CSA was set up. There have been at least two major overhauls since then and still we haven't cracked it.

Whoever mentioned tax-code based CM upthread was onto something, I think.

To be fair, I think the biggest problem with CM is fathers that dodge either by quitting their jobs (and therefore denying themselves ~80% of their wage just to avoid the other ~20% going to the children) or creative account for the self employed.

Under the CMS if you're a bog standard PAYE employee, I think you'd find it hard to play the system. I think they have now tightened up the rules for SE people paying themselves dividends to try and avoid that being calculated as part of the CM calculation.

People don't want to wait or be financially solvent and that's fine, but don't bother saying that "you did everything right"

Yes, I did 'everything right' (as it's me you're quoting). A degree, masters degree, professional qualification, travelled the world independently, good career and good money. Had had previous long term (longer than a year) relationships prior to meeting ex at 27, married at 30, first child at 33. Ex buggered off at 38. I gave up working when I had my first child to support my ex in our so-called joint business ventures. We were doing well - 2 new cars on the driveway, two properties owned in the South East. What else is it that you think I should have done, exactly, to be considered to 'have done everything right'?

There is no protection from people turning into absolute wankers somewhere down the line. Why do you think that only 'people like us' can have children? Not everyone will go to university, not everyone will earn more than minimum wage. Why should they not be able to have children?

In other countries, single parents go to the work houses. Now that's a deterrent!

(I'm not saying I want that, just giving other examples)

Although there are a few fuckers I'd like to see shipped off there

In other countries, single parents go to the work houses. Now that's a deterrent!

are you fucking serious? I should go to a 'work house' because my husband left me at a time when I wasn't working and couldn't be persuaded (not even with court orders) to make even a minimal payment towards the upbringing of our children? that would be despite the fact that I was a qualified teacher in a shortage subject area and just needed a bit of time to get myself back on my feet and back in the workplace?

what the fuck is wrong with you?

In other countries, single parents go to the work houses. Now that's a deterrent!

A deterrent??

You think you can deter someone from being left holding the baby?

The things you list are (mostly) not protective from poverty.

The biggest risk factors for family poverty are divorce/relationship breakdown, having an ill or disabled child, having an ill or disabled parent and -yes- being in a larger family.

Are you now arguing that getting to know someone well before having children together does not prevent relationship breakdown? And that it doesn't reduce the odds of ending up with someone who doesn't pay child maintenance?

You're implying that if women followed your 'steps', they'd avoid poverty, but most single parents did have children in marriage or LTRs, did have a career before children and weren't young parents.

If you can show me a statistic that proving that single mothers

1. previously married to their children's father
2. having two or fewer children and
3. having became mothers after 30

are worse off (or even no better off) than their younger, unmarried, 3+ children counterparts I'll gladly eat my words.

And of course having a disabled child is a major predictor of poverty - I'd these parents should have anything short of the most comprehensive state support.

Don't ,mind Sunnsoo, she also wants to slap foster carers for, you know, being foster carers.

I'd never suggest these parents should have anything short of the most comprehensive state support.

There is no protection from people turning into absolute wankers somewhere down the line. Why do you think that only 'people like us' can have children? Not everyone will go to university, not everyone will earn more than minimum wage. Why should they not be able to have children?

I agree there's no absolute protection against men becoming wankers, you can only reduce the risk.

Much as I disagree with young/single parenthood, I don't view it as the preserve of high-earners. There's a big difference between stability (which realistically, we all can achieve in time) and wealth.

I disagree strongly with low earners having more than 2 children, but no-one escapes my judgement here - wealthy people shouldn't either. I think we're all pretty hard done by in 2016 because there's just too bloody many humans on the planet.

Much as I disagree with young/single parenthood

Does that phrase actually sound meaningful to you?

What possible bearing does your 'agreement' have anyway?

I disagree strongly with low earners having more than 2 children,

You're starting to sound like an edwardian eugenicist.

Don't ,mind Sunnsoo, she also wants to slap foster carers for, you know, being foster carers.

Does she now?

All the empathetic posters are out in force today.

What possible bearing does your 'agreement' have anyway?

More than likely, none - like anyone else's opinion on this thread.

much as i disagree with young parenthood
I had my first at 18 and do not care if you agree

Perhaps you mean 'approval' Apple?

Oh how I hate stereotyping. I'm a single Mum and do not claim a penny in benefits except cb.
I have my own house which is mortgage free because i inherited an awful lot of money when my Father died, that said I would rather have a mortgage and my Dad.
I had dd at 18 and hey guess what I still managed to go to uni.
I did marry but exdh turned out to be a bully so he had to go. I am now 35 with a 17 year old dd and quite happy.
So because I had dd when I was 18 I get the sometimes vicious stereotyping from the masses .
Nobody is perfect so do not look down on others

cannot - " I gave up working when I had my first child to support my ex in our so-called joint business ventures. "
You said you did everything right. You didn't. You gave up yuour job. I carried on working full time. We as a couple spread risk so if one went bust or lost a job we had the other income. You put all your eggs in one basket. Make sure your daughters never do that.

cannot - " I gave up working when I had my first child to support my ex in our so-called joint business ventures. "You said you did everything right. You didn't. You gave up yuour job. I carried on working full time. We as a couple spread risk so if one went bust or lost a job we had the other income. You put all your eggs in one basket. Make sure your daughters never do that

ah yes, all my eggs in one basket...the basket that was growing a successful business and thus securing my children's financial future. The one that one person could no longer handle so it was either pay someone else to do it or recognise we had a good level of success and that there was potential to build it further.

You do, however, very much prove the point that others have made (including myself) that no matter what people do, there will always be someone who has a bad word to say about the 'single mum' rather than looking the wider circumstances and understanding that we all make decisions which could potentially be regretted at any given point in the future should X, Y and Z happen.

Utterly hilarious. Despite everything I have written here, despite education, money in the bank, a long relationship etc. I am still in the wrong.

Oh, and I don't have daughters.

Much as I disagree with young/single parenthood

you know that these two things are not the same thing, right?

And that there are plenty of excellent young parents and plenty of awful old parents? And that there are equally plenty of awful 'together' parents with amazing single parents?

But more importantly, who are you to cast a moral eye over those of us for whom life threw a bit of a curve ball? There but for the grace of god, love.

These conversations never go well, because pointing out that certain paths carry higher risk is inevitably interpreted as a moral judgement rather than a statement of fact.

My opinion on this matter hardly matters - you're free to think that it's all down to luck, as many previous posters have suggested. I'd prefer that my children avoid the major pitfalls of too-early parenthood, too-quick partner choices so they have the freedom to make other mistakes.

I'd rather my children avoid the pitfalls of early parenthood
How do you know when they will become parents?
I dont see my dd as a pitfall, she is a very astute young lady with 11 GCSEs and currently taking A1s.

Out and proud.

I claim every benefit I am entitled to claim as the single parent of a disabled child.

The two things in there I had no choice over are "disabled child" and "single parent". It wasn't meant to be like that but you see life throws curve balls at times.

I worked for over 30 years and desperately tried to avoid giving up work completely but in the end it was my only option if my child was to be adequately supported.

I cannot imagine why anyone would choose it willingly, I was far far better off financially in work.