To be gutted that I won't be getting tax credits for 3rd child?

[GutenTag]

I'm just wondering what people's opinion is really.

We are trying for a 3rd child and I won't be getting any tax credits for this child as the government has changed the rules so that from next year tax credits are only paid for up to a maximum of 2 children.

I currently receive around £1k of TC for the kids and I would have received £4k for the 3rd if the government hadn't made the changes.

That would have meant an extra £250 a month. It's a lot of money for us. My DH works and I'm a SAHM. We have a £100k mortgage on a small house in a deprived area of town. We get by. We don't have much money left each month and I need to save literally for everything. I'm really really gutted. I really wanted 3 kids and this has meant that I'll be financially alot worse off now.

Of course I don't expect the government to "pay" for my children but it would have really helped, that's all. It would have eased the pressure off.

Just for the record we have never received any other benefits apart from JSA when DH was made redundant last year which was a godsend as we would have been homeless otherwise.

Do you think AiBU to feel/ think like this?

I don't get any tax credit and myself and DH work to provide a high standard of living for DC. I don't mind this as id much prefer those in need are given financial support. You don't 'need' to have another DC, if you want one, get a job and boost your income

Just, I can't say anymore without potentially outing myself. But I stand by it.

What's that got to do with the contradiction between your two posts?

Careful chipped you'll be suggesting a policy next to stop poor people reproducing.

Why have 3 children? Think of the poor middle child

We can't afford even a second child :o

People will continue to have children for a plethora of reasons. Some people will never have the potential to earn over 20k, does that they have less right to a family than you?

Agreed.

I don't want to live in a society in which a third of the population are obliged to live as childless service industry drones. That's all flavours of dystopian sinister.

As an aside, there is an article in today's guardian magazine where an attachment parenting woman is blaming Adhd on neglectful parenting (i.e. not attachment parenting)

"Some people will never have the potential to earn over 20k, does that they have less right to a family than you?"

I don't think there is a particular right or entitlement to have children. Maybe it's that sentiment which has sent the OP down the wrong path.

If someone is a low earner and they know that their family income will always be low because of their earning potential they need to accept that they have two choices. Firstly, have one child, or at a stretch two children. Secondly, have three or more and live hand to mouth for twenty years.

It's not fair that some people who intend to rely on earned income have to make the decision to stop at one child because they can't afford any more, while others who rely, in part, on tax credits or other benefits feel that they deserve as many children as they want and expect the part of their income provided by the state to increase accordingly.

Parents and one child still = a family

What I find ironic is that by having more children when they can't afford it and expecting the state to pay, people like the OP are actually not only making their existing children poorer, but other vulnerable people too.

Pay for your own kids. We can only afford one and don't want to pay for yours.

The problem we have now is that tax credits were introduced, continued and increased, partly in preference to sufficient minimum wage hikes to meet the cost of living. It was quite a bone of contention between Blair and Brown.

Now the TC system is being dismantled but low pay has fallen well behind the cost of living and it is hard to see how and when it will catch up. Which leaves the low paid high and dry.

I'm sure if you get a job if £6-10k a year you would notice the difference.

The OP must be very highly qualified if she is going to have 10k left after paying childcare for two kids and a baby.

She will of course though get maternity pay, a benefit, and be able to stay at home for some time with the baby.

There are jobs out there where you can work 39 wks and have it factored over 12 mths. Working evening, weekends can easily bring in this wage ., You then don't need to worry about childcare cost.

I love it when people say they aren't relying on the state. Unless you have full private health care & education then you are relying on other people. Fucking numpties. Not saying its wrong but don't make out that you're not taking out of the pot.

Well if you can't afford another child why on EARTH are you trying for one?!

Why should taxpayers should prop up your wish for a bigger family? If you can afford a child have one. If not then sorry- not the government's problem.

If you want another child then you need to go to work to pay for it your self!

They're possibly even relying on people to care for their own children who are themselves dependent on CTC to make ends meet. However, I do think OP is unreasonable. It is all very well to feel disappointed, quite another to moan about how hard done by she is on a public forum. And while what she receives at present is a supplement to her Dh's income to care for her kids, what she would have received for the third, if her numbers are correct,would have pretty much covered all the cost of that child. She has 2 choices, either live with the disappointment, or scrimp and scrape to have the third.

All benefits should be for falling on hard times. ALL benefits. You should be self reliant otherwise.

if you need tax credit that much then dont have any more children. if you have to save for everything your not exactly in the right place to even plan for a baby. the cuts were well spoke about and highlighted. other cuts have been made to the vaunrable in our socity its them i feel sorry for. if you want a 3rd then go to work and save a little bit. if you cant afford to be a SAHM then you shouldnt be. I am a stay at home mum and student (open university) because i can afford to be. of our situation ever changed i would work.

"Skilled or not, the jobs need doing. If nobody would take them because they couldn't pay rent on the pay, the pay would rise."

Wouldnt they then consider using workfare though.

I am effectively disabled but am too scared to register as such because my symptoms wax and wane. The government is too busy looking at fraudsters and they've decided my disabilitating disease is a mental illness - even though the world health organisation, America etc etc state clearly it is a physical illness and in no way psychiatric.

You have 2 beautiful children. Where do you think the money is coming from for them let alone a third? I ruined my health on IVF (paid 100% by us) to have our wonderful daughter, who I struggle to look after.

Just count your blessings. I wouldn't start a thread to bleat about my half existence where I'm neither lucky enough to be cured or die. Because I'm too busy struggling with my life.

And I pay for my health care myself. Because the NHS provides me with nothing, absolutely nothing. So I do whatever work I can whenever I am able.

Just be happy with what you have op. YABVVVVVVU to expect people like dh and me to empty our pockets out for people to have more children when they don't have enough money to provide for the ones they already have.

I think the worst problem with these new rules is that families with 3 or more DC who currently do not claim tax credits will not be allowed to claim if their circumstances change in the future.
I can accept that children not yet born are excluded but what about children already here?

highland its "tough shit" as a PP posted.

Then parents need to do everything possible to ensure the children are provided for should circumstances change. Having numerous children with no back up plan or savings for rainy days is irresponsible.