That cutting benefits to widow/ers with young children by over twenty thousand pounds is heartless and cruel?

[Somerville]

My DH was diagnosed with lymphoma in 2013 and died in 2014. During both the period he was ill, and immediately afterwards, it was extremely difficult for me to continue working. A well as caring for him and then dealing with the huge administrative burden, I have children for whom continuing to attend school every day and 'cope' with normal life was impossible. Alongside all that I had to somehow try to find a way to live with my own grief. And then get out and learn a living - as a freelancer I'd have had no income at all unless I continued to work.

The bereavement benefits I received helped me immeasurably.

• I got a bereavement payment of £2000 which helped cover the immediate few months after his death when I could barely get dressed - let alone work.

• I also got a monthly amount of widowed parents allowance - about £450. (Non means tested but taxable, meaning that as my earnings increased I returned some of this to the government through my tax bill. However, I knew the safety net was there when my earnings dropped again - as indeed they did at one point when one of my children could only manage half days at school.)

I've remarried so no longer qualify - fair enough - but if hadn't I'd have received this until my youngest child left school.

However, the support available for parents who are experience the devastation of becoming widowed after April 1st this year is changing.

• £3,500 immediately.
• £100 per month for the next 18 months.

That's it.

Research by the Childhood Bereavement Network (CBN) suggests 91% of widowed parents will be supported for a shorter period of time than they would under the current system, which can pay out until the youngest child leaves school. It says the typical working family will lose out on more than £12,000, and expects a working parent with young children to lose even more – £23,500 on average. link here

Widowed parents are lone parents without any shared care with an ex partner. Without any maintenance payments from a former partner. And with bereaved, confused and devastated children.

How about it MN? Am I unreasonable to think this change is cruel? And if not, what can I do about it?

Wouldn't universal credit/tax credits/housing benefit if applicable also be available in this situation??? I can't imagine the sadness and turmoil at losing my husband would bring but there are already benefits in place to help people on the lowest wages so surely this widows allowance is just on top of that??

Yes, they would. So the point that so many have tried to make is how do parents who have lost a spouse differ from lone parents who have been left/abused/had a relationship end 'just because'? Why should a widow receive state support to her children reaching the age of 18 when a lone parent by any other means is expected to work when her child reaches 5?

More importantly, how to we measure the trauma an individual child may experience as a result of the death of a parent/the breakdown of a parent's relationship/any other kind of trauma and translate that into cold, hard cash? Or indeed, the trauma that the parent may have experienced?

For example, such was the trauma of my marriage breakdown that 10 years later, I am only just beginning to think that another relationship is a possibility. The OP is re-married within 4 years of her husband's death. At her insistence, her situation is worse than mine because her husband died and mine left me. Now personally, I agree, her situation probably was worse. But she has moved on without too much difficulty and has had the benefit of benefits to help her do that. She also has society's sympathy. On the other hand, I suffer the stigma of single parenthood, have perfect strangers scoff at me and make 'benefits' comments loudly within my ear shot and refuse to allow their children to play with mine because single parenthood is apparently catching and to be very clear, I am a full time teacher and have been for many years!

As SemiNormal said a lot of comments on this thread are making me realise just how much stigma there is against "us" and how some people want as much distances from "us" to "them" as possible This. With knobs on. Losing a spouse must be awful - I won't pretend to understand. But it doesn't stop you being able to work, does it?

As many posters know I was widowed in 2014 whilst pregnant with my second DC. Which means that I can claim the WPA for 18 years at a rate of £512 a month as DH was a high rate tax payer.

Yes, I agree it's a staggering amount of money over DC2's life. But what's interesting is I have a good career and thus am not entilited Tax credits. So on my salary I have to pay all bills including a massive childcare bill of over £2000 pcm. Because that's what childcare for two tiny children costs! So in essence, the WPA allows me to work by paying a QUARTER of my childcare bill. If it didn't exist then I'D be on benefits and costing the state money - as it stands I am a net contributer!

Is it fair that I get this money and another lone parent does not? Tricky one. Grief at the death of a spouse is beyond crippling. It's not like divorce. I have been on the edge of developing seriois depression and anxiety many times. I used some money to access counselling. I used some to buy takeaways when I was alone, pregnant and too sad to cook. I use some to take the kids on holiday with other beareved kids which helps their mental health immensely.

So is it 'fair' I get this support? Probably not. But nor was it fair I had to give birth alone and raise a child who will never meet her dad. The amount I will claim is far less than the state pension DH would have claimed had he lived to a natural life expectancy.

Widowed patents are not just lone parents. We ate fighting a battle most of you cannot even imagine.

For your pension mainly? But also for stuff like death in service - exactly the point I think I was making but clearly am not as wise as you. There does seem to be widow bashing going on from my perspective. As if somehow an affluent widow should thank her lucky stars. Maybe I am being over sensitive, as I am still in shock at endofcentury's post.

But she has moved on without too much difficulty

You have absolutely no right to say that. None whatsoever.

Needsahalo is taking over where endocentury left off with the snide comments, sadly.

You have absolutely no right to say that. None whatsoever

My apologies. It is crassly put, I agree.

Out of interest, are parents of children who have passed away eligible for any government support. I do realise it's a very different situation to a parent dying.

For your pension mainly? But also for stuff like death in service - exactly the point I think I was making but clearly am not as wise as you.

Well not just that. NICs are supposed to insure against a host of adverse circumstances and qualify you for ESA, JSA etc of you need them. It's all the welfare system. All benefits. There are no hairs to split.

I realise I have a brain-numbing level of insight into this. It's dull I know and most people hope never to know this stuff. It was part of my job once upon a time. (Still is sometimes, tangentially).Fascinating to learn that so many people are so misinformed and believe that it IS genuinely a different thing though.

There does seem to be widow bashing going on from my perspective.

I'm honestly not seeing that.

I'm seeing a lot of people saying "Yes widows should get it, to help with the hard circumstances and other solo parents should too."

And I'm seeing other people saying "No widows are uniquely deserving of special financial support."

I haven't noticed anything that could be deemed negative about widows.

Out of interest, are parents of children who have passed away eligible for any government support. I do realise it's a very different situation to a parent dying. - I'm not 100% but I was told (so may be wrong) that parents are given a 'grace' period whereby certain benefits would continue for X period of time.

You really haven't??

Needsahalo is taking over where endocentury left off with the snide comments, sadly.

Certainly seems so.

I think it's so sad that in a well off country people have been reduced to squabbling about this. We can afford this. Its less than 50,000 families ffs.

I dread to think what would have happened to my DH under the current government. No doubt he'd have been sanctioned for 'willingly' giving up his job - someone is bound to end up getting hit by that. Even if it's later rectiified it's still shit.

People don't seem to realise that people can do the right thing and still need the help. I've been a single parent. My ex is a feckless waste of space and CSA are fucking useless, but that doesn't mean widows and widowers should lose money.

That money allowed by DH to give up his job (he worked nights, there was no scope for working days and his only other experience was on oil rigs) to look after his toddler. He retrained once DS was at school. It made much more sense financially to allow him to do that than to get a low paid part time job and top up with tax credits. It almost meant when it did hit DS what had happened (which wasn't until he was bigger) he could be there when DS needed counselling because he was terrified that what happened to his Mum would happen to his Dad.

They were sensible. They had insurance. They had income replacement insurance and mortgage insurance. Income replacement doesn't pay anything if you get paid off because the factory shuts (no redundancy pay) three months before you die and have no income to replace. They couldn't afford life insurance for his wife because she had a heart issue. It wasn't that that killed her though.

@ToastOfLondon

From government website -

You’ll usually get Child Benefit for 8 weeks after the child dies. If they would have had their 20th birthday before the 8 weeks are up, Child Benefit will stop on the following Monday.

• So I imagine many benefits would be the same.

My sympathy to you OP and others on here who have lost a spouse

Its my biggest fear. What complicates things is we are an age gap couple.

Hes 67 this year and im 44 this year Ive seen a post from a PP that the rules are different depending whether you are over or under state pension age.

Toast

Im a bit out of date now but I think child benefit continues for a few weeks and anyone who can't afford a funeral can apply for limited help, but that's all.

Because the rationale of bereavement benefits is to help with lost income, not with grief, as harsh as that might seem.

Which is why the lack of similar support to DV escapees, families of prisoners and families of men who die after a separation seems anomalous.

I'm seeing a lot of people saying "Yes widows should get it, to help with the hard circumstances and other solo parents should too."

I'm seeing "Other solo parents don't get it so widows shouldn't get it either"

Which is basically what the government relies on with cuts like this. Rather than starting a campaign to get more for people who need it AND say "These people should keep their help" the "I don't get it so why should they" attitude ends up winning over.

I'm seeing "Other solo parents don't get it so widows shouldn't get it either"

I'm saying the opposite and I thought other posters were too.

Whether "should" is realistic to hope for in this brutal politic atmosphere is another matter.

I don't even hold out much hope for a reprieve for Widowed Parents Allowance TBH.

Tax credits also continues for 8 weeks after the death of a child.

BeingEB
Yes, he did have insurance - but that cleared our mortgage. He was self employed and we live in a very expensive part of the country. He earned several times what I did and that all went overnight (he died in an accident).

He had, however only been earning that sort of money for a couple of years and obviously didn't expect to die but he had contributed to an NI system for over thirty years and won't be drawing down a pension. In my own circumstances, I will receive the benefit for less than two years but I certainly do not begrudge any parent (married or not) such an allowance. My own employer was very sympathetic but for many people, the extra money will be the difference between them eating or not if they are unable to go to work or have to decrease their hours to support grieving children.

My main issue is where is all the money going? It's simply not good enough to say there is no money left when companies are being given tax cuts or in some situations not paying taxes at all.

Surely someone on jsa alone will not be earning enough to pay tax otherwise they wouldn't qualify for jsa. Hence why I believed it wasn't taxable. I am a sahp and if my dh passed I would expect to receive either a bereavement allowance or jsa if I haven't managed to find employment. I would not pay tax on either as I wouldn't be earning enough to pay tax. If I found employment quickly I would have to pay tax on bereavement allowance.

Exactly lylylylyra

Tax credits also continues for 8 weeks after the death of a child.

We received absolutely nothing at all. Don't qualify for tax credits.

Which is basically what the government relies on with cuts like this. Rather than starting a campaign to get more for people who need it AND say "These people should keep their help" the "I don't get it so why should they" attitude ends up winning over.

Well I have no horse in this race financially (I do professionally and I survived very serious DV more than 20 years ago) and what I can hear on this thread is rather the other the way around.

I'd very happily support this campaign but SOME posters on this thread would be well advised to drop the "widows are more deserving than x, y and z groups" approach.

(Not all posters by any means)

It's not at all sympathetic and will alienate people who would otherwise be supportive.

Surely someone on jsa alone will not be earning enough to pay tax otherwise they wouldn't qualify for jsa. Hence why I believed it wasn't taxable

It's extremely common to only claim/qualify for JSA for weeks or months. So in terms of tax, which is of course determined annually, it does count and is taxable.

If I found employment quickly I would have to pay tax on bereavement allowance.

Exactly the same as JSA or Carers Allowance. What's different is that you'd keep the BA even in work and it isn't means tested.

Once again bereaved spouse forget that being married makes their grief more important. My son's father committed suicide at 27. He lived just down thr road and he saw them all the time. I was pregnant with DD in a new relationship. I had to cope with three smalk biys of 7 , 5, and 4. Just because we were divorced do you genuinely think it made it any easier? Because if you do you are deluded and quite unkind. I woukd have loved my kids to have benefited from a nice holiday or a treat or yes even a take away. We git big all. Im all for a bereavement payment but frankly think we all get it or no one does. If you approach bereavement like some sort of fucked up competition then yoy sre going to seriously upset people like me.