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?

Because I'm answering other posters who keep raising it, Semi! That was a reply to someone else! - You have posted like this throughout the whole thread, even seemingly aghast that someone could possibly draw a likeness between a widower and a lone parent.
I feel you perhaps would have got more support for the cause if when that comparison was drawn you said "I can see the similarities in a financial sense and there really should be more provisions in place for those people, but that aside for the moment what is your opinion on this ...?" instead you differentiated and made it 'us' and 'them' and your apparent distain for the 'us' was clear.

But we're not talking about absolute numbers. I was answering a question about averages. I'm not a statistician and from a recent baby name thread I think you are though. So lay into me if you want. It's not like I'm not used to it today.
I'm just trying to explain why widowed parents get upset when they are compared favourably with other lone parents. All widowed parents (yes, thankfully, there are only small numbers) have 100% responsibility for their child/red ALL the bloody time with no-one to share that with. And 100% of the children are traumatised. Whereas most lone parents still co-parent to some degree with their ex; when their kid is rushed into hospital there is another parents they can call. But not all. Of course not. Which I've said, too.

It sounds like you can write my OP better than I can Semi. But you didn't. I searched and there was another other thread on this. And yes I should have thought through my phrasing better, clearly, because I've spent most of the bloody day explaining that I do understand that there are other situations which are also very traumatic for children. But those wasn't what this thread is about.
It's about what happens when a married person's spouse dies and they have dependant children. And the fact that the support from the state that I got is not what anyone reading this who is widowed after 5th April will get.

even seemingly aghast that someone could possibly draw a likeness between a widower and a lone parent.

Widows and widowers are lone parents. But every single one of them has additional costs, with a funeral, and emotional and practical burdens that not all other lone parents have.

I'm speaking generally about various benefits and allowances here but when they were initially put into place, the economy and population were very different. Things move on and we do need to review and reassess but some groups of people are always going to get the sharp end of the stick. I'm not sure how it's ever going to be fair. I'm not sure it's helpful to compare bereaved spouses with those who fled DV relationships. Both are exceptionally painful and have impacts in various areas of lives.

Somerville - I'm bowing out now. I am genuinely sorry for what you've been through. I'm sure you're not meaning to come across the way that I'm reading it. This thread lost it's way around the first page and I think that's a shame. I just feel slightly 'othered' and feel that rather than divide we should unite, which is why I think people like to draw comparisons sometimes - to unite and feel like we can in some small way understand each other. Anyway sorry if my last post sounded slightly hostile.

Yes it is a very large reduction.

Again, the numbers are so small that it has not been worth means testing it and still isn't. A means test is not one of the criteria they are planning on bringing in.
Personally if it were cost effective I would support means testing, with more going to the most vulnerable.

40k people get it currently. A better mathematician than me will have to work out how many on average apply for it each year.

I'm sure you're not meaning to come across the way that I'm reading it.

If that's as othering you then no, definitely not as I mean it. As I say, I'm a lone parent too.
Good evening.

I think it's going to get to the stage where life insurance is going to have to be complusary, maybe part of your pension as it is in other countries. I have it as it's the only way I know my kids would be looked after. Shame you can't insure against marrying a twat and becoming a single parent otherwise I'd have bought that too. It all sucks

I'm not sure it's helpful to compare bereaved spouses with those who fled DV relationships. Both are exceptionally painful and have impacts in various areas of lives.
I didn't do that.

Shame you can't insure against marrying a twat and becoming a single parent otherwise I'd have bought that too. Wise and witty!

If the government announces tomorrow that it will limit the number of years that state pension is available will that be ok too? This is the equivalent of a state pension, paid when someone has died before retirement age leaving dependent children.
Should it be paid to parents who live as partners without marriage? Probably, but there are plenty of other areas where there is positive discrimination for marriage/civil partnership

Yes 5 years would mean that any parent will get it at least until their youngest child is in school, and also covers more than the length of time it takes to go and do a degree, for those who need to retrain in careers that can fit around school holidays.

From what I've heard at the widowed parents group I attend, people with no financial pressure at all tend to not claim it. But that's just anecdotal and I have no evidence at all.

If the government announces tomorrow that it will limit the number of years that state pension is available will that be ok too?
WPA has been seen as untouchable for some years. And yet now it is being touched. Pensions up next, I reckon.

Somerville I'm so sorry for what you've been through.
*
Valentine2*
Really? Where is all the money going? If there isn't any money to go around and I am STILL paying the same tax, what the fuck is going on?
It's people like you who normalise stuff like this. Bit by bit. Step by step. And then realise when it's too late already.

Not sure if the above has been addressed already, I've not read the entire thing yet, but wanted to respond with the answer 'ageing population'. The amount of paying in isn't rising with the amount of people being supported/taking out. People live much longer these days. Perhaps we should be paying far more tax, but thank goodness we're not.

In a roundabout way, you did and so did others. I'm not criticising you but just observing from an unemotional perspective. I appreciate that it's impossible for many people on this thread to do so because they've been through relationship and life traumas that I have not.

Careers & jobs around school holidays basically minimum wage jobs tbh, they are a trap I'd advise against, if you can even find them. Teaching aside I guess but they can't all become teachers. You are somewhat fucked as a single parent.

Thanks, applesauce.
I've not read the entire thing yet
Well you're in for a treat - it's a jolly old thread! NOT

It's terrible what's happening to this benefits system. The government need to go after the tax avoiding corporations, then they won't have to keep making unfair cuts.

*Somerville
*
You're right about this thread. Not a treat at all. It's all very sad. Everything so sad at the moment, politically, economically...

Another vote for mumtobelle. It's not just the ageing population that's causing such strain on the welfare system and public services like I said before. Those bloated companies need to pay their share.

As I say, I'm a lone parent too

op i thought you were re married

As I say, I'm a lone parent too

op i thought you were re married

My mother lost her dad at 6, her mum at 13. Long enough ago that she was some how expected to buck up and get on with it. No support after the initial bereavement and lost her home. Her mother was already unwell and the extra stress contributed to her early death. Mums entire life has been blighted by the early loss of a place of safety and unconditional love. I think the initial support for those who have been widowed was a mark of the type of society I hoped I lived in. £450 a month for 18 years is generous, although if you assume the state effectively assumes the financial burden of an NRP then for 2 children that equates to appro