To think the abortion rate will increase after April this year?

[RocketQueenP]

When the new rules on tax credits / universal credit come in ie when no one can claim benefit be it top up or otherwise for any more than 2 children

Sadly I am helping a good friend cope who has just had an early abortion, she did not plan the pregnancy and one of the main reasons is she and her DH are low earners/ They already have 2 at school, and won't be able to afford to have this baby. She is devastated and has admitted they could have squeezed another DC in if it wasn't for the new rules. I think this will happen a lot. :(

In times gone by people would adopt out children that were unplanned that they couldn't afford and I really feel that this is what we are headed back to. Not adoption but, you get my drift

I also think the government fully know this and its one of the reasons they have brought it in. Simple population control

I think the tax credit move is the correct one, encourage people to go back to work - the current system makes the trade off pretty shakey with lots of children and the high cost of even wrap around care.

More of those people back in work means more childcare workers in jobs, more money for cleaners, restaurants etc and crucially more taxes being paid.

However I do agree with Somervile that the balance is all off. Pensioners are now richer than working people but the elderly fuel payments are still not means tested, free bus passes remain untouched for wealthy pensioners, tv licenses etc. This is one of the problems of democracy unfortunately.

So once again it is mothers that are capped, men can go have two more and move on as many times as they like(women are the majority of people left with care). Sounds fair!
I don't think abused women need any more difficulty getting access to benefits. It is tough enough for them to leave.
Also, most of us are only 2 months wages away from the streets or needing benefits. Life can change pretty quick and some of you commenting here may be in a very different situation and feel very different about the lack of help.
We are broke, but paying 12 billion in foreign aid!

I can only answer for myself, which is to say I will do everything possible not to have a third child because we can't afford it. If it happened by accident in spite of that, I already know I would have to have a termination. In this house, the wages pay the bills, mortgage and car, and our food and clothing is paid for by tax credits. We cannot afford to have another child on the money we have, there would be no more money coming from anywhere else, so there could not be another child. So it is quite possible there are many other people thinking the same way, and the numbers of terminations could increase.

I don't think people will comment on my situation rufus because it doesn't fit in and humanises the DM single mother viewpoint.

People don't like shades of grey. They like black and white with hunts. Look at somervilles post, facts are there for all to ignore. Learned ignorance is very powerful.

Yes I realise that tax credits etc are claimed by people in work - both DH and I were working full time when we terminated. I still broadly agree that benefits should be limited to 2 births though.

Gertrude I hope things are better for you now. What a nightmare to have to go through.

SquidgeyMidgey As everyone and their Mum is trying to point out to the vast majority of mumsnetters who frankly make Herod look relatively pragmatic on this thread - these are cuts to IN WORK BENEFITS which mean some people may end up being OUT OF WORK in having to make a psychologically emotive decision based on money rather than choice.

These claims changes will impact on everyone who works and claims. Everyone. Regardless of bloody class and finances. Everyone.

Just like PIP just like UC just like everything that apparently the majority of mumsnetters on this thread who don't seem to have a vested interest in society don't feel is unjustified.

Sadly, people who indulge in letting society down with low brow insights frequently end up on the receiving end of these claims long term.

It's easy to end up situations which could financially ruin you. Easy.

The narrowminded neo liberals and hard right wingers who uphold a system which lets down the vulnerable and disenfranchised seriously need to consider sterilisation first.

So if all new claims will also be capped at 2 kids after 2018, and we're due to roll over to UC in 2019, a new system, does that mean everyone will have to make a new claim and all people with 2+ kids will lose some ctc?

No i agree gertrude

and the situation with your husband sounds ridiculous helena

Yes it was a nightmare Helena but I'm really lucky in that I am resilient and could access post graduate education, so my aspirations and opportunities weren't ruined.

Other people with a similar story to mine weren't as lucky. And it's those I feel angry for.

Helena Your situation with your DH is deeply unfair. My point honestly wasn't that there should be a race to the bottom. I was countering the attitude by some posters that the country can't afford to keep children out of abject poverty. We've afforded it until now, and we can offer it for pensioners. Children don't have a political voice, so they're the easy target.

Rhayader - the vast majority of ctc claimants are working.

YodaBest, I believe the new rules were flagged up 12 months ago. In my experience of pregnancy, that should be enough notice to prevent an unwanted or unaffordable baby.

No purple it won't apply changing for tc to UC or a gap of less than six months between claims.

SemiNormal so that is your concrete proof for 'them'. For an entire group of people. Because one or two people may not make it known to you their aspirations and just gone 'whatev's' to life you feel that penalising a system meant to encourage work is the way forward? Really???? - I clearly wasn't talking about an entire group of people for fuck sake!

What happens to families with more than two children (those born before and after Apr 17) who have been entirely self supporting and been able to afford their children, who then fall on hard times and need to claim the tax credits or govt assistance? Is that just tough luck? It can only lead to child poverty surely?

No worries Somerville I get what you mean. The problem is that the computer dealing with UC can only deal with very simple situations and cant deal with things like an age gap.

And the idea of older people being continually reassesed for PIP is horrifying.

Is the overall plan for everyone to move onto UC?

If that's the case then everyone will be making a new claim so everyone will be limited to the 2 child rule.

The existence of tax credits in the first place upsets me to be honest. The NMW should be increased so that people are paid an living wage and don't have to rely on benefits to live. The state shouldn't be subsidising this black-market style devaluation of labour. It's fucked up.

AndNowItsSeven The vast majority of people i know on tax credits do not work full time, they tend to work 16 hours a week. I'm talking about people increasing their hours.

Actually, seeing as you seem to know that they are mostly working, do you have the figures? I would be interested to know what % of spending goes to working goes to working and what % to non working.

I know that the more you earn the less you get, so it would make sense that there are a lot of claimants who do not receive very much, but the majority of the spending goes on the unemployed.

Rhayader The government would very likely pay out more in wtc childcare than they would receive in income tax.

I think if someone is desperate not to abort they won't do it, regardless of the finances.

There is always a way to increase your family income - a second, third job. Most people in the U.K. wouldn't consider working a 70 hour week, but if they were very committed to not aborting they might accept that this was a price worth paying.

space83, there needs to be a cut off somewhere- if the cap were to be on the fourth child there would still be uproar from some. If assuming people should shock plan to provide for the children they have is worse than Herod then so be it. The benefits system is supposed to be a safety net not a matter of course.

I have 2 children, I would have loved 3 or 4 but guess what, we looked at our finances and chose to stop. Why should we miss out then pay for other people to have what we wanted? With rights come responsibilities- I don't care how that gets twisted, I'm sick of hearing how entitled some people are to have what they want. If we want to try to maintain some semblance of a decent financial payment system for the disabled and the elderly then there have to be cuts elsewhere.

It's interesting to hear the anti-foreign aid-ers who then turn the other face to say how entitled poor British people are to have as many children as they wish and have someone else pick up the tab. Are we really so ENTITLED to have a third child paid for that we would take food and medicine from the mouth of a starving and disease-ridden child in a country where contraception and clean water are unavailable? Some people need to take a very long and hard look at what the words entitled and deserving actually mean.

It is absolutely untrue that there is 'not enough money'; that's entirely a matter of perspective (and spin!) and which economic model a government chooses to follow for political and idealogical ends.

Happily, it's in the news today that the Treasury is running a surplus! So we're not so utterly broke after all then.

Some interesting graphs here about welfare spending. The UK spends twice the EU average on subsidising housing - if the housing market hadn't been allowed to inflate to the degree it has, we wouldn't need to do this to such an extent, and many more people might be able to afford to live on their wages, without subsidies.

data and article from December 2016

Successive governments have put structures in place that have created a society where normal things that people often hope for (a few children, an adequately sized home) were affordable to people in regular jobs.

SemiNormal ffs but you were though, indirectly. That's the whole point. Demonise one group and then the problem will go away. The fact that you didn't even mean to makes the massive generalisations going on on this post more and more anger inducing.

Can you see my point? I can see yours but it is the wrong one.