Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

930 replies

RocketQueenP · 21/02/2017 17:07

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 Angry

OP posts:
Dawndonnaagain · 21/02/2017 20:37

We could cancel trident. We could force MPs to use their wages to pay for their bar, their refectories, their hotels, just as many, many other people do. Not all jobs pay expenses.
Noam Chomsky once pointed out that the way to sell out to private business was to run a service into the ground by withdrawing real term funding, that's exactly what's happening to the NHS and that money is being used to fund the Tory tax cuts for the wealthiest. That money is being used to outsource government tasks, e.g.. ATOS and Capita among others. The money they're paying them to ensure those who need benefits don't get them is money that could be saved and used to support those who need it. Mental Health services, the NHS and yes, welfare services because we owe it, all of us, to those children born, no matter their circumstances.

Summerisdone · 21/02/2017 20:38

YABU, most accidental pregnancies are because people don't bother using contraception, so maybe if they used it in first place they wouldn't have to resort to an abortion.
I agree with the new rules, there needs to be a cut off point so that people cannot just keep having children even when they know they cannot afford it themselves.
There are plenty of people who earn too much to qualify for benefits but still not enough to actually be able to afford a third or even just a second child, so why should others earning less or nothing at all be afforded that luxury?
I actually rely massively on child tax credits also, so clearly I'm not biased against benefits.

CaoNiMa · 21/02/2017 20:40

"most accidental pregnancies are because people don't bother using contraception"

Do you have any statistical evidence for that, Summer?

GreenGinger2 · 21/02/2017 20:40

Happy for money to go to the NHS,mental health.... benefits for more than 2 children no thanks.

I guess we could give tax breaks to those who don't get benefits in order to make it fair and then they too could have the family they want. Except that won't work will it,those taxes are funding benefits.

Floggingmolly · 21/02/2017 20:40

Bitterness, spaced?? That poster (squidgymidgey , I think) didn't have more children because they'd decided it didn't work financially for them.

She doesn't want to be subsidised any more than she wants her tax dollars subsidising someone else to increase their family way beyond what they can fund themselves.
Do you really think we should all be altruistic enough to think otherwise?

space83 · 21/02/2017 20:40

GreenGinger2 I'm sorry to hear that you can't have more children. You're right, its absolutely ludicrous that they should have to have an abortion or even selective foetal abortions in the case of multiple pregnancies, caused through abuse, or contraception failure, and not have considered that you paid a percentage to make sure that they definitely do do that instead of making a lifestyle choice. Inconsiderate reprobates.

Doowappydoo · 21/02/2017 20:41

I think claiming people are bitter, broken on the inside and hoping Trump will press the red buttton is completely off.

I haven't bought the Tory line about austerity and I passionately believe in the welfare state. I am happy for my taxes to go to those who need it, I would pay more and agree that the cuts to local government schools and the NHS have had terrible impacts on the most vulnerable. But I do think that a well functioning society where people buy into supporting each other has to strive to be fair and people should take responsibility for the decisions they make. Having children that you can financially support when there is access to free contraception and abortion is a responsibility in my view. I agree that people fall on hard times and the state should step in as safety net to properly support families of all sizes when this happens but to start from a position where if you are receiving benefits you're not restricted from planning your family in the same way as a family who are not seems unfair to me.

There is a finite amount of money - there really is - and I don't think it's a bad thing in principal to say to people that if you want more than 2 children then you should factor in that you won't get additional money from the state after 2. Whether the new rules are fair or workable is , I agree, highly suspect.

GreenGinger2 · 21/02/2017 20:42

And having looked down the barrel of a gun named infertility I'd just like to point out that anybody with 2 children are incredibly lucky.

Original poster
RocketQueenP · 21/02/2017 20:42

Gertrude Flowers for you ...I am glad things are better now x

OP posts:
space83 · 21/02/2017 20:44

FloggingMolly clearly you do not think that. How very pragmatic of you. It must be nice to not emote or empathise.

Floggingmolly · 21/02/2017 20:45

Isn't it petty to not just be glad that someone can do something you can't?
I'm beginning to think you're on a windup now, spaced. We could all do whatever we wanted when someone else is picking up the tab Hmm

HelenaDove · 21/02/2017 20:45

There should be more penalties for men who refuse or avoid to pay Child Support.

Bet its the only thing from the US that they wont be copying.

GreenGinger2 · 21/02/2017 20:46

'is'

Original poster
RocketQueenP · 21/02/2017 20:51

I'm writing my dissertation about single parents and welfare at the moment, so this thread is interesting. It seems the majority of people believe the shite that the tories and the Murdoch owned papers trot out...The UK is not in the shit because of the reckless spending of Labour. The country is in the shit because of a global financial crisis caused by bankers. Yet the most vulnerable members of society, who have been systemically scapegoated in the media, are footing the bill, whilst the (now largely state owned) banks continue to hand out huge bonuses. Austerity is a choice, not a necessity. It's all part of the Tory ideology, and has always been, to shrink the welfare state. People would be able to afford to have three children if businesses paid an actual living wage, and the housing market wasn't in such a mess. I think it's sad that having more than 2 kids has now become a preserve of the rich. And yes, a huge backwards step in terms of feminism and women's independence, as now women with more than two children won't feel able to survive financially on their own, which means many will stay in abusive relationships in order to survive

Wildbelle ^^ THIS !!!!!!!! Bloody well said!! And I would love to read your dissertation I bet it will be interesting x

PS - I posted a thread the other day about what you say at the end of your last paragraph....Ie that I believe that many women will stay in abusive relationships because of the changes to the benefit system. I for one would have stayed in mine ten years ago! Thank fuck I didn't have to but I want to weep for all the women and children that will and are suffer/ing I fucking hate social injustice

OP posts:
OCSockOrphanage · 21/02/2017 20:53

Recently, I read that the first reaction to a benefit is gratitude (think NHS 1947) but it quickly becomes entitlement. When limitations are imposed, resentment follows. This thread doesn't disprove that. Where was it ever written that society had to fund whatever we want? Doesn't happen, not everyone who wants a child will have one.

minifingerz · 21/02/2017 20:55

Dawn - if we're going to massively increase spending there are still many, many things we could spend money on which would benefit poor children more than tax payer support for people who choose to have very large families while being on low incomes.

For example we could fund schools to provide really top notch school meals. We could have great libraries, decent housing, a much better education system.

I personally know three families with 5+ children where mothers have chosen to grow their families while not being in work or a stable relationship. All the children have been hugely disadvantaged by this. I don't think they would have done it had there been a powerful financial disadvantage rather than a financial incentive to do it. All three are in 4 bedroom rented properties in London which means all three are now in an out and out benefits trap. Not good - for them or for their children.

DistanceCall · 21/02/2017 20:57

I don't think people have, per se, the right to have children. Children have the right to have to parents who will be able to care for them. If you can't afford them, you shouldn't have them.

A 2-child limit sounds reasonable to me. And no, a zygote or a foetus are not "unborn children". They are not children yet.

Owlzes · 21/02/2017 20:59

I don't quite understand how anyone can say in the same post 'well, no one should be having more than two children' and then 'but enforcing this won't mean abortions will rise'.

No contraception is 100%. Accidental pregnancies happen, all over the world, and there is a lot of evidence that providing a good social security net reduces the abortion rate because many many abortions are the result of women feeling unable to continue with a pregnancy for financial reasons.

Of course abortion rates will rise. I sort of presumed that those who supported the new legislation viewed this as a fair price to pay.

RufusTheSpartacusReindeer · 21/02/2017 21:01

I agree owlzes

OCSockOrphanage · 21/02/2017 21:01

The USSR used mandatory abortion in lieu of contraception for 50 years, or thereabouts. Just saying.

OCSockOrphanage · 21/02/2017 21:02

It was cheaper, apparently,

Floggingmolly · 21/02/2017 21:03

Nobody is "enforcing" that people only have two children, Owlzes. You are at perfect liberty to have as many as you like if you're prepared to be financially responsible for them yourself. Why is this so utterly shocking to some people?

RufusTheSpartacusReindeer · 21/02/2017 21:06

flogging

What do you think about someone in gertrudes position though

SuperBeagle · 21/02/2017 21:10

Don't have kids you can't afford. If you have to rely on the government to fund your children, then you shouldn't have them.

I'm not bothered if the abortion rate increases.

FourBeasts · 21/02/2017 21:10

How is it that some of you welcome migrants with open arms, knowing that their concomitant large families will be a burden on the infrastructure of this country, yet you would like to see the poorest British nationals forced to limit their children to two?