Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To feel irritated when families have multiple children they cannot afford

559 replies

Teddy7878 · 31/07/2017 10:41

First of all I accept that no contraception is 100% foolproof and pregnancy sometimes can occur even when people are trying their hardest to be careful.

I also accept that sometimes people's circumstances change and they could go from being financially comfortable to losing their jobs etc during their children's lives.

What really winds me up though are people who actively try and get pregnant when they already have several children and cannot afford the ones they already have. I sometimes see threads on here where people state they have less than £50 to feed a family of 7 for a week and no money at all for any luxuries whatsoever.

My DP and I will be in our mid 30s when we have our first child and we have decided it might be our only child. We want to be able to afford to give it a great life so have saved up hard for a few years beforehand. Between us we earn 65k so we live comfortably and don't have debts (other than the mortgage). It upsets me that we have to make the decision to only have one (possibly two) children and other people are having 5+ kids when they can't afford them.

Money isn't everything, a loving family home is always going to be the most important thing, but if you can only afford to eat lentils and never take your kids out anywhere fun or go on holiday or afford a car or pay for them to do activities outside of school or buy them a few nice things for Xmas then why keep continuing to have more and more children and making your situation even more stressful for everyone involved?! Why not just stick to one or two children?

OP posts:
SerfTerf · 02/08/2017 13:30

This was the statement I was referencing when I said the welfare state wasn't designed to make wishes come true. A safety net for hardship to me indicates six months or a year to get back on your feet after redundancy, longer in the event of a catastrophic illness/lifelong disability. Bigger picture, work needs to pay, properly, so that indolence through choice is not an easier o

But that doesn't apply to tax credits. Or shouldn't.

Yes ALL work needs to pay enough to enable people to be self supporting, if they're well enough to work a FT week.

If I ever found myself single again and back on a low wage, I'd claim tax credits without any compunction at all. Work should pay. Ideally via pay packet, but failing that, through a top up.

Banderwassnatched · 02/08/2017 14:03

We had twins and then had a third we couldn't afford were it not for Tax Credits. You can't do that now that we have this horrible two-child rule. Anywho, the point is that we couldn't afford it then, we can now. And at 33 I'm glad I already have the kids I want, I'm aware my fertility is dropping off and I'm not locked into a race against my biological clock. And we knew we wouldn't be brassic forever, we had earning potential, so why not? We're paying back what we took over those few years.

Mittens1969 · 02/08/2017 14:19

Curiously, in France they offer extra benefits for having more than 2 children because they want to increase the birth rate of the ethnic French population, they are struggling with an ageing population. I have a friend who has married a Frenchman and they have 4 children, this is how I know this.

They do have a rapidly increasing immigrant population, as we do here, because they do have more children.

woodhill · 02/08/2017 14:40

Well why should our indigenous population be criticised for having large families if other cultures just carry on doing so.

The VAT argument is irrelevant.

Mittens1969 · 02/08/2017 15:50

No, I'm not saying having large families is a good idea, I'd hate to have more children than I have, 2 DDs. But some large families do work well, my BIL and his wife have 5 children as I said previously, and they are self-supporting even with her as a SAHM. I think they are crazy lol, but each to their own! Grin

What I am saying is that the reasons for other cultures having large families are complex and they won't just suddenly change to having fewer children.

I do find it very sad, a lot of women have very hard lives, but it's what they know.

Jux · 02/08/2017 16:09

Not everyone is as educated, intelligent,or aware, as we are, and we're jolly lucky we are. Now we can look down on people who aren't as clever as us whoopdedoo.

woodhill · 02/08/2017 17:11

No I get that MittensSmile

Nancy91 · 02/08/2017 17:17

I agree OP, I used to work for DWP and there are a phenomenal amount of people who have loads of kids despite always having lived on handouts. Many of them have a really entitled attitude and feel that the world owes them something, but they've never worked a day in their lives. Working there really opened my eyes.

bbcessex · 02/08/2017 17:54

Just in case you're still watching the thread OP.. to reassure you that you're not an old fogey..
I had my first DC at 33 and my second at 36.. it's quite usual in my case environment to establish career and finances first.

Like you, I hope to live to be old and unreasonable 🤣 And don't think my kids suffer a jot from having an 'older' parent.. very typical round this south eastern part anyway.

TheFirstMrsDV · 02/08/2017 19:38

phenomenal amount of people?
Really? The last ONS report says that 15% of families have 3 or more dependant children.
So if we assume that the majority don't have more than 3/4 and its unlikely that all of those 15% are on benefits (although many will be on tc) that wouldn't come close to a 'phenomenal' amount.
Also out of those who have large families and are on out of work benefits what would the percentage of 'entitled' ones be?

NeedsAsockamnesty · 02/08/2017 20:11

Nancy91

Bollocks utter bollocks.

Unless of course you magicked up the very families that the entire dwp spent fecking ages trying to find but couldn't.
If so I think you should have a job change to something that involves finding stuff

NeedsAsockamnesty · 02/08/2017 20:17

I saw a harassed looking Mother with 5 small dc a few days ago, all very close in age. I looked at the older ones who were about 8 and imagined all the help they are going to have to give and probably do already and just felt sorry for them

I have more than 5 kids outside of 'could you pass me the baby wipes please' they do nothing to help other than tidying up after themselves and being considerate. The parenting here is done by actual parents or occasionally delegated to hired help or childcare when I work.

And that mum may have been a childminder.

Peanutbuttercheese · 03/08/2017 10:03

She was not a Nanny and was not someone who was flush with money. I live in a town that was an industrial heartland, it's quite a deprived area now. I took part in a study on poverty levels of my town a couple of years ago as did some work for a charity.

The area I live in does still have a significant number of larger families and the area has very few ethnic minorities, I just checked and only 4.2% ethnic minorities. Someone upthread mentioned how some young women due to their upbringing and circumstances don't consider further education etc and see children as their only option.I live in a place very much like this. It has some areas in the bottom five percent for income nationally.

In the playground my nickname from the other Mums was Grandma, I had DS when I was over thirty and that was considered ancient. I'm in touch still with quite a few of them, our dc are now sixteen. My best friend from this group has just hit thirty five, I now call her Grandma.

Personally The only way I feel about these women with big families around where I live is what a hard life and see a life of poverty stretching ahead for many of them. They wouldn't be able to pay to hire help but they may indeed work in those kind of roles themselves.

I don't focus on if they receive benefits I just see a stretching of all resources for them of time and money.

AliTheMinx · 03/08/2017 10:43

I haven't read the full thread, but totally understand where the OP is coming from. We are in a similar financial position, and just have one DC by choice. I feel that another DC would really squeeze us financially, but at the moment we are able to live relatively comfortably, pay for our DC's education and have a nice holiday every year, which we simply couldn't afford if we had more than one DC. I am an only child, and I think my parents felt the same.

I can totally understand why people want to have larger families, but agree that when people are struggling to feed/provide for the family they already have it seems foolish for them to have more children - especially if they are reliant on the state. I agree that child benefit should be capped at 2 children.

Chamomiletea · 03/08/2017 10:49

We have 3, we want more without being a burden so we are going to foster.

MotherofSausage · 03/08/2017 11:06

This reply has been withdrawn

Message from MNHQ: This post has been withdrawn

Tw1nsetAndPearls · 03/08/2017 11:09

I can't imagine putting school fees before having a sibling for my child.

SerfTerf · 03/08/2017 11:12

Indeed twinset. We're in danger of producing millions of "little emperors".

MaisyPops · 03/08/2017 11:14

I can't imagine putting school fees before having a sibling for my child.
Me neither but that's a perfectly reasonable decision for somebody to make as they are providing for the children.

The main thing on this thread is people having children they can't afford and relying on others to prop up the family.

JensenAcklesUndercrackers · 03/08/2017 11:42

I'm irritated by people who judge me for having a large family. I'm also irritated by people who assume we are living off benefits because I'm a SAHM. We don't claim benefits, my DH works full time to support us.
We scrimp and save to afford our one holiday a year and child benefit is spent on kids clubs so they don't miss out.
Perhaps you would like to unwedge your judgey pants from your arse, you've clearly hoiked them a bit too high.

Elendon · 03/08/2017 11:50

I have three children my exh has five. He certainly can't afford to have all five children. Plus he's in his fifties with babies.

MotherofSausage · 03/08/2017 11:52

This reply has been withdrawn

Message from MNHQ: This post has been withdrawn

MaisyPops · 03/08/2017 11:54

JensenAcklesUndercrackers
Have you actually read the thread?
People dont have an issue with large families!
People have an issue with people having children they struggle to look after and can't afford.

If you can afford a large family, great. The thread wasn't 'reasons I hate large families'.

Maybe telling people to take their 'judgey pants out their arse' was needlessly defensive.

SerfTerf · 03/08/2017 11:54

Just showing you that there are more opinions out there than the most small minded, judgey posters on this thread would have you believe Smile

Fortunately, most people realise that there's more than one way to live a life and mostly keep their preferences and opinions to themselves Wink

Alittlepotofrosie · 03/08/2017 11:59

You could easily have another child if you wanted to make some sacrifices but you don't. And yeah if you come onto a thread judging people with low income then I think you are fair game for people to criticise your choices as well.

Private school and holidays. My heart bleeds for you.