If you're an unemployed waster then you should have a vasectomy!!!

[sirlee66]

Ben Bradley, an MP, wrote in a blogpost, 6 years ago, that the country would be soon “drowning in a vast sea of unemployed wasters” if workless families had four or five children while others limited themselves to one or two.
This is what he said:

''It’s horrendous that there are families out there that can make vastly more than the average wage, (or in some cases more than a bloody good wage) just because they have 10 kids. Sorry but how many children you have is a choice; if you can’t afford them, stop having them! Vasectomies are free.

There are hundreds of families in the UK who earn over £60,000 in benefits without lifting a finger because they have so many kids (and for the rest of us that’s a wage of over £90,000 before tax!).

People have to take responsibility for their own lives, and if they are struggling but working hard to help themselves then they should get help. But if they choose to have 10 kids they should take responsibility for that choice and look after them, not expect everyone else to foot the bill!

Families who have never worked a day in their lives having 4 or 5 kids and the rest of us having 1 or 2 means it’s not long before we’re drowning in a vast sea of unemployed wasters that we pay to keep!''

So What to do you think? Do you agree with Ben Bradley or do you think he is being unreasonable?

I don't wholly disagree with his point of having a large family when not working being a very bad idea. My issue is how this is managed.

I'm conservative not a Tory. We have 3DC, two with ASD. Both DH and I work. I strongly believe that all families need to be better supported in the UK. 70% are living in poverty. It's an insane proportion. I see it myself when I go home with more and more children clearly going without. Nearly every single time I see more than three children, a single parent and a low/no income parent(s). My heart breaks for the children because their parents and our society are really letting these DC down. The parents don't have the time or the money for their family.

DH is Danish and it's a very different system there. Everyone is expected to work after their youngest child is a year old. The government will find something for you to do no matter how menial the task. Childcare is heavily subsidized and good quality. I don't know any SAHPs. They all work at least 30 hours a week or are studying with a clear pathway to reentering the workforce.

We tried workfare in the U.K. and it was a disaster because they brought it in too quickly. They also used it as a way to replace job functions. This isn't how it is used in Denmark. It's used to give experience to those out of work because they found that the biggest hurdle the unemployed had was actually getting back into the workforce. I can fully understand where a 30 something year old who has never had a job is coming from when they decide to avoid working by having another child. It's extremely intimidating to walk into a workplace for the first time when you are of an age where the expectations are that you have a decade of experience.

So yes he has a point but a broken watch is correct for two minutes a day. He also offers that men have vasectomies. Yes this should be offered but what about making men accountable for their role as a father and putting some teeth on child maintenance? What about giving people who won't work the shove up the arse that they need. In Denmark if you are unemployed you are not allowed to receive benefits and go on a holiday abroad plus you are bottom of the pile when it comes to housing lists.

In Denmark very few families have more than two DC. We can't rent a 7 seater at the airport. They have to bring one of their 10 seven seater cars in from Billund for us!!!!

We have 3DC, two with ASD. Both DH and I work.

What out of school childcare do you use? I can’t use childminders because of their diagnoses (all 3 are autistic) and after school/breakfast clubs aren’t inclusive. I have no family to have the bairns, and DPs job has unpredictable hours so I can’t work round him. I’d love to be back at work, or studying.

No childminder will accept my kids is what I meant.

I agree that carrots or sticks are needed.

It's funny that the same people who beat their breasts about immigration and say we need more people to come here to fill the jobs are the same ones who then say there are no jobs and that's why they're on benefits.

I should think every single care home in the country (well, every one in my area, anyway) has a sign outside saying "Now recruiting!" In my pil's care home - which has good contracts, flexible working and very good conditions - constantly struggles to recruit. There are no "young" people working there - ie between about 20 and 50. This is in an area of relative deprivation and one of the places with the highest level of single parents in UK. I suppose you can extrapolate from this that people would rather have children than work in a care home.

notreally We found an excellent aftercare program that is privately run. He, or one of his staff, picks DD1 up from school and walks them back to his facility. The man has a natural gift and we are extremely lucky to have him.

DS is looked after by his old daycare teacher who is excellent with him. She finishes her shift at 3:30pm. He takes a school bus to her daycare, the daycare manager is on board and has a massive soft spot for him. He reads his book until she finishes her shift at 3:30pm. We pay her from 3:30pm until 6:30pm. We have in home therapy for him which is much easier. She plays with DD2 while DS has his sessions.

All in we pay about £20k for our childcare a year. It's not cheap but we have the right people/team. We live in America by NYC so prices are comparable to the UK.

That sounds brilliant Want2b
I wish there was something like that here, it wouldn’t be an issue to pay for it, it’s finding someone who doesn’t trot out “oh I’m not trained for autism” that’s the problem.

I whole heartedly agree, there would have to be an easily reversed sterilisation method though - after all, benefits are supposed to be a temporary crutch not a lifestyle choice. We need to punish those who choose benefits as a lifestyle whilst increasing benefits for those who have no choice.

notreally I'm in America and the school and daycare have helped us find appropriate people. Can you ask them if an aide or teaching assistant wants to earn more? Also if you are willing to pay cash in hand you will find more people happy to take on the work. As awful as it is that is the way it works here. I can not find a sitter who will work on the books.

reddington I agree.

Being on benefits long term under Labour

Agree. I've noticed this trend gor decades and it's got worse as workers cant pay c care for lots of kids so limit their kids to 3 max.
Meanwhile, the other lifestyle choice holds no limits on the number of kids.
I can see his point but i know most will shout "generalisation"

Can I just say I didn't agree with the statement. However, I do think that it's unfair to expect others to support families because they were reckless. The thing is education I believe is everything. I know will disagree, but if we educated the people more likely to reproduce without looking at the situation they are in then we could improve everyone's lives. I'm not saying for them to not have children but maybe educate them if to get in a good stand to be able to have kids and support them. I understand my statement may come across like I'm looking down on people but really I'm not. Everyone should be equal but that included equal amounts of tax paid and benefits recieved

That graph doesn't tell us anything about the number of people on benefits makeourfuture. Labour moved huge numbers of people onto sickness benefits precisely because they weren't included in unemployment figures. Ditto stay at home single mothers on income support. Those numbers exploded under Labour.

They fiddled the unemployment figures.

Lady I applied for care jobs when I was looking. A lot of them want you to work to a rota involving some evenings/weekends and some people like myself just don't have anyone to help with childcare at weekends. Care in the community positions require a driving license which again some people don't have.

We need to punish those who choose benefits as a lifestyle whilst increasing benefits for those who have no choice

But as I've asked repeatedly, how do we separate one from the other when those who are actively choosing to remain on benefits will hardly admit it?

But as I've asked repeatedly, how do we separate one from the other when those who are actively choosing to remain on benefits will hardly admit it?

But the current system of penalising everyone on benefits is draconian, literally everybody who has any claim at all is paying for the transgressions of the minority.

They fiddled the unemployment figures.

And the explosion of unemployment under Thatcher? The original cause?

No comment on that?

How do you rip out the working heart of a nation and not expect social problems?

Being on benefits long term under Labour

As usual, make doesn't add any context or reasoning....

One of the reasons for that graph, as you know, was that they introduced the back to work scheme, which would move the long term unemployed into a charity or public sector department. It paid minimum wage and lasted 6 months.

Again what would you have done with these millions of unemployed - defenestration by her hand of Jesus? Moved them into banking and finance?

I think some people should consider more carefully whether ther genes are so outstanding that they have to be replicated. I was (voluntarily) privately sterilised at the ago of 26 because i have a deformity of the lower leg. Medically it’s no big deal, it has never affected my mobility in any way and it’s not even hugely noticeable but i did’t want to pass it on. (I suppose the next question is why i’m on Mumsnet). But seriously, i didn’t want someone else to feel the way it has always made me feel.

And are those figures any more real than those used today?

Or is benefit street pablum enough to feed your class hatred?

Also it's too late to lock the stable door after the horse has had six foals. With the "Every child matters" philosophy you cannot punish children for the "sins" of the parents, so it is difficult to know when to draw the line. People will say it's wrong if ten children are in a 2-bedroomed house, but then it's unfair that someone should get a larger house for having more children. Then of course there are the free school meals, free school trips, etc etc and when you add them up you can see why Family A on benefits with 4 dcs are getting an "income" of more than Family B with 2 dcs but earning £25K.