Is it a right to have Kids you can’t afford!?!

[KN2212]

I am totally fed up of listening to people complain about how broke they are after having kids. Babies and childcare are cripplingly expensive but that’s pretty much common knowledge, right?

I fell out with a long term friend of mine about a year ago. Since the birth of her DD all she did was complain about the situation she’d orchestrated.
Her and her (now ex) partner had no home of their own, low income, high debt and no savings when they decided to go ahead and have a child (though granted had been together for 7 years). The poor boyfriend busted his butt working 13 hour shifts 6 days a week in a call centre whilst they all lived in one cramped room at her parents and she complained he wasn’t doing enough. Due to her crippling shopping debts and inability to hold a job they were never going to make enough to live and knew that pre getting pregnant.

(Other friends are in similar situations, complaining about how they ‘can’t afford to go back to work’ because of childcare costs but equally can’t afford to live if they don’t go back to work!!! Come on and take some responsibility you knew this was going to be your situation.)

Whilst she was complaining over coffee one day about how the benefit system wasn’t giving her enough free money I called her out on her obvious poor planning and asked why she didn’t wait and save pre child. She got very defensive and said that they were never going to be able to afford a child due to their financial situation so why bother waiting?

It just got me thinking really hard, since when did having children become a right? It seemed so clear to her that she deserved to have a child despite not being able to afford one and that the government should now support her because she deserved to have her daughter.
Am I wrong in thinking that having children you can’t support is completely irresponsible and shitty and entitled?

I know a lot of women who want kids but are having to wait and plan and save and do it ‘the right way’ it seems unfair to them. When women like my ex friend do exactly what they want without planning and then hold the government over a barrel saying that their kids don’t have food and clothes. It just sucks like the children shouldn’t have to suffer but the tax payer shouldn’t have to pay for your unfair choices.

To clarify I have empathy for unplanned pregnancy’s no contraception is 100% but that’s not the kind of situation I’m talking about here. I’m talking about planned pregnancies.

I don’t disagree with the overall sentiment of the thread.

I would query the argument that we “need be workers of the future”.... we do, but not nearly as much as we did a generation ago, and in a generation’s time that need will be even lower. More people are employed as a “driver” in some capacity than any other role. In 25 years we will need less than 1% of those drivers as automation comes in. Even some jobs you consider as “professional” now will be replaced by computers and artificial intelligence.

“Recipient of universal income” will be the main job of 40 years time, so personally I do think we should be discouraging families with 4, 5, 6 kids, it’s creating an employment timebomb, not the workforce of the future.

If you can’t afford another baby without relying on benefits, you can’t afford another baby, Bluelonerose.
No government agency can force your ex not to behave like an dishonourable arse.
Why do you assume it’s anybody else’s fault??

Round all the mothers and babies up and put them in a work house/camp.
Simplest cheapest way. And you’ll get some burlap bags out of it too

Because it's not my fault he's paying bare minimum. Working on only paying £7 a week per child no wonder they think they can afford it.

I’ve got friends who chose to stop at 1,2 or 3 children because they wouldn’t be able to privately educate any more

There are lots of ways to dress up the opinion that children are a privilege poor people should not be allowed, but you can never disguise the fact that it’s disgusting.

Is the pill still free? Haven't taken it in years but when I did it was free on the NHS as it's cheaper for the government (taxpayers £) than paying child benefit.

My parents waited until my sister was 5 and in school as they couldn't afford to have me. Childcare was much cheaper back then but my mum worked from home and my Dad worked shifts.

DH and I saved up for our wedding. Saved for our house and waited for two years before we were in a better situation before applying for a mortgage. We have one child. A second would be a stretch for several reasons but £ is one of them.

Childcare costs can't be a surprise if you live in the real world/UK and also read Mumsnet. Planning on having a child you simply cannot afford to provide for (I mean basics, not holidays to Disneyland) is frankly irresponsible and selfish. My parents made sacrifices to have me and worked hard all their lives with nothing but child benefit from the government to help pay for what we needed. It was a choice but one they planned for. Anything else is shortsighted and foolish.

Yabu

People have had babies for millennia.
The structures of society change. If this is unequal, why should people be denied the right to reproduce?

Who says society should be this way? Money is just cultural and lifestyle is subjective. Poverty for one person is managing to another.

I think we’ve been sold up the river by successive governments and the cost of living compared to wages is so out of control most people can’t afford a family. I’m in a fortunate position because im slightly older but if I had been slightly younger I would struggle to afford my own home and certainly children. So I don’t think anyone should wait until their finances are perfect before having kids or they never will

Ok so in your scenario only middle class wage earners and above should have children.

Isn't this called Eugenics, a particularly unpleasant form of social control used by dictator states prior to mass genocide.

How about is it right to have kids when you favour despicable social engineering.

I wasn’t intending to goad with this thread. I Wondered if others had been in similar situations or were sick of listening to complaining too.

My main focus is my one ex friend who I think is a prime example of ‘entitled and selfish parenting’ although , I did extend it to others complaining about not being able to live post children.

She’s living in one cramped room of her reluctant parents house, with a now four year old, a new boyfriend and £35,000 in debt.... but yes mums net 🙈 I’m the ‘ignorant and offensive’ one for thinking that’s selfish on her part.

As for the other comments. There’s a really big difference between ‘oh it’s tight and a struggle’ and ‘we can’t afford to pay the bills now whether I go back to work or not because childcare is too expensive and we didn’t consider that until we already had a child’.

The second is plain bad planning of a situation you KNEW would arise. If you cannot afford to have a child I just don’t think you should have one. That doesn’t mean you need £50,000 in savings and a owned 5 bedroomed house. But you do have to meet monthly bills, keep a roof over your head and basic food on the table. Once again, I grew up in a working class family who struggled but we had a home and food and clothes and love.

🙈 Unfortunately, when it comes to this subject common sense seems to be the unpopular oppinion. You say ‘don’t have a child you can’t afford’ and instantly people assume you’re expecting only millionaires to reproduce. 😂

I’m glad quite a few agreed though, especially those mentioning that they’re education professionals...etc. That’s encouraging.

What I can't stand is that people who think like this don't have the imagination or empathy to see that circumstances can change. Most of us are 3 paypackets away from poverty anyway but ill health, disability, relationship breakdown can happen to absolutely anyone. Not one is immune.

Biglass, yes people have had babies for millennia but it’s a relatively new phenomenon that allows people to have children without providing their basic needs . We’ve all read posts from people complaining about the council not rehoming them or how they can’t afford a holiday etc etc .I do feel some sympathy for them but honestly if you keep doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different outcome it says a lot . I honestly think some people would lay down and die before they’d get off their arse and go provide for their family .

Biglass, yes people have had babies for millennia but it’s a relatively new phenomenon that allows people to have children without providing their basic needs

Mmm. I wonder what is wrong with this statement, considering that reliable birth control only arrived in the 1960s.

I wonder who filled the workhouses.

Option 1 Your friend will have another baby with her new boyfriend . Her family will “ chuck “ her out so she ll run to the housing office and present as homeless . She’ll be placed in temporary housing at huge cost to the taxpayer . Hopefully she will stop at two kids and when they go to school she’ll get out there and support her children . Most likely scenario is she won’t and the state will continue to pay for her children .

Scenario 2 What she should do ! Date the boyfriend for several years .Get married and or Get a house together . The eldest child will be at school so they can both work . She only has wraparound care to pay for . When they know they have a future together , plan the second child . If they need tax credits to support them so be it , that’s what they’re for . Support both children to be the best they can be . Break the cycle of poverty .It is possible but often requires to use your head and not your heart .

My mum taught us girls to never have children that we couldn't personally afford - it was more important for us to have careers to support any children.

I currently work in the educational sector. Last term a 8-year-old girl said she wanted to go to dance lessons at the village hall (£3 per session) but "my mummy doesn't have the money as we're poor".

She's one of 4; 10,8,4,3 - her mum is a nursery worker (gets free childcare with that) and her dad works in a warehouse. The parents should have thought about the costs of having kids a) shouldnt if had so many b) waited a while to build up their careers before having a large family.

Wow, so many hysterical posts from people who obviously haven't read the opening post properly or the OP subsequent posts.

Can anyone really, hand on heart, say that the person who the OP is talking about made a sensible decision? And she is continuing to make irresponsible decisions which are to the detriment of her child.

Remember that poverty has an impact on children. Children from poor backgrounds have been shown to make less progress at school than children from more affluent backgrounds. Why would anyone choose to put their child in that situation when there are things they can do to ensure their child has a better life than maybe they did, or improve their child's life as they grow up. It is selfish to have a child and not allow it to have a chance to succeed in life. Children need a home and food and, ore importantly sensible parents who don't put their need for frivolous possessions before their child.

What audit said

I grew up without any spare money btw . It was shit! It doesn’t take a genius to work out how not to end up in the same situation .

I suppose you gave birth in a private hospital and gave packed your little darlings off to private school? Obviously it us wrong to have children expecting someone else to provide but that is what 90% of parents in this country are doing.

@Coyacon she said that this system allows people to have children without meeting their basic needs the implication being that they are able to have children without taking responsibility because the state does not that people have never had children they couldn't afford.

Was that directed at me Racecardriver?

I wouldn't for a second suggest that people should remain child free unless they earn X amount but I absolutely believe people should think about when they start their family and the number of children they can reasonably provide for. None of us can control government policy but the majority of people are capable of considering their current housing situation, income and expected earnings and planning their families accordingly.

Yes relationship breakdown, disability and unemployment can hit anyone but anyone also includes the family of 2 adults and 4 dc already barely getting by!

On MN someone always says "but what about the family who could provide for their dc until such a thing happed" and I accept that's true for some but honestly, the people I know with more children than they can reasonably provide for are struggling financially because they had more children, not because of an unanticipated major life change.

I have family on both sides (my brother, DH sister and their partners) for whom this is true. I know poverty can be relative but I think both would be considered poor as in they can't always meet their bills, the dc do go without appropriate clothing, footware, healthy food and the type of fairly ordinary childhood experiences many of their peers are able to expect.

Yeah I know, anecdote not anecdata but they're not atypical from my working class background (despite the fact one of each couple is educated to degree level). I do think they're irresponsible, in one case I know that what they believed they'd be "entitled" to was a factor and I'm afraid I do judge, especially when I see the very obvious differences between my DNs lives and my own DC.

Hm I know some people who have had pretty ‘solid’ foundations for a family (married, together long-term, own house, secure jobs, no debt) but would still be reliant on a sum of tax credits and cb to top up wages once they had their child. Which I think is fair enough really.

But I do understand your frustration with your friend, I know people who have somehow decided to start a family despite being in a completely unsuitable situation (and young people as well where there was absolutely no rush) then complained about the situation they created afterwards, blaming everyone but themselves

@Coyacon she said that this system allows people to have children without meeting their basic needs the implication being that they are able to have children without taking responsibility because the state does not that people have never had children they couldn't afford

So, in fact, the benefits that people are getting for their families are in place to look after the children. There have always been people who have children irresponsibly and do not think about the consequences. I live in a country where there is no social welfare and there are still people having children that they cannot look after.