‘Two-child limit taking toll on family life’

[SweetMelodies]

www.itv.com/news/2019-06-25/two-child-limit-taking-toll-on-family-life-study-suggests/

So the first detailed research into families effected by the 2-child policy, where tax credits are only paid for the first two children unlike in the past when it was every child, has taken place and has found that families are suffering as a direct result of this.

A lot of comments on SM seem to forget that many many working families are effected as well. Even some families with ‘above-average’ incomes used to be entitled to tax credits for a third or subsequent child.

Any thoughts on this? I have mixed feelings as to whether it will work on in the long-run or not. Of course we all know families who have carried on having babies with no thought because each child has meant another monthly tax credits sum... but then there are also the families who are going to face one unplanned pregnancy that could push them into poverty and make their other children suffer.

If immigration is the solution, which I'm fine with then people need to get rid of this idea of us not needing immigrants

Of, alternatively, we could make it easier for families here to have the amount of children they want to have and can support. Why does the next generation have to be imported from abroad?

I completely agree with this policy. Loads of 'contraceptive' failures on MN.

People shouldn't have children unless they can afford them, without going to the state for benefits.

I agree that you shouldn't have children if you can't afford to.

I've been sexually active for 12 years and have never accidentally got pregnant.
All of my friends and family also have never had an unplanned pregnancy.

Contraceptives, when used correctly, are incredibly effective and are bloody FREE in the UK.

It is not difficult to not have children - people need to take more responsibility for their lives.
The level of entitlement in the UK is utterly bonkers.

Pay your own way.
Pay tax for public services and EMERGENCY safety net care.

Unsustainable population growth, food, water, energy all problematic, global warming. It’s obvious what we have to do to try and preserve our species.

And all you are bothered about is tax credits.

This country cannot support its current population levels and the true figure is being hidden from us.

A compassionate society would face facts and have a survival plan in place.

Yea I agree this is probably to try encourage people who had a career history on the dole with a tribe of kids. So I think they put a cap on so the people on welfare didn't live beyond their means. And tbh if you cant afford your children then shouldn't have any.

My partner has a child that he cant afford to keep as it is, if im honest. We cant afford days out or trips, treats or even the cinema. so we made the decision to not have any of our own as we simply cant afford it and combined earnings is 49k per year. Rent alone each month is 1100. Madness isn't it.

1)We need children to continue earning and paying tax when we are old or our country collapses.
2) People who have more children knowing they don't have enough are usually in extreme circumstances dealing with stuff that most of us thankfully don't have to.
3)Children growing up in poverty is morally wrong regardless of the wisdom of their parents choices
4) It is very much in all our interests to have a small gap between the wealthiest and the poorest. Equal societies are safer, happier and more prosperous.
5) If life is tough for you, blame the bankers not the minimum wage job single mum.
6) If life is tough for you, making someone else poorer is the rich man's way of making you feel like you are getting a better deal without you actually getting a better deal.
7) wise up mumsnet.

Contraceptives, when used correctly, are incredibly effective and are bloody FREE in the UK

A poster upthread said how difficult it was to get hold of contraception - apparently there’s a long wait time for a GP appointment at her surgery

Some people don’t have the sense of a billy goat.

@happyhillock

Um... I would suggest you read my post again. I think you may have misunderstood it?

We both work. DH full time (and more), me 4 days/week. Both very demanding and stressful jobs. Fairly well paid. But we live in an expensive area and we are tied here for the time being.
We are not big spenders, barely eat out and haven’t been abroad in years.
We have two DC, would love another but won’t because of financial reasons and environmental reasons. Even if we could afford another now, we are thinking ahead to when they are older and more expensive.
Many working families are choosing not to have children or to limit the number they have.
So i think the limit is fair for families who are not working.

Contraceptives are available from GPs, family planning clinics, sexual health and contraction clinics. They are easily accessible.

Do you people who ‘despair’ of this policy get that there is actually a movement of people who are not having children because they are so worried about the viability of the planet?

The outrage is an affront to sensibility.

People who have more children knowing they don't have enough are usually in extreme circumstances dealing with stuff that most of us thankfully don't have to.

No, they’re irresponsible, and making excuses for them and saving them from the consequences of their bad choices doesn’t help them make better ones.

Children growing up in poverty is morally wrong regardless of the wisdom of their parents choices

It’s an incentive for people not to make poor decisions.

It is very much in all our interests to have a small gap between the wealthiest and the poorest. Equal societies are safer, happier and more prosperous.

It’s in your interest to when you want to put your hand in someone else’s pocket and help yourself to their hard earned money.

If life is tough for you, making someone else poorer is the rich man's way of making you feel like you are getting a better deal without you actually getting a better deal.

You don’t mind making the wealthier poorer. People who earn it don’t deserve it as much as those who don’t earn it?

A long wait time at the surgery?

Then maybe abstain for a couple of weeks. If you can't afford a packet of condoms bw you then how could you afford a child?

There are plenty of contraceptives on sale in every pharmacy and some supermarkets. Condoms and spermicidal cream. If someone can afford to risk having a child they can afford to buy contraceptives whilst waiting for an appointment with the doctor.

Nevertheless things can go wrong. If, for example, someone has a digestive upset whilst on the pill, the medication could go straight through their body and they would not be safe. I know three people to whom that happened: they knew if they vomited they'd 'lose' their pill but didn't realise bad diarrhoea is just as dangerous. They had lovely babies :-), they managed, but at a time when a baby wasn't in their plan and it was very hard.

OK - so a poor parent has too many children (defined by the Government as what "too many" are). As has been mentioned - by this time, the kids are here, living and breathing. Obviously, at that point, the rules have not worked, and there is now a child who (thanks to government policy) is now growing up possibly with limited food, benefits etc. I do not see how making the child pay for the perceived "failure" of the parents is morally justifiable or sane.

That is the outrage I can see (along with instead of, oh, raising taxes in the highest earners, let's give them a tax break - see Boris' latest wheeze - while blaming the feckless poor)

scary Wages have increased but the problem we have is that housing costs, Utilities and childcare etc has risen faster than wages. If wages go up then the cost of goods and services have to rise in order to cover the increased wages so you spend more of your wages purchasing the same goods and services and are no better off financially even though you are earning more.
Nursery places are so expensive now because wages have risen and the nursery needs to charge more to pay its staff.
If house prices and childcare had risen only in line with inflation families would not need to be so reliant on benefit top ups just to survive. I blame the government for house prices. Too much selling of council houses, too little house building, too many overseas investors being able to buy up property.

It's not a 2 child limit. People can have as many children as they want but they are their financial responsibility not other taxpayers and only they should feel guilty if the children have a horrible quality of life when things like condoms and the pill are available. And it's unrealistic to think that a job is for life these days and will always provide for 3, 4, 5 kids, modern life is expensive and nobody is owed anything.

Haven't rtft but this is a great pasison of mine. I just cna't fathom how people are choosing to have kids based on whether the government gives them £20 pounds a week for them. It's absolutely ridiculous. If you can't afford another child, then don't have one until you cna afford them, it's not the government's job to help you raise your own children. I've seen terrible posts about women are being forced to abort because of this new rule and i'm annoyed about how entitled people are these days. There's no reason why anyone should have more than 2 kids anyways, barring multiple births of course.

3rd/4th/5th etc children aren't exactly abandoned to work down t'pit though, are they? They are still (and quite rightly) entitled to free education and healthcare and fsm and pupil premium and are taken into account for housing etc They just don't keep topping up your benefits if you have them. That's fair enough I think.

I’m guessing most people who have more than 2 children benefit from free healthcare and free education for their children. I don’t think anybody would advocate that 3rd or subsequent children should have to pay for these things because the parents have too many children.
I don’t know the figures but I reckon the vast majority of people with 3 plus children are not net contributors even if they earn enough to not need any monetary benefits.

Child Benefit is paid at a higher rate for your oldest child. This is £20.70 a week. If you have other children, you get £13.70 a week for each of them.

You receive Child Benefit for every child or qualifying young person who you are responsible for, even if your other benefits are limited by the two child limit.
just to clarify for those who are confusing CTC and CB

I think it should've been limited to three children but only if both parents are working. 2 if not.

IsabellaLinton
You sound very angry. What are you so cross about?
I have paid an awful lot of tax, and if some of that was towards a young mum who made bad life choices so she can feed her third child then I am totally okay with that.