‘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.

Wereeaglesdare Sorry I thought you were asking a hypothetical question if a person got pregnant on their 3rd. I did not mean you get a job.
If a family welcomed number 3 they would have to do it without a payment from the government, other than the cost of healthcare and education.
It is not a bad deal.

That poor little baby who god forbid any of your taxes goes towards could just save your life one day.

Hitler and Stalin were little babies once, too. Never know what you’re going to get in the future!

The ability of posters to see into the future and determine that these children are absolutely going to be one of the above, or cure cancer, or halt and reverse climate change is astounding

I know. The reality is if raised on benefits they will likely follow the same path as children tend to copy their main role models.

I think UC and the two child rule were good steps in the right direction. Not harsh enough but nevertheless a move the right way. People are free to have as many children as they want, they just have to finance them themselves. Not a hard concept to grasp surely.

But why would you put yourself in such in such a precarious position? Why take such a risk of putting yourself and your 2 children into poverty?

You cannot possibly judge or comment on people who must rely on welfare/financial aid if you are coming from a position of privilege. When I talk of a position of privilege, I mean if you have never been in such a dire situation that benefits are the only way you can turn.

Got it. If I see a blonde woman kicking her young son in the street, I can’t judge or comment. I’m not a blonde woman and I don’t have a son, so I’m not qualified to make a judgment as to whether she’s acting appropriately. I’ve never been in her shoes, so my opinion on her abuse of her child means nothing. Right, I got it.

@barbarianmum
What you don't realise about falling birth rates is that as they fall, the economy drastically falls too. Look at Japan. Do a little economic research, and you'll realise that the amount paid in benefits for people having extra children is much less than the losses we'd suffer as a nation if our birth rates fall below 1.4. And the funny thing with birth rates is that when they fall, it's much harder to counteract (ie increase them again) .In other words, in supporting the small minority of families who have 3 or more children, we're saving money to make money (ie helping the economy)

It would be great if we could counteract that with immigration, as the us has done in the past, but unfortunately, we're leaving the EU, which is making quite a hostile environment for said 'immigrants'. And funnily enough , the same people who don't want to fund benefits with their tax paying money are often the same ones who have qualms about immigration.

Don't take my word for it though, do some research.

@isabellalinton yeh but when you cut the welfare you are denying children opportunities as a society. I feel like we're going round in circles here. Basically what you put in you get out. And to stop history repeating itself you create better incentives to work. You are not rewarding mums you are buying in to a child's future who will contribute just like you.
I mean i doubt they are all gunna be mini hitlers running around. But atleast they were presented with the same opportunities as everyone else.

@Emeraldshamrock apologies I thought you were telling me to get a job.

Haven’t read all of this but....
Would the family that does not qualify for benefits be able to afford a third child if their tax liabilities were lower as they were not contributing to in work benefits ( including tax credits for children)?
Or would this same family be able to afford more children if wages had not been artificially depressed by the in work benefit system which removes the onus from corporates to the state?
The whole system is buggered and the tax regime is fundamentally unfair and inefficient

@crazyasafox WELL SAID

Wereeaglesdare
Please don't try to pretend that this is a left wing vs right wing issue.

I'm left politically and am in favour of a strong welfare state, in some areas much stronger than it is now. I'm not happy with people to keep popping out children because it fills some sort of emotional need/ they didn't use free contraception and expecting taxpayers to subsidise their poor sexual choices.

It's not about ivory towers. I would happily have higher taxes and higher public spending (on nationalised public services so the NHS and no academy chains in schools) and a much better welfare system. I would much rather that money went on building decent social housing, better benefits and support for those with disabilities, properly funding education, social care, access to mental health services.

When it comes down to it do I believe that suicidal teenagers should struggle to access specialist services, or a child with an EHCP should have a limited education provision, or someone with a lifelong disability should live in poverty for 20 years so that a couple down the road can have baby number 4 because it'll make them happy? Not a chance.

You are not rewarding mums you are buying in to a child's future who will contribute just like you.

You are rewarding mums, quite obviously, and you hope that child will contribute.. but they may choose to be irresponsible too.

And to stop history repeating itself you create better incentives to work

Giving people more in benefits doesn’t create a work ethic

Taking them away usually does though as they have no choice.

I think its a good idea, why should people get more money for having more children. I would love to have a had a football team but haven't as we couldn't afford it. I have 3 now and waited till each 1 started preschool before having another due to nursery fees.
When i had my 1st baby 9 years ago a friend of mine had 4 children straight after another, she would get more money just off tax credits than me and partner got in wages. Made me so angry at the time, so I'm glad they are now changing how its done.

No but it starts in schools then it starts with opportunities such as apprenticeships. More jobs, better contracts

But until you get there kids need to eat and be warm n have clothes. Honestly you win thread you win.

Cos that's what I was saying let's have a great big fucking benefits party. Wait let's get all the poor people and throw all of our collective taxes at them and whoever grabs the most money wins.
Or let's just stick to our own little bubbles not like anyone likes each other now or wants anyone else to succeed.

IceCreamAndCandyfloss
Or there is a more progressive and targeted system that supports those in need more (e.g. I'm not sure that cutting disability benefits is going to magically make someone fit for work), whilst cutting back elsewhere.
So have a higher minimum wage (because top up benefits for working people are really allowing companies to lower their costs), better disability benefits and so on, but lower benefits for sitting on your arse wanting to have 5 children 'because babies make me happy'.

Again the two-child limit also effects a large number of working families. To get tax credits for a third child a family would earn 40K or under a year... so that includes a lot of ‘typical’ married families with a mortgage and both parents at work. So not sure about the ‘get off your arse and work’ and ‘children raised on benefits’ comments are entirely helpful when talking about the policy in general.

Interested in the range of viewpoints though! A lot of SM comments seem to mention the whole ‘don’t have sex if you can’t afford another child’ in relation to potential contraceptive failure. Is this realistic?

Not sure if it's been mentioned.. Read some then skimmed the rest

Those in receipt of these benefits are also more likely to be needing social housing. 3 kids means needing at least a 3 bed house not a 2 bed flat. The 2 child limit likely makes a few people think twice before readily deciding on a third and getting a house likely with a garden, for doing nothing more than having children when others save and buy their own home.

(yes we know in London the waiting list is a million years but elsewhere it could be just a few)

I’ve said it before and I will say it again. Unless you have private healthcare and private education for your children the chances are the tax payers in general are paying to support your children even if you don’t claim monetary benefits. The vast majority of parents are not net contributors even despite earning decent salaries. So perhaps it’s not a good idea to complain about other people’s children bleeding the state dry when your own children get state funded stuff in life too. If we all waited until we could truly afford to find our children self sufficiently we would have a rapidly declining population because not many can afford private education and healthcare until 18 years old, even for one child.

dobtdoubt in my region you get priority for social housing if you are employed and not in receipt of housing benefit.

Housing related also... over crowding does give people in social housing an option of a bigger house. Those private renting/mortgage will have to family plan based on their house side.

I mentioned to a mum last year that her income won’t increase for the third child. Her response was “how do they expect me to survive”?

The councils are struggling to provide services. In this situation, we cannot afford large families. Even self funding families. One adult income covering 5 humans in the house. It’s not going to cover the education costs.

Are vasectomy and tubal ligation covered by the NHS? (genuine question as I do not live in the UK).

Because once people's families' are complete, there are your options.

I would be fine for making an exception for the very small number of people who have a TL or V failure.

OK so let's just routinely sterilise women after child number two shall we? And give men vasectomies.

Err, no. People can choose to do this, or not. If they choose not to, and wind up with an unwanted third child, the state just isn't going to pay any extra for it. Surely this is not hard to understand.

It's all very well to say that people shouldn't have children they can't afford.

But reducing tax credits won't stop poorer people having larger families.

How is it that the children born into those families are the ones who should bear punishment? They didn't ask to be born. Or don't they matter to some of you smug people who only had the children you could afford?

'It makes me so mad that you are mums are on here saying this stuff, while Jeremy Hunt and his mate Boris Johnson are promising more tax cuts for the well off. It is relatively cheap to lift a huge proportion of families and children out of poverty. The tories just refuse to do it. And in the meantime it is children who are suffering.'

👏👏👏

Exactly. Many people on this thread are the people who psychopaths like Johnson rely on to keep the focus and blame on poor people for all the UK's problems. The welfare budget goes mostly on pensions (as it should). And as the above poster says, addressing child poverty is relatively cheap.

If you think it's ok for the super rich to keep getting massive tax cuts and it's ok for poor children to suffer, then quite frankly, shame on you.

To answer the original question, I would move to the Alps and cut myself off from people because most people are assholes.