‘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.

Contraceptionismyfriend
Did you actually read what I posted?

Benefits/tax credits are supposed to be a short term crutch to help you back on your feet not a long term financial solution. Benefits/tax credits are always going to change that's why they are designed to be short term help not long term dependency

Luckily Ive never claimed either and always worked to support my 2 kids

I wouldn't think prince William would claim tax credits with his all money.

There may be a families or individuals set out to have many children and be supported by the state. I think there are very few.

For this policy to work all couples apart from a few of the super rich should only have two children. An illness, disability or death could leave many many families affect by the rule. That includes middle class and higher who had three children when they could easily financially afford it. (Although it is possible to get life/ health insurance it can be hard to claim/manage)

Actually given the level of divorce, second marriage or partnership and blended families, maybe one child only.

YABVU.

Kids aren't expensive, it's the lifestyle you choose whether you can afford them or not.

Why should the government i.e. the tax payer, pay to support your child? If you cant afford them then you shouldn't have them. I do understand some circumstances i.e. death of partner cant be planned for. Not forgetting there's over 7 billion people on this planet already.

Benefits/tax credits are supposed to be a short term crutch to help you back on your feet not a long term financial solution

Tax credits are not designed to be a short term crutch at all. They’re designed to subsidise large corporations so they don’t have to pay a living wage.

Benefits/tax credits are supposed to be a short term crutch to help you back on your feet not a long term financial solution

This isn't true. They are two totally different things, but people with agendas like to consider them the same, one of the reasons some get their knickers in a twist.

Welfare benefits, out of work benefits are meant for this.
Tax credits, in work benefits are not the same.

Working class children don't even get to university in the first place
Oh please fuck off dear, and then come back when you know what you're talking about. Working class children can go to uni if they get the grades.
My w/c son has just completed his honours degree, and will be doing his masters degree next year. He's paying for it through working part/full time and student loans, just like his fellow students. None of them are from wealthy families, some of them are from the Ukraine. I wonder what they'd say if they read this thread?

ton

There is a lot of hypocrisy around don't have them if you can't afford them.
Some believe this but then expect others to fund their choice to use childcare.
Being employed is no better than not working. You aren't more entitled to help if we go by the "Don't have em if you can't afford them"
Affording childcare is no different to affording to feed and clothe.

“If you need state handouts to afford to raise your kids then the sensible option is to stick with the limits the government supplies.“

This is all well and good, if you are able to plan everything, but the two child limit on tax credit payouts refers to new claims and applies to children born after April 2017.

This means if you are in a long term relationship which ends, and you have 3 children, the youngest of which is born after April 2017, you will only get tax credits for the two eldest. This means that mothers of three or more may not be able to leave a dysfunctional relationship due to financial pressures.

The assumption that low income families are thoughtlessly pumping out kids they can’t afford is a myth. (Some might be, but not many)

Bubble,no Universal Credit is not just for unemployed.Child Tax credits have gone but it is one of the benefits that Comes under UC.It is paid along earnings as a sort of top up,and reduces with how much you earn.For every £1 you earn over a certain amount you lose 63p.

I don't understand why people will say things such as if you can't afford kids don't have them. As if having a child is a commodity. People have children because they find a partner they love and want to have a family with. It is a basic instinct. If you think like that we might as well sterilise everyone that is on minimal wage. It is not all about money.

Some excellent analysis, measured argument and comment pieces here -
fabians.org.uk/about-us/our-projects/poverty-and-social-security-where-next/

This is especially pertinent:-
fabians.org.uk/a-female-face/

But times have changed.
How many with a mum and dad compared to a single mother with several kids then a new partner on the scene and then another child with them,then they split up and it’s on to the next and possibly more children.All possible before the two child limit.

Nearly47 yeah thats cool love, but still no reason why the tax payer should have to pay for it.
As far as I'm concerned, the 2 child cut off is a good compromise.

Nearly

Maybe those who earn over the cap for tc see their dc as a commodity.
Maybe it's just us wc who have kids because we love them.

I knew a judge once, she said Oh, I've not had children for now, they are to look after me in old age. Poor kids were pushed from pillar to post, we all felt sorry for her kids. She had no clue why all the other mums asked to take them home, offered play dates etc.

I often wondered how her kids turned out.

I was away from the UK for almost 40 years and when I returned for a extended visit (where I had to use public transportation) I suffered profound culture shock.

I found my hometown to be grubby, dirty with streams of dried or recent urine flowing out of shop doorways and into gutters. People were publicly camping or scamming/begging. Once flourishing family owned small shops with turned into Subways, Starbucks or charity shops. Many shops in one part of town were covered in posters so I have no idea what they sold.

Besides all the above I was stunned at the quality of the people. Manners were almost a thing of the past and I witnessed street fighting and swearing in the town centre. I saw one very obese woman in the bus station with almost her entire bum and long suffering lacy pink thong exposed for all to see. She laughed ignorantly while her husband let their toddler play around the buses.

I concluded the people we once referred to as 'common as muck' had taken over and had out-bred the decent salt of the earth working and posh people. These are results of paying the 'gimme gimmes' to breed and do fuck-all else.

Well done Lefty. < This is sarcasm btw.

I don’t see why I should support people who want the luxury of having more than two children.

Also, we seem to be funding Prince William's third child. Where is the punishment for them going over the population replacement limit? Oh yeah, they are rich people living off the state, so that's fine.

Agree with this 100 %

David Attenborough said there is not a problem on this planet that couldn't be solved by a smaller population. Everything alarming that is going wrong, at increasing speed would be slowed a little by having fewer people. Don't have children if you can't afford to bring them up without expecting financial input from someone else - harsh but true .

sunshine

I can understand your view, it must be hard to work and see others not having to, but some people with 3 children are working, they just don't get paid enough.

What do you propose happens to those children, the third one?
Taken into care, workhouse, forced adoption to those who can afford them, because you sure as hell can't push them back up there again.

It’s easy to say if you can’t afford more children don’t have them but what about multiple pregnancies. People don’t plan to get pregnant and consider a multiple birth, I know I didn’t. We had DS1 then planned our second and found out it was twins. I felt ill with worry about the cost implications, needing a bigger car to fit 3 car seats in, how I would pay childcare and if I could even afford to go back to work as I wasn’t eligible for any extra support other than the basic child benefit.

My pregnancy ended at 24 weeks with only one twin surviving. I should have been more careful what I wished for. I didn’t want twins but I didn’t want it to end the way it did either. For us it would have been a real struggle having the 3 and we are both professionals with good incomes. It would definitely have affected our children’s quality of life.

I was amazed when William and Kate had a 3rd child. They are meant to care about the planet and environment. If they truly did they would not have had a third.

They should be setting an example to others and I hope the stories that they might have a fourth are untrue. I don't care how rich someone is more than 2 children is selfish

It’s not a limit. It’s a concession. You can have as many children as you like-the government will even subsidise the first two!