‘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.

You could be on £30 000, but after you have paid for your housing,childcare,bills getting back and to to work,have literally nothing left over,but according to those on benefits you are rich and just jealous.
Ps none of those things apply to me

Can you afford a childcare bill on 30k, wouldn't it be better to have one parent working and the other at home if you can't afford it. Or both working full time but shifts so there's no childcare. People could have as many as they wanted then, within reason.
My friend did this, she went into nursing and her dh worked in a factory. The time they didn't earn enough, they had tc, when it still paid to larger incomes.

Kashali
Got it in one about the corporations and wage slaves.
I see it all the time.
Zero hour contracts,minimum wage.
Wages standing still,bills going up.
You only have to be on a few hours a week and you are off the unemployed figures,and hey the government tell us how low the unemployment figures are and everything is great don’t you know.

I don’t think for a lot it makes sense to work when you have childcare,literally working for nothing.

sandy would you really call those mc, they are surely wc jobs. I'd say those on 40k+ wer mc, or the squeezed middle.

Although I do believe if you are on a lower wage childcare costs are refunded up to 85 % but only up to a certain figure.
That’s why it is all bollocks really.
You could be working for one of these piss taking corporations,only paying you £8 an hour but the government are paying out for housing child care and others benefits because these companies pay so low.

Shine

I think we are agreeing more than disagreeing. Apologies for above, I thought they were your views.

I think it's so easy to get wrapped up in she has this and he does that etc. Sometimes, you just have to live how the system is, you have no choice. You can vote to make it more fair, and of course when it isn't fair people will be upset, but taking it out on those stuck in the system won't help anyone.

I find it scary to see how easily we have become like this, in a relatively short space of time.

@Shinesweetfreedom i didn't mean middle class, just the middle ie between both extremes. I have never really understood how the class system is supposed to work! But I see the confusion.

@Shinesweetfreedom

Kashali
That’s ok.
It’s the way the system is designed.If you are too busy fighting amongst yourselves you can’t see the bigger picture,which is what those in charge want.
Money is flowing upwards to the Corporations,the 1%, the rich landlords,basically the very few while there are more of us fighting over less money.

2eternities - just to let you know, I am not out of touch, not do I regurgitate any crap about responsibility. BUT if you haven't noticed (and judging by your subsequent posts you actually have!) There is a housing crisis in the UK along with a social care crisis. To limit the amount of children the state will support financially seems a good enough option. Unless you have a better idea? If course it will have a an massive impact on families who are already struggling. But there is a choice of how many children one has. You can't choose if you need care in old age, you can't choose if you are ill and unable to work, you can't choose being made redundant and having to settle for min wage job. That's what the welfare system is for. A safety net, one that is getting smaller as the people needing help increases.
So maybe making people take responsibility for their own actions isn't so bad after all. If course there are always some vulnerable people who will loose out. Unfortunately, you can't help everyone. It's sad but that is the reality.

It makes sense to work and cover childcare because it’s investing in your career. It’s contributing towards your pension, it’s keeping your skills active. A woman who leaves the workforce to raise children for 5 years leaves herself incredibly vulnerable because of the difficulty in returning to the workforce. She will also lack ni contributions.
You are better off even working a couple of days a week than leaving work completely.
We can’t always get what we want out of life. I wanted 3 children but my means don’t stretch to it. I do not expect the public to fund it.

Someone I know had the most horrendous childhood including rape when a young child. She was in and out of care because her mother didn't give a crap. Barely attended school and left with no qualifications. Has never been able to hold down a job for longer than a couple of weeks because she lacks the life skills to cope with being an adult. All through her life she has been let down, abused and ignored. And she continues to be ignored and is now on the streets because she is unable to get any benefits.

She's single and childless. She decided at a young age to never get pregnant because she knew she wouldn't be able to cope and didn't want a child to live in poverty.

The strange thing is she would nave been better off - financially and support wise, if she had had a child. As it is, she's forgotten.

Single, childless people are living in poverty and despite the commonly held view that they can just go where the jobs are, the reality is that they are unable for many reasons to do that. Who is looking after them?

That's why I resent benefit money being spent on feckless people having loads of children when there is no need. Who looks after the other people in society? And don't give me all that crap about bum wiping in old age.

You also responded to the wrong poster, it wasn't me who even said I'm glad I'm not you, but yes, I definitely am as your a bit nasty.

2enterties
Didn’t say I was superior to others.
You say your dad is well off and your family have everything you need,so what the fuck are you going on about benefits for.

we need to help the vulnerable and they come in all shapes and sizes.
Whether they are working for shit money, ill, disabled, abuse victims, those who had bad beginnings, anyone who needs help.
Whatever the reason they are there.

I suppose my main argument is what about those born who won't be helped because their parents gave birth to them after they already had two.
What about the third?

Because I have a very unusual family background where my dad was very good at a certain sport and was offered a scholarship at a top us university to play for their team and he managed to build a good career there, I'm his only child because of my issues from being raped and abused as a teenager he pays for my car and sends me a generous weekly allowance this is taken like Cm payments and doesn't effect benefit eligibility because it's not money from working. This money enables us to live normally and not in poverty so I fee very sorry for women in my situation with out that financial help which is most. How they survive is beyond me since benefits are so low. My dad carries a lot of guilt about my childhood BTW. It's called having compassion, something obviously beyond many posters here.

Leighhalf
I agree about the single childless.
I know of a mid 50 year old man who was homeless and diagnosed with prostate cancer.The council told him to come back in a year and he will just have to sleep in his car.His cancer consultant told him without an address we cannot do the operation.

@2eternities, that's all very well for expecting people to have compassion because they want a third child but can't afford them without getting more benefit.

How about my friend who got together with a man who has grown up children. They feel in love married and ttc for her first child. Sadly, nothing happened and tests showed that he now had low sperm count and the only way she could get pregnant is with ivf. Except that they are not entitled to NHS funding because he already has kids.

They earn together £40k but live in the SE and after taxes, pensions and mortgage, they have little disposible income. They managed to save £10k to have a go but it failed. It took them 4 years to raise this amount. She is now 42 and her chances of pregnancy is about 2%. They won't be able to raise the money to try again in the next year.

Hearing people who are fortunate to have two kids, reliant on other tax payers like her to support their children act all outraged that they can't have more money fromm tax payers because they feel entitled to a 3rd child is quite disgraceful really.

Vyla no its not OK for vulnerable 'people' ie innocent children to go without in a rich first world country with gross inequality, but people like you make that possible with your bitter, twisted and judgemental views of other people. It's not a child's fault if their parent made a mistake or had a contraceptive failure or was pressured into unprotected sex with their dad or whatever. They shouldn't be punished.

It's terribly sad some people can't have children but it's becoming more common with people not starting a family till advanced fertile years, how old is your friend and her husband?

I've already explained why this policy is bad so have other posters. It hasnt had the desired effect as I know several low income tax credit relying people who just had their third including SIL. As I said us poorer folk are often good hustlers lol.

Swing
Here here.
Sorry can’t quote,how the feck do you quote on this

A friend from school has had her fourth and fifth since this rule came in. He works low wage at asda, they are doing fine and this policy doesn't seem to be having the desired effect in my experience, us poor are still having our families. Lol.

*It's terribly sad some people can't have children but it's becoming more common with people not starting a family till advanced fertile years, how old is your friend and her husband?
She started late because she wanted to meet the right man before having children. She was 32 when they met, started trying at 35. She will now never be a mum because whereas the government think it is OK for ppor families to get funds to allow them to have not 1 child but 2 and before as ma y as they wanted, they considered that she wasn't worthy of even having 1.

So how about being grateful that thanks to tax payers, some who don't have any children themselves, you can support 2 children rather than moan that what you get is not enough?