‘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.

Oh and I was also brought up when kids had to pay for bus fares. We had to walk otherwise.

Where do you live that kids fares are free? Certainly not in my area.

Interesting responses so far. A lot is about the parents "needing to plan" etc. I fully accept circumstances can change, and yes, there are genuine scenarios where a partner has left, leaving the other parent (all too often the mother) left holding the baby.

Three key points however:-

1. It is the children who pay the penalty for this, not the parents. The kids who have a cold house, no food etc. So if a parent has 4 kids, then there is a death/separation, it is the children who have the bad life
2. Research has shown that if children are brought up in a struggling household, this frequently leads to many problems in adult life - which end up costing more than if there was a reasonable level of support in the first place
3. Finally... this is a combination of social engineering through taxes, using the kids as pawns and just more examples of the effect of the fairly right wing press about "free loading do nothings" etc. Yes there ARE some of these... but are they the majority, or even a big majority? This constant barrage about the feckless poor, free loaders etc. The next concept (along any moment) will be about the "deserving" poor Vs the undeserving (very Victorian that one - next stop the work house?)

I am not blind to there being problems and issues.... but the blanket statements about "Well.. if you can't afford kids, don't have them" is far far too simplistic I feel.

should have been " big minority

There is a thread in AIBU with a mother who has four kids and appears to be really struggling with day to day stuff (she is not on benefits, but she HAS to work full-time to keep the family afloat financially and this is clearly making life very hard for her). I look at threads like this and wonder what is going on in people's heads--why would anyone keep producing kids to the point that everyone is only "just about" managing and is so stressed? I would not have a third kid unless I had quite a bit of independent assets in my name.

Totally agree. I have no earthly idea why anyone would ever do this to themselves. Usually when someone makes something I consider a bad decision I can say oh yeah, I've been there, I get it. This one, not in a million years.

Some of the responses here are downright selfish and smack of "I'm alright Jack attitude". So you have 3 kids with your husband. Then he leaves. So what? You are not working, or working part time.
Well people should think about this before going on to have more than one kid.
If you chose to limit yourself to maximum two kids then at least you know in advance what you'll be dealing with if you get left and can plan for that.
If people choose not to use their common sense and want to be selfish about their lifestyle choices - then don't EXPECT the tax payer/the rest of society to fund it for you!

Kokeshi123, I think if it’s one or the other I’d say the former is ‘better’, but there’s definitely a middle ground. I wouldn’t say I planned a family this purposefully due to worrying or anxiety about the future, more being sensible. I’ve lived in poverty and done shit jobs that wrecked my health and experienced a lot of crap and it’s made me understand that nobody else in the world has the same responsibility towards you and for your actions as you do. And then when you have children, it’s on you. I wouldn’t have had kids if I couldn’t provide for them. There may be a medical emergency that means I’m absolutely unable to work in which case I’d hope the benefit system would step in. But giving healthy fit parents money for unlimited children just encourages the mentality of ‘it’ll be fine we’ll get by one way or another, babies only need love they don’t need much’ etc. it’s just too big a decision, bringing a dependent human into the world you are responsible for for two decades, to take the ‘I’m sure we’ll find a way!’ lackadaisical approach imo.

also adult children don’t move out until late 20’s you have to take that into consideration.

What do you mean by this Gin? Some people don’t move out until very late but it’s not the norm. I know I was expected to move out before twenty (and would have done anyway under my own steam!) as were the vast majority of friends my age. Are you in an area or from a culture where it’s just expected that kids will be at home so late?

It’s also selfish to keep producing babies without any thought as to the impact on your existing children, the reduced resources for each one, less time for each child, being unable to offer them opportunities you might have been able to give if you’d stopped at two rather than doubled that number. It’s a complex decision bringing another baby into the world and impacts everyone from you, your existing kids, society and the environment, and not least the new child themselves.

I don’t think child 3,4 5 or 6 should suffer as a result of parent choices.

I hate the argument I saved my child . You live in a different world to some .

Of course some take advantage of whatever system is in place this is why though huge international companies are paying virtually no tax I. This country. Start making them pay would cover it all.

I have one dc btw

Btw, I vote Labour, consider myself a socialist and to be on the left, I despise the daily mail, and the current party in power, for many reasons. But I still think it’s nuts to expect zero personal responsibility to be taken for child rearing and financing, to encourage a culture where it’s partly offloaded onto the government. It’s not just people on the right mindlessly absorbing the right wing press who think this way.

I look at threads like this and wonder what is going on in people's heads--why would anyone keep producing kids to the point that everyone is only "just about" managing and is so stressed? I would not have a third kid unless I had quite a bit of independent assets in my name.

No different to those who go abroad on holiday without insurance, or don't have household contents insurance, or don't have life insurance or pensions, etc. Some people just won't take any responsibility for themselves. Then out comes the begging bowl when things go wrong.

My dd and her dh both work full time but have nursery fees and a large mortgage and high travel cost for her dh to get to work. They cannot claim any benefits as dh earns just over threshold for child benefit and so I am told they cannot afford to have any more children at the moment even though they would dearly like one more. By the time they can afford another baby my dd will be almost 40 so may be too old to conceive. People who claim benefits are lucky to get money towards raising two children and should be grateful for that help. Only irresponsible parents would have a third child if they could not afford to pay for it and so should be very careful with contraception.

Just have 2 kids then. Circumstances can change, but that's life and people should have plans for this. It's irresponsible and selfish to have another child if you have to rely on benefits. People should stop making excuses.
No one is saying there aren't genuine cases, but they're a minority.

I’m sorry but I’m agog at this. We can speak about people not having children for different reasons, but what if a person’s third child is a doctor that helps many people, or the scientist that invents a cure, or a career who impacts many many people’s lives? It’s like so many on this thread are forgetting the humanity aspect to all of this

Seriously, I'm agog that so few parents are selfless enough to take carbon footprint into account. As a race, we're heading towards self-destruction very very fast - in the last month there were news articles about a study predicting our current way of life will be totally unsustainable within 30 years (or was it by 2030?!). Only an idiot would keep pushing children out in case one of them turned out to be a doctor who would cure cancer! I mean, what are the chances really? Far more likely that you're condemning yet another child to live on a catastrophically compromised planet. The"humanity aspect" is that there won't be any humanity at all if we carry on the way we're going, ffs.

What are the statistics for that assertion Queenofthebiscuittin?

And so what? Are you saying that there should be no benefit payments if the feckless selfish parents have a 3rd child. That the children should then suffer. The chldren shouldbe in poverty. The children should be short of food. Short of warm clothes and the chldren should then have all the disadvantages (for their whole life) (with the huge costs to society that would entail) that would then stem from this.

(if you actually read the report, you'll see that in a huge majority of cases people aren't even aware of the 2 child limit).

Are you saying that there should be no benefit payments if the feckless selfish parents have a 3rd child.
But there are, they are still receiving help for two children in this case.

(if you actually read the report, you'll see that in a huge majority of cases people aren't even aware of the 2 child limit).

Presumably then they assumed that they’d receive more money for having another child, and this is what you’d view as something that should continue.

The usual mn myth that somehow you can plan for every scenario and that a wealthy family ticking on happily by with a veritable team of children can't have their circumstances drastically changed.

At some point the things you want to do in life also have to happen. Not every penny can be saved. Some people want children, some people want a yacht in the bahamas

The children should be short of food. Short of warm clothes...
These things can be bought very cheaply in the UK, or handed down in the case of clothes, and I don't really think you need a benefit top up to pay for them.Of course there are extreme circumstances (having to leave the home because of domestic violence, benefit sanctions, etc), but on the whole if children are going without these things I really you need to look to the parents rather than the benefit system.

Really Anna it's been advertised everywhere and there have been many ,many debates about it that's really not an excuse if people take so little notice of current affairs that they dont realise that they won' now get extra tax credits for a third child than they are highly irresponsible.

So, after reading most of the replies on here, I feel compelled to say something. It seems most of you are under the impression that people need financial assistance because they're uneducated, didn't plan well enough or are just greedy. It's such a simplistic view. Whilst I realise there are SOME who abuse the system, it's not the whole story

Although I don't have three children, I can identify with those who may need financial assistance with their children . Parenthood is not always exactly what people expected and things happen which mean they may require help.

Before we had our little boy, we were in a really good financial place. In fact, we were in a position in which we probably could have afforded to have three kids quite easily.

I had a normal pregnancy, all my scans showed baby was perfectly normal. Long story short, my baby was born with a medical condition which meant an incredibly long hospital stay, far away from home. He is also at risk of sudden cardiac death, so one of us has to monitor him over night, and we had to buy expensive monitoring equipment for watching him over night, as he could die in his sleep. This equipment isn't provided by the NHS. We also had to buy a defibrillator. My husband lost his job (well, he couldn't legally be fired, given the circumstances, but on a zero hours contract, you have very few rights ).

All of this, as you can imagine has put immense financial strain on us. So much so, that we have gone from being pretty well off, to claiming universal credit.

Now we can't even afford one kid, let alone three. See how circumstances out of your control can effect you, even though you are educated (husband and I have 4 degrees between us) planned well (we waited 5 years to have children, bought our flat and saved up money)?

And who loses out in all of this ? The children. I can't afford to buy the things I'd like for my boy and he will probably never have brothers and sisters, as one of us has to take 24 hour care of him.

And I have to endure the judgemental looks people give me walking in and out of the job centre, and chatting to people in the waiting room, I don't find many of the uneducated scroungers u suggest , but vulnerable people who have had a tough life and have no other solution but to seek financial help from the govt.

Before you give your two cents, take a good long hard look in the mirror and check your privilege.

The cost of a third child isn't much more than having 2 already and clothes can be bought very cheaply second hand. So no, they won't go without.

There are so many other things that I think are more important uses of public money.
You are right, children being fed and clothed and adequately housed is just not necessary.

Don’t have children if you can’t afford them. Unplanned pregnancies are no excuse. If you already have 2 and can’t afford a third then get the snip.

As others have said, people who don’t qualify for benefits have to wait until they can afford to have kids. Why should people on benefits be treated any differently?

@fluffedup
This means that my two youngest (born before the two child ruling came in by the way) are growing up without the safety net that others have.
It won’t affect them if born before April 2017