To believe that providing free meals for children

[Completelyfrozen]

Is not enough!
I hear people saying that children shouldn't go hungry and I wholeheartedly agree. It is a travesty in 2020 that any child goes hungry, regardless of the reason behind it, but is that where our responsibility as a society ends?
I want to live in a society where children are provided with a hot meal every day.
A warm dry bed to sleep in at night.
Warm clean dry clothes.
Facilities to wash and brush their teeth.
Warm dry shoes.
An adequate education.
Opportunities to play and socialise.
A safe environment to grow up in.
A home free from damp or mould.
I want to live in a society where adults have access to hot water and washing facilities so they can keep themselves and their children clean.
What can we do, as a nation to address these issues so that children have their most basic requirements met?
YABU - Providing one hot meal per day is enough and parents should provide the rest, despite their circumstances. It is not the govts responsibility to provide anything more.
YANBU - Providing one free meal a day is just the start but as a society, we need to do much much more to ensure children are provided these basic needs and if the parents cannot provide these basic items for any reason, then the govt has a responsibility to step in and provide them.

[quote kittykat35]@jasjas1973

A bit like child benefit then? doubtless you claim that, whether you need it or not.
But child benefit is means tested!! In the U.K. it is. [/quote]
Not really, a household with an income of £99,000 can still get child benefit. Hard to argue they need it.

With child benefit my view is it should be household not individual income otherwise it's unfairly skewed against single parents.

I agree with the second/ third comments. I can think of a few families where the one or both parents have gone on to have further, multiple children. I used to work with a guy in his 50s who had 3 grown up kids met a woman with 6 kids, they then had 2 more together (she was a lot younger and more attractive than him and he wanted to keep her happy). Her ex also met someone else and had more kids with them (and didn't pay anything for the first set).
Families that size are all very well (leaving aside the environmental impact) but if my colleague had lost his job or become unable to work, that would have been 8 kids immediately in poverty.

The majority of parents don't want to be on benefits (not hard to see why given the comments on here) but sometimes there is no choice because things change.
Do people on here not watch the news? Do you have any idea how many people are out of work due to Covid? Do you have any idea how many more will loose their jobs? Please please tell me what you want these parents to do. Just for the record we're not on benefits and both work but unlike so many I can see, why some parents are struggling. These parents will have paid in to the system, why so angry that they are now struggling on the tiny amount of benefits the government gives.
This thread makes me sad and angry. Be kind didn't last long.

Child benefit should either be universal and capped to first child only or scrapped and the money used elsewhere.

The majority of parents don't want to be on benefits

I don’t doubt some use them as a short stop gap but many do choose them. Adding extra children when already claiming, won’t increase part time hours, claim they can’t work as they have children etc. There would have been no need for caps etc if people only used them for a few months.

These parents will have paid in to the system, why so angry that they are now struggling on the tiny amount of benefits the government gives

Some will have but many won’t have and it’s not a tiny amount otherwise it wouldn’t cover living and housing costs. They should be more contribution based so those that paid more in get more out in times of need.

“The majority of parents don't want to be on benefits”

Hmm, a significant percentage make it a lifestyle choice.

“Adding extra children when already claiming”

This is one example of the above. If you’re already on benefits and struggling, what on earth would make you decide to have another child? Plenty of free contraception around nowadays so no excuse. The majority of us budget when we decide to have a child and only have as many as we can afford.

“ There would have been no need for caps etc if people only used them for a few months.”

Precisely! The more who abuse the system, the less for everyone who genuinely needs the help.

“They should be more contribution based so those that paid more in get more out in times of need.”

Absolutely! I feel so sorry for those who have worked all their lives and who get the rug pulled out from under them, whether by illness, bereavement, redundancy etc. To me they deserve maximum help to enable them to get back on their feet, but usually these are the people who don’t qualify for any.

Whereas those who never work and pop out kids left, right and centre seem to qualify for everything going. The whole system needs upheaval.

Food banks should not be a thing in 2020

More and more people using food banks

As the economic fallout from the coronavirus crisis starts to bite a growing number of people in Belgium are finding themselves forced to seek help from foodbanks. With this in mind the federal secretary of state responsible for tackling poverty Karine Lalieux (Francophone socialist) has announced that 7 million euro extra in Federal Government funding will be given to the country’s foodbanks and social services departments providing food aid.
12:37

The number of people using foodbanks has risen by 15% during the past few months. Of the 7 million extra federal government funding, one million euro will be shared among the Antwerp food aid storage and distribution centre, the Red Cross, the Belgian Federation of Food Banks and the not for profit group Aliment.

The money will be used to buy basic foodstuffs and hygiene products and pay for deliveries to people of limited mobility. The funding should ensure that they have enough food to see them through the winter.

6 million euro will go to the various social services councils in municipalities across Belgium. The extra funding will help them fund the increased demand for food aid and basis hygiene products. The 7 million euro come on top of funding already granted by the previous federal government.

@Watermelon999 - what percentage? I’d be interested to see the figures and where the research has come from, have you got a link?

@Deadgoldfish

No idea, no statistics. This is purely my opinion based on my own experience of the people I come across through work (nhs) and the anecdotal evidence from many of my friends who work in various places (schools, social services, benefit office etc).

Watermelon999

I think the CSA can still take money from the fathers wage packet but there are loopholes and even when one of my friends told them where her ex was working they didn’t do anything.

There is a loophole (Or used to be a few years ago. So don’t know if it still apply) where by the CSA can track the father and then if they have been working in their current job more than either 6 or 9 months (can’t remember exact details) in order for them to deduct earnings.
One ex I know worked for his local council and swapped job titles every 6 months to avoid having to pay out for his children (who he didn’t see)

He then got given a 3 bedroom council property because he needed 3 bedrooms for when his children came to stay.

The system is a joke.

Men don’t disappear. Most of the mothers know where their non paying ex lives or know where his parents live and could track them down from there. Unfortunately even when directed to where someone lives and where they work. The department can’t seem to do anything in a timely fashion.

@Oliversmumsarmy

That’s appalling....

*Of course we need a safety net for those who are going through hard times, but to say that it's up to the taxpayer to provide x y and z for however many children you choose to have is not acceptable imo

You are suggesting that the state helps the deserving poor but not the undeserving, so what happens to those not helped?

A very Victorian view of poverty and one that ends up with crime, the workhouse & pauper graves.

However, yours isn't an uncommon pov so likely to happen within the next 10 or 20 years.*

@jasjas1973

How do we work around this though? I grew up in a sink estate with a family permanently on benefits. Not just my parents, quite a few members of my extended family were lifelong benefit recipients. Only one had a genuine disability. The rest were just accustomed to living off handouts. Should we forever subsidise people who can't be bothered to work? There is a case (and I am a staunch proponent of it) for a welfare system that acts as a safety net for those genuinely in need. Whether that be through disability whereby they are completely unable to do any sort of work, the elderly or those temporarily down on their luck. But we cannot keep going the way we are going, generation after generation after generation of families who live off the state. It's unsustainable.

It also affects other services, for example the NHS. People will continuously be at their GP for any excuse to get signed off "on the sick" to claim benefits. Believe me, my family are experts. Where do we draw the line with how taxpayers money is allocated, especially if its misappropriation has a knock on effect on the availability of funding for benefits, the NHS etc. As it currently does; disabled folk needing to go through all of these assessments etc as it is necessary to weed out the genuine from the piss takers.

How do we deal with this?

@Deadgoldfish how can one provide stats for statements such as “The majority of parents don't want to be on benefits”.

Hmm, a significant percentage make it a lifestyle choice.

It isn't marked on someone's benefit form whether they'd prefer to work or not. I suspect you know this. I suspect your request for evidence was just to try and undermine the statement knowing that black and white evidence can't be produced for anecdotal evidence.

Many of us have grown up in environments where this behaviour is the norm. Just because I can't post a link towards 'proof' that the majority of my family prefer to live off handouts and have done since I was a child wouldn't make the fact any less true.

Maybe we should start licensing births?

@caringcarer

Parents have the responsibility to feed their children. Child benefit is enough to feed the children. If parents choose not to use that money for food for their children what can government do? Take the child into care? Earlier poster checked benefits calculator and found a single parent with 2 kids renting a 3 bed house for £750 pcm can get £1750 per month. After rent that is £1k just given to them every month. That money should be enough to feed their children along with child benefit. Too many parents can't budget and waste money on tattoos and cigarettes.

Except that poster was wrong, as most non working families are benefit capped. www.gov.uk/benefit-cap/benefit-cap-amounts

@Deadgoldfish

I will tell you a story about one of many similar people I have come across at work.

This person was unable to work due to a “physical disability”, and claiming benefits. It was summer and I asked if they had anything planned. The person explained that they were touring America on a motorbike....

Another despite being on benefits managed to own a horse, others seem to keep buying pets... (why would you do this if you can’t afford food for your kids?)

They obviously don’t represent everyone, but definitely exist.

[quote Watermelon999]@Deadgoldfish

I will tell you a story about one of many similar people I have come across at work.

This person was unable to work due to a “physical disability”, and claiming benefits. It was summer and I asked if they had anything planned. The person explained that they were touring America on a motorbike....

Another despite being on benefits managed to own a horse, others seem to keep buying pets... (why would you do this if you can’t afford food for your kids?)

They obviously don’t represent everyone, but definitely exist.[/quote]
Do people with disabilities have to surrender their passports now?

No, but if you're fit and well enough for an 8 hour flight to the US and to ride a motorbike round for days and weeks at a time you're probably also not physically unfit for all forms of work.

There are people playing the system one way and another. We see multiple examples of it in personal injury claims on a regular basis, where not only are they playing the benefit system but the insurance system to, or at least trying to.

Not every claimant is genuine. Just like not every person using a food bank is really in need (some have chosen to spend food money on non essentials). That's not to say there aren't children going hungry, but often they aren't the ones whose parents are going to foodbanks, or accepting hot meals for them.

Watermelon999

If you think that is appalling one of my friends nearly lost her children because her ex didn’t want to pay CM. His reasoning was if the children were taken into care then there would be no CM to pay.

He called up SS and told a really torrid tale of how my friend was working as a prostitute. She was dealing drugs and all sorts of other stuff that made her out to be a completely unfit parent.
Ss lapped it up and the first thing my friend knew was when she answered her door to SS saying they were going to take her children.
It took over a year of fighting in a world where up was down and down was sideways to prove that she wasn’t a mentally unstable drug dealing prostitute and that her exh was the drug addict who lived off his wealthy parents and spent their money on coke and prostitutes.

Yet despite being the recipient of several million pounds in the form of a house to live in and a fancy top of the range car to drive this mans children are the ones who are receiving FSMs because he won’t pay.

It isn’t as straightforward as children who receive FSMs have hardworking parents who are poor so need help.
Some of these parents have the money but choose to stick it up their nose or in a vein or down their throat than provide for their offspring.
And will continue to do so as they have come to expect that the state will take over.

My friend who is getting a divorce and is severely disabled was told by her ex that he wouldn’t be paying CM so she better fill out the forms for getting benefits.
It is now expected from a lot of fathers that they don’t need to pay as the state will provide.

Why are these children going hungry?

As is what are the reasons why. Is it always money?

I cannot fathom how parents leave their children hungry, as in there is no way they can physically find food and offer it to them.

CMS is an awful set up.
It should be a court order a non payment order = jail time. Lots of men get away with it in Ireland but definitely spend time in Jail if the DM pursues them through family court.
It is amazing how they find the spare cash once prison is looming.

@EmeraldShamrock

CMS is an awful set up. It should be a court order a non payment order = jail time. Lots of men get away with it in Ireland but definitely spend time in Jail if the DM pursues them through family court. It is amazing how they find the spare cash once prison is looming.

I wonder how that would work here. Obviously it would need to apply to both parents as both should provide financially not just one. Maybe it would force parental responsibility and more would think twice before having children to ensure they could afford them now and in the event of a relationship breakdown.

www.independent.ie/business/farming/news/courts/judge-tells-farmer-you-treat-your-cows-better-than-your-children-39643005.html
This judge deserved a high five.

What evidence is there that there are lots of starving/ underfed children in U.K.? What data is there?

The data that is available shows that over one third of children are overweight or obese, and one per cent are underweight.

Why isn’t this much energy being put into dealing with the obesity crisis which will affect the health of millions of children? Because it’s easy to give out free food. It makes people feel like they’re ‘doing something’.

Yorkshirelass some parents have different priorities, such as drugs, drink, cigarettes, eyelashes, new clothes. Others just don't see proper food as a necessity and might buy a multi pack of crisps for dinner. Some know they should cook but cba or feel overwhelmed. A whole plethora of reasons really.

I think building many many more properties so that supply and demand whether rented or owned are more balanced would be a good starting point. People hopefully would have more money left to pay for essentials if this was the case. I think high rents have a lot to answer for. This would have major consequences and be controversial but I do feel it's the only way.

Fundamentally I agree with the sentiment. I'd like to think the schools know exactly who the hungry children are and make the necessary interventions on their behalf.