Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think that people shouldn't have children if they can't afford them?

203 replies

ideamummy · 30/10/2007 14:44

I ask this as I'm dealing with a case at the moment of a woman who for various reasons is being charged for her health treatment. She is 21 and on her third pregnancy, she has no employment, no means of supporting these children and yet seemingly does not use contraception. It makes me so mad. We've waited three and a half years to have a second child because before that we just couldn't afford it. Why do some people think it's okay to have kids with no means to support them?

OP posts:
spookykitty · 30/10/2007 15:23

I think we all know someone like the woman in the OP, I know someone who has had 4 children in 3 year, she was claimning benefits and her DP was living with her and she wasn't declaring it. This only came out when she gor "grassed up" the thing is all she could talk about was the "scum" who had grassed her up and that her kids would be going without at Christmas etc.

She is too young to be considered for sterilisation, doesn't use contraception so will probably have a load more kids.

It's a personal choice how many children you chose to have, some people think they can only afford one some can afford 4 or more. Do agree with the statement that the state shouldn't pay because someone decides not to use contraception but it's a very grey area contraception isn't 100% and waht about people who get divorced lose their job etc circumstances change.

binkleandflip · 30/10/2007 15:24

Unfortunately my experience wouldnt bare out that they are few and far between but I suppose it comes down to geography as much as anything. Where you live can have a big bearing on how likely you are to feel living on benefits is a perfectly acceptable vocation and the norm.

scorpio1 · 30/10/2007 15:25

the area i live is one of the poorest in the country, so its quite common. many many jobs here are minimum wage, unless you have a degree or a trade, IMHO.

VoodooLULUmama · 30/10/2007 15:25

and absolutely agree wtih colditz last post

binkleandflip · 30/10/2007 15:25

Sorry about your dh 2shoes

Bectheneck · 30/10/2007 15:26

Give us some stats then binkle.

I know their are people like that. I used to work in a jobcentre and deal with those long term unemployed who see the dole as a right and work damn hard to make sure they don't have to find a job. The irony But they were in the minority.

My Mum worked about five jobs when we were little after my Dad died. No tax credits or extra help then. I hated her having to work so hard and not even be able to speak because she was so tired when she got in. I don't think it benefitted us or her at all.

binkleandflip · 30/10/2007 15:26

Signing on is horrible - I've had to do it twice myself in the past.

colditz · 30/10/2007 15:26

But I am on a rough estate too. Although now I think of it, I know a few single mothers with both kids at school who claim benefits ... one of them is an alcoholic.

I just can't help playing Devil's Advocate

NoNameToday · 30/10/2007 15:28

Sorry Lulumama, but if you can't afford to 'buy' something, you do without or make do with what you have.

Why should children be different, there are lot's of things many people would like but cannot afford.

A baby is for life.

As I said, circumstances change, not every single mum, or family receiving benefits starts out that way.

It's people who start a family with no other income than state benefits that I am referring to.

scorpio1 · 30/10/2007 15:28

the women i know have their children at school too-i dont know much about the amounts of the benfits you get, but surely its in your interest to work part-time in school hours, if such jobs exist? i know here we have an agency that links mums up to suitable school hours jobs.

binkleandflip · 30/10/2007 15:29

I could only comment on the area which I worked in and so I dont think its right to put that information on here.

Suffice to say I have worked for the benefits agency (for DLA/AA/ICA) and also for Social Services and so I've been exposed through work to lots and lots of 'world owes me a living' types in all truth and obviously that will colour my views.

It is ironic how hard people will work to avoid work sometimes though

OozingSlashesFromTigerFeet · 30/10/2007 15:29

2shoes, I don't think anyone is disputing your family's right to benefits. What a shitty situation for you all

There are many, many people who are on benefits because of their circumstances whether it be job loss, caring for ill/disabled family members/whatever.

However in the town where I am from and the town I live in now, there is a fairly prevalent attitude of "so what if I get pg, I will get more money that way". I knew a couple years ago who had a baby solely because they wanted to get up the council house register.

It is very upsetting and frustrating for people such as myself and dh - we don't make a vast amount of money between us and although we aren't on the breadline we are by no means well off. Childcare is just too bloody expensive for us to afford another child so we are extremely careful not to conceive. A complete belt and braces approach. It makes me so sad and angry.

NoNameToday · 30/10/2007 15:32

And if you can do it Oozing, then why can't others?

colditz · 30/10/2007 15:34

there have always been long term unemployed in our society. There's more now because it is only recently that it has been accepted that mothers should work! Women didn't even trip the unemployed radar 100 years ago. They were just wives and mothers.

Now, more marriages are breaking up, IMHO due to less tolerance of husbands having affairs, messing with family finances, not pulling their weight abnd beating their wives. This used to be accepted as married life - well, not any more. As soon as a marriage breaks up, the woman goes from "Stay at home mother and homemaker" to "Unemployed". She was unemployed before, but without the financial support of someone else, she has to claim benefits until she finds work - and with small children, this is no mean task.

There are more long term unemployed because there are more single mothers, there are more single mothers because society's expectation of what a marriage entales has changed and a lot of men have not changed with it, and besides which, there have always been some long term unemployed - and if the parish didn't feed the children, then in the main, they starved.

SueBarooooItslikeaWarzone · 30/10/2007 15:34

When I think of the hoops I had to jump through to get DLA.. and breathe

TheQueenOfQuotes · 30/10/2007 15:34

"If every parent had to totally support their offspring from their earned income, I'm darned sure the birthrate would fall for those totally on benefits. "

As I said earlier - "yay" lets apply that to the developing world then we wouldn't have to worry ourselves with debt relief.......as the majority of child bearing age people in the world would therefore not have children - and those countries which are poor now would "die out" as there wouldn't be enough people having children to keep the birth rate ticking over .

kittywitch · 30/10/2007 15:35

I've only read the op, but I have to say that I agree. It's not right.

hanaflower · 30/10/2007 15:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheQueenOfQuotes · 30/10/2007 15:37

and of course if we just applied it to this country I suppose it's a good way to "get rid" of the working class.........because they wouldn't have children so the working class would also "die out"...

IntergalacticWarlock · 30/10/2007 15:38

ooooh, a judgey thread. Wunderbar

eleusis · 30/10/2007 15:39

In principle, I agree with OP. It is unfair that those who are working hard to support their families and have to decide not to have more children they would otherwise want can't because of financial restrictions. Then to have those on benefits carrying on having as many as they like and never have to lift a finger to support them.

But... what can you do about it that doesn't punish the children?

So, here's one to ponder... should people on benefits be entitled to IVF treatment? I mean people who are capabe of working but choose not to because they have a house and enough to live on provided by the state, and they therefore don't need to work.

And regarding family size, I do think that large families (say 5 kids?) are a priveldge of the very wealthy and the very poor in today's economy. I have stopped at two for financial reasons.

LadyOfTheFlowers · 30/10/2007 15:41

Can I just check what people opinions of my situation are?
Dh and I both worked full time, then I went on MAT leave to have Ds1 and returned to work P/T as Mum looked after him for me.
We wanted 2 and she said she would look after both.
I get preg with Ds2 then she chages her mind and decides she is going back to college. and
I become a SAHM as paying for childcare is a catch 22 situation and it's what I have always wanted to do if I am honest.
We have to watch what we spend and DH works full time and very hard, doing extra hours where he can. We feel it is worth it to allow me to bring our children up.
I claim, obviously Child benefit, and we also get some Child Tax credits.
I feel I am entitled to these as my hubby works and pays tax and I have paid tax and worked till Ds2 was born.
Is my attitude right?

IntergalacticWarlock · 30/10/2007 15:42

Instraed of condemning girls who may or my not get accidentally pregant, why not look at the fact that in many areas of the UK there are shit schools, shit (and expensive) accommodation, shit job prospects and shit wages. For many ypung girls, whatelse is there to do?

Given the choice between having a baby or being stucj in a dead end factory job on mimimum wage, I know which I'd prefer.

IntergalacticWarlock · 30/10/2007 15:43

Now, if you will excuse me, I have to get back to my children that I can ill afford.

LadyOfTheFlowers · 30/10/2007 15:44

Surely not have a baby you dont really want?