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:
FrightOwl · 30/10/2007 22:17

ladies, i congratulate us. a benefit thread and noone has said f**k off or argued at all tonight.

well done {pats myself on back}

bigmouthstrikesagain · 30/10/2007 22:19

thank you expat - and congrats btw - how beautifully and wonderfully iresponsible of you.

I am from a large and economically disasterous family - and one of my sisters has far too many children... but when we gathered together on the North Yorks Moors to scatter my dear departed dads ashes - I was very very happy that dad has so many grandchildren running around enjoying their lives despite the fact their parents couldn't afford them

MummyTubb · 30/10/2007 22:35

First timer here so be gentle with me!

I don't think it is unreasonable, but I doubt there is a magic solution to it. I think there is a big difference between those who find themselves on benefits with children unexpectedly, and those who have more children knowing full well that their only means of supporting them is through the benefit system.

Maybe we should adopt a workfare rather than welfare system - where people on long-term benefits are required to give something back to the community in return for their benefits...

ggglimpopo · 30/10/2007 22:43

We have a large family
We can 'afford' to - if being not on benefits means that you can afford your children.

If my dh lost his job tomorrow we would still have our large family but we would not be able to 'afford' them.

A single mother of 3 on benefits might meet the man of her dreams in Tescos.

He might fall madly in love with her and marry her and take her home to his stately pile and they could afford to look after her children together.

Who was right having the kids in the first place.

Nothing is black and white.

StarlightMcKenzie · 30/10/2007 22:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

onebatmother · 30/10/2007 22:56

Genuine Question:

HAS anyone on this thread lived longterm-ish on benefits with more than one child?

If so, what was it like and how did you feel about more kids? Were kids happy? Did you feel entitled, or guilty? How do you think your life compared with others who worked?
Repeat: genuine question. Repeat: genuine question.. etc. etc.

dd666 · 30/10/2007 22:58

not read all the posts but you have made me very angry i dont need cash to have a baby LOVE got me through the first six months!
and we are ttc even though dp has been made redundent as we have fertility issues and knew we wanted more children and it could take us a while its really non of your business though how much cash ppl have whilst having a family and it was your choice to wait and no one forced you to wait this long are you jealous that she has been able to have her family whilst young? and for your info out of all my jobs being a mother is the hardest iv done!

Original poster
ideamummy · 31/10/2007 08:37

Apologies for not getting back to you all sooner. I'm not a benefits officer and this woman is not a case of mine. It's unlikely you'd guess my connection to her.
I don't think you can identify her from what I've said and to be honest, she's one of thousands of people in similar situations so it could be anyone.
It's been really interesting to read all your posts, thanks for them all.

OP posts:
eleusis · 31/10/2007 08:40

I think the point is, DD666, when you require the tax contribution of hard working parents who can not have more kids because they can not afford them it seems a bit unfair for you to go popping them out at the taxpayers expense. Not that you personally are popping them out. I don't know much about you or your circumstances. But, I do think that hard working people who can't afford children they would otherwise like to have do have a fair gripe about having to support other peoples children when those other people are capable of working, but choose not to.

Original poster
ideamummy · 31/10/2007 08:45

I forgot to say, this woman isn't on benefits for various reasons so she really has no way of providing for the children. I wasn't having a go about people on benefits, sure there are some skivvers on benefits, but there's lots who aren't.

OP posts:
RosJ · 31/10/2007 09:00

Am I being unreasonable: not to expect DSs nursery to lose his clothes every week? I can understand that they are looking after a lot of babies, so I dont mind if one or 2 things go astray, but I cant afford to lose one item a week (always the things I really like too). I dont understand how they manage it; also they seem to change his clothes when I wouldn't bother ie a little bit of food on his top. The clothes get put in other babies bags and never returned. When there are other people's clothes in his bag I always give them back. I'm wondering whether to complain-I really dont know if I'm beig a bit petty....

RosJ · 31/10/2007 09:01

Oh dear silly me, didnt mean to post that AIBU message in the middle of this thread. Sorry.

olala · 31/10/2007 09:14

what an interesting Op. I guiltily think this a lot. ANd then I am told off by my DH who was raised by his single mum who was on benefits and worked as a waitress ovre night - dh and his bro slept upstairs in the restaurant whilst their mum slaved donesstairs for £3 an hour or something. When she got pregnant, she was 17 and naive and didn't want to have an abortion. Once she had DH, she didn't want him to be an only child, and so had a planned baby 1 year later. The dad then left and she was waiting tables and claiming benefits for the rest of their childhood. What I'm trying to say is that its easy to judge, but often if you scratch the surface of any seemingly irresponsible situation, there is always a reason, a perfectly undersatnable one.

I do, however, and this is perhaps the most controvertial view in my repertoire - think that people who are serious drug addicts, with seriously chaotic lifestyles, who have had children removed from their care before, and then get pregnant again, shoudl not be allowed even a 5 minute CHANCE with their next baby - they should just be whipped away and adopted by a nice family as quickly as possible. I think once you are a parent, you rights are entirely and always secondary to those of your child, and if that means the child needs to be taken away from you, that is tough. I think the mums should then be forced to have some kind of semi permanent contraception - a coil or somesuch so they need do nothing to maintain it, and they are not allowed to have it taken out until they can demonstrate they have changed their ways. I know how harsh that is, but I have seen far too many children born to parents who have had children taken away from them in the past, the children are allowed to stay with them until they inevtiably fuck things up, by which time the social services bureacracy takes a billion years to find them an adopted home, bb which time the kids are often irreperably damaged. Why?
End of Rant.

OozingSlashesFromTigerFeet · 31/10/2007 09:22

dd666 - love got me through the first 6 months too. Unfortunately since then I have needed cash. I still have the love though.

Good luck with the ttc

But I hope you understand if I am incredibly as I am not in a position to.

paulaplumpbottom · 31/10/2007 09:31

People could argue that people shouldn't have children for loads of diffrent reasons not just finacial. By judging others you allow yourself to be judged. There is a part of me that completely agrees with the OP by the way

eleusis · 31/10/2007 09:57

Hi Paula.

willbiteyourneckandmakeulikeme · 31/10/2007 10:00

thats a question that will be asked for ever more. no answers.

paulaplumpbottom · 31/10/2007 10:02

Hey honey!!!! You ok?

bethoo · 31/10/2007 10:09

i am a single parent who works part time and receive about £200 a month benefits through child benefit and family tax credit which i believe that every parent single or not is entitled to. i get by and i would not change it for the world. even working full time i would not have been able to 'afford' a baby. my sister and alot of friends say they will not have children until they are financially secure, i believe they will be waiting a very long time!

eleusis · 31/10/2007 11:26

I'm fine (but stop calling me honey). How are you? Are you coming to the Christmas meet-up?

paulaplumpbottom · 31/10/2007 13:19

Sorry, no I can't go, DH wants to do Paris for our Christmas shopping

binkleandflip · 31/10/2007 13:24

I love CHristmas Shopping in Paris, its so decadent!!

paulaplumpbottom · 31/10/2007 13:30

I love shopping there any time of year

AnAngelWithin · 31/10/2007 13:35

twofalls i didnt say that we are currently in difficult circumstances. unless you count claiming tax credits and living in a council house as 'difficult'???

onebatmother, we were on benefits for 4 months when husband had to leave work through illness and then again for 3 months when he was made redundant. TBH we were almost better off. Stupid as it sounds, at least we knew that the rent and council tax were being paid!! if anything as well, the children were happier cos they got to see their daddy before school and he was here when they got home. We felt as though were were entitled to the help because at the end of the day we had paid our taxes before that, and sickness and redundancy weren't our fault. TBH it wasn't really much incentive to go back to work etc, which is stupid cos it should be.

GColdtimer · 31/10/2007 13:45

apologies, I misunderstood your post.