I did say in one of The first comments that they've been together for 2 years and to me that is a pretty committed relationship, not just a fling. That's why the 'we're seeing how it goes' just didn't sit right with me for some reason.
Obviously this case is slightly different because he fathered one of her children but I absolutely don't think 2 years is that committed of a relationship when there are children involved, either on both sides or on the mothers side.
It can all fall apart when new man moves in. And then it's usually the woman who is totally fucked by the system - either because she lost her tax credits and has to now move over to UC, or because she has to make a new UC claim and wait however many weeks until it starts up.
I think in most cases it's totally sensible to see how things go for 6 months before you start to rely on a man to provide for your children and pay your rent.
If the people at the top weren't doing exactly the same in different ways, then yeah I could get annoyed about it. I can also get annoyed at people who do this long term (and living in a "deprived area", I know a few) i.e they've been with the guy 8 years and repeatedly had children with him, and have lived together the entire time BUT on paper guy still lives at his mothers address. That annoys me the same way any sort of fraud does. But seeing how things go for a reasonable period of time seems sensible to me, even if the relationship is 2 years, it's totally different when children are involved and the couple starts living together, and it's a precarious situation for any woman who relies on benefits to put herself in.
They're basically giving up their financial independence.