Two Child Limit

[MobilityCat]

Will you be affected? Campaigners have lost their legal challenge to the government's two-child limit on welfare payments.
They had argued the policy breached parents' and children's human rights. The Supreme Court dismissed their case.
The rule, which came into force in April 2017, restricts child tax credit and universal credit to the first two children in a family, with a few exceptions.
It was one of George Osborne's most debated austerity measures.
The policy has affected families of about one million children. Campaigners described the decision as "hugely disappointing".
Full story here www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-57776103

You saying anything against the Tory Government on here and people start snarling and frothing at the mouth.

@AlexaShutUp

It's a tough one. I do think it's irresponsible to have children that you can't afford to support. I also think there are strong environmental arguments for encouraging people to have fewer children.

However, it isn't quite as simple as that, is it? Some people will accidentally get pregnant and not wish to terminate the pregnancy. Some people will experience a change in circumstances through illness, disability or redundancy etc that mean they are no longer able to afford the family that they had planned. Sadly, some women will get pregnant as the result of rape. Not everyone's lives are perfectly planned. And none of it is the fault of the innocent children who did not ask to be born and who do not deserve to grow up in poverty... even if their parents are feckless and irresponsible.

It is inhumane to deny support to children who really need it, whatever has caused that need.

Thanks! First humane post here acknowledging the complexity of the issue.

So 2 people on minimum wage in london should do what then? Move somewhere cheaper? So whose going to do the minimum wage jobs? Childless people only?

@Bigassbeebuzzbuzz stop at two children? It's not that terrible a suggestion, most of us only have 1 or two.

I agree with the limit. I raised one child as a single parent myself and we claimed benefits for quite a few years, it was fine, partly because life is just cheaper with one child but mainly due to sensible budgeting. It never crossed my mind to have another child in those circumstances, or when in precarious employment that could result in being back on benefits at any time. I know of other families who did take that risk and have more children, but that's a decision they made and they have to deal with the consequences of it.

Can you take a photo of the back of the sky box for me please?

Disappointing is a huge understatement

It's massively discriminatory and plain sexist - men who go on to have more dc aren't similarly affected. While it would have been shit for the children involved I feel if they had even made it that BOTH parents are subjected to the same rule that would have at least been fair.

My ex who never reliably paid maintenance is about to have his 7th child, 6th by 2nd wife. He works part time only, his wife full time and they receive tax credits for their first 5 children as they were all born before 2017 I don't think they'll get tax credits for no 6. But even if we had split after 2017 and he'd had 2 more dc with wife 2, 3 of his dc would have had tax credits paid for because he was only living with 2 of his dc. If this policy is to be applied fairly in terms of how the parents behave then non resident fathers with dc from previous relationships should also have their tax credits restricted

Those of you saying it's a fair ruling do you also think it's fair that a man that procreates all over the shop but doesn't live with all his children isn't affected by this ruling? That he can have 2 children with as many women as he likes as long as he only lives with 2 of them the state paying for all his dc?

Don't even get me started on the rape clause crap!

Horrific!

I think the first shitty thing they did was redefine working tax credits as a benefit.

Definitely!

And so sneakily too!

I remember David Cameron being on question time and similar shows dodging the question prior to that election and then a very angry/upset woman appearing who believed voters had been promised there wouldn't be cuts to tax credits and voted accordingly and then the Tory govt in their actions made it very clear that they viewed anyone getting any state help as "scroungers"

People's circumstances change, women shouldn't be financially coerced into an abortion that isn't right for them, then there are the dv/rape victims penalised by this policy

I have one dc. When I was ttc and had her I was married, healthy, working in a decent well paid job...cut to 5 years later divorced (he cheated), disabled and unemployed

You never know what's around the corner - there but by the grace of...well whatever higher power you believe in

Or I don’t know
Global pandemic no one could plan for …

Exactly!

I have a number of friends who had good jobs they believed they'd be working until retirement - now redundant or businesses have been sunk by COVID impact

I'm shocked and dismayed at how many posters think this is ok when we have children literally starving in this country because of policies like this, when we are a wealthy country and have obscenely greedy politicians (of al colours) with their snouts in the trough!

And I agree with @Thelnebriati. WTC or it’s equivalent in UC shouldn’t count as a benefit. It’s propping up the appallingly low wages in this country. The only people it truly benefits, are employers. They should be required to pay a proper living wage

Absolutely

A lot of people of this thread who can't imagine life circumstances beyond their own

Aren't there?

@Upamountain43 well said

In this situation the onus should be on absent parents paying for their children

Yea good luck with that. Enforcement of even current very poor maintenance laws is to all intents and purposes non existent

There needs to be a much more stringent approach to this, forensic investigation into finances, cash in hand working, hidden assets etc , until people accept their responsibilities

One very simple thing they could do is deduct at source from all non resident parents on PAYE

If this one area was properly regulated and enforced then men would be much more careful with contraception and sexual activity too and I think that would have much more impact on the number of children conceived.

You can have your tubes tied

Not easily! Not on the nhs. I have severe endo plus another rare medical condition that means ANY pregnancy after Dd was very likely fatal to me - still couldn't get sterilisation

I love how the older generation think we shouldn’t support those who want children but we should pay for their care whilst they hold on to massive family homes…..

Yea funny that 

@newnortherner111 the fathers are mostly unaffected by this it's a deeply sexist policy

@Foxglovesandlilacs86 - and if you and/or your partner/spouse were to become sick/disabled where would you be then? Where would your kids be? What if one of them becomes sick/disabled and one of you has to quit work to be their carer? What if you're made redundant? What if one of you dies?

With 8 dc I very much doubt you're a net contributor

Having so many children in poverty isn't good for society as a whole we know this. It increases ill health, addiction, crime, domestic abuse...

Which taken from a purely financial perspective is likely a damn sight more expensive to deal with than the tiny amount of help we're discussing here so it's not even a decision made from a true financial/economic basis it's pure prejudice and snobbery!

Poverty does not pay in the long run!

Very well said!!

If not then no you don’t pay for them all yourself.

Also a good point - unless you are independently wealthy and only use private education, healthcare etc you're also a drain on taxes!

They both pay all their taxes so they've paid back more than it ever cost the government to raise them

very very very few people are net contributors

People love to demonise welfare recipients as being scroungers, but most are honest people who never wanted to be in the situation they are in.

Thank you

Increasingly on mn those of us on benefits are talked about and treated like bloody criminals 

@Aprilinspringtimeshower that poster has fairly extreme opinions on benefits recipients I won't even engage with them now it's pointless

We had a system that significantly discriminated against tax payers

Oh come off it!

Are people on low incomes & zero hours entitled to these?

Serious question or sarcasm?

This thread is basically saying only wealthy people should be allowed to have dc

why can't they go after all those corporations that don't pay their taxes first?

Tories will NEVER do this because -

They have shares in these companies or their family/friends do or their family/friends own these companies

These are where they get their donations for political campaigns

MISFORTUNE DOESNT DISCRIMINATE

Hear hear!

the state shouldn’t help even though they allowed 0 hour contracts, haven’t provided affordable housing for decades and cut all provisions meant to help poorer people succeed

Yep!

The housing thing is especially heinous. Housing prices in Uk are artificially high. Partly due to selling off council houses and banning councils from creating/buying more but also because mps - again of all colours - repeatedly vote down any change to regulation that would reduce prices. Why? Well a hell of a lot of them are landlords and property developers!

Barely reported in the news the reduction of uc coming up. £20 a week, of no consequence in real terms to the govt the admin will cost them more than that but it will plunge many more families into poverty.

The govts response is that they're "creating jobs" - where?! Doing what?!

I've a number of friends and family currently job seeking for various reasons - there are fuck all jobs around!

We should have a system where working full time doesn't mean you need any top ups of uc

Absolutely - a full time wage should be enough to live on

Government can only afford to help support two

If you believe that I've a unicorn for sale

Not true. If they can afford brexit, hs2, tax bungs to the already wealthy, bungs to cronies, extortionate expenses, 2nd homes for MPs who don't need them and which aren't given back to the state when the Mp is no longer an Mp, Chris graylings £bns of cock ups they can afford to feed poor kids!

@caringcarer When I had my children small there was child benefit and that was it. No government top ups unless unemployed.

Genuine question as this must have been some considerable time ago - but when did you have your dc? Because that hasn't been true for several decades.

with both parents in well paid jobs.

Which can disappear at any time for a number of reasons that can't be predicted

Before child benefit there was family allowance, I'm almost 50 and my parents received family allowance i believe it was not means tested everyone who had more than one child got it.

There's a load of ill informed revisionist shite being spouted on this thread!

And now we're onto "I work hard for my privilege" 🙄🙄🙄

Cos cleaners, bin men, shelf stackers... they don't work hard AT ALL!

Actually the majority of what we all achieve is down to luck, luck who are parents are, luck with our health, luck with our continued health, luck luck luck!

Precisely!

@HelenHywater

Most of the posts on this thread are utterly utterly depressing.

You do know that children are going without FOOD because of the Tory party policies? That children are in poverty? That children are suffering. Jeez. The inhumanity on this thread.

Thank you for that because when I read it my thoughts were 1 million kids at risk. I retired from teaching after a disabling accident but when I was still at the chalkboard every one of us had an average of four kids thaat we bought school meals for.

Whatever the reasons they were coming to school hungry and the meal was probably all some of them got each day

Life insurance, health insurance. Savings. Careers going in the right direction. Getting on the property ladder and budgeting for the cost of raising each child rather than just having 3 and hoping for the best?
Wow millionaires only need reproduce yep?!

You don’t need to be a millionaire to work hard, climb the ladder, make careful budgeting decisions and investments, choose your career path wisely and protect your family with life and health insurance. In some cases it may be down to luck but in many it’s down to careful planning and budgeting.

Nobody is saying only the wealthy should have kids, just that the government won’t give you additional tax credits if you choose to have more than 2 kids.

Exactly OP. I work in a school with a high percentage of school meal entitlement- I know for sure a huge amount of these kids only get that one hot meal a day. Our dinner ladies know the kids who seem hungry to give a bit more to. The sheer amount of kids who sign up for after school activities/ supported study because there are snacks is unreal. The kids who turn up super early and stay super late because they don't want to go home is increasing. Food banks in the area are bursting with need. There's constant shout outs on social media for school shoes/ school trainers. The amount who come to school in the winter from freezing houses and with no coat is shocking (we provide what we can). I'm at the chalk face every day. This is poverty. It needs systematic change and investment not the cutting of benefits.

The chat of those so privileged they cannot see this makes me so sad. Walk a week in the (split) shoes of these children and come back and tell me about privilege.

Conflicted on this one. Obviously nobody wants to see any child go without, but on the other hand there are those I know who wouldn’t have another much loved and wanted child because they know they simply couldn’t afford it.

I’m afraid I would struggle to support a state based system that punishes those who try to act financially responsible, and incentivises those that don’t.

That said I do believe in social safety nets, but I happen to lean towards the view that private charities are oftentimes more efficient than government based ones.

I literally sat with a young woman who had two children and was five months pregnant with a wanted third when her partner left. She was unable to work full time herself for various reasons and it was explained to her that the only money she would get to help her support the new baby was £13 a week child benefit. Oh, and because of the benefit cap she wouldn't get her full rent paid so could expect to be homeless.

Or my friends who have 4 children and never claimed much in benefits until they had to, and found that the support they had paid their taxes for wasn't there for their children.

It's wrong. All children in our country are all our children. And as mothers we all deserve that safety net to be there for us if we need it.

@Thelnebriati

I think the first shitty thing they did was redefine working tax credits as a benefit.

But Tax credits ARE benefits they are based on what you earn and your circumstances, the only difference between them and other means tested benefits is that they are administered by HMRC not the DWP and you have to renew them, and of course they are part of the welfare bill.

@lynsey91 no you still don't get it but what is the insurance you can recommend that completely protects against a parent becoming incapacitated?

70 years ago people didn't really think about overpopulation (plenty don't now) so why would my parents have thought that?

Are you 70 then?

@Graphista we would be fine. We are financially stable and have family support. No mortgage, we own a few successful businesses and have inherited properties that we rent out so it’s unlikely something like illness/disability or someone dying would put us all out on the street.

I did already say that my situation is unusual though, I agree most people with this many children probably don’t have that kind of stability, but we do exist

You don’t need to be a millionaire to work hard, climb the ladder, make careful budgeting decisions and investments, choose your career path wisely and protect your family with life and health insurance. In some cases it may be down to luck but in many it’s down to careful planning and budgeting

But you DO need to have had opportunity to get out of the cycle of poverty/ escape your adverse circumstances. And you need to have been taught the things you list by parents who gave been taught them before you. It's called equity and there is no equity of opportunity in 2021 in this country.

I know 3 brothers who have all been dealing drugs by age 12- their father is the local dealer. They've grown up in domestic violence their whole lives. Where do they get their guidance? Where do they have equity of opportunity. I'll bet at least one follows in their father's footsteps and gets some poor girl pregnant with however many and inevitably leaves her/ goes to prison. And the cycle starts over again. This is modern day Britain.

I cannot defend people who condemn children to a life of even deeper poverty.

I don’t think anyone is saying that they want children to suffer and if people do fall on hard times, they shouldn’t be helped. I don’t think that’s the issue. The issue is that people are (were) relying on the state to fund their third (and subsequent) child (ren).

@AlternativePerspective

Which newspaper are you writing for? Your post reads exactly like a tout for opinions for the press.

FWIW nobody is going to be affected, because the 2 child limit was already in force, so it’s not going to be a case of people suddenly losing out, they just won’t be getting what they already didn’t have.

I think the ruling is correct. People are free to have as many children as they want, it’s not up to the state to pay for them. If you can’t afford to have more than 2 children, without child benefit, then you don’t have more than 2 children, it ain’t that hard.

nobody should be having children they can’t afford.

I'm not a journalist, I'm a retired teacher. I'm sorry you didn't like my post I wasn't sure how to introduce the topic so I copied and pasted the opening paragraph and a link to the article.

Sorry, should be helped.

It was actually Family Allowance and, no, you didn't get it for the first child

Again it depends when you were born.

My parents definitely got it for their first & it wasn't means tested.

I think it's fair. If your choice is to have more than you should pay for them.

@Puffalicious I don't understand how so many don't understand social mobility & the narrative that careful planning can get you out of poverty is BS.

In some cases it may be down to luck

In EVERY case it's down to luck!

Luck according to where, when and to whom you are born

Luck whether you're born healthy or not

Luck whether you're academically able or not

Luck whether you're supported to access and engage with education

Luck whether you live in optimum economic times

Luck whether you remain healthy

Luck whether you have a supportive, healthy, non abusive family

Luck whether you have a financially able family/home

Luck whether you have access to education at a time when it's not being fucked about with (I was first lot to do GCSEs, new style a-levels, degree nurse training - every time it was a bloody mess!)

Luck as to what contraception you can access/use (it's not the same even around the Uk)

Luck as to what job you get which affects pay and conditions

Luck regarding if you have a decent employer

Luck with housing

And...

Luck as to what govt is in place and what policies they implement/push

I support the two children decision with benefits. The world is quite populated enough.

Id be quite comfortable with only millionaires having more than two children

🙄