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

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

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

Contraception is free and methods can be used together so there’s really no need to be “accidentally” pregnant if a person doesn’t want to be. Yes job losses etc can happen but it’s not hard to think I can afford x now but could only afford x if I wasn’t working and make a decision that’s financially sound if things change. Or have good insurance in place or savings.

Not everyone can afford to save or pay for good insurance.

It's really easy to say this kind of stuff from a position of privilege, but many people just don't have those options. I'm not talking about myself, so I have no skin in the game - I have one dc who was fully planned and a very well paid career, mortgage paid off, good savings etc. I am very lucky. But life is complex and it isn't always that straightforward. It's a bit blinkered to insist that everyone should be just like you.

And the fact is, children are born into these situations, whether there are benefits to help pay for them or not. So should we just shrug and say it's their bad luck that their parents can't afford to pay for them, so they will just have to suffer? That isn't my idea of a civilised society.

This isn’t a well if they can’t afford don’t have it lark. If you have more than two children and lose your job or become sick or disabled or need to become a carer you will only be able claim for 2 children. Or I don’t know
Global pandemic no one could plan for …

I think they should go a step further and limit council housing and temporary accommodation to three bedrooms. And housing benefit to be limited to three bedroom rate too. If a family can't afford more (securely!) then don't have more. No reason councils should be forking out for unreasonably large properties because of individuals choices.

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

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

Contraception is free and methods can be used together so there’s really no need to be “accidentally” pregnant if a person doesn’t want to be. Yes job losses etc can happen but it’s not hard to think I can afford x now but could only afford x if I wasn’t working and make a decision that’s financially sound if things change. Or have good insurance in place or savings.

Your first point isn't exactly true. I can't use hormonal nor copper coil contraception for medical reasons which means we can only use barrier methods. Luckily that hasn't failed yet!

Yes I'll be affected, no I'm not upset about it. I agree with the ruling.

It has left many children in poverty. Whatever the parents situation (and there are reasons like critical illness that are not due to poor planning) the children surely shouldn’t be in this situation. I think it’s shameful personally.

We won’t be affected. We made a decision to have one, for many reasons. Financial, I’m not well enough to cope with another pregnancy, environmental impact, etc.

I understand the longing for another baby - DH & I would have dearly loved another child. But there are so many people in the world already & the environment our grandchildren will experience may already be vastly different to the one we grew up in. Every extra child increases the environmental impact.

I do think that children born before the cutoff should not be affected though - I don’t know if they are, even for new claims.

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.

@AlCalavicci
A multiple birth is one of the exceptions to the restrictions.
It would be based on living children. So if you have 3 but the middle child tragically was to die you would still be able to claim for the 2 children you have.

So people can have more than 2 children but not have extra help after the first 2.

The policy has affected families of about one million children.

One million children is definitely too many to pay for!

Haha sorry, stupid joke. Really, I think children have to be supported. If their parents can't support them, the state should. They didn't ask to be born.

@BrilliantBetty

I think they should go a step further and limit council housing and temporary accommodation to three bedrooms. And housing benefit to be limited to three bedroom rate too. If a family can't afford more (securely!) then don't have more. No reason councils should be forking out for unreasonably large properties because of individuals choices.

Reminds me of that woman from gloucester, unemployed, 11 kids, demanded and got a 6 bedroom house at tax payers expense. I think they knocked 2 houses into one as didn't have any large enough.

The problem is shit happens. I have three children, born into a long marriage with a successful business and private schooling. Ex had an affair and a change of personality. I have worked pretty much the whole thing (we are many years down the line), but a lack of support for my third child would have rendered work pretty much pointless purely from a financial perspective and with the cost of childcare what it is in some areas, work simply wouldn’t pay. And the Government has done sod all, despite the CSA/CMS and plenty of legislation, to help us otherwise.

So I can’t agree this is a good thing. We need to support single parents to work and make work pay, not penalise them for choices that were made before life changed for them.

@AlexaShutUp you are right. My dad died when I was 6. My mum was left to raise us alone. If it were now she'd have been on UC. People's circumstances change and the system should be compassionate enough to allow for that. Fat chance with the tories but we can dream. Whatever the situation its never the child's fault.

A two child limit is very generous. If you want DC then you should ensure you can afford them. Tax payers shouldn’t have to pay for someone else’s 7 kids.

@IceCreamAndCandyfloss

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

Contraception is free and methods can be used together so there’s really no need to be “accidentally” pregnant if a person doesn’t want to be. Yes job losses etc can happen but it’s not hard to think I can afford x now but could only afford x if I wasn’t working and make a decision that’s financially sound if things change. Or have good insurance in place or savings.

Another one here who can’t tolerate any reliable method of contraception.

It must be nice to assume you’ll always be able to afford to have good insurance in place, or sufficient savings to see you through a significant rocky patch. Many people have to choose between heating & eating each winter. Unemployment insurance would be a ridiculous luxury & savings… don’t make me laugh.

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.

Spot on.

Plenty of people would love a bigger family but don't as they can't afford it. When so many areas of the government (nhs, social care etc) are underfunded paying for people to have loads of children isn't justifiable.

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

The 2 child cap is unfairly targets women and children.

@RocksOnTheHill there’s way more available that the pill or coil. You can combine methods such as cycle tracking (avoiding fertile days entirely) and condoms/femidoms, ring and condoms, cap and condoms.

Or cycle track (avoiding fertile days entirely) and use condoms and a vagina ring or cap or something and that is a triple whammy.

If someone took all those precautions and still found themselves pregnant and didn’t want to be abortions are free too if they wanted one. We are lucky in this country.

i think a lot of people need to look at the population timebomb we are looking at in this country - many countries are starting to pay people to have children or else they are going to be in a complete mess in a decade or so.

These children are the ones who are going to have to pay for your pension, health and care in old age - its typical short term purely for votes thinking that has typified British politics for years.

@CoralSparkles

A two child limit is very generous. If you want DC then you should ensure you can afford them. Tax payers shouldn’t have to pay for someone else’s 7 kids.

Obviously it’s different if your circumstances change, but receiving support for 2 DC will be a great help to those indeed.

It's going to be very interesting when the plummeting fertility rate and the curbs on immigration catch up to Britain.

@Getawaywithit

The problem is shit happens. I have three children, born into a long marriage with a successful business and private schooling. Ex had an affair and a change of personality. I have worked pretty much the whole thing (we are many years down the line), but a lack of support for my third child would have rendered work pretty much pointless purely from a financial perspective and with the cost of childcare what it is in some areas, work simply wouldn’t pay. And the Government has done sod all, despite the CSA/CMS and plenty of legislation, to help us otherwise.

So I can’t agree this is a good thing. We need to support single parents to work and make work pay, not penalise them for choices that were made before life changed for them.

While you are technically a single parent, the fact remains that your children have two parents. In this situation the onus should be on absent parents paying for their children, not the state supporting them on the absent parents behalf. 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.

*Your first point isn't exactly true. I can't use hormonal nor copper coil contraception for medical reasons which means we can only use barrier methods. Luckily that hasn't failed yet!

• @RocksOnTheHill

Neither can I. But I still don’t want other people to fork the bill for the children I have. It’s a case of having to abstain during the most fertile times. Accidents can happen. You can have your tubes tied.

Or your husband or partner could have a vasectomy…

It’s awful for the children who cannot choose to be born into a small family. Imagine growing up in poverty because your parents made bad choices and you, as a child, are punished? It’s insane.