To think why have so many kids if you can’t afford their presents?

[yuletidey]

Before I start I just want to say I have absolutely nothing against large families, I also understand people will have times in their lives where they struggle.

I recently volunteered for a local to charity, they donate toys to children in need all around the country. I have volunteered for around 6 years around Christmas time to get toys packed. Yesterday I was helping pack boxes as they are really overwhelmed with the demand.

Recently I think the charity has changed their criteria as before anyone could get in touch and they would receive toys, I think the founder was a bit naive there but hey. Now people need to be referred by a school, social worker, support worker etc as a lot of people were taking advantage.

Anyway a woman turned up to the charity yesterday, asking for toys. The young girl working there said they will be giving them out all next week, she mentioned they had changed the criteria. The woman was saying she has ten kids and she was relying on them for toys, she was saying how can I get toys, she has kids from 16 to 1. They will now have to go without and no one bothered to tell her the criteria changed. The young girl apologised and said all updates were on their social media but they can’t update everyone individually. The woman lost her temper saying they have ruined her kids Christmas, it’s the girls fault, she’s ruined 10 kids Christmas.

This went on for a bit until I someone else stepped in but I was just shocked. I appreciate people need help and the pressure of Christmas can’t be nice but this woman has used the toys since they started, in that time she’s had a few children. I realise it’s a touchy subject but I felt so sorry for the young girl as she was really upset at letting children down

There is an enormous amount of research on the benefits of play. Your post clearly thinks that play is valueless and ‘not learning’. When the opposite is true. You could try following the Upstart campaign and the book of the same name by Sue Palmer ( a literacy expert) A play based approach is a highly effective way to develop children’s cognition, language, social and everything else skills. It really is. Attuned, skilled adults use children’s play to extend their language and learning. On the other hand, dyslexia rates are highest in countries which start formal literacy at the earliest ages.

Underanothersky · Today 13:30
for some folk maybe, good at acting in some cases. Example. A local girl claiming she can’t go out, suffers panic attacks, has her mum taking her 5 kids to school. Saying she passed her assessment, so she gets so many 100s a month more. But if you go into her boyfriends fb page, we’ll that states a different story, pictures in nightclubs, going to New York, parties. Well she’s certainly fiddling the system. So many more do.

I said you are not being unreasonable but if you are going to work in charity or human rights you leave your biases at the door. You haven’t done that. The young girl will of course have felt very attacked and upset but that doesn’t translate to giving opinions about peoples life choices. Choices that you have no idea how they came about. That is dehumanising and the very opposite of what anyone working in a charity should do. You refuse her the toys as per the rule, you defend the young girl, you don’t start to think up a life philosophy. Read all the posts on inter generational poverty and other reasons. This is a different world. You don’t come into it with your world view.
well, you do at first but if you are in it for the long haul, you reassess your own privilege. We all had to do that because if you are working with a sense of outrage you burn out and aren’t the person you wanted to be going into this work.

Sorry my last post. So many 100s more in benefits per month as she passed her not fit to work assessment

The woman was indeed rude, I don't think anyone can deny that, maybe she is entitled, maybe this pushed her over the edge?
No one should have 10 kids regardless of affordability, you cannot possibly provide the emotional stability etc... that all children deserve on an individual level.
I do think all parents should plan properly when having a child, of course circumstances can change, disability, illness, death, it's why you take out insurance policies, and if you don't have them, then yes it's on you and no you didn't do a good job of protecting yourself or your dc, and no the taxpayers should not pick up all the slack. If your only one paycheck away from poverty then no your not in a good position to have more children.
A lot of financial problems can be mitigated but I do feel it's easier to just shrug your shoulders and blame the circumstances.
But I can say all that as someone who had a relatively good upbringing, it's not that simple for a lot of people, how do we help those people, that should be the question. The children of course shouldn't suffer, they didn't ask for any of this, but when the parents are constantly bailed out, there is no incentive for them to take responsibility.
I don't know the answer, there isn't a simple one size fits all.

Why has the charity a young girl working front facing and not a more experienced staff member?

what do you mean ‘not a standard bedroom’?

My own anecdotal experience is MIL who has been on disability benefit for the past 30 years and has nothing wrong with her.

Surely not? I thought it was difficult to get disability benefits?

Theres always “a woman on Facebook “ someone knows living the life of a celebrity on benefits on these sorts of threads.

My husband passed his Not fit for work assessment after falling off a roof 18 months ago.
The extra money we received as a family of 4 while I worked part time hardly touched the sides.
We could barely afford to eat. We sold our car to stay afloat. It was the worst experience of my life.
This is the case for most reliant on benefits.

There’ll always be criminals in society. I don’t see how your tale has any relevance to this thread.
Unless you’re insinuating the woman in op’s example is a lying crook. Based on nothing.

SmileyClare · Today 13:49
im hardly going to tell everyone her name, address and whereabouts here am lol 😂

Oh give it a rest and read all my posts before you go shouting your mouth off.

I hardly spoke upon people with special needs for a start, I responded back to a comment a poster who mentioned special needs to me. So don't be making out I was slagging people off with special needs because that was the F.... case at all.

My point was GENERALLY we all have good qualities about us. If you look back I mentioned this and I have NO need to research because growing up I had to work with a 1 to 1 myself.

So back right off hun!!

I have beared it mind that was I stuck to the amount of DC I have.

Have you just bypassed people saying they would have liked more DC? But they did not because perhaps they considered a rainy day! 🤔

I too stand by my post all. So we will leave it at that.

But people like your husband is why the benefits system came about.
Why would anyone hate on your husband for collecting benefits if he truly is unfit to work?

SmileyClare · Today 13:49
im not slating her travelling and the money it costs to do those things, her partner might have paid for these. But it’s the fact she’s claiming she can’t go out, take kids to school, panic attacks, unhappy on a public forum like fb. But on another page, tells a different story. Totally defrauding the system. While genuine folk struggle to claim what they entitled too.

I have beared it mind that was I stuck to the amount of DC I have.

. What on earth are you talking about? I think you've rather missed the point.

@SmileyClare

Surely you should be more pissed off than anyone about people claiming (or over exaggerating) medical conditions in order to claim?

Im pretty sure there are quite a lot of these people in society and it would make a difference if this ethic could be changed. We need people who can work, working. People who can work.

This can only really be changed if companies start paying a living wage though. No one in full time employment should need to be claiming benefits and no one should be better off not working or working part time than they would be in full time employment. That’s the crux of the matter. But they are and so this cycle continues.

I’m not expecting anyone to be “hating” on my husband. I was illustrating how little extra benefit payments for injury/illness are.

im just sick of the “woman I know living the life of Riley on benefits” story that’s always trundled out on these sorts of threads.

As if it’s representative of all mothers on benefits. That’s the sort of propaganda that’s promoted by the media and it’s bullshit. See Benefits Britain on channel 5, see most benefit stories in the Daily Mail.

You only have to go back a couple of pages to see sneering comments like “I bet she (woman in op) buys fags and has nail and hair extensions “ what a tedious stereotype.

It’s not difficult to use a little imagination and empathy when considering families in poverty and their diverse situations.

This is really well-expressed.

It must be hard to be as perfect as some posters here.
Just think!! If only I'd known that my husband was going to die at 48, we could have had less children! Never a crystal ball around when you need one.

I've never had my nails done, hair extensions, tattoos or anything else..

firstly omg 😲, then what happened to the spirit of Christmas and being appreciative for each other, rather than just gifts ?

Coming at it from a different angle...I had two children with my ex husband. We could absolutely have afforded another child although only wanted two. They weren't spoilt but they had clothes, food, toys, treats and we were able buy them presents and to save.

When we divorced I ended up in a 2 bed in a rough part of the city on universal credit, only able to pay the rent and buy food for the kids (Yes, I didn't eat or pay water and heating so got into masses of debt so they could eat when at my house). My ex had to change jobs onto lower pay a short time after.

I went from being VERY MUCH able to afford the two kids I had and the option of a third to barely able to survive. If you had turned round and told me at that time in my life "you shouldn't have had kids you couldn't afford" because I couldn't get them a present it would have been the last thing you ever did.

Life can change so drastically in an instant. I hope none of you posting above me who are judging people who "have kids they can't afford" never go from living comfortably to being dirt fucking poor and your kids suffering for it. That said, if it does happen to you it might humble you.

1 kid, 3 kids, 10 kids.... you have ZERO fucking clue if she could afford them at some point and now cant due to misfortune.

Oh come on.

There is a HUGE difference between suddenly not being able to afford your two or even three kids, and choosing to have ten kids.

Your circumstances are completely understandable, and I don't think many people would be making the same criticisms of you.

@ItchySnoof I think you've just reiterated the point really, imagine how much worse it would have been with 3+ kids. No one is saying you shouldn't have children, you can't predict the future. I don't think anyone would judge someone with 2 kids who has fallen on hard times. But when you start getting to 3+ there is an element of personal responsibility that you've gotten into a situation that if anything changes, it will be more challenging than if you'd had fewer children. It's one of the reasons I've stayed at 2 (but I completely take on board what has been said about the complexity of disadvantage and know it's not as simple as that).

Yes much more understandable

Aren't you full of the Christmas spirit