AIBU to think parents on benefits shouldn’t be allowed to have more children until they’re financially independent?

[Tellitasitisss]

I can’t help but wonder why people who are already on benefits are still choosing to have more children. Surely if you can’t afford to support the children you already have, it’s unfair (on the kids and taxpayers) to keep adding more into the mix?

I’m not talking about people who’ve fallen on hard times unexpectedly, or someone who loses their job. That can happen to anyone. I mean those who have never worked a day in their life, keep having baby after baby, and then expect everyone else to fund everything from housing to school meals.

Meanwhile, working households who are just scraping by get absolutely nothing, yet are footing the bill for those who keep expanding their families with no thought for the consequences.

AIBU to think there should be a cap — no more kids funded by benefits after the first two, unless you can afford them yourself? Or is that “punishing children” like people always say?

🍿🙄

There is already a two child cap in place (except in limited circumstances)

However there is nothing to suggest this has made any difference other than putting more families into poverty.

There is a cap. Maybe we could have state sanctioned sterilisation as well?

Isn't there a cap already? Or have I gone mad?

🙄

It's a huge question, that I'm not qualified to wade into, but one major factor I would imagine is that people don't always choose to get pregnant.

Ok settling in.

The two child benefit cap has been in place for years. Get your facts right.

Thank goodness poor people throughout history have continued having children or likely none of us would be here now.

...

I am a strong advocate for every child to be born to a parent that wants it and has planned for it, including financially.

There is excellent free contraception available in the UK - a real variety so I don't really buy the 'accidental' pregnancies - I think people are either not caring if they get pregnant or in some way want to be. I think people who don't care if they get pregnant don't always care about the welfare of the child that is produced.

I would welcome financial incentivisation for people to use long term contraception if they are on long term benefits/have addiction problems/have had children removed into social care/other issues.

I do not think there can be any other way to this - we cannot force it on people, that would make us a very different society.

You can see the responses you’ve got but the bottom line is that the welfare state was not designed to shore up the terminally feckless. People say these children don’t chose to be born which is of course true but at what point do you make people take responsibility for their own actions? Never, it seems. And the cycle continues.

So do you want to spend your tax money on supporting families, or the immigration that we'll need? This is our issue, we've demonised having children, made it difficult and now Europe and the USA have too low a birth rate.
We all pay tax, we rely on goods being bought, services being used, we need people with disposable income to keep our society running.

People in receipt of UC work. When you or yours are next in the hospital, shops, your school support staff, ask the workers if they should be entitled to have children, because they won't earn enough without a top up benefit.

Working families are the bigger 'benefits' claiments due to companies using top ups to get out of paying properly. Add 'childcare' and its an enormous cost. In which case perhaps they also shouldn't be allowed to claim. Maybe you want to extend to anyone claiming anything. or...not.

Another 100% genuine thread about benefits!

What level of financial independence would you find acceptable?

Mhmm, yes, of course OP 🙄

Although there are plenty of classist arseholes who do think this way

Err there is a cap.

Surely you don't need this spelling out op.

A) we can't forcibly sterilise anyone (thank god) and that's the only way to completely prevent unplanned pregnancies outside of abstinence.

B) many people are on benefits because they are vulnerable in some way which could also increase their liklihood of struggling with decision making around things like contraception. This also doesn't factor in issues like rape/ peoples views on abortion/coercion/ women in abusive relationships etc etc etc

C) our social services system is on its knees after years of chronic and sustained underfunding and cuts, increasing poverty by reducing benefits entitlements will put even more pressure on this service as we know poverty directly links to community problems and neglect.

D) many people on benefits are already working but are unable to earn more or unable to study more and are being impacted by COL rises.

E) this would also create links to increased crime rates, poorer health and education outcomes etc so overall a negative impact on a societal level.

F) do you think 3rd+ children are free to rear?

Yes, it’s today’s benefit bashing thread with a new twist.,,

Do people not see it's issues like thike that cause the flag flying and protests? Why will we pay for some people and not others?
There's outrage if people suggest that babies shouldn't be being born after a year in a war zone, or born in extreme poverty, but here in a safe, good country, British people (of all colours and religions) need to stop having babies. Or we could do a version of Logan's run, which would save a lot of money.

Well, you know most people receiving universal credit work and receive benefits because their wages aren't high enough. Benefits subsidise the private sector because companies are all too tight to pay a decent wage.

People on benefits aren't the problem.

I can't see the twist...

How do you propose to stop them having more kids?

Stopping benefits punishes the child.

Since 2017 yes ,
Just to clarify though it's not actually child benefit ,there is no cap on child benefit
Its other benefits such universal credit, where there is a two child cap.