To think it's a bit harsh to say people who've never worked shouldn't get benefits?

[DonaldBiden]

Was reading another thread where many were saying if someone has never worked they shouldn't get any benefits but couldn't comment because it had reached 1000 comments.

I know this might be an unpopular opinion but I don't agree because that would include young mums who can't work because they have a baby to look after. Most of them will get a job when their child is a little older. Why are they any different from older mums who've fallen on hard times and need help?

And I know people will say it's because they've never worked and haven't proven themselves unlazy etc and could be on the dole forever but why should they have their lives ruined just because of something people think MIGHT happen.

@Mosaiccat I agree it’s about breaking the cycle (I work with the parents of the children you describe!) but it isn’t easy or quick, as poverty is really hard to get out of. When someone’s entire social network doesn’t work, and they’ve never had a parent who worked or enjoyed their job, found satisfaction in paid employment etc, it’s very hard to rise out of that. I tend to find that people have very low confidence and self belief, often un diagnosed neurodivergence and poor mental health. Jobs can be few and far between in deprived areas too. There needs to be more free courses and training available to people, and more hope and aspiration rather than blame and shame. There needs to be more mental health support too.

Single parents can still work - I’ve always worked.

My DS has autism. At 11 he’s finally been awarded DLA. It’s been a very long 11 years for us as a family. DH and I are both teachers - despite working full time and at times putting other children before our own - we are trying to make DS independent. If he can’t be, I would would like to think he can have help.

Yes, I am aware of this. I was simply pointing out that many people who claim PIP do so because they cannot work or may never have worked and should obviously not be penalised as a result.

Jeez you have all led such comfortable, safe, privileged lives.

You all belong in Victorian Britain with kids up chimneys, no health care and kids at work from 8 years old and vulnerable people ravaged because of lack of choice and support.

That's not a world I would ever want.

We ARE mostly comfortable, safe and privileged in the UK! Look at Gaza.

If people felt better off they wouldn't react to this nonsense about several thousands of people on boats.

But as they do, DH and I are considering moving overseas, to Thailand or Sri Lanka as and when we need to be cared for. We can sell what we own to pay for care and live in a congenial place. I'd hope the DC would visit every so often, but given that they are already busy making their own way in life, I would not expect to see them often.

But, again, that's because universal credit is a non taxable benefit while her higher wncome would be taxed.

Ok, yes,but just incase some other posters are not aware of this, I pointed it out. Too many times I have seen on Mumsnet some posters not knowing that lots of people on PIP, are actually working as well.

I think it’s worth bearing in mind that most of these ‘kids’ having kids and claiming benefits, have come from a family where the parents have done the same thing, and therefore, know no different.

Applying the logic you were brought up with makes sense: as in - “I work with a baby and pay taxes” but these youngsters do not know what it is to work and are probably egged on to have a baby young by their mother, in order to get a council flat - that way, they are no longer a financial burden on the ‘benefit claiming’ parent.

OBR states that one sixth of people who claim PIP were in work as of October 2024 (that is the most recent data they have). So of the approximately 4m working age people claiming PIP, just over 650,000, or less than 17%, are in any sort of work.

I mean how old is the child we're talking about? Because where does the newborn go while you're at work?
Anyway point is many are ok with an older mum claiming some financial help but think young mums should just starve I guess because they "know" a woman who had a kid young then had 20 more kids just so she wouldn't have to get a job. Even though 99% of young mums get a job when their child is a little older.

If anything shouldn't the older ones have known better?

Thanks. That is interesting to know. It is a lot more than none, as some people seem to believe.

You wouldn't move in to be with your DC?

No I don't think all young mums go on to have many kids, and I agree that those that have found themselves in tough circumstances should have support while their babies are young, and them while they are studying or working part time up to secondary age.
Too many abuse that though. Yes I am aware of the 2 child benefits cap. The example I gave is them spacing it out to keep the benefits flowing. Don't know the exact kids ages of all the women I know of. But the 1 I do know exact ages. Her 1st born is 23 so benefits for him ended 5 years ago, 2nd 17 so benefits end next year, but she has a 4 and 5 year old so will be claiming for them for the next 14/13 years. So she will have received the max child benefits for 36 years in total. She definitely didn't have them for the love of being a mum. Passes them off on relatives for a lot of the time. Cant be bothered to do the school run so a friend does this. The school is a 10 min walk away so not due to lack of transport. She is just 1 of a quite a few in that street. Her parents never worked, she never worked, nor her siblings, and the 23 year old doesn't either. Don't know how they get away with it

YABU. Benefits should be and were originally intended to be a safety net. I had a baby at 19 and was in full time employment, I went back to work after 9 months maternity, then had to leave work 10 months after that because my mum couldn't look after my daughter anymore (needed a brain operation). So I was glad of the support from benefits. But its not something I ever intended on happening. When she was in school I worked again. People know what they are doing when they continuously have children from a young age have never worked with no intention of working. My parents neighbour has done just that.

Not sure why some people have a brood of kids because they don't want to work apparently through sheer laziness, raising kids is far harder than just working a 9 to 5 especially if you have a brood. People like that aren't that common though the birth rate is like less than 2 now

Anyway 19 is different from 16 because that's 3 years of being able to work, sorry i should of been clearer in the post by young I meant so young they couldn't of worked. Why shouldn't they get the same support an older woman gets when shes going through a hard time. Most go on to get a job

I went to school where there were a lot of families like this. I now live in a much more middle class area where almost all mums take maternity leave then go back to work (with the odd stay at home mum but they seem pretty rare). It’s an interesting question, how you take these kids outside their narrow world view. What I never really ‘get’, is whether any of them have had the thought that we obviously could not all live like this and where the money they are getting comes from. It feels like something that should be taught by parents but probably could be included in the school curriculum (though I am very conscious that teachers absolutely have enough on their plates!

No it isn’t. It’s not common at all, it’s extremely uncommon.
It may have happened to you, and you may therefore have been exposed to other women of your age that also had babies at 16 who did not have support from their families. This is called confirmation bias. It doesn’t mean that it’s common.

I mean fair enough, but in the grand scheme of things what makes you think it's extremely uncommon

I agree.. never judge...we don't know what road others are on x

I so agree with this. Having a child isn’t a right. Having a child who you cannot support and take care of is a massive failure on that child.

Spot on

Thank you. I think this a sensible idea instead of a "let's gut it all and let them starve" kind of idea

It's interesting, because it implies that the only reason to work is money. It shies narrow and short term thinking. I.e. if you work more, then promotions might be possible.

Bigger still though is working for self worth abd modelling to your children. I work to pay the mortgage but also I get so much satisfaction from my career and the example I set to my children, especially my girls.