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.

I disagree, a family member who was pregnant at 16 and spent years on benefits struggled to find work because she had MH problems, undiagnosed adhd and learning disabilities that weren’t picked up on.
She is a liability to herself and the workplace and it was that impulsive trait in adhd that led her down the spiralling path of having a baby at 16 I honestly think she saw no other purpose and still hasn’t.
In my honest opinion nobody who doesn’t have genuine struggles to work would choose to spend their days with no money, no life and no meaning.

This thread is about those who can work. Not those who are medically unfit to work.

There are many people who could work but chose not to.
There are many who could work a fuller working week but chose not to

The threads about 16 year olds who’ve just had babies, you can’t work 99% of jobs under 16 in the uk and no one with a newborn works anyway

So as I said it’s not about those who are medically unfit to work

The later part of my comment disagreed with yours in terms of ‘nobody’ would chose not to work.

Lots of people do

But how can anyone work when they have a newborn baby to look after?

I’m simply commenting on some points made in that previous post.

Those comments I was referring to did not relate to having a newborn.

The people who say stuff like that are either not truly thinking about the consequences or they know the consequences of not providing welfare to certain groups of people and they don't care about the abject misery it will cause.

Yes, it's not fair that some people will work all their lives and continually put in to the system, while others will only "take", but if we really do only provide a safety net for people who have worked x number of years this will mean things like chronically mentally ill people (who are often denied disability benefits unfairly) taking their lives, young mums continuing to live in abusive situations so they can get adequate food and shelter, drug addicts starving and dying at a higher rate, children of parents who are not working for whatever reason living in completely unbearable circumstances. Anyone who thinks we should put children of parents who won't work into care is both woefully naive about what our care system is like and condoning destroying children's lives. The level of suffering would be obscene (look at stories of benefits related deaths).

I know someone who had active psychosis and was awarded 0 PIP points.

Ok fair enough sorry I tend to think people mean the worst because some people genuinely do hate young mums.
I mean I do get the argument that people don’t like their taxes being wasted but that’s no reason for being nasty to individual girls seeing as what 15/16 year old is thinking of that when they conceived.

Actual criminals walk amongst us and get less hate I think probably because they’re not easy targets

Why can’t young mums work? I did, over 40 years ago, with no nursery vouchers. 🤷‍♀️

Not me
Young mums need support not hate.
but they should all be searching for education or employment once their kid is 1yr old. For their own mental health if nothing else

How did you find the time?

I mainly mean these days you need to be at least 16 for most jobs so if one is pregnant before their 16th birthday no where will hire them then they’ll have a baby to look after so will have to wait another nine months before baby can go to nursery

The support for a mum who's 16 should be temporary as she raises the newborn. There then should be a plan to work.

Why would a 16 year old never be able to work? The kid is in school by 3 and full time at 4. Yes, i am saying that a mother who has kids in full time school and still refuse to work should not be able to live in benefits. A 16 year old shouldn't even be having babies. Please raise your daughters aspirations as living in benefits isnt right.

Yes I agree but why shouldn’t they have help when their child is a baby is what I’m saying seeing as some people think you shouldn’t get benefits if you’ve never worked and 15 is too young for a job

I'm sure this has already been said, but there are obviously some exceptions. By the time the kid is in school, the mother should be working. If she refuses or has another pregnancy she cannot afford, then I don't think she should have any help. This whole living on benefits trend is generational too where the kids end up following in their mother's footsteps and repeating the pattern. Its pure laziness.

Yes I agree I was a teen mum and got a job when mine went to nursery so before school even I’m talking about the baby stage only really.

Please raise your daughters aspirations as living in benefits isnt right

thousands of people claim benefits for all kinds of reasons. I am a single parent with a disabled child and was entitled to benefits for many years. How is that not right? You won’t improve outcomes for either parents or children. With a shit attitude like that - you just make people feel dreadful when shit happened in their life,

I think PP was more on about at some point you cannot rely on the state forever and you need to take personal responsibility (if you're of healthy body and mind). Benefits shouldn't be forever unless you have health issues that do not improve.

Ok, say she has another pregnancy and "refuses" to work so the state refuses her and her now 2 children financial support... Would you be OK with those children getting poorer and poorer and everything that comes with that?

I would be okay with them being referred to social services due their mother being unfit. We seriously need food stamps here in the UK because living on benefits shouldn't be a lifestyle choice. Are you speaking from experience here? Why would you want to live on benefits?

I don't want to live on benefits, so I don't. I mean, that's one of my points, no one wants to live on benefits. Almost anyone intelligent enough to understand consequences would not choose a half life on benefits over a full time job.

But, you know what you're saying actually means in practice? Those innocent little children would be deprived further and further, go with less and less high quality food, fewer toys, dirtier clothes, uncomfortable cold housing until a threshold was met and social services stepped in. Then, if no financial aid is given, and the mother is deemed "unfit" they'd be put in our care system at over £400 a week each, deprived of mother they actually loved (and who could have parented "good enough" with money) completely traumatised, put at huge, enormous risks when they're teenagers (as many children in care are) and have their lives obliterated. Plus it would all cost the taxpayer more money than the original benefits.

There are people who simply will never be able to get regular paid employment.

For example some people with disabilities and/or long term health conditions.

If you are someone with profound physical and mental health issues who needs help from a carer to look after yourself then it is likely you will never be able to work.

I don't want to see anyone in this country starve or end up on the streets so I strongly believe that everyone is entitled to enough money to meet their basic needs and keep their dignity.

The ''benefit scroungers' rhetoric in this country is frankly appalling.

@Greenwitchart I completely agree. It is always easier to punch down.

I understand if someone is totally disabled to the point they cannot work. Hopefully this should be a small fraction of the total population, because otherwise what's going wrong?

I think every person who is physically healthy should take charge of their own destiny and make their own future. If you're physically healthy and have two arms and two legs, benefits should only be temporary stopgap if you need serious support. Then a plan should be made to be self reliant.