Do you think we should life the two child benefit cap?

[Marshmallow4545]

I believe that the majority of people think that the cap should remain and child poverty should be tackled in different ways.

Personally I would like to see children on FSMs allowed free access to after school extracurricular clubs and activities. I would also provide more poor families with access to food banks and would look to stock these with a range of healthy and nutritious options either through donation or state funding if required. I would also look to recruit volunteers to offer advice on health and diet in these places. I would provide clothing and school uniform banks with high quality, second hand clothing that kids would actually want to wear. I have some branded 'fashionable' stuff my kids have grown out of that's still in great condition that I would happily donate.

All of the above in my view is preferable to lifting the cap and would be more effective in tackling the impact that child poverty has on the child.

So AIBU that the two child cap should remain and we should look at other more direct ways to tackle child poverty?

How can you be so completely ignorant.

While it would be great if this were the case, and I would agreed that perceptions of stigma have significantly reduced because of how FSM are handled, stigma is still subjective. Some parents do not even want to go through the sign-up process for FSM, however discreet that process is. I don’t agree with this myself and if it were me, I would absolutely sign my children up, but the fact is that we regularly deal with parents who do not want to do this. There are other reasons as well as perceptions of stigma, but it is a reason, sadly.

Because people are people. Just because you're poor and have loads of kids it doesn't mean that you are a great parent. So many posters on this thread have mentioned limiting family size due to financial constraints. This is what loving, responsible parents do that put their existing children first.

I know at least five families that would receive more benefits if the cap was lifted. A few would absolutely spend the money how you suggest, but a few definitely wouldn't. I know this because of the way they spend the money they do have now.

The homework point in particular is super naive. I know at least three of these families make absolutely no attempt to make sure the kids do the homework and they all are households where the parents don't work. They don't value education and don't see the point of homework.

Do you think that disabled children are born with an 'I'm disabled' tag attached to them? Sometimes another child is born before it becomes obvious the first child is disabled.

Not to mention the fact that just because 1 child is disabled, it doesn't mean that all children born after will also be disabled.

So you want to punish all families due to the actions of a few? On the basis of what you know of approximately 5 families ?

Thank goodness those in charge aren’t so narrow minded .

Exactly.

I knew a family whose 3 dc were disabled in a car accident so there are all sorts of scenarios where suddenly a family has more than one child receiving dla.

No. We will all have to pay with increased taxes and spending cuts. If that’s her approach the cap should remain. I’ll say it again. I’m sick of paying for everyone else.

How am I punishing them? By wanting to provide the children with clothes, food etc directly instead of just giving the money to the parents?

I would argue you are punishing the children that don't have responsible parents who would spend the money wisely and in their interests. Those children would be far better off having their needs met directly and in a way that the parents can't hijack to meet their own needs.

That's another obvious point too.

Children aren't immune to suddenly becoming disabled due to accident or illness.

You think she CHOSE to have two DISABLED children?

This thread has opened my eyes to how a lot of people in the UK are emotionally disabled.

It is awful to read people being so cruel and obsessed with money. I think this obsession is a health issue.

I have a very comfortable life, own my home outright, have a great private pension, as does my husband. My two children have professional jobs and good incomes. We have good savings. I want the cap lifted because I am not emotionally unwell. I have empathy.

The lack of it on this thread is appalling.

I agree with this. More people would start small businesses without the fear of losing money if they had a basic income to fall back on, plus most people would be happy to work more to earn more, without the fear of not having a basic income to support them, especially with the way things are now; zero hours contracts, no fixed hours, flexibility for the business owner which usually comes at the cost of the employee.

But so many people won't agree because they're terrified people will get "something for nothing".

I'd rather expand FSM and properly funded breakfast clubs.

I'd also look at increasing the threshold at which people start paying tax and NI.

Every family on UC will get free school meals next year (England). It is going to save me about £50.

In principle I think responsibility for looking after children sits primarily with their parents.

However, children don't ask to be born into poverty, and I don't think they should suffer for their parents choices. The evidence suggests the most cost effective way of lifting children out of poverty is to scrap the cap.

So on balance I'm in favour of doing so.

I get your point but unless you never go to school, never benefit from anyone else's education, live entirely off grid, forage for food, have no kids and die alone in your cave, you do generally benefit from all those things at some point from birth to death.

If those parents are so irresponsible and neglectful that their children are going without basics such as food by the parents choice then what makes you think that the children would suddenly have their needs met by those minority parents?

They might attempt to sell the high quality clothes
They might not bother taking their child to the free clubs

etc

It is very easy to be benevolent in your situation.

People everywhere are struggling. They are on their knees. The UK imminent tax hikes are going to have a very real impact on families. Homes will be lost, jobs will be lost and families will have to make cut backs when there is no fat left to trim.

Lifting the cap isn't victimless. You are redistributing money from people that can't necessarily afford to lose it. You are then spending it in an undemocratic and unpopular way. You are emotionally unwell if you don't understand how this cause anger and resentment.

It is harder to sell children's clothes than it is to just spend extra money in your bank account.

The reality is that nobody can stop feckless parents being selfish. You can mitigate the risks though by making it harder for them to hijack benefits that are intended for their children to spend on themselves.

Yes but you do for an extremely limited period of time in comparison to how long you pay tax for. Obviously my point is just that we all pay into a system that we might not all directly benefit from and that is a good thing.

We don’t constantly need to push for a race to the bottom which is what a lot of people really are advocating for.

Per month.

There is definitely a separate issue here whereby families who are above the threshold for receiving UC are being squeezed too tightly. But that is not the fault of UC clamaints. It's the system.
Child maintenance is another issue with so many 'fathers' avoiding payments. I honestly do not know many families that are in the position to gift family members enough funds to make a difference to their lives. Maybe a relatively expensive gift for occasions or helping out with childcare if you're very fortunate.
I worked in a school with around 21% of children considered to be living in poverty. You could look at a class and almost always see which ones they were.
My own sister would be considered to be living in poverty. She works full time in the early years sector, which is unbelievably low paid. She's a single mother of 2 boys after leaving a DV relationship. The father does everything possible to avoid child maintenance payments. Her children have some designer clothes and fancy phones. She has a new car on finance. All things we do not have as a family and would not choose to have for our children. But I can assure you that you would still be able to tell her children live in poverty.
Some people who are raised in poverty end up prioritising the things they never received growing up and purchasing luxury items for their children. Getting themselves into debt a lot of the time. This is why further support is needed in the community to help encourage people out of this mindset that contributes to their deprivation of basics. But that does not change my mind that the 2 child limit is inhumane and punishes children who are a victim of their own circumstances. The benefit cap would still remain and limit ridiculous entitlements under the welfare system.

Those kinds of people will always find a way.

Those children need more help than free after school clubs. They need early help at a minimum or even social services if parents are willingly not feeding them.

The worst ones will sell the vouchers at a discount. This is the reason why voucher schemes have never been introduced. This thread is just rehashing the same tired old MC arguements about controlling how people spend their money. It's not new, it's just ill educated people thinking they know better than every expert on child poverty.

Anyone who can’t afford to buy their kid lunch but refuses to sign up for something that will be completely anonymous because of online booking (my dc thinks I pay for his meals😂) because they’re embarrassed (embarrassed of what when literally no one but yourself has to know) is making some questionable parenting choices tbh putting their feelings before their children being fed it’s pretty strange.

I agree completely.

I don't know any families though that don't feed their kids at all. That is outright neglect. I do know families that feed their kids cheap easy meals e.g. cereal for dinner and cloth them in poor quality clothes that the children have clearly grown out of whilst the parents go to the pub every Friday and spend a lot on drinks. They also vape constantly.

This kind of family doesn't currently meet the threshold for SS involvement but lifting the cap won't help the children.