Funding everyone to have multiple children???

[MyLimeGuide]

Hello all, this issue seriously gets me down, as someone who has worked solidly since forever (im 45) always wanted 2 children. I have 1, realised I cant afford 2, seeing what labour have done, lifting the 2 child cap for benefits MADDENS me to the core! Not because of my own circumstances, im more than happy with one and I can give him everything.
Im a teacher, currently working in a SEN school, the majority of the cohort are from non working families with multiple siblings. Their biggest problem is neglect. Often these kids tell us their mum is pregnant again!!
i have seen this pattern with neglected children un every single school ive worked in. Unbelievable that Labour want to increase this!
It's not to help children, its the opposite.
Its unfair on hardworking people to be expected to fund it.
I believe EVERYONE is entitled to be a parent, regardless of circumstances, but NOT breed like its a hobby (a freeloading one with no care)

AIBU - Let everyone breed as much as they want regardless of circumstances its their god given right.

AINBU - This is unfair, children should be born into families that can afford to look after them fully and offer them the time and nurture they need to develop into humans with good mental health.

Of course, these MPs just actually really 'care'...

The parents have made irresponsible choices that have led to their children suffering. Having loads of children is seldom a sensible choice. We know that life is unpredictable and you are making your family unit extremely vulnerable by adding more and more children.

We need to intervene to help the children but we absolutely shouldn't be giving money to the irresponsible parents that have caused the problem in the first place.

Well what then? They don't really give a shit about poor children, just want to annoy high earners?

You make two mistakes. The first is that the two child limit has actually driven a change in behaviour. It didn't.

The second is to assume that the cohort on benefits are one set of people most of whom don't work. In practice many claimants move in and out of benefits every month. A lot of those moving onto UC could afford 3 children and only could not after a change, sometimes tragic, in their life circumstances.

£293/month for an extra child isn't a life changing sum is it.

Agree with all this . Just handing out more money and assuming this will somehow solve child poverty is simplistic and naive.

Maybe bring back Surestart, extra resources and support. Make it directly of benefit to children .

And have you got an actual argument against what I said or just moaning that I’m too lazy to type out a slightly different sounding comment and had the gall to resort to copy and paste, despite the fact to have noticed it means you’re also on multiple threads about the same thing probably making the same arguments I’m just more efficient with it

Studies show that some children are far more likely to become contributors to society than others. The odds are stacked against you if you are growing up in a large family dependent on benefits. So it absolutely does matter who is having the children if you don't want to just create a future where we have ever more dependents on an already struggling welfare state.

Teachers should be more intelligent than this.

I'm not telling you what time to get up.

But if you're asking me whether I believe that you should contribute to society in accordance with your ability to contribute, then yes, I absolutely think that you should.

Personally, I would prefer for my taxes to be spent on lifting disadvantaged children out of poverty rather than on dealing with the impact of that poverty in a few years time. We will all end up paying for it in one way or another in any case.

It makes zero difference to how many children people have, plenty of research has gone into this. People are having less children across the western world generally, fuck all to do with getting an extra bit of cash each week.

I also don’t know how much people think those on benefits actually get. It’s like people think it’s hundreds of thousands, it’s naff all. Very few people will intentionally have more children to get a couple of hundred quid extra a month.

Yes, because taking children into care is known to be such a cheap option for the taxpayer, and the outcomes are so wonderful.

Also, when you say 'forced into unprotected sex', you mean rape, so stop being so craven and say what you mean. Your attitude to rape victims is that they should make better choices. Own your cretinous views please.

Are there families who decide hiw many children they have based on child benefits? The ones who really thibk about their financial means won't have a third now that yiu can have child benefits cause it won't actually cover the cost of 3rd child. The ones who don't consider finances will he having children regardless.

Considering you teach generationally disadvantaged children, I am shocked that you do not understand the socio-economic issues that surround these families.

I am a single mum with 4 children and claim UC. I do also work part time
when I had my children I was in a stable marriage with both of us working and had never claimed a penny. But my 3rd pregnancy resulted in twins then my marriage broke down due to my ex husband’s addiction and I was left trying to pick up the pieces. I’m having to sell my children’s home as I can’t afford to pay the mortgage as i get no help from their dad as he lost his job. I was left with all the family debts to try and pay. We will be moving into rented. I do already get help for 3 children due to the multiple pregnancy exemption. I hate having to rely on UC to live. Sometime I feel judged and stigmatised for that.
all that being said I do actually agree with a benefit cap. I feel a taper system would’ve fairer.

I’m not entirely sure that all of these parents will choose to spend the extra money on their children
I think it could have been approached in a better way

Anyone who knows anything about benefits knows that there is a benefit cap separate to the two child benefit cap.

Benefit cap means no extra money for poor people so you can relax.

Really some of you should read the government website instead of the daily mail.

Only a few and your post that was deleted. Been too busy doing a night shift to notice others you may have been on.

This whole conversation is like a fever dream to me. I don’t know if people deliberately think / post nonsense or if there is another point they’re making but this can’t be the one.

the 2 child cap was only introduced in 2017. It didn’t directly lead to people having less children.

are people genuinely saying they believe anyone has a child on the basis of getting £17 a week child benefit? Are we still in the 90s wanking over the poor people in benefit Britain or something?!

Does no one do ANY research before spouting off ignorant shit like this?

"Evidence suggests that lifting the child benefit cap (specifically the two-child limit in universal credit and tax credits) is unlikely to significantly increase the number of children people have.

"Research indicates that the availability of government support is only a minor factor in fertility decisions, which are shaped more by broader systemic issues like housing and childcare cost. Personal aspirations, the incompatibility of work and family life, unaffordable housing, stagnant wages, and inadequate childcare are considered much stronger influences on fertility rates than benefit levels.The primary impact of the cap was a significant increase in child poverty, not a change in family size.

"Campaigners and government analysis highlight that scrapping the cap is one of the most cost-effective ways to lift hundreds of thousands of children out of poverty."

Could someone - anyone at this point, the board is full of people doing the same - just try and explore the evidence-base for your emotional reaction to something, before whipping up a bit of online fury?

It was bad enough when we were just hating immigrants based on vibes.

Now we're kicking low income families and their children.

What is WRONG with people today? Why have so many people allowed themselves to be manipulated into hating their neighbours and people they see every day in their community?

OP, you shouldn't be around kids. I really mean this. Not just because the families you are seeing today apparently had lots of children while the cap was still in place, so it clearly didn't fucking work in the way you want it to and your ability to interpret information doesn't seem compatible with your role as a teacher. But also because if you work in an education setting, and say you are seeing the impact of child neglect every day, and your angle on this is 'freeloaders that see breeding as a hobby' and not 'families that need support' - you're in the wrong job mate. Go and sneer at the people you should support from somewhere else.

As your experience shows, the cap made zero difference.

The difference is made by having effective interventions into families.

We've also got a negative birth rate, more dying than being born and immigration at its lowest levels for years.

My opinion isnt a mistake. The majority agree with me. Even 80% on mumsnet, MUMSnet. Clues in the mame.

Maybe they’re all a bit thick tho?

I agree with the OP. The government has limited funds. Funding and encouraging people to have more children is ridiculous. Benefits should not be a lifestyle choice (unless disabled/ ill health) and should be reined in.

If they want to reduce child poverty it should be spent on meals in schools and child services so the feckless parent don’t spend it on booze/ fags/ nails etc. Those children still end up neglected.

People on benefits should not be having as much disposable income as workers as it defeats the point of going to work - there is no incentive.

What’s the point of working hard in a stressful job, long hours, to support your family when you see minimal benefit and lifestyle improvement?

I recognise the description of the families. I've seen it in schools too. However, the 2 child cap didn't stop them. I'm not convinced that money is the motivation although I'm not sure what is. All the reduction in money did is put those children deeper into poverty.

But the problem is that the majority of children from larger families sadly live in deprived areas, in poverty and with poor education. These children will then grow up and often repeat their family history.

An example:- my husband's niece is 38 and has 5 dc (3 are asd). Her mother had 4 children and is a drug addict, she is 56 and has been on benefits her entire adult life (from a family on benefits). Niece has never worked and was pregnant at 16. Two of her children have also become pregnant at a young age and are likely to follow the same path as their mother. Niece's grandmother had 6 children and has never worked either.......you see the pattern, will it ever break amongst these families? I doubt it.

My husband's DNs life is not unique to this country, in fact I live near one of the UK's most deprived town's and it is so common there, encouraging more children within poorer communities does not benefit anyone.