Another UC 2 child cap thread…

[IWantAShitzu]

Sorry.

Probably every one has had enough of these now.

I have seen so much uproar over the lifting of the two child limit.

And, I get it. There are so many people leaching off the system and it will only get worse.

Background - 35 year old married mum of four aged 11 and under.

Always worked - went back to work after maternity leave each time when I had the first three. Loved my career, best work/life balance. Husband, despite being epileptic and had a stroke works full time and earns a decent income (on paper) - no benefits claimed as not entitled.

Finally got to the point in my career I was happy to stay in until I retired. All came crashing down when my youngest was diagnosed with a severe life limiting genetic disorder. Requires 24h care, tube fed, blind, cannot sit up and is unlikely to walk or talk, daily seizures and regular blue light admissions to hospital.

I decided to give up my job to become a full time carer. We had to remortgage our home to adapt it to his needs as we are not eligible for support with this.

Started claiming UC which has been a huge help. And I am delighted that the limit has been removed. This essentially means we get a full food shop extra per month without having to scrape each last penny.

I know I won’t be the only person in this situation - please remember that for all the ones who will take advantage of the limit being thrown out - there are so many families who have been through life changing difficulties through no fault of their own, and this will make such a difference xx

Im pleased to hear this will help you. Do you know how much extra you will get per month?

Thank you! I have no idea to be honest, we get deductions off anything around £600 in earnings - my husband earns around £2.8k a month.

we will get £292ish each for our two youngest but not sure how much we will have deducted. Even an extra 100 will be a massive help xx

I dont think many of us would object for families in your situation. I am pleased you will get more help. X

Op if you're receiving uc now, then they're already deducting the maximum amount for your husbands wages, you'll receive the full extra amount for your two younger children. I'm not exactly sure how it's worked but as it's your younger child that was disabled and you weren't getting paid for them, were they paying the disabled child element on your claim? If not you'll qualify for that too.

Thank you that’s really helpful to know, we are getting the disabled child
element but it’s pretty much wiped out by my husbands wages xx

I’m enormously pleased for you OP and also thank you for highlighting why the system is necessary.

Don’t you claim dla op?i thought dla wasn’t means tested?

For families like yours who have Sen /disabled children the increase will be so helpful

I really hope no one begrudges you the UC or the fact that removing the cap will benefit your family - it is completely right your family receives this additional help.

I do think using stories like yours to justify removing the cap creates a sort of Victorian deserving poor and undeserving poor narrative.

Removing the cap is one of the cheapest and most effective ways of reducing poverty in all families with children regardless of whether those parents are considered saints or sinners.

With the net contributor thing though, you have to be in the top 40% of earners to be a net contributor. I'm no economist, but does this mean if you are a family of 2 adults and 2 children both parents have to be in even higher earning bands (top 20%?) to cover their non-economically contributing children? If we focus too much on net contribution, it doesn't feel very fair that someone slogging their guts full time in a boiling McDonald's kitchen is valued as less than anyone in a white collar, high paying job. It's just a quirk of capitalism. It's natural for net contributors to feel a bit resentful that 'their' money is going to other people but - I think I'm phrasing this all muddled - in my opinion it's never really 'their' money in the first place. Why should more share of money (income) be given to an advertising executive than someone working the same hours on a shop floor? Could people not say the high earners are actually taking all 'our' money? That was probably very poorly articulated...

People also contribute economically in many ways other than income tax - VAT, council tax etc etc.

Isn't that a communist view 🤔
It's a bit like saying why should a top brain surgeon be paid more than a cleaner in a hospital as they both would very hard
It's not exactly going to incentivise anyone to study hard .

Yeah, definitely I'm definitely more of a communist. I did deliberately pick jobs we don't have much emotional connection to (so not teacher, nurse, doctor, social worker etc).

Do you not find the value attached to most jobs (retail vs advertising exec as examples) sort of arbitrary? I find it difficult to stomach that people think those in well paying white collar jobs are worth more and therefore that extra money is owed to them but not others who literally work just as hard.

I guess its not about who work ,s hard and I agree you can work just as hard if not harder in a low paid job
But its about skills attached to the higher paid job if you needed your rewiring,done you would want a fully qualified electrician to do it rather Bob down the road whose a bit handy and can fix most things .
So the fully qualified electrician would expect to be paid well for their expertise .

I'm pleased for you, OP and hope the extra income makes life easier.

You should get an extra £580 or so a month, so it will make quite a difference.

I get what @StartingFreshFor2026 means- and I’m definitely not a communist!

A city trader earns multiples of what a doctor is paid, but has fewer skills / less training.

During the pandemic, the roles that are essential for society to function became more visible. But there has been no shift in salaries to make that recognition tangible.

@IWantAShitzu I hope the extra money helps. This can happen to anyone and some people forget this.

I have never come across these fabled piss takers in real life. I am friends with two families with three / four children. One family are doing ok but cannot afford to do anything other than the essentials. No holidays, children’s clubs, vapes, coffees out etc. - both parents are working at above minimum wage jobs.

The other family has struggled hugely since the cost of living went up. It’s a hand to mouth existence. They were doing ok but their youngest turned out to have complex needs, so mum has become a full time carer. They live in a draughty old house with single glazed metal windows. I am so pleased that they will now be able to afford to put their heating on!

I hear what you are saying, but what would you expect us to do?

We had no idea our son would be born with a one in 500 million disorder.

Yes, he costs the NHS a fortune, he has even had the air ambulance out multiple times.

He is on specialist feeds and needs expensive equipment to keep him safe. Not to mention the 800 syringes and feeding tubes we have delivered each month, plus the cocktail of medication he is on.

Do we just leave him in a corner without treatment until he passes away? Because he is costing the tax payer too much and we are now not contributing enough.

Or shall we continue to keep him safe, keep giving him the best life possible for however long we have him for?

He is happy, always laughing and very cheeky. His life looks different to ‘normal’ but that doesn’t mean he isn’t deserving of one.

One day things will change - he could get an infection or have a seizure we can’t get him out of. He could get to the point where there is no quality of life. We have had discussions and made plans that no parent ever wants, or should have.

So if there is a system there that enables me to be there for him 24/7 then absolutely I will use that system.

It’s costing the government much less than it would if I decided to put him into care and say “sorry, I need to contribute my taxes to society”

Both can be true i live in a deprived area and im also the parent of a disabled child with complex needs
We rely on UC as well as carers allowance my sons DLA etc my dh works full time in a low paid job
Just becsuse you hsve never known people who dont work but continue to have children doesn't mean they don't exist

Where this is concerned it's the idea that the only 'worthy' contributions to society (for want of a better phrase) are financial, that the net contributers are the only ones doing anything, paying and recieving 'nothing' in return - only they do benefit from the work that's done by those who don't earn enough to be net contributers - the cleaner and the surgeon for example - the surgeon can't safely operate in a theatre that isn't clean, in order to do their job they need the cleaner doing theirs.
You don't expect the cleaner to earn as much as the surgeon (well I don't) but the cleaners contribution is just as valuable as the surgeons to the service being delivered.
And that opens up across society, the surgeon could be relying on childcare so they can have children and do their job, social care for an elderly relative, or even not essential but things that enhance their lives or make it easier - a shopping delivery driver, a barista when they grab a coffee, a waitress when they go out to eat so they have some leisure and down time.

I think we've lost sight of the fact that both sides of this are essential to society - after all if everyone were surgeons and net contributers, who is doing the supporting roles that means they can do that? And vice versa, What's the point of having a sparkly clean operating theatre if there's no surgeons to operate in it because everyone is a cleaner?

Of course there are people who don’t work but continue to have children!

But it’s a hard path that most choose not to go down.

I think unfortunately there does need to be a limit on the very expensive medical treatments people demand from the NHS especially when there is no hope of recovery.
Hopefully the assisted dying bill will give a sensible way forward & a change in society mindset towards life saving treatment/prolonging suffering as it's just not sustainable
Unfortunately everyone thinks that their story is special & their circumstances are more deserving but the reality is there is now a very tough financial burden on society as a whole which is unsustainable.

This is what benefits should be for and paid much more.

Just to clarify, claimants would always get the disabled child element for a child with DLA, even if that child was not one of the two entitled to the child element.

And this is exactly why the Assisted Dying Bill is a pernicious piece of legislation which has mission creep at its core. I really hope you never discover why what you said is deeply insensitive and offensive. Either that or you are being deliberately provocative.