To think my SIL is the most selfish mother ever

[suziequeue1]

SIL is pregnant with her fourth child. She lives in a two bedroom council flat and is on Universal Credit. From what we can tell, she’s only having a fourth because her youngest is turning three soon and UC will start pressuring her to go back to work.
I’m really confused about how she’s going to manage four kids in that tiny flat. Right now, the youngest sleeps in the same room as her and her husband, and the other two boys share a bunk bed in the second bedroom.
The thing is, and I would never say this lightly, she’s not a good mum. She spends most of her time on her phone while the kids run amok until she throws iPads at the,, and they’re really badly behaved- they can’t go out in public without causing a scene. Sometimes she even neglects them. Her oldest is six and honestly the most disrespectful kid I’ve ever met.
On top of that, she and her husband constantly ask my husband for money because they can barely afford the three kids they already have.
Her husband is a deliveroo driver and she doesn't work.
AIBU for thinking it’s selfish to be having a fourth when she clearly can’t handle the kids she already has and keeps relying on my husband for help?

There’s not really anything you can do about it. People are selfish and shit parents all over the place. There’s no law against it.

Yep . That’s mumsnet .

And even if she doesn’t want to work and gets UC it’s not exactly an enviable life is it. 4 young children, 2 bedroom flat living in penury.

sounds like hell to me. Her shit life is more than enough punishment.

DH has a family member like this. 5 kids now and never ever worked. Lazy cow.

Yes they can.

The council will tell them to turn the living area into a bed room and get a bunk bed.

She won’t see it as a bonus soon enough living in abject poverty and she won’t get a bloody bigger house either they’ll be stuck in that 2 bed flat or house for a long while yet.

Plus if he’s working he’s paying taxes as well most likely.

I’m finding this story unbelievable to be honest and it’s all the SIL fault not both

It’s absolutely on them both!

Most likely BIL isn’t supposed to be living there either. So they get separate UC claims - therefor more money. This happens a lot!

There absolutely should be though!

If there is neglect here like you say, then you must report to social care or NSPCC who will put supports in place for the family. You can do this anonymously.

How on earth would that be policed and enforced?

If you give your daughter an iPad all the time then she won’t be interested in toys, iPads are addictive and too much screen time is harmful for young children.

It might be “what she likes to do” but I’m sure she’d like to eat sweets all day, never brush her teeth, have no bedtime and no rules, children should be guided into doing what is best for them and not just to be allowed to do as they like.

Excessive screen time can increase attention deficits, obesity, anxiety, and disrupt sleep cycles so it might be a good idea to take the toys out of the boxes.

I'm not sure, but I agree that it's unfortunate that the only times child neglect is punished is usually when it's too late.

If you think their is neglect then it’s your duty to report it, or you are allowing children to live in danger.

It can’t. In an ideal world perhaps. So we just have to put up with it.

By ex-felon I meant ex-criminal, recently released from prison. I just don't know the term.

He is not my brother. Read the thread. She is my husband's sister.

We’re all subsidising these sorts of people through our taxes.

So the children who are neglected suddenly aren't neglected when their dad is home? Not sure how that works. If the children are neglected that is down to and the responsibility of both parents. If the OP believes a report to Social Services is required then both should be reported and investigated.

Presumably stand by their bed or wherever to ensure he's using them too.

At present people in receipt of UC only get paid for their oldest 2 children (that's until the Govt remove the Benefit Cap) so the family will be even more strapped for cash with another mouth to feed.

I was widowed whilst pg & went back to work when my DS was 4 months old. I used to joke that I went to work for a rest. At work you get coffee breaks where you actually drink a drink while it's still hot, you're allowed to go to the loo without a little person hammering on the door asking how long you're going to be, at work you're a person not someone's mum/daughter/partner and it's recognised when you do a good job or go above & beyond the call of duty.

However, on my non-working days I used to make sure that I did things with DS taking him to the park, library, swimming pool, hunting for bears in the woods, making cakes etc.

Well there you go then. If they pay tax why should they subsidise them twice?

Just because a company does checks, doesn't mean they don't hire criminals. It depends on the crime, and how it affects the job. It is completely up to the hirers discretion.