To think you and your partner ar unemployed you shouldnt really be trying for another child...

[Nointhemood]

probably be flamed for this. But I know a couple who have two small young children under 3 and are trying for another even though neither have managed to find employment in the last few years. I would love to have another child but even with a dh in a job we couldnt afford it just doesnt seem fair.Im not saying that people on benefits shouldnt have children as each cicircumstance is different etc.But surely with a couple who can both work and aren't exactly childless there should be mor responsible. I feel really angry tbh that we can'y afford to have a child and wouldn't dream of it in their situation

Actually I don't think that having children is a basic human right.

the problem with that narky is that you're punishing innocent children for having irresponsible parents. children with parents who have them whether they can support them or not prob need more help not less.

Rockbird - "Having children is more than a right, it's what we're bloody well here for. It's the very basis of our existence. So stop bleating on about it not being a right, because it absolutely is."

No, it's not.

Procreation at other people's expense is not what we have been put on this planet to do.

Writing literature, cooking food, building houses, designing clothing, curing diseases, performing music, entertaining people, educating children, employing people, supporting the needy etc etc - these are all things that people do that, along with self-financed procreation, also contribute to the wealth of human existence.

Children aren't the be-all and end-all of everything.

RobynLou, the problem though is the irresponsible parents don't spend the extra benefits on the children but on themselves - smoking, drinking and primark fashion for example round here.

Children have always been punished for their parents mistakes, do we say people cannot get divorced because it's punishing the children ? Or they must breast feed if able because to give formula is punishing the child ?
People make choices, sorry if your parents make bad ones but that should spur you on to do better when you have your own family.

goodness me, this is where it starts then you get that lady who wants to go Haiti and Africa and pay poor people to be sterilised!

dont go there OP, just dont go there........

This old chestnut.

I agree and disagree at the same time really.

I'm 38, have ben working for 20 years and only now feel I can 'afford' to have a child. But for many people, lack of money is no object to having as many kids as they like - or don't appear to actually like but that's another issue.

I'm not jealous of those people as I personally would not like to live on benefits. Anybody that would like to live on benefits and have loads of kids could presumably follow the OPs friends lead and do it.

But yes, people having lots of kids when they can't afford them is a genuine problem. And yes, it also affects starving people in the third world etc.

It's my belief that at some point we will have to evolve as a society and have grown up discussions about issues such as legalising drugs, allowing people to choose to die etc, and another thorny nettle we will one day have to grasp is that of world overpopulation.

mamatomany my parents made great choices, never claimed benefits apart from CB and worked really hard, and we try hard to make the right ones for our family too, we get tax credits anf CB, and have been lucky enough to never claim jobseekers etc.
fransandisco I know what you mean about the parents spending it unwisely, it's very hard, but I try and keep believing that most people do their best for their kids, even if they have more than they could support alone. I don't think cutting benefits past 2 children is the answer.

I know RobynLou, but I think you have to draw a line somewhere and I do think that it would crush the Daily Mail stories of 'scrounging' benefit families and decrease the legitimate resentment people have about this minority that tends to result in all claimants being tarred with the same brush.

The welfare state was intended to help and support those temporarily in need back into a stable position, and I honestly think that the biggest danger it faces is being slashed by those who don't believe in it on principal (Tories) and piggyback on the resentment of those who struggle just above the help threshold and see people abusing the system.

The direction of the latest budget really disturbs me, as does the return of foodbox vouchers at government sites- someone else did a thread on this recently.

The combination of the Tory 'big society'- passing on the responsibility of caring for the needy to charities instead of the state- and the Lib Dems clipping tax credits etc from national average earners seems to me that they're gearing up for a big idealogical shift away from the system we've had for over 50 years. All the tory 'initiatives' seem to be imported Republican policies. Welfare to Work will be the next one.

Next one to go that is.

what morris said - agree and disagree really.

people should be able to have children if they want regardless of circumstance - er the government starts saying well you can only have one or we will just pay for one ... hmm didn't they do that in china to limit population?? human rights. anybody?

II'm not jealous of folks that live on benefits. I don't want that lifestyle. I'm still trying to get my head round the fact the goverment gives me £80 a month CB. Its "free" money I didn't earn it. Don't get me wrong I 'll use it and invest it in my child but it doesn't quite compute with me in the sense I got it for doing nothing iyswim.

I live in a town that has employment opportunities but the sight of young able bodied fit young men and women and more often than not young men with prams , dogs, uncle tom cobley an' all congregating outside the local supermarket is not uncommon. In the childrens centre during the day too you see young dads. (That's great btw) ! However I do wonder why are you at not at WORK.

Go to any city centre on a week day and there are clearly young couples there who are not in work but clearly not well off either.
That didn't happen 30 odd years ago but it is more common in times of recession. And if I'm honest it does get on my nerves a little because SOME people out there are LAZY!!! < looks around nervously for the plain speaking police> and don't WANT to work. They don't see being a parent as a job either. Or they do but little realise the huge responsibilty it entails.

A huge amount of money has been pumped ( millions)into the schools I worked in the last 10 years to raise aspirations of some of the kids I've worked with has not changed the mindset of some of them in the slightest leading to some sad horrific stories. I also know someone who wanted her dh at home whilst she was struggling with pnd yet they opted to have another baby and maintained they would get by. Getting by means help from the state. Do I begrudge them that- no its' their business. Good luck to them I couldn't live under that pressure. That niavety of "we will get by" when it is planned can lead to a very miserable existence. The road to hell is paved with good intentions you know.

YANBU. Benefits should not increase for any child conceived whilst on benefits. I didnt get an automatic pay rise when I had my dc's.

isolde, there is a world of difference between a govt saying you can only have one (human rights), to saying it will only pay for one.

There are no human rights issues in the latter. As there is no inalienable right for people to expect the state to foot the bill for their offspring, however many they plan to sprog.

"the government starts saying well you can only have one or we will just pay for one ... hmm didn't they do that in china to limit population?? human rights. anybody?"

Capping state benefits to one child only has absolutely nothing to do with human rights. It simply sends out the message that those wanting more than one child will have to ensure they financially support them.

Personally i'd love to see all child related benefits scrapped inc tax credits and instead have higher personal tax threasholds and free childcare facilities for those who work. That way everybody would be on an equal footing and can make their choices accordingly.

oh yeh I know blueshoes but it's a rocky road. I remember when I just had ds 1 - the hospital giving me and dh( right pair of old crocs) the contraceptive chat before they let us leave.

Many younger teen mums are susceptible to conceiving quickly again in the "babymoon" period. Finances are rarely at the forefont of their minds at this point. Imagine having to half the finances . Well I suppose people do in the sense CB is already reduced for subsequent children. What you do in this case ? Will the state coming down harder and refusing to foot the bill for second children mean that some will think twice? Or would the abortion / adoption rate suddenly rise? What if the first baby was the "wrong" gender?

I'm not sure as I don't know the answer.

Some folks do start talking about sterilising the poor as was my point as an earlier poster pointed out. It's a bit of a rocky road which thows up all some of these other scenarios iyswim.

YADNBU - I know a family (through a friend of mine) that has NINE children and both parents have never worked in their lives. They feel they are entitled to have this amount of children (and cannot be arsed using contraception either) and each child has dropped out of school early, no aspirations etc.

So OP has a point - if you cannot afford it, don't bother having any(more).

YANBU.

I don't think you should cut off benefits to discourage people to have kids when they can't afford it, because then the children suffer.

But I do think people who make the choice to have 3+ kids when they can't afford them (and please note this couple have been unemployed for years, not months) are irresponsible and take the piss out of the benefits system.

One is fair enough; two, OK, because you might feel it is sad to be an only child; but more than two is a luxury, and you should only treat yourself to luxuries if you can afford them.

I know that you can't control this unless you cut off benefits - all you can do is feel disapproving and cross.

HappyMummyofOne: "Personally i'd love to see all child related benefits scrapped inc tax credits and instead have higher personal tax threasholds and free childcare facilities for those who work. That way everybody would be on an equal footing and can make their choices accordingly."

I totally agree.

YANBU

spongers

my concern is that anything that cuts benefits for people with kids, means that mainly the kids suffer (ie the govt 1-only rule)

I do see where OP comes from, I see masses of people who I KNOW are on benefits with three kid buggies, the "stop fucking breeding" thought has been known to cross my mind

However they probably have 4 kids in a room, for most of us on here I suspect we;d rather not have that occur

fuck knows, I am confused and torn!!!!

Then they should learn to live within their bloody means. If they live in one room why have they got 4 kids?
God these people make me

Since we do have a tax credit system in place, I would much rather pay tax knowing it is keeping another family supported in work, as opposed to the vast sums needed to work with the scum of the country who drain our public resources in terms of no job/endless kids/social workers/youth offending/police/probation/etc

I am not saying all unemployed people are scum, not at all, far from it. But we all know who I mean.

For decent families the kids wouldn't suffer though, if we lost everything tomorrow my children wouldn't suffer. DH and I might be on cornflakes for breakfast, dinner and tea but the children wouldn't go without.

YANBU.

I agree with Rockbird but most seemed to have missed her point.

To hold a belief that another woman should not procreate (whatever the circumstances may be) is inherently misogynistic.