Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Single parenet benefits proposed to end when youngest child is 11 rahter than 16

725 replies

uwila · 30/01/2007 09:56

Oh this will be popular round here.

here

OP posts:
charliecat · 30/01/2007 10:03

PMSL, It just means some of my mates will have MORE children. To keep the youngest one a few years away from 11.

expatinscotland · 30/01/2007 10:05

But you can't legally leave your child on his/her own until the age of 14, right?

So you'll have to coordinate childcare then.

If they're caring for disabled child get Carer's Allowance and tax credit instead?

Fillyjonk · 30/01/2007 10:05

pmsl

have put popcorn on

expatinscotland · 30/01/2007 10:06

Again, they're talking targets.

Bloody Labour.

Bozza · 30/01/2007 10:06

I don't understand the disabled children issue. I may be wrong here but shouldn't parents of disabled children be receiving carer's allowance rather than income support? Or do they get both?

Bozza · 30/01/2007 10:09

Also I didn't think there was a legal age limit on leaving children. Suspect a lot are left at younger than 14.

Saggarmakersbottomknocker · 30/01/2007 10:09

You only get carers if you earn less than £80 ish pounds a week and I think it's deducted from your income support although not sure about that.

And getting Disability Living Allowance is just soooooo easy. Not!

Original poster
uwila · 30/01/2007 10:10

"So you'll have to coordinate childcare then."

Yep, just like the people who have been going to work and paying taxes so you can stay home for the first 11 years.

OP posts:
Fillyjonk · 30/01/2007 10:10

you get, in effect, both, bozza

its more complex thsn that but...

oh and carers allowance isnt that much iirc

Original poster
uwila · 30/01/2007 10:11

Oh, but if you do leave them alone, I bet SS could come get them and have them adopted and then meet those targets.

OP posts:
Fillyjonk · 30/01/2007 10:12

i never worked so anyone else could stay at home

i worked cos i enjoyed it and wanted better standard of living than i'd get on the dole

giraffeski · 30/01/2007 10:12

Message withdrawn

Tortington · 30/01/2007 10:12

whats incapacity benefit?

giraffeski · 30/01/2007 10:12

Message withdrawn

Bozza · 30/01/2007 10:13

DLA is for the disabled person though isn't it? rather than the carer? I know, in effect, in most families it probably all goes in one pot.

But I do think that single parents who are carers for their children (and that must be really hard work in many cases) are in a different position to single parents with NT children.

Saggarmakersbottomknocker · 30/01/2007 10:13

Carers is £46.95.

Original poster
uwila · 30/01/2007 10:13

BTW, my comments don't apply to parents of disabled children. Totally differnt situation there.

OP posts:
Saggarmakersbottomknocker · 30/01/2007 10:14

Sorry that's a week.

Original poster
uwila · 30/01/2007 10:16

How much benefit do single parents get? Do they get more for more children?

This article isn't about parents/children with special needs.

OP posts:
itsmeNDP · 30/01/2007 10:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Fillyjonk · 30/01/2007 10:18

yes but it affects them

the fact that the effect on parents of sn kids has, yet again, not been considered is an issue in and of itself

and theres no easy test of sn. Some kids get DLA. but you can have SN and not get it, IMO, becuase of the way the test for DLA is structured

Tortington · 30/01/2007 10:20

ok. my guess is that incapacity benefit is the "i've got a bad back" long term, after kids have left home.

in that case incapacity benefit needs revamping not single parent benefits.

education and opportunity are the key you see. the only reason i have my distinctly mediocre existence is becuase i had a childcare opportunity at a local college when my twins were babies.

sadly it was a one off - i was just lucky.

BrummieOnTheRun · 30/01/2007 10:20

Based on my encounters with benefits dept, you're entitled to help with EVERYTHING...as long as NOBODY in your household works. At all.

If the govt doesn't think this affects the number of single parents who are non-working they are bloody idiots.

expatinscotland · 30/01/2007 10:21

i think the big problem is that places like Sweden and Denmark offer quality low-cost childcare and you don't lose all your benefits if you go out to work.

Here, there's no such wraparound care.

And if you're single, earning say, £14K-£16K, how are you supposed to manage?

Oh, tax credits, yes, but they don't pay the full cost of the childcare.

And you literally cannot afford to pay even 30% of it on that sort of wage, which believe you me is VERY common for even semi-skilled and skilled professions.

The other issue is the enormous cost of housing/council tax and the fact that a person who earns so little still has be pay tax and NI.

The tax threshold is WAY too low.

tinkerbellie · 30/01/2007 10:22

i think thet should stop messing with things the wftc was fine then they changed it and now i have had to stop working as we can't aford the child care as they reckon we owe them £1000 (because my hubbie is self employed and he earned £1000 more one year than he did the year before) i think it is all stupid and i would never get a job again where i have to rely on childcare as you can't rely on wftc to be reliable

i hate them!!!

oooh and this was three years ago and they have cut our payments down to a third for a year and have been taking at least half of it for two years and we still owe them almost as much as we did when it started