2 child limit, why is nothing done about it? Do you agree?

[Hopeforchildren]

Hey guys, so it has been a fee years since the 2 child limit on tax credits. I know a few families with 3 children and started this thread for them. It seems quite odd that nothing has been done about it while most families have more than 2 children and are on low income. I mean not just single parents and non working parents, it’s a common struggle for all this including full time working couples or lone parents. What are your views on this subject. Shouldn’t there be a stop to it since its unfair on the child and even the previous children that has to go without? Before anyone attacking, please bear in mind that some people don’t agree with abortion or feel strongly connected with the baby to terminate the pregnancy. Looking forward to hearing your views. Please stay kind.

... just another human rights violation
No human rights are being violated.

I think the limit should be 3 children.

There are many ways to stop the environment affect rather than blaming poor children. I too agree with the climate emergency and do as much as i can to contribute but this topic has nothing to do with it. We need healthy human beings that can solve these problems in the future and raise them equally. And remember it takes a village to raise a child.

People who aren’t able to conceive aren’t getting any of the money. That’s such an odd argument.

So this is my real opinion, people who work and have kids should be entitled people who never work and pop out kids should be limited because you should have children because you love them not for benefits I've known a fair few people who have babies a few years apart once one goes to school another pops out they never have to work and the men didnt either

You do know you can have as many children as you want?

No one should have more than 2 kids anyway outrageous expecting tax payers to stump up for third children! What planet are you on?!

You can have as many children as you want. It’s a free country. Nobody is stoping you. Fill your boots.

Why, however, should I as a child free person be expected to subsidise your choices from my taxes? The taxpayer does not owe you or anyone else a living. Your children are your financial responsibility, not the government’s. The existing state subsidies for parents are more than high enough.

These children will be subsidising you in your old age or god forbid you are in need of prolonged expensive medical care
Fortunately we dont live in a quid pro quo society

Child poverty should be everyone's concern. Including the concern of those actually having the child.

@JoJoSM2 wonder why you would have those ideologies. Is it your way of saying people that can’t afford should get their kids taken off and be sterilised?

I think the number of children claimed for should be limited to the number of children in existence when the claim is first made.

For example if you go on/ claim benefits with 1 child you get support for 1 child and no further children.

If you start the claim with five children you get support for 5 buy not any subsequent children.

You should only have the children YOU can afford to keep but my idea supports those who fall on hard times.

(Have a 9 month window built in for any unborn children at the point of claiming)

No-one is "blaming poor children" - we are simply disagreeing with your idea that the government should contribute in the way that you think they should be.

This seems an odd thing to argue for. Doesn’t it equate to approximately £15 per week per child?

@MsTSwift the same planet, in fact the same country that probably paid for you and your children in the past.

We are net contributors to the tax system thanks. We stopped at 2 partly for environmental reasons. Am unpersuadable on this one.

When I first was expecting a baby and heard about child benefit payments that nearly everyone was entitled to I was amazed.

Most people don’t need it for even one or two children
If it was means tested then the people who have 2 and don’t need the money don’t get it when the people who have 1 or 3 or 4 children who can’t afford it can get it

On the other hand I think environmentally it hopefully makes people who can’t afford their children question before increasing the number of their offspring

I am one of 5 children.
It’s obscene in my opinion.

@Hopeforchildren

Just giving you an example of what a human rights violations would involve. Hopefully, you can see the difference between those and not having endlessly increasing benefits.

I think we are lucky to have money for having children at all.
If you wish to have a large family that's absolutely fine but only do so if you can afford it. I understand that some will be conceived by mistake but surly that's not many as contraception is so good now.
We are living in austerity. I'd rather that money be ploughed into schools or NHS than feeding someone's desire. It would be a different matter if there was a two child limit.

My argument for a 3 child limit is that having twins is actually not that uncommon. A woman who already has one child could quite easily have twins with her 2nd pregnancy.

There are many ways to stop the environment affect rather than blaming poor children. I too agree with the climate emergency and do as much as i can to contribute but this topic has nothing to do with it. We need healthy human beings that can solve these problems in the future and raise them equally. And remember it takes a village to raise a child.

No one is blaming the children. It's the people who are thoughtlessly adding to their number who are to blame. And it's nonsense to say that population levels have nothing to do with climate change or that the answer to it is to create more humans. If all humans were wiped out overnight, the planet would recover much more quickly without them.

OP, seems as if you’re just looking for an argument and a disagreement.

Oh I didn’t realise this was also a universal credit thing. That’s a bit more complicated then.

My argument for a 3 child limit is that having twins is actually not that uncommon. A woman who already has one child could quite easily have twins with her 2nd pregnancy.

Twins in a second pregnancy are exempt.

Well fair enough.

I do agree that you shouldn't have children that you can't afford to raise without them being in poverty, but I don't agree with this policy.
There's far more NRPs paying diddly squat than women who 'get themselves' pregnant for the income and whose children then go without because of the cap.
Maintenance should be taken from source, like tax, right from the start with no exceptions for each child from the NRP, none of this writing off old debts bollocks - does the council do that with council tax? Does inland revenue do it? Do companies do it? No, they don't but men who piss off shrugging and saying that the woman they had a child/ren with will just get "all that money from the government" need to be sorted out first. My feeling is that it would save the state more money in the long run because maybe men would start thinking about the concequences of their actions too because there'd actually be some. Now not only do they get to bugger off and nothing is done, they're not held to account by the government or society and can go and do it again, and the icing on the cake is that the women left holding the baby are the ones hated by society for being scroungers.
If my ex had paid up then I'd have had no need of tax credits - my income covers my outgoings and in reality about 75% of Dds, the other 25% should be coming from her father, and him forced to do so if necessary. Once that's in place and working then we start looking at other things.