Page 19 | Both work and we claim UC but still can't afford to live.

Mocha1 · 2025-09-26T21:48:11+00:00

We have 3 kids, 2 who aren't at school yet, my husband and I both work 30 hours a week for charities so not highly paid. We also have childcare for part of the week and then juggle the kids between us the rest of the time (We don't want to work more as we dont want the kids in fulltime childcare). We rent and down't own. We claim UC but we are still really struggling to make ends meet. We really try to live to a tight budget but I have no idea how to lower our expenses any more. Am I missing something? Is this normal? does anyone have any tips for saving money/ making more income somehow? I feel a bit at a loss as we keep dipping into our savings for just day to day expenses and we're nearly at the end of those. Our income at the moment (I'm on MAT leave) - £3980 Outgoings- £4250 Do these outgoings seem like a lot for a family of 5 living in the south west? I've been going over our budget and I have no idea how to save any more unless we literally never bought another birthday present or went to a soft play ever again.

ParmaVioletTea · 27/09/2025 10:56

Mocha1 · 26/09/2025 23:59

Wow, this got quite unpleasant quite quick. Thank you to those of you who have been genuinely supportive. I was going to post more of a breakdown of our outgoings but now I feel very vulnerable after some of the comments.

From the research we’ve done, we’ve come to believe that it’s not beneficial to their development or long term wellbeing to be in full time childcare at a young age. I understand not everyone would agree with that. And I have honestly never heard of a third child being called a luxury.

If you’re on maternity leave, why isn’t your husband working full time?

Soft play is not an essential. Why are you paying for that when you’re at home full-time.

And children don’t need expensive birthday presents when they’re very young. A toddler in my family received many many expensive shiny toys - she prefers the saucepan and wooden spoon (oh the noise!) and a set of wooden blocks her father made her from some wood off cuts. Total cost maybe £2

It’s all very well being so conscientious. But you are expecting other people to subsidise your beliefs. Universal credit is for those with no other options - they or their DC are disabled, widowed, deserted by the father. - in dire need. And for them, it’s not enough.

But you are not in dire circumstances. Your DH and you are presumably healthy and educated. You’re able to work, and both of you could work full time. You choose not to. That is your choice, but you then have to understand the consequences.

CAMHShelp · 27/09/2025 10:58

LadyoftheMercians · 26/09/2025 23:48

(We don't want to work more as we dont want the kids in fulltime childcare)

This

InformationEnthusiast · 27/09/2025 10:58

Digdongdoo · 27/09/2025 07:32

Schools are not full in the earlier years. Closures are coming in lots of areas.

Show quote history

That doesn't mean we need more children. It means the kids we have will actually get the correct amount of focus and attention, like they used to years ago, when classes were much smaller.

Cherryicecreamx · 27/09/2025 10:59

DurinsBane · 26/09/2025 23:44

Thor joint take home pay, if one person would mean a wage of 70ish k a year. That isn’t low (though it is in MN world!), I’m surprised you are entitled to UC

Yeah I'm really surprised how you get UC too. I know they can "top up" your wages but it sounds like you're taking home over the threshold.
I was on much less than you and my UC dropped to peanuts.
I also live in the South West. Prices do seem expensive but I do think your pay is average.

BabyToothbrush · 27/09/2025 11:00

MyJKwasasaint · 27/09/2025 10:51

I think most people would struggle with 3 children these days. I know several people who stopped at 1 because they couldn’t afford more. Especially if you’re not both working full time.

I think it’s quite unusual for both partners to be working part time.

The cost of living in this country has changed so much that people on low-medium salaries would struggle with 3 children when not bringing in 2 full time wages.

We both work PT and have 3 kids, because we wouldn't financially be better off working more due to the cost of our overall take home vs cost of two in childcare. But we aren't entitled to UC anyway. Other option would be the higher overall earner full time and the lower earner SAH as is more common, but we don't want to do that for many reasons.

CAMHShelp · 27/09/2025 11:01

Mocha1 · 26/09/2025 23:59

Wow, this got quite unpleasant quite quick. Thank you to those of you who have been genuinely supportive. I was going to post more of a breakdown of our outgoings but now I feel very vulnerable after some of the comments.

From the research we’ve done, we’ve come to believe that it’s not beneficial to their development or long term wellbeing to be in full time childcare at a young age. I understand not everyone would agree with that. And I have honestly never heard of a third child being called a luxury.

I’ve not read the entire thread so unsure about the unpleasantness but a lot of people would love a second or third child but simply cannot afford one.
I doubt you’ll get much sympathy on here when neither of you want to work fulltime and there’s people working 70+ hours struggling to make ends meet and you are only working 60 between you.

User5306921 · 27/09/2025 11:01

OP I understand not wanting to put your kids into wraparound care. It is not something I have done or would do.
I have two kids and really thought hard about whether to continue with the pregnancy of my second child due to finances.
For a while, we both worked (one a five day week and one a four day week) and we barely saw the children. I knew something had to change when my then 1.5 year old cried when leaving the childminder.
DH works full time and I now work part-time.
We have 7K a month combined monthly income and we manage but have no savings at all. We have a couple of hundred in the bank account halfway through the month.

I think one of you will have to work fulltime.

Digdongdoo · 27/09/2025 11:02

InformationEnthusiast · 27/09/2025 10:58

That doesn't mean we need more children. It means the kids we have will actually get the correct amount of focus and attention, like they used to years ago, when classes were much smaller.

Show quote history

Oh I agree. State education is a mess. But rolls are falling. It isn't true that schools are "overfull" anymore. (I'm also not suggesting that it is a reason for people to have loads of kids)

TotallyUnapologeticOmnivore · 27/09/2025 11:02

Mocha1 · 26/09/2025 23:59

Wow, this got quite unpleasant quite quick. Thank you to those of you who have been genuinely supportive. I was going to post more of a breakdown of our outgoings but now I feel very vulnerable after some of the comments.

From the research we’ve done, we’ve come to believe that it’s not beneficial to their development or long term wellbeing to be in full time childcare at a young age. I understand not everyone would agree with that. And I have honestly never heard of a third child being called a luxury.

A luxury is anything you don't actually need. There's nothing wrong with having luxuries, but they need to be paid for and for most of us, that means working full time.

Perpetualscroller · 27/09/2025 11:03

To those of you still replying to OP, there’s no way she’s coming back here! 😂

Anon501178 · 27/09/2025 11:03

Bobiverse · 27/09/2025 00:34

I would love a third child. I can’t afford it, not with the lifestyle I want to give my kids. I could do it, but our lifestyle would have to change and it wouldn’t benefit the children I have. That’s a choice I’ve made because I’ve decided that it’s what’s best for my family.

You had the exact same situation; you had two kids and the lifestyle and work life balance which you want, and you could rise them according to your parenting ethos. But it doesn’t seem like you can keep that going with a third child. There have to be sacrifices.

It isn’t wrong to have the third child. You just made a different choice from me. Not a wrong choice. I have to accept that I’ll always feel a little sad about the child I didn’t have, and maybe it will be a huge regret later. You won’t have that. But, for the time being, you have to deal with more difficult financial situations that I don’t. That’s life; we make different choices and face different challenges.

Luckily, you actually do have the ability to fix this. You’re both part time so one of you has to go full time. But you’ll need to look at your UC as you need to find the balance of what you gain from more hours and what you lose in UC from increased earrings.

This is a very balanced and sensible answer!

NotEnoughKnittingTime · 27/09/2025 11:04

Lovingbooks · 27/09/2025 09:48

Unless you have been through the whole UC and Working part time on UC it is not as easy as you are suggesting, the rules keep changing with people expected to work more hours with young children, also basic income expected before you are taken out of the group to look for more hours better paid work. Employers have been using this in order to keep pay low.

Show quote history

Plus many working parents on UC aren't entitled to all these freebies even when our wages our stupidly low.

Zippidydoodah · 27/09/2025 11:07

LadyoftheMercians · 26/09/2025 23:48

(We don't want to work more as we dont want the kids in fulltime childcare)

Right. 🤔

RoyalBumWiper · 27/09/2025 11:08

Anon501178 · 27/09/2025 10:47

How strange to call having children a 'luxury'.....3 children (which really isnt that many!) was the norm across many varied income households several decades ago, people just didn't get criticised and judged for it.

Show quote history

So what? If you can't afford them, you can't afford them.
OP is being subsidised by tax-payers who've sensibly had the number of children they can afford, likely with two full time working parents and zero UC.
Plus those who've decided not to have kids, of course.
Substitute the word luxury for "reckless" or "entitled" if you like- it's all one.

Differentforgirls · 27/09/2025 11:09

CAMHShelp · 27/09/2025 11:01

I’ve not read the entire thread so unsure about the unpleasantness but a lot of people would love a second or third child but simply cannot afford one.
I doubt you’ll get much sympathy on here when neither of you want to work fulltime and there’s people working 70+ hours struggling to make ends meet and you are only working 60 between you.

Show quote history

People have been so nasty she hasn't returned. I don't blame her.

GeorgeMichaelsCat · 27/09/2025 11:11

Perpetualscroller · 27/09/2025 11:03

To those of you still replying to OP, there’s no way she’s coming back here! 😂

Totally!

Anon501178 · 27/09/2025 11:12

Just to add as others have mentioned you both working part time....I'm not sure OP if you mean you and your husband work 30 hours each or 30hrs between you?
If between you (guessing 15 hours each) then agree with PP i don't understand why he isn't working a full time job, you part time, then children in childcare for some of the week? Eg; I work 18 hrs, husband 40hrs.

I don't think having a 3rd child is a 'luxury' but I would say that for two parents to be able to work part time is a luxury.And you would need a good income each P/T for a family of 5.

charliehungerford · 27/09/2025 11:14

If one of you worked an extra ten hours a week you’d have an additional £400 per month, that’s based on minimum wage and standard tax/NI. That would make up your current deficit.

OhDear111 · 27/09/2025 11:14

@Anon501178 No it wasn’t the norm. In the 70s it was 2.4 children! So less than 3! People who are sensible have dc they can afford. Back in the 70s there wasn’t UC.

Steph888 · 27/09/2025 11:17

Differentforgirls · 27/09/2025 11:09

People have been so nasty she hasn't returned. I don't blame her.

Show quote history

She is moaning that other people aren’t working enough for no pay and handing that money over to her and her DH so that they don’t have to work more. That’s an enormously selfish attitude to have. She deserves to get flamed on here.

Anon501178 · 27/09/2025 11:17

RoyalBumWiper · 27/09/2025 11:08

So what? If you can't afford them, you can't afford them.
OP is being subsidised by tax-payers who've sensibly had the number of children they can afford, likely with two full time working parents and zero UC.
Plus those who've decided not to have kids, of course.
Substitute the word luxury for "reckless" or "entitled" if you like- it's all one.

Edited

Show quote history

I'm sure by today's perfectionistic standards many people in the 80s or 90s 'couldn't afford' three kids.But many turned out fine.
But it wasn't seen as a sin for them not to do 10 extracurricular clubs a week, share bedrooms and not have £££££ of savings behind them when they reached adulthood.

Mildmanneredmum · 27/09/2025 11:18

Similar to several PPs, we had 2 children and would have loved more but couldn't afford it. Then redundancy for both of us happened and we both took FT jobs and DH another PT job on top to make the finances work. We both had the view that we had the responsibility for our family and, in particular, that money has to be earned and food doesn't miraculously appear through the door. The children were both in FT childcare - no option, or we would have lost the house - but I used to take them supermarket food shopping on a Friday night. Makes us sound very priggy but it meant we were both able to get careers, the kids had a great life in the local community and have progressed in theirs, as well as both having disabilities. AMA btw

Keepitrealnomists · 27/09/2025 11:18

I think the issue is you don't earn enough for the size if your family alongside the increase in COL.
A family member worked 3 days a week in a term time professional role for 10 years, never used paid childcare, had 3 DC, my sibling on a low income, the results, tons of debt, fallen behind in career, DC not at same level or had the same opportunity's as peers.

Lara1978o · 27/09/2025 11:19

Anon501178 · 27/09/2025 10:47

How strange to call having children a 'luxury'.....3 children (which really isnt that many!) was the norm across many varied income households several decades ago, people just didn't get criticised and judged for it.

Show quote history

I mean there were plenty of things that were the norm several decades ago you would absolutely get more than criticised for now 🤷🏼‍♀️ Times change.

3 children when working part time and having to claim government top ups is obviously a luxury. OP must have known this and made this decision when she decided to have her third child.

I would love more children but we can’t afford it and I wouldn’t want to impact the quality of life and experiences I can give my current child.

GAJLY · 27/09/2025 11:19

Your rent is quite high. What are your outgoings? We stopped at 2 children because we couldn't afford another. For me it wasn't worth going into debt for. Is it worth one of you giving up your job to look after the children until they start school? That's what we did, and UC will increase. If you have 2 cars, can you reduce to one?