Benefit rant- seems really unfair?

[Tralalalalaa24]

I know I will probably get a bashing for what I’m about to say. But for the record I’ve always worked full time until I had my children and then financially it made no sense to work full time and pay nursery fees to not see my child much so I dropped to part time hours and have remained part time as I’ve gone on to have 3 more children. I then became a single mum to those children and have no financial help whatsoever from the dad but have managed ok on my wages and UC top up. I’m now in the position of wanting to live with my partner but it means I will lose all my benefits due to his wages. He’s not a massive earner (around 40k) I get that’s what the system is but it seems really unfair that he will be held financially responsible for my children. He has two children of his own who he has 50% of the time and still pays child maintenance for. So ultimately it means we can’t afford to live together without it being a struggle which I don’t want for my kids, or for his. Not really sure what I’m after as there is no solution, we just won’t live together until I’m in a position where I go full time when my kids are a bit older. Just wondered if this is a common issue people have

Don't engage with this one, we all know why they're here.

Many people decide not to have a second or third child because they know they will be unable to support them.

You have decided to have additional children and to stay at home while the state (taxpayers) supports you and them.

You now expect to be able to move your partner in and enjoy all the benefits of a two adult household while expecting the taxpayer to continue to support you.

No wonder that the benefits bill is unsustainable.

I totally get it — it does seem unjust. Universal Credit and a lot of benefits are based on household income, so your partner's wages will have an impact on what you receive for benefits, regardless of how many children he already has or how many maintenance payments he has made for other children. This can be quite common for parents who have taken a reduction in hours to provide childcare. Many people eventually find themselves to live separately for a period of time or wait until their children are older to work full time. It can be beneficial to manage your budget accordingly, or it may be worth checking to see if it is financially viable to pay for childcare, however it is unfortunate that the system does not consider these matters. You are not alone; this is a dilemma faced by numerous families. For your clarity, the gov.uk Universal Credit page outlines how household income may affect payment amounts.

If you get a job and support yourself free of UC you can then live entirely as you wish. That’s what the rest of us do. If you take their money you have to abide by their rules. Thems the breaks.

Its like the driver who owns the car and drives gets to decide about the journey - the person accepting the lift has to fit in with them.

You know that thousands of people 'on benefits' work? Including full time in jobs that need doing?

Really, don't bother. You're wasting your time. They don't want a factual discussion on this.

This 100%.
I think you should be ashamed of yourself OP to be honest. Why don’t you focus on improving your financial position and reliance on the state rather than shacking up with some man?

Unfortunately in the UK it’s impossible to make absent parents pay. This needs urgent reform.

We need to bring back the concept of shame. It should shame a man that the tax payer has to support his offspring. It’s outrageous when you think about it for more than 30 seconds.

But that’s a huge part of the problem — we live in such a disenfranchised society now that’s lacking shame as a social consequence- it is every man for themselves and this will fuel selfish behaviour further as there’s a complete lack of consideration or care for others.

I would feel a sense of shame that I’m claiming benefits to raise my multiple children because I haven’t considered an alternative if my partner were to leave, be unable to work or die. And that’s been factored into my decision making to prioritise my career and not have multiple children. It’s easy to blame the man, but some accountability needs to be taken by the mother as well in my opinion. Welfare should be limited to those in absolute dire need, not those who are choosing to rely on it for their lifestyles or poor decision making. I appreciate I’ll get flack for this, but I don’t care. Merging such a big family together when one parent is on benefits and the other is on an average income is a really poor decision, and rather than take any responsibility- no it’s the state’s fault for not continuing to fund my lifestyle

But you’re ignoring the fact that luck plays a part in getting a well paid job. Many people work extremely hard, rack up thousands in uni debt and still don’t ‘make it’. You could have made good choices and still not be where you thought you would be.
The issue is threefold, an ‘average’ job, is no longer enough to support a family without help. My parents bought a house on an average wage, with no benefits. Today they would not be able to put food on the table without extra support.
The men are able to financially abuse women and walk away, and the government does not enforce child maintenance enough.
By only merging families with a ‘wealthy’ partner you’re leaving yourself open to financial abuse.

OP I'm in a similar situation. I have a chronic pain illness which leaves me unable to work. DP is on minimum wage. If we moved in together I'd lose all my benefits and he'd be expected to support me. We have to live separately to afford to live. Due to his age he can't find a better paid job.

No, I do agree with you. I am part of the demographic you’ve described. I didn’t suggest that you only find a wealthy partner - that’s silly, not to mention unrealistic. But I do think many rush into having kids with the wrong person and haven’t thought about a plan B.

My advice remains the same. Focus on improving your financial situation and focus on raising your own children. Unless you get married to that chap, then I guess you have a bit of a safety net and you can be more of a joint household. Merging families under the current circumstances doesn’t seem wise or stable emotionally, practically or financially

But if you don’t “make it” surely you don’t then opt to have numerous children you can’t afford? We are in a decently paid middle class set I guess - most of us have 2 children a few 3 no one has more than that because we have to support them ourselves and our children and want to do so properly.

Most of the younger families like us I observe seem to have stopped at one.

@TheaBrandt1 I agree that parents should absolutely support their offsrpring. But why is it only men you refer to?

@PeonyPatch Brilliantly said 👏
When I divorced and started dating again I knew I was only looking for men with no children because I had two of my own already. I simply couldn't afford to house any additional children and didn't want to put my sons in a position where they would have to room share etc.

Wish more people thought like you!

Trying to support six children on a low income and expecting state benefit is madness…..out of choice… appreciate some people find themselves in unfortunate situations…

But surely you’d still be entitled to some benefits if you cannot work due to disability and he’s on minimum wage… that’s what it’s there for.

The men should be held to account and money should be taken from their wage before it enters their account. The mother shouldn’t have to fight for this to happen. It should be a law unless they have them equal amounts. If they don’t work and relay on benefits they should get maintenance deducted from their benefits too.

Appreciate circumstances can change ,and very few people can say they would 100%
always be able to support themselves
But the OP is choosing to have another child in her current circumstances 🤷‍♀️

Well I refer to men because it largely men that abandon their families for the state to support 🙄. Yes there are exceptions that prove the rule but come on

Have you tried putting the numbers into entitled to? To see if you would actually lose everything

You're a benefits specialist and you really find it that surprising or confusing?

A combined salary of 70k is going to come in at around £4800 monthly take home give or take what the actual split is and deductions for pension etc.

Depending on whether they rent or not, their work allowance will be either £411 or £684 so either £4389 or £4116 after that then multiplied by 0.55 is £2413 or £2263 for the wage deduction

It wouldn't be at all unusual for a total UC award to be more than £2413 or £2263 if it included housing or maximum childcare costs or disability elements etc. This would leave whatever is left over after the wage deduction.

No we've checked and we wouldn't be entitled to any. He earns 10p over minimum wage per hour.

🤨