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
Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Original poster

Benefit rant- seems really unfair?

276 replies

Tralalalalaa24 · 09/10/2025 22:10

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

OP posts:
AhWeNoss · 10/10/2025 07:36

Rather than relying on the taxpayer to fund your lifestyle, you could start working full time again, as many families do not because they want to but because they need to.

AgnesX · 10/10/2025 07:43

PeonyPatch · 10/10/2025 07:19

I don’t understand why people have so many children they can’t afford to raise.

I don't imagine the OP intended on having children with an absent parent.

So, two people live together. Regardless of the relationship those people share the bills. Given this relationship the new partner should expect to pay towards the household he lives in.

The previous partner should also be contributing but realistically we know that's a foregone conclusion.

RoachFish · 10/10/2025 07:44

It can’t all be on your terms. You chose to have 4 kids that you couldn’t afford without help from the state, you then chose to start a relationship with a man who already have 2 kids and can’t afford to subsidise you and your children too. Sometimes we have to sacrifice things we want in order to support ourselves and our children.

If your children are still so young that it makes no financial sense for you to work full-time then your new relationship can’t be that old that you shouldn’t even consider blending a family of 8 yet.

NewHat · 10/10/2025 07:44

I can’t understand why you think it would be unreasonable. At least you have found a way around it. Not living together.

The person in the wrong here is the father of your four children.

I don’t think you can have everything. Not working full time so you can spend more time with your children, universal credit to facilitate that and a live in partner paying a portion of the rent, bills etc.

luckylavender · 10/10/2025 07:48

What seems unfair to me (& I’m a bleeding heart leftie) is that you have four children that the rest is us are paying for. Terrible example for them too. And you are moaning about the life you can’t have.

Motheranddaughter · 10/10/2025 07:51

High time the taxpayers were not having to support your DC
Get back to full time work

Bumblebee72 · 10/10/2025 07:54

Of course it's fair. If you choose to be dependant n the state you can't expect to have the same chooses some one who is independent. This is why the government really needs to move the minimum working time from 16 hours to at least 30.

teees · 10/10/2025 07:55

Bjorkdidit · 10/10/2025 02:28

I suppose what's really unfair is that either the taxpayer or an unrelated man has to help support your DC because their dad has walked away from his responsibilities and the system lets him get away with it.

This. The problem isn’t the benefit system, it’s the flaky fathers who just walk away.

oldclock · 10/10/2025 07:56

Blended families are usually a disaster so the tax system is doing you a favour here and giving you an excuse not to.

Bumblebee72 · 10/10/2025 07:58

May be look at it another way: why do you consider it unfair that someone you presumably love should be responsible for paying for your children, but totally fair that the government is responsible for paying for them?

socks1107 · 10/10/2025 07:58

You’d have to consider going back to work full time, which you should be doing anyway. Claiming benefits at this stage in your situation is a choice and it’s right that the tax payer should not be funding it. Many parents work full time and manage children without claiming any benefits and you’d be able to live together then

PeonyPatch · 10/10/2025 07:58

AgnesX · 10/10/2025 07:43

I don't imagine the OP intended on having children with an absent parent.

So, two people live together. Regardless of the relationship those people share the bills. Given this relationship the new partner should expect to pay towards the household he lives in.

The previous partner should also be contributing but realistically we know that's a foregone conclusion.

Show quote history

I disagree. Sounds like an absolute disaster blending such a large family when one of the parents depends on benefits. It would be totally different if they were better off financially, but it doesn’t sound like that’s the case. The new partner didn’t choose to have 4 children, so why should they have to pay towards such a large brood. Honestly, it’s just disastrous, and the children should be coming first.

ChardonnaysBeastlyCat · 10/10/2025 08:02

Absent fathers - this is an area where the welfare bill can be cut, if the state can make them pay.

I don't understand why DWP can't be bothered.

PeonyPatch · 10/10/2025 08:03

ChardonnaysBeastlyCat · 10/10/2025 08:02

Absent fathers - this is an area where the welfare bill can be cut, if the state can make them pay.

I don't understand why DWP can't be bothered.

Agreed! This is where they should be focusing!

Theroadt · 10/10/2025 08:03

bluewhitebluewhite · 10/10/2025 05:29

I’m a big supporter of our welfare system and I’m really happy to pay my taxes knowing that our most vulnerable are looked after. I would not be happy to pay for you to keep getting UC in a household with in income of more than 40K.

Totally agree. Benefits are there as a safety net for those in real need.

Gingernessy · 10/10/2025 08:04

Firstworldproblems2025 · 10/10/2025 07:14

I’ve never claimed anything in my life and I agree, that is a stupid rule. Why does the state expect some random man to take on financial responsibility for you and your dc, whilst simultaneously allowing their actual Father to make zero contribution?

OP gets the benefits she does because she's a single parent and there's only her income to pay the bills.
If she and her partner live together then there's 2 incomes to pay the bills so officially her bills have halved hence she doesn't need as much in top ups.
By the time it's getting to moving in stage I'd hope the partner isn't just some random man - if he is they shouldn't be thinking of living together anyway.

Theroadt · 10/10/2025 08:08

Motheranddaughter · 10/10/2025 07:51

High time the taxpayers were not having to support your DC
Get back to full time work

Totally agree. I work hard, not sure why my taxes are funding part time working for someone who can’t be bothered?

Terfedout · 10/10/2025 08:08

Sorry I'm sure this will offend some. But you've had a lot of children that you cannot afford, and now expect those of us who actually contribute tax to fund your life style. That's taking the piss.

CocoPlum · 10/10/2025 08:08

RoachFish · 10/10/2025 07:44

It can’t all be on your terms. You chose to have 4 kids that you couldn’t afford without help from the state, you then chose to start a relationship with a man who already have 2 kids and can’t afford to subsidise you and your children too. Sometimes we have to sacrifice things we want in order to support ourselves and our children.

If your children are still so young that it makes no financial sense for you to work full-time then your new relationship can’t be that old that you shouldn’t even consider blending a family of 8 yet.

Edited

I understand what most people are saying on here but not your comment. Presumably the OP believed she was in a lasting relationship and could afford 4 children with their father, that relationship has broken down.
And your "chose to start a relationship with a man who can't afford to subsidise you", what on earth? So a single parent should only be dating/getting involved with men who can afford to financially take on her children??!

Ilovegoldies · 10/10/2025 08:09

I agree with the PP who said that its saving the heartache of blending families.

TheaBrandt1 · 10/10/2025 08:17

We’re high earners and we stopped at 2 🙄. Why should we all pay for your choices? Used to be left leaning but the sheer piss taking needs to end.

Lovethystupidneighbour · 10/10/2025 08:19

bluewhitebluewhite · 10/10/2025 05:29

I’m a big supporter of our welfare system and I’m really happy to pay my taxes knowing that our most vulnerable are looked after. I would not be happy to pay for you to keep getting UC in a household with in income of more than 40K.

You think £40k is enough to support a family?

Also, fyi we are on a joint income of £70k and we get UC!

Lovethystupidneighbour · 10/10/2025 08:21

TheaBrandt1 · 10/10/2025 08:17

We’re high earners and we stopped at 2 🙄. Why should we all pay for your choices? Used to be left leaning but the sheer piss taking needs to end.

People should be supported to have children if they are working. Otherwise we will have issues with an aging population and not enough workers

olderandnonthewiser · 10/10/2025 08:24

Do you think it would be fairer for you to live with your partner and have his income and all your benefits while you work part time and the tax payer funds it?
Dream on.

PeonyPatch · 10/10/2025 08:24

Realistically my DH and I may only be able to afford to have one child, that’s with us both working full time and we are middle to high earners. Why on earth are we working hard and paying towards someone’s lifestyle and multiple children? Make it make sense. Maybe spend your time and energy actually looking for a job and earning a wage before thinking about moving in with some bloke.

Swipe left for the next trending thread