Jeremy Hunt: "Don't expect us to pay for your children"

[LadyBlaBlah]

I know lots of people agree with this in principle (especially going by the Daily Mail comments)

If you can't afford a child, don't have one. Simple.

But it really is not that simple-like all these things that make judgements on those on benefits

Where does this policy end up - eugenics and enforced sterilisation?

Based on what criteria?

Starving children?

And this is all in the context that Nick Clegg was bleating on increasing international aid to lift children out of poverty in his conference last week - "look at me and how good I am to the little starving children in Africa". The hypocrisy staggers me. By the same rules, Africans should stop having children too. That should be policy rather than giving them aid - right?

Desmond Tutu said "My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together." I love that quote. It is simply a reflection on us how we chose to treat other human being.

This poor bashing is really really depressing me. It is daily It is worse than I imagined it could be.

On and on the religion / lots of kids thing I mentioned earlier that in my area there are strict religious communities of branches of christianity and judaism and they are the ones who are having trillions of children.

I teach in a secondary school on an estate oop north which suffers very high levels of unemployment. There are a large number of girls within the school who see having children as a career choice, and go on to procreate as soon as they can. Having sat in a waiting room at the hospital with one of the girls I taught last year, I felt quite depressed at her statement "Well, I don't see how I'm expected to raise this baby on the amount I get." I have waited to the age of 32 to have my first child, having only just cleared the debt it cost me to qualify as a teacher... I am aware that this girl may be in the minority, or the school in which I teach is merely a one-off but from my own personal experience, girls planning to have multiple children in order to secure a future (because they know of noone with a job) is depressingly common.

Riven - I totally agree, it is the house price explosion that has caused the massive change in circumstance.

I have a one bed flat in central(ish) London which cost 115,000 in 2001. It's now valued at 250,000. Absolutely nothing has changed in the area (if anything it has got slightly worse) and demand will have gone down not up as there are a ton of new build luxury flats in the area. Yet the price has still exploded, for no concrete reason that I understand.

But I also don't know what the solution is. Because if there is a proper house price crash, most of those who bought in the last 5 years will be in such negative equity that it will make more sense to go bankrupt and start again than it will to stay where they are with no prospect of ever clearing their debt.

So, either you chose to sacrifce all these people or you keep propping up the house prices with tax credits and housing benefit and all sorts. It's dead money as well - if everyone had little mortgages then they would have more spare cash to spend on maintaining the economy rather than just paying it into the equivilant of a long term non-access savings account.

the house price bubble was deliberately stoked up by loose credit and low regulation. The stock market was in the tank before the year 2001. Some artificial measures were taken to create an asset bubble and give the illusion of wealth to keep people spending. The dot com boom was created to inflate stock values and the housing boom was used to create an illusion of wealth. It was just a matter of time before the plug was finally pulled.

its quite logical to have children early if you are poor though - the age of death where I live varies by district from 65-80. needless to say it is directly related to house prices and relative wealth. so if you were statistically more likely to die 15 years early and waited til you were 32 and your daughter also waited til 32 you would only live to see one grandchild for one year. I'm sure it isn't consciously thought out that way but biologically it makes more sense to have them younger

ISNT 'Christians having trillions of children' Please elaborate and tell me what town or planet you live on where CHRISTIANS are have millions of kids. I'm a Christian and would love to know where this group of people are, who are following the Bible so closely and 'going forth to multiply' you made it up! Good try!.... awaits reply while playing with rosary beads.

complimentary honestly you're not very good at this are you, you make yourself look a right plank.

We live in a part of the country which has a large population of Exclusive Brethren. They are a breakaway group of a sect called the Plymouth Brethren, who I think you are more likely to have heard of.

Made it up honestly that's pathetic. I don't like being called a liar TBH.

Riven the famous Tory politician was Cecil Parkinson who I think was the Tory party chairman and a complete bastard.

ISNT This 'exclusive Brethren' how many members does it have? They live in Plymouth, you're having a laugh, no Christian groups in Plymouth have 'trillions' of members having children do they? probably 200 at the most! Must google it, or perhaps you could and tell me the vast numbers of these people. I feel to be fair to you, you may be rather economic with the truth?

Complimentary please google "The Duggar Family" and the "Quiverfull movement".

Actually I'll do it for you.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quiverfull

www.duggarfamily.com/

There are many families like this and the movement is really taking off among fundamentalist christians. And it isn't only in the USA.

Lovelymumma I would have answered your question some time back, but the computer crashed. I honestly don't know what you are talking about. Did I say I would deny hospital treatment to people. I said I was already paying for it! Please don't threaten me with your host of nurses, in your family, or you will force me to abandon the great NHS which I believe in, and go private! especially when I see a nurse called Ms.Lovelymumma.

Lovesthechaos. Thanks for the link.

"On and on the religion / lots of kids thing I mentioned earlier that in my area there are strict religious communities of branches of christianity and judaism and they are the ones who are having trillions of children."

"We live in a part of the country which has a large population of Exclusive Brethren. They are a breakaway group of a sect called the Plymouth Brethren, who I think you are more likely to have heard of."

Try reading complimentary.

I have not said there are trillions of these families. I said they are a large Christian group who are having large families. And they are - having large families.

Nor have I said that I live in Plymouth.

Why are you hell-bent on accusing me of lying? Is it really beyond your ken to imagine that there are religious groups like this in the UK?

Lovethechaos.I looked at both links. I am aware of Christians having large families in the USA, but as far as I'm aware this movement is not large in this country, although it may be spreading. It is certainly worth investigating and I find it interesting. I am also aware that certain sects of judaism, have large families and this is promoted in the Torah.

Another Link. It isn't just the Duggars. This quiverfull movement is taking off amongst Christians. Soon there probably will be trillions of them, all believing that the earth is only 6000 years old. Duh.

So you flat out do not believe that there are very deeply Christian communities in the UK who have large families?

You really have very little imagination.

"ISNT* You are the one who used the words.
I quote from your text;
'That in my area, there are strict religious communities of branches of Christianity and Judaism and they are the ones who are having trillions of children'. Look ISNT it's not very fair to get shirty with me, your the one who typed the above words. Perhaps it was tongue in cheek, I don't care. I've made plenty of tongue in cheek remarks myself. I will always answer in a polite way, but you must expect to be challenged when you insult me and call me a 'plank'.
I looked at Lovethechaos. link and found it interesting, but this country does not have huge numbers of Christians procreating.

compimentary you can't read.

Are you trying to say that you took me literally, that you genuinely thought that I meant there were families here who were having more children than the entire population of the planet?

An interesting interpretation, but if that was what you thought, why did you ask

"This 'exclusive Brethren' how many members does it have? They live in Plymouth, you're having a laugh, no Christian groups in Plymouth have 'trillions' of members having children do they?"

I never said that they had trillions of members and I never said that I live in Plymouth. Please, you must try reading what is written.

Why are you having such trouble processing the possibility that there might be Christian sects living very traditional lives here in the UK? Just because they don't live in your area? It seems strange.

I don't understand why you keep accusing me of lying either, it's out of line.

Why the fuck I should have to google for you, i don't know.

brethren

more

If you ever come around here I could take you to some of their churches.

They wouldn't let you in, of course. And you couldn't see in, because their churches don't have any windows. But still, they are there, alright. Not sure if that would convince you though, you seem terribly sure that they are imaginary

ISNT. You wote the words trillions,as if Christians were having very large families which they are not. Small Christian groups may be having large familes, but as your link points out this Christian sect is only 16,000 strong in this country. I wish you were as good at figures as you are at swearing! Of course I realise their are Christian sects in this country, but not in the numbers you suggest!

For God's sake, (not so) Complimentary, give ISNT a break. She said 'strict religious communities of branches of christianity and judaism', which clearly didn't refer to Christianity as a whole. Now perhaps we can move on.

Holla cinnamontoast

haven't caught up on the whole thread, but we're just coming out of the Labour Govt years - so haven't the standards for education been raised? (referring to your 70% improvement)

Totally agree that education is only worth the investment, but don't you agree that a significant majority of, even less well off people, have access to the education and FREE CONTRACEPTIVES and advice (bar religious and family pressures) to enable them to make informed choices about the size of their families.

As the offspring of a rather poorly educated family I am finding the whole 'the less well off / well educated people are totally unable to make decisions for themselves' thing a bit frustrating.

People, even those who don't achieve 5 A-C's are not stupid - they're just not good at passing exams. So, I completely believe that ANY individual can look at their personal circumstances and make choices about how many children they will or will not have.

All about personal responsibility ie. if I have an income of £26K per year whether or NOT that is through benefits, I have the choice to have another child / not have another child. Therefore it is up to me to decide just how much of the money I have available I will spend on children.

There are problems when people wind up on benefits after having a large family that they expected to be able to care for themselves, but ALL people have to choose betwee

a) More money and less kids

B) More kids and less money

It's a basic fact of life - why should people on benefits be treated any differently from non-benefit claimants by removing the expectation that they are capeable of reaching their own conclusions or making their own decisions?

I haven't had the time to read the whole thread so I'm not sure if views similar to my own have already been published - so apologies if similar views have been posted.

I had my DS at the age of 28. I was in full-time work in a relatively low-paid job (19,000 pa) and my husband was training to be a teacher. We managed, just! We would have loved to have had a 2nd child but finances dictated that this would have been impossible as we didn't earn much but too much to be eligible for benefits. We are now trying for another child as we are finally in a position where we could support another in addition to our own dd, however this is not proving to be as straightforward as we had hoped.

So, you tell me why I should support the families of people who have never worked in their lives and who can procreate at will. What the coalition government is saying is that you shouldn't have children that you can't afford and that the State that will not support you if you choose to do so.

I can't see what is wrong in that sentiment. Hopefully it will deter people having children with the belief that the State will be a safety net for them.

Having said that, I am disturbed by the undelying racism from the OP.

Apologies - it wasn't the OP that I had issues with. It was another post which stated that it was foreigners that tend to have larger families.