Cap child tax credit after four children, says MP

[SardineQueen]

here

One of nadine's friends!

I'm not surprised to see this from a conservative MP, as ever I think this sort of thing is a terrible idea - children don't choose to be born and by restricting benefits in this way you are punishing the children for something you disapprove of the parents doing. And as I understand it the number of people with no work ever and loads of children is actually very low? So this sort of policy doesn't actually save much money at all. Can't remember where I saw that though.

I am sure there will be some who disagree. I thought that people who post here might be interested anyway.

Larry - I don't deny that 'these people' exist - but it's not their CHILDREN'S fault! You can't penalise a child for the wrongdoings of their parent - it would be like putting a 3yo in jail if their parents burgled a house, yet letting their parents who comitted the crime walk free.

And who gets to decide who is 'worthy'? ATOS? Because they aren't exactly doing a stellar job of it at the moment - if you consider that 70% of the people they say aren't disabled enough for disability benefits are found to be disabled enough for disability benefits on appeal. And such a position of power over other people's lives as to be the person deciding whether they are 'worthy' of financial support is open to abuse. And as they have been given 'targets' to meet to make a 20% reduction in the cost of disability benefits (Including claimants of the old IB, ESA and DLA), despite the fact that there is only a 0.5% fraud and error figure on claims of disability benefits - which means that a HUGE percentage of those who are being refused disability benefits have a GENUINE disability that affects their ability to work.

Where do you draw the line? Do you draw the line at someone who has been in and out of Foster care for so much of their childhood that they have attended 8 different Secondary schools but have left with no qualifications, making it nigh on impossible for them to EVER get a job as they are functionally illiterate - they have never worked, so they are undeserving of help? They are unable to find gainful employment, so they should never be allowed to procreate? Do you draw the line at helping someone with uncontrolled epilepsy? If so, where should the line be drawn - one seizure a week, or two seizures a day? Because both make it difficult to gain and keep employment. THAT is the difficulty - where do you draw the arbitary line between 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor.

I HAVE worked in the past, and am hopeful that in the future I will work again, albeit PT due to both my disability and the fact that I have caring responsibilities as two of my four dc have asd, and I am unable to find childcare for one of them. I did not choose my current situation, I am in it because my Ex-P chose to walk out on me. Am I deserving or undeserving poor? These things are subjective, and every person will have a different opinion on who is deserving and who isn't, which is why a system like that will always end up adversely affecting some of those who should genuinely be helped.

Hunty,

Well argued. However, the alternative is to create an entirely non judgmental system where people are encouraged financially to make irresponsible decisions. I take your point about where to draw the line but there has to be a line on the other side. What do you do about a single mother, aged 24, with 6 children. Give her a four bed house and plenty of allowances? Then how does someone of a similar age with one child, struggling to rent a couple of rooms without subsidy feel?

Is it possible to have a system where no one is unfortunate, without overly penalising everyone else?

In your instance i think it would be irresponsible to have another child. If someone is long term unemployed and they cannot support their current children its irresponsible to have even more. The examples of people you give - one being disabled and the other struggling to support themselves - again people who would be irresponsible to have large families as they wouldn't be able to support them. this seems quite cut and dried to me.

agree its not the children's fault and things obviously need to be put in place to minimise the negativity of poor parenting. So instead of giving extra benefit money that can be used on things other than the children, funds should be used to provide out of school facilities - role models and food etc so that these children can find a way out of poverty and not just think its the norm.

I agree that dc shouldn't think it is the 'norm' to be out of work, and on benefits - but I know that my dc don't. My older dc (13yo DD) has lots of SN as well as her asd - but is aiming on going to catering college and working in a kitchen somewhere - she has found something she IS going to be capable of doing. My 9yo DS1 is aiming for Grammar school, University then medical school. He is more than likely to be able to do that - he is VERY clever (not bragging, his HT has said that he is in the top 2% for IQ when they tested him). I am trying my best to bring up my dc to be ambitious, to find something they are capable of doing for employment, and they have seen me try my best to work despite my own issues, and they see my Ex-P work like a dog for NMW.

And I agree with the role models thing - maybe a good start on that would be to attract more male teachers to schools. There are 4 at my dc's school, and it has been very good for my dc to see that, it gives them positive male role models. (Unlike my Ex-H, DS1's father, who is a feckless profligate layabout. But I'LL be sent back to work before him, they pick on the easy targets, not those who REALLY refuse to work. It's one of the reasons why he's my Ex-H )

im with hunty on this one .Ds1 is at catering collage and working p/t .

Ds2 is planning med school

dd well at 8 think not to woried what she wants to be

ds 3 has sn i just want him to be happy

I would like to see more male teachers as i think that would help .

I did and have worked and according to teh govermnet i still am ( as ds3 carer )

and yup i suspect my ex will swing it where im going ahve to justify it as im seen as a easy target and dreading the DLA/PIP changes as im indepndley mobile unde rthe new rules despite being in wheelchair full time and erm booking trains at least 24 hours

larry - people like the ones you describe annoy the hell out of me too.

BUT I am with HuntyCat that it's not their kids fault - they didn't ask to be born and don't deserve to starve because their parents are feckless tossers. Further up the thread I suggested making more benefits paid in vouchers as a a partial solution - to ensure the money was spent on the kids. I also said I'd be happy if all child benefit (including my own) was paid in this way - after all, that is supposed to be spent on the kids too - then vouchers would cease to have any stigma attached, as everyone would have them.

I do feel concerned that there has been too much language in this thread suggesting that those on benefits are inherently inferior or undeserving - as HuntyCat's example shows, the reverse may be the case. Struggling to care for 4 kids with special needs on one's own, but not through choice, must be pretty tough.

Thinking of her example, I'd also like to see any dads (well, either parents, but I think it is usually dads) who fail to support the kids they have produced, locked up or very heavily fined.

breadandbutter - i feel inherently superior to someone that has never tried to do their best and can't be bothered to work and is longterm unemployed as a result. (I'm not talking about ST unemployed or disabled here or people with caring responsibilities for disabled children). I also feel superior to anyone who doesn't do the best they can for their children.

absolutely agree with your comments about the dads - they are much more their responsibility (or should be) than mine

But, how do fathers on NMW SUPPORT their dc? You take away 15% of their earnings after tax, for one dc...and they can't afford a roof over their head. Ex-P (DS2 and DS3's dad) works for a bit more than NMW (he gets £16.8K before tax, so about £5K pa MORE than NMW). CSA take 20% of his income to support his two dc. That works out to £55 a week. For TWO DC. Which is LESS than the Tax Credits for those dc.

If workers weren't paid such a derisible amount - then maybe more fathers would be ABLE to support their dc to the extent that their ex's wouldn't need to rely on the state.

Can you imagine how little money my Ex-P is left with after he has paid his maintenance? Then he has to try to pay to keep a roof over his own head.

Yes, there ARE feckless fathers out there, my Ex-H is one of them - but a lot of the time, the reason many give up work is because paying out 15-20% of their income when they are on NMW or not much more means that they cannot EAT themselves.

While I don't condone it, having seen my Ex-P's outgoings (and the 2 dc we have together are his only dc, and he works FT) there is NO WAY he can afford to eat more than one basic meal a day after paying his maintenance to me if he wants to keep his roof over his head - which is only a room in a houseshare.

Not ALL absent parents are feckless fathers. Some are, some aren't, some just want to be able to support their dc from a previous relationship and EAT as well...

Maybe silly question, HuntyCat, but how come you and nice exP are not together, as you speak quite highly of him, and are both struggling on your own?

Not relevant to thread, I know...

dreamingofsun - I hope I don't feel inherently superior to anyone - we're all different, and have different skills etc. I don't claim I'd like those who choose to live on the dole at my expense or wish to be friends with them (although in some cases they come from backgrounds/homes where they've ever had any encouragement/support to succeed in the world of work - I know how lucky I have been in terms of supportive family, excellent schooling - and yet how hard I find it financially for all that - so can appreciate that others without my advantages might well be finding it hard) - but there is something rather uber-race about this whole superiority thing that makes my skin crawl, sorry.

Breadandbutterfly - We are apart because he is emotionally abusive when we are in a relationship. He treated me like a slave, refused to do anything around the house, refused to even look after the baby so that I could have a bath, call me names, and much much more. However - now we are apart, I can appreciate the better side of him, and the fact that he does his best to financially support his dc, as I have also seen the other side of it from my Ex-H. Wouldn't make me get back with him in a million years though - as he'd just treat me the same way he did before.

Oh, fair enough then.

Bloody men.

I think they should cap it at 2 children which is the replacement rate . People should have more children if they want as long as they are prepared to pay for them.