Impact of 2-child benefit cap on abortion decisions

[niceberg]

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/dec/03/two-child-limit-on-benefits-a-key-factor-in-many-abortion-decisions-says-charity

This was inevitable and as such must have been seen as an acceptable outcome by the government when it was introduced.

@PotholeParadies

Typical use is quoted as low as 88% effective, and using a condom with it requires responsibility on the part of the bloke.

Imagine if blokes started taking responsibility for getting women pregnant when they don't want to be, by using condoms - the only reliable method of contraception which has zero negative health effects and zero pain to use.

Imagine what a different world that would be.

@PearPickingPorky

but I think people should have some responsibility for ensuring they don’t get pregnant if they can’t afford to raise a child by them self and we cannot consider every possible circumstance for why they haven’t been able to do this

"People" need to ensure they don't get pregnant. People who get pregnant. And those people who get pregnant need to be able to raise the child by themself.

Wonder what people these are who have to take all the responsibility.

Th

@PotholeParadies

Typical use is quoted as low as 88% effective, and using a condom with it requires responsibility on the part of the bloke.

Then maybe don't have sex with irresponsible men. Is that such a difficult concept?

The fact that the burden of pregnancy falls on women is the fault of biology, not society. If you've got a uterus, you can get pregnant. It is your responsibility to make the right contraceptive decisions for your uterus.

"Previous generations all had to make decisions on how many children to have / keep, even before the benefit system. And this involved back street abortionist, adoption, sending children away to live with other family members, if they were lucky." I'm not advocating for a return back to this.

Women fought hard for the right to have safe and legal abortions.

Children shouldn't be in poverty and it is a big failing of this current government and society, but if you are already in poverty, another child and a small increase in benefits (if you are eligible to get them) isn't going to help!

The amount of people on here claiming to be feminists while absolving women of the consequences of their own decisions as if we're all too witless to know what's good for us and have to be protected from ourselves!

Why isn't it mens responsibility not to get women pregnant, even if they have two or more kids they don't pay for?

women of the consequences of their own decisions

It's not just women experiencing the "consequences" is it.

Children are not an amorphous blob of inconvenience to punish poor decisions with. They are people. With emotions and the capacity to suffer. Even the unplanned ones. Yes. Really.

So now this thread is pushing for a ban on abortion due to the fact that women should fully face up to the consequences of their actions

It gets better and better.

Sorry when I say women, for the benefit of PP, I do of course mean bitches.

Couple of thoughts.

Should women on third or subsequent pregnancy get looked after by the NHS?

Logic says no.

Did the philpotts do the right thing?

Survey says. Yes I would say.

PearPickingPorky

but I think people should have some responsibility for ensuring they don’t get pregnant if they can’t afford to raise a child by them self and we cannot consider every possible circumstance for why they haven’t been able to do this

"People" need to ensure they don't get pregnant. People who get pregnant. And those people who get pregnant need to be able to raise the child by themself.

Wonder what people these are who have to take all the responsibility.

So what you’re saying is only women should have to take responsibility for not creating a baby? That’s ridiculous.

And I wasn’t talking about rape when I said special circumstances. I’m referring to the posters who say benefits should be paid when contraception has failed or they have felt pressured to get pregnant by their partner etc. We cannot consider every possibility for why and how a woman has gotten pregnant which is why we cap at two and only consider a third if she has been raped. It’s a fair and reasonable policy.

So we've got this magic wand to detect which women were raped then? Every single woman who was raped will get what she's legally entitled to, yes?

Could someone please take the magic wand to the courts, because I think it's needed.

Police recorded 55,130 rapes but there were only 2,102 prosecutions and 1,439 convictions in England and Wales in 2019-20. Three years earlier, 41,616 rapes were recorded, a third less than currently, and there were 5,190 prosecutions and 2,991 convictions.

www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/30/convictions-fall-record-low-england-wales-prosecutions

'why we cap at two and only consider a third if she has been raped. It’s a fair and reasonable policy.''

Who is 'we'. It's not me.

I don't think it's fair and reasonable at all.

Then use inconvenient methods, plus a condom, like many of us did for decades

Like back in the 50's and 60's when women had an average 2.5 children compared to the 1.7 they have now?

@Ohalrightthen

The fact that the burden of pregnancy falls on women is the fault of biology, not society. If you've got a uterus, you can get pregnant. It is your responsibility to make the right contraceptive decisions for your uterus.

"If you carelessly ejaculate into someone with a uterus, you might get them pregnant. It is your responsibility to make the correct contraceptive decisions about where you put your semen"

@itispersonal

I'm genuinely sorry you didn't feel able to afford all the children you wanted. It's precisely because I don't want anyone to have to choose not to have children they want solely for financial reasons that I'm against this policy and support generous and universal child benefits for all families. It's why I campaign for affordable childcare and affordable housing. It's why I'm aghast at the cuts to child tax credits and child benefit that have crippled families while pensions were protected. Why shouldn't children be protected every bit as much older people? Global studies show that as living standards rise, the birth rate goes down so there is no need to attack the people who still wish for a bigger family in this way.

@PearPickingPorky men have the ability to take zero responsibility for a pregnancy if they feel like it. women do not. that is a fact of life. It's not particularly fair, but there's nothing we can do about it. You would not rely on even the most responsible, morally upstanding man on the planet to protect you from pregnancy all by himself, unless you were stupid.

@Prestel

But isn't that the grown up decision ... I can't afford another child and I have free and available contraception to try and help avoid falling pregnant. Having children isn't a right, it is a privilege/ blessing etc.

I agree with having a universal basic wage and living wage, reasonable rents etc to help those already on this planet.

But tax payers need to pay for the benefits, (yes, government could stop the big companies dodging their tax responsibilities) and even if you gave everyone £2k a month, some would have £1k left every month and others would be £1k in debt through their own spending habits, that is human personalities.

"You shouldn't have children you can't afford" is what the Tories tell the voters who can no longer afford to have a family on stagnating wages living in overpriced homes that they've brought about with their policies that promote corporate profits and exorbitant rents over decent wages and affordable homes for ordinary families. These warped priorities don't just affect the poorest, even those on higher incomes are seeing most of their wages disappear into mortgages or into landlords pockets and struggle to cover spiralling childcare costs but none of this is inevitable, unless people keep voting for it.

@Prestel

"You shouldn't have children you can't afford" is what the Tories tell the voters who can no longer afford to have a family on stagnating wages living in overpriced homes that they've brought about with their policies that promote corporate profits and exorbitant rents over decent wages and affordable homes for ordinary families. These warped priorities don't just affect the poorest, even those on higher incomes are seeing most of their wages disappear into mortgages or into landlords pockets and struggle to cover spiralling childcare costs but none of this is inevitable, unless people keep voting for it.

And yet, in the last election, huge swathes of the country (including record numbers of those who depend on the principles of the welfare state) did just that. So many people on benefits and working class people voted Tory last time round. The bitter bit of me would very much like to tell those of them now wailing about benefit cuts that they reap what they sow.

A tory government is in my best interests, and yet I've voted labour my whole life for those less fortunate than myself, and i am far from alone. There was a workingclass wave of Tory voters, and now they have the audacity to bitch about benefit cuts?

I used to live in Spain 20 years ago where there were no child benefits and very little welfare. There was little teen pregnancy as you would have to either live with your parents or have an abortion. The State wouldn't provide you with a flat. It obviously affects behaviour and there's a low birth rate in Spain as children will not be subsidised and work has always been precarious, even more so now.

I'm sure if Rishi gave all low paid families a post Covid holiday in the Caribbean for free, Polly Toynbee would be complaining that their hotel and flights weren't good enough. Good idea to ignore her click baiting columns.

There's still no child benefits in Spain, I think I read somewhere that it offers the least support to parents in the EU.

Isn't Spain facing an increasingly aging population and associated problems? Maybe they should be a bit more generous

Spain and the UK are totally different cultures. It's a pointless comparison.

EG not being able to leave home till you get married. That's a massive change to society. There's also the religious aspect.