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.

@HoppingPavlova

All the cap does is make life 10x worse for families who had more than 2 children because they could afford it right up until a parent dies or is permanently injured and unable to work

But that’s part of financial planning when considering if you can afford children. We put in place insurance for each of us to cover these scenarios so if this where to happen we wouldn’t be in a pickle. It’s a cost in deciding whether you can afford kids. I know of someone who couldn’t get death/disability insurance due to a serious health issue. This was the main factor in them deciding not to have a child and factored above the actual health issue in their decision.

I agree. We have really good insurance, which we pay a lot for. It feels the right thing to do. If we both die, it pays out for my brother so he can support our kids.

Likewise if one of us dies, it pays out to support the other.

We also have illness and redundancy cover.

It was one of the costs we factored in when planning number 3.

I am uncomfortable with the idea that only those that can afford can have 3 kids. Equally, why should the rest of us pay for other people's choices?

@cherrypie790

The Government doesn't hold a bottomless pit of money. How can you say this is a rich country when our national debt is over £1.8 billion??!

It's not a right to bring children into the world.

Of course this is a rich country, we spend billions a year on weapons for a start. The Queen probably costs more than child tax credits did for larger families.

It's not a question of whether it's a right or not. It's a reality, those children have been born and they deserve not to go hungry because some in society believe the mother has done something wrong.

Christ almighty.

I'm really shocked by this thread.

When the cap was coming in MN in general was fairly evenly split. The feminist board was against it.

The change in view since then is mind boggling.

As for the having to prove rape, well shit happens post upthread.

If women who consider themselves feminists are ok with children paying for the actions of their parents, with women having to prove rape to government officials, with what from the % looks like large numbers of women being essentially coerced into abortion by the state,

Then wtf is the point?

I'm genuinely shocked.

NiceGerbil I really hope that most posters have seen this on active threads and are not regular posters on this board.

The majority of the thread reads as though it was written by Katie Hopkins.

Equally, why should the rest of us pay for other people's choices?

You sound like you've done rather well for yourself. But where do you think your money came from, and society's money generally? The wealth of the rich is dependent on the labour of the poor. Literally the only place that wealth can come from is the extraction of surplus value from workers. So I bet you'd be the first to complain if we the working class stopped having kids, because the middle classes would starve first when the world ran out of workers.

NiceGerbil why do you think everyone posting on this thread is a feminist? That is clearly not the case. There certainly aren't many FWR regulars.

This thread title came up in Active Convos and, since it's about benefits, and abortions, it will have attracted many different posters from far and wide, not just feminists.

@NiceGerbil

Christ almighty.

I'm really shocked by this thread.

When the cap was coming in MN in general was fairly evenly split. The feminist board was against it.

The change in view since then is mind boggling.

As for the having to prove rape, well shit happens post upthread.

If women who consider themselves feminists are ok with children paying for the actions of their parents, with women having to prove rape to government officials, with what from the % looks like large numbers of women being essentially coerced into abortion by the state,

Then wtf is the point?

I'm genuinely shocked.

No one has to prove rape to government officials, they can choose to disclose it to regular people, just like any of us, who are compassionate and highly trained in their job

It's in feminism. Most pester avoid FWR like the plague!

LittlePosh that makes zero seen sense.

There is no point in disclosing it to any old person.

They need to disclose it to someone in a certain role, they need to complete a form which has to be countersigned. Here is the guidance and the form.

<a class="break-all" href="https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.gov.uk/government/publications/support-for-a-child-conceived-without-your-consent&ved=2ahUKEwjTloOwrrLtAhWjoXEKHeOCAIAQFjAFegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw1FpuqB-Hcfuj63IyJTrtMh" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=www.gov.uk/government/publications/support-for-a-child-conceived-without-your-consent&ved=2ahUKEwjTloOwrrLtAhWjoXEKHeOCAIAQFjAFegQICBAB&usg=AOvVaw1FpuqB-Hcfuj63IyJTrtMh

Sorry new phone typing is hit and miss.

Abusive men don't keep women pregnant for the additional benefit money. They do it to keep a woman trapped and vulnerable. If there is less money, then the bits that do get to the woman and children are less, it won't make abusive men start using condoms.

The proof of rape shit is one of the worst things I have ever seen our government do. For a lot of babies born of rape, it is the first time they have had to formalise that in writing and one of the first parts of their child's paper trail. When they should be enjoying their newborn instead they are being retraumatised telling job centre staff about it. It's just not ok.

@NiceGerbil

It's in feminism. Most pester avoid FWR like the plague!

Nobody can resist a benefits bashing thread though.

I don't avoid fwr. Have definitely posted here before.

Maybe I came across as smug, wasn't intentional. In my mind, insurance is part of how I look after my kids. To make sure they would be provided for if we couldn't.

Of course that is grossly unfair if insurance is too expensive. How you square that circle, I have absolutely no idea.

It's also a bit of a leap to connect my views with forced abortion. Not to mention deeply offensive.

It is possible to be a feminist and believe in responsible family planning. Of course these are always cases that would be considered exceptional. Rape is the worst end of that, but multiple births, contraception failure, redundancy etc all play a part.

There are many reasons why I'm not a politician, but just because I have a different view doesn't make me Katie Hopkins.

I don’t think it should ‘pay’ to have more children. That’s what did happen to SOME people prior to the cap. I wanted more children but cannot afford any more, so I stopped. My brother had 8 and had more money than I and my husband did. Cheap rent, free school meals. Latest PlayStation and Xbox, dvds galore. He told me it wasn’t worth working and he was right. Yes we should be paid a living wage but wages don’t always cover the expense of lots of
Children and I honestly don’t think that it’s fair to have a child KNOWING you don’t have the income and just expect the tax payer to foot the bill when they have to make adjustments if they can’t afford it.

In order to get this extra support, you must not be living with the other biological parent of the child. You will be asked to confirm this

Quote from that form. It's not like things are that simple, is it? Women don't just LTB the instance they are subjected to sexual violence.

So the woman who is morally entitled to this, cannot claim it until she leaves. But part of why she does not leave may be financial dependence due to the child cap! Catch 22.

And why should any child in Britain go hungry because his or her parents aren't the right kind of deserving poor?

Not to mention, the knock on effects of poverty cost society more. Hungry children who don't concentrate at school. Children who under-achieve. Children who are in poorer health (increasing costs both directly through the NHS, and in their reduced potential as part of the workforce later). Increased crime. Increased pressure on the courts and prison system.

I think according to this thread none of that is important.

Yes if they are in an abusive relationship they have to leave.

DV services were decimated before covid and the there's been loads in the news about DV increasing during lockdown, child abuse and CSA.

The insurance thing is quite funny if it wasn't so sad. Tens of thousands of women lose their jobs every year because they are pregnant. Losing any benefits provided by work etc.

The hardening of attitudes is something I'm seeing across MN. I think maybe because people are feeling at risk because of covid/ Brexit combo and the me and mine thing kicks in.

I don't understand the punish the kids for the actions of their parents thing but anyway.

FWIW my #2 costs the state far, far more than my #3.

Pesky disability benefits.

We generally have a good income and a good life. I would have an abortion because I can't afford three children. I can't give three children I could give to two children.

If people cannot afford children because they can't afford to not get £60 a month, then they really shouldn't be getting pregnant. I know accidents happen but most are just careless.

Its so easy to say people shouldn't be getting pregnant and shouldn't be having kids, but they do. Why should the kids have to suffer?

@SerendipityJane

All the cap does is make life 10x worse for families who had more than 2 children because they could afford it right up until a parent dies or is permanently injured and unable to work, and they have to put up with the level of judgement shown here that they "should have thought about that before hey had so many kids".

And as for having to prove you were raped ...

Those situations are why insurance exists. It is vastly irresponsible to have children without insurance.

I'm all for the cap. If you can't afford to raise a child, you shouldn't be having one.

I know accidents happen but most are just careless

So what? Whilst I agree with all the points about abusive parents and the horrifying rape clause, what if someone just makes a mistake? What if they forget to take their pill, or go out and get pissed and have unprotected sex, or fall in love and have kids with someone then it all goes to shit? What if someone even just says fuck it, I like being a mum and I'm going to have loads of kids on benefits? Are you saying their children should be punished with hunger for a mistake made by the parents?

Those mother , and they are mothers in 95% of cases, are working. They are raising the next generation who will build and clean your houses. The ones who's low paid work props up your pension fund. The ones who even if they are surplus to requirement will place downward pressure on wages and keep profits and investment returns high. I can understand someone working minimum wage being a bit miffed at the parent next door who doesn't work and gets benefits for their kids, but not those who benefit so well from mass population, both at home and abroad. You have a good life because these mums, like the mums before them, are raising the next generation of workers. How dare you seek to emiserate and impoverish them even further by attacking their children of all people who are completely innocent in this scenario.

I said my view was any family should ideally not have more than 2 children rich or poor and got accused of advocating forced abortion 🙄. Err no. I just think there are too many people on the planet as it is so financially incentivising people to have more seems odd.

Those situations are why insurance exists. It is vastly irresponsible to have children without insurance.

Why do people think insurance will solve all your problems?

It doesn't pay out for everything. It doesn't pay out very much (people who are wealthy enough to have it usually only have enough to cover their mortgage).

Child Benefit is available for all kids.

In principle I am appalled by the idea that women's fertility choices by a cap on welfare provision for those children. Or that children should suffer as a result.

But.

I have had 2 abortions because I was not in a position to support a child properly. And I don't regret either. I didn't have children at the time, and am very glad - even more glad now I know what being a mother entails - that I did wait until I could be a parent who could give my child what they needed.

And if I had had kids already? Well, I would have been grateful for those children and want to support them to thrive. Not make life harder.

Removing the stigma from abortion could help a lot of people. It often seems as if you are saying something outrageous to say 'I had an abortion and I don't regret it'. 'I felt relieved'. 'It was sad but I made the best decision at the time and I think I was right'.

Of course, many women do feel sad and suffer long term upset over a termination. But I think the stats are that one woman in 3 in this country will have a termination. Many of us just get on with it, and on with our lives. No big drama.