Irresponsible to have children on benefits?

[Mum2b_Claire]

I have a friend claiming various top ups, who gave up work. She was musing whether or not to buy a stokke or babydan high chair. Two top brands. How is that fair to someone who can't even afford a high chair?

That's what I don't understand and what irritates me too. We only have a stokke highchair and a few other bits that we shouldn't have because my parents wanted to buy them for us. ANY large/exceptional purchase puts us overdrawn so we have to be really, really cheap on food the next month, which is the only expense we have any control over really. I don't get how people have ANY spare money on benefits, really I don't, and I totally find it galling that people do when we don't when we both work at the moment! In my case, work doesn't pay the bills and benefits will (just about), what a ridiculous situation that is, but I REALLY hope people see this bolded statement and don't write me off as a lazy scrounger as I am anything but!

 

[TennisGal]

I don't think anyone does, at all!

No, it is people like said friend who are why the benefits system is a mess. It honestly makes me fume. She also lives in one of the very best parts of London.

 

[Mum2b_Claire]

ugh, and the other thing that really really gets me more than any of this stuff is people who do jobs that are cash in hand, therefore pay no tax. I knew someone like that once who had the nerve to boast that she earned more than me, well no mate, I earn more but you take home more because you are stealing basically! I do wonder whether some of these folk on benefits that seem to have the disposable income of someone on 40-50k are actually doing work for cash...but then I'm cynical. Or they might be massively in debt.

 

[Hayley90]

I have actually reported someone who was claiming benefits and working cash in hand for over £2k a month. Her family 'hired' her but not through PAYE so she escaped with £24k a year with no NI, no tax... AND had everything paid for her by benefits. It was a piss take - and SHE was one of the people who called me neglectful for working FT when Harrison was still tiny.

She was caught though, she doesnt work there anymore!

I do love it when karma bites ass.

 

[LeeBee]

I agree, it's a bit irresponsible to be TTC while on benefits. But at the same time, I know what it's like to want a baby more than anything... I guess you never really know what it's like to be in a situation like that until you are

If a couple on benefits WANTS a baby that much then one of the parents needs to get off their backside and get a job. jmo x

Totally agree. I'm not condoning anything, just trying to have some understanding as to why some people do the things they do.

I would imagine that someone who was brought up on benefits might not have the right mindset about them. Some people might not have very high self worth, and therefore think they'll just never be able to do any better. Some might be in bad relationships. I've got a friend who is on benefits (has two kids). She was in a car accident about a year ago and knocked out a bunch of her teeth, and feels like she's can't get a good job because of how she looks. On the one hand, I look at her and can see exactly what she should do. But evidentally she can't

Again, I do not agree with TTC on benefits. I just don't think it's so black and white as people may think.

 

[4magpies]

I agree, it's a bit irresponsible to be TTC while on benefits. But at the same time, I know what it's like to want a baby more than anything... I guess you never really know what it's like to be in a situation like that until you are

If a couple on benefits WANTS a baby that much then one of the parents needs to get off their backside and get a job. jmo x

Totally agree. I'm not condoning anything, just trying to have some understanding as to why some people do the things they do.

I would imagine that someone who was brought up on benefits might not have the right mindset about them. Some people might not have very high self worth, and therefore think they'll just never be able to do any better. Some might be in bad relationships. I've got a friend who is on benefits (has two kids). She was in a car accident about a year ago and knocked out a bunch of her teeth, and feels like she's can't get a good job because of how she looks. On the one hand, I look at her and can see exactly what she should do. But evidentally she can't

Again, I do not agree with TTC on benefits. I just don't think it's so black and white as people may think.

My other half nearly died in a car accident a few years back, he broke his back. If he wanted to he could sit on his bum and claim disability, he took a year off (because he was too ill to work, he was in intensive care for a month) and is now back to work doing a very physical job, working hard. If he can do it, someone with a few missing teeth sure can.

xx

 

[Aidan's Mummy]

I think if people are on benefits and are capable of working then they shouldn't plan a baby. They should concentrate on finding a job and when they are finically stable they can try. Although not all people can work, for some people they will have to be on benefits for the rest of their lives. For example some mothers may have a severly disabled child, it could be a physical disability or learning disability. You could say "what do the mothers do whilst the child is at school". The child may be at school but often with disabled children there are endless hospital visits that the mother will have to take them to. I don't think any job could accomodate for the amount of time they may need to have off. Also the person may be disabled themselves making it impossible to work. The benefit system is there to suppourt those in need, the people that can not work have as much right to plan and have a baby as much as a person working does. They arn't on benefits through choice and they will never be able to work, so they should be able to have a family.

In addition not everyone plans to have a child, I fell pregnant with my son at 16 and it was a shock. I was in no way trying for a baby and I was taking precautions but I still became pregnant. For the first year of his life I was in receipt of benefits and they supported me and my son. I didn't plan him but I faced up to my responibilities and did the best I could. A question the OP has asked can not be answered with a simple yes or no. It's a complex issue but I don't think a baby should be planned if the person is on benefits and they CAN work. But again suprises do occur and they shouldn't be judged for this x

 

[ShanandBoc]

Sorry to hear the 4magpies that must have been very hard on both of you, what an inspiration he is! x

 

[4magpies]

Sorry to hear the 4magpies that must have been very hard on both of you, what an inspiration he is! x

We weren't together at the time, I would've been a mess if we had been. I'm bad enough when he has stomach flu! It's me that is in hospital all the time these days.

But yes, he's a hard worker and I damn proud of him. He has a good work ethic and that's one of the things that attracted me to him if I'm honest.

Can't wait to make him a daddy.

xxx

 

[Aidan's Mummy]

I've seen a few comments about the amount of money people recieve etc. Yes it can be very frustrating if a person can work and they arn't and they can afford lots of nice things. BUT should those that can't work for various reasons live on next to nothing? Afterall they didn't choose to have a condition preventing them from working, so why should they be punished? x

 

[BabyJayne]

But there are a whole range of reasons from A through to Z as to why the people who plan these children may be on benefits and only a handful of these people will actually be the ones who just want as much money as they can have without working.

You find more and more all the time now, for people, including myself, that wanting to go back to work is just not affordable and being on benefits until such an occasion arises where going back to work will leave us better off, benefits is the better option.

And for those who have never worked....where is the incentive? It's all well and good people going into one about people who don't work, but when the situation arises where being on benefits is BETTER than going out and earning a wage, I fail to see where the incentive is for people to even bother trying.

And tax is paid by everyone on a daily basis. No matter what you buy, the healthcare you receive, everything is taxed, everyone pays tax. It goes round in one constant circle. So for me, all this taxpayer stuff is just....tit for tat. I may be on benefits myself, but I do contribute some how.

Food, Petrol, Cigarettes, everything has tax on it. No matter what people buy, taxes are paid and everyone buys these things. Food mainly anyways.[/QUOTE]

But paying tax isn't like having a savings account, and it shouldn't be treated as such. You don't pay in and expect to receive later down the line. Benefits should be there to help you, they shouldn't be seen as something you will inevitably receive.

There is a fundamental problem with the welfare system in that at present people are finding themselves in the position where they are better off not working. I totally agree that this needs to be addressed.

My problem lies with families where nobody works. I don't believe when two people are both on unemployment benefits that they should consider TTC, and if they do, I believe taxpayers have the right to an opinion on it.

Also, as for paying tax, although you might see it like a big circle, it will not work like that - more money must be received than be claimed otherwise the economy will crumble. Tax from buying items just isn't enough. And also, I'm sure VAT is zero on most food..?[/QUOTE]

Emma - I couldn't agree more. The tax here is not Income Tax or National Insurance. It is not what pays for the NHS, schools, pensions, benefits etc.

I echo what most people have said here - that actively TTC while neither parent is working is wholly irresponsible. (Disclaimer - I am not talking about people who find themselves in a situation through no fault of their own, or the other things that have been mentioned here. I mean those people who do not work, have no intention of working and still actively plan and bring children into the world knowing they have no means of supporting them other than what the state can give.)

I work three days a week in employment and do self-employed work in between that. My DH works full time. We have a nice, but very small 2-bed house that we pay a mortgage on. We are scraping and saving everything we can to build up savings and to sell our house as we need more room. Until we have done that, we cannot have another child as we simply don't have the space.

I don't see how I can feel anything but resentment to those who have planned pregnancies and babies while on benefits, while we are working and having to plan when we can afford to have a brother or a sister for Madeline or even have the room. I don't just feel resentment - I feel anger. Because it is simply not fair.

I completely agree with the benefits system. I do not begrudge paying tax as I understand the need for benefits for certain people in society. I expect to get a health service, I expect my child to have free schooling and I expect some form of state pension when I am eligible (wishful thinking maybe). However, I certainly don't expect the system to support me to have another child because I have paid into it. The state owes me what it owes everyone - in the health and education I mentioned above. It doesn't owe me the means to bring up a child. That is my responsibility.

The benefits system should be a way to live when there's no other option, not a way of life.

p.s - sorry for the essay. I've been away from BnB for a short while...so I have a lot of typing to make up for!

 

[Scamp]

I've not read the whole of the thread, going to go back and read it properly.

This is something that really annoys me.
I think every situation will be different but I'm talking about when someone is able to work and they don't and then they claim job seekers etc.

It's irresponsible. If you can't afford to support a child yourself then wait until you can. It's wrong to expect every other person who does work to pay for you.

I can't work out how people can bring up kids on benefits? Surely there wouldn't be enough money to buy everything the kid would need?

We were planning a baby while I was unemployed,but hubby was working full time.
Now I have a job,we have stopped TTC so we can get on our feet financially.
However when I was pregnant,my husband lost his job so we were solely on my SMP and unemployment benefits and I guess people must have thought we were irresponsible.
xx

You were pregnant already hun, not ttc so it's not irresponsible imo xx

In my view, I don't think it's anyones business whether people plan children while on benefits or otherwise. The only thing that should be of any concern is whether these people are fit to take care of children in the first place. So many people, even those who do work, aren't fit to make toast let alone look after kids and my main concern is that the money, however it's received, through work or through benefits, is spent wisely and on the child and obviously looking after the child in general.

Surely it is when it's the people who are working are the ones paying for them? xx

I agree, it's a bit irresponsible to be TTC while on benefits. But at the same time, I know what it's like to want a baby more than anything... I guess you never really know what it's like to be in a situation like that until you are

I want a baby more than I could ever explain but if Mike lost his job (it'd be different if I lost my job, we can afford to live comfortably on Mikes wage and I wouldn't claim anything) then I would stop ttc until Mike found another job. xx


I'm having ago at anyone btw, just saying my opinions

 

[LeeBee]

I agree, it's a bit irresponsible to be TTC while on benefits. But at the same time, I know what it's like to want a baby more than anything... I guess you never really know what it's like to be in a situation like that until you are

If a couple on benefits WANTS a baby that much then one of the parents needs to get off their backside and get a job. jmo x

Totally agree. I'm not condoning anything, just trying to have some understanding as to why some people do the things they do.

I would imagine that someone who was brought up on benefits might not have the right mindset about them. Some people might not have very high self worth, and therefore think they'll just never be able to do any better. Some might be in bad relationships. I've got a friend who is on benefits (has two kids). She was in a car accident about a year ago and knocked out a bunch of her teeth, and feels like she's can't get a good job because of how she looks. On the one hand, I look at her and can see exactly what she should do. But evidentally she can't

Again, I do not agree with TTC on benefits. I just don't think it's so black and white as people may think.

My other half nearly died in a car accident a few years back, he broke his back. If he wanted to he could sit on his bum and claim disability, he took a year off (because he was too ill to work, he was in intensive care for a month) and is now back to work doing a very physical job, working hard. If he can do it, someone with a few missing teeth sure can.

xx

Like I said, I don't agree with it. I'm just trying to look at it from other peoples point of view.

I don't think it's rocket science that it's irresponsable to ttc while on benefits. Or that it's bull that some people receive them when they could be out working. What's interesting to me is the different reasons why people end up in these situations, why they stay, and whether or not those are valid excuses. I'm definitely someone who likes (trys!) to take all factors into consideration before making judgements about other peoples lifestyles. Because as smart as i like to think I am, I have to admit I don't always know it all- no one does! Except Oprah

 

[caz81]

I didn't say that lower earners don't work as hard, and I don't for a second think this is true. I have a friend who works for a charity, and earns a pittance...but she works all the hours God sends. What I was trying to say, and probably not very clearly , is that those on higher wages don't tend to ever have a 9-5 option, and these jobs are very rarely available outside of the city. I would never pontificate on how hard someone works based on their wages.

Of course anyone and everyone is entitled to have a child, and I wouldn't for a second want to go down some dictatorial state where we say who can't and can have children. However, to plan for children relying on benefits is, IMO, irresponsible.

I could also get annoyed that I'd like my dh home to have dinner with us in the evening, to be able to get a breakfast together...but his job supports us, and so various sacrifices are made. It's another reason why we will rarely go out together (just us) unless dd is asleep, as he is so protective of the time he has with her.

I don't think, if I am completely honest, that one person automatically has the right to stay at home to bring up the children if they are relying on benefits. It's a privilege these days, and one several working mothers would love to have, so why should their taxes support those who have just decided that they want that privilege without working? It doesn't seem fair.

Everyone, unless they are millionaires, has to make some kind of financial sacrifice these days-and I would rather see top ups going to help the disabled or those who really are in sure straits.

I have a friend claiming various top ups, who gave up work. She was musing whether or not to buy a stokke or babydan high chair. Two top brands. How is that fair to someone who can't even afford a high chair?

Sorry if this is a bit ranty, I am just enjoying the debate and NONE is meant personally to anyone...just in the spirit of good discussion

The point I have bolded is I guess where we disagree as I do believe that as long as one person is working then the other should have the right to stay at home to look after the children and if help with living costs is needed then I think it should be given, as long as its top ups to the partners wages.

That said I dont agree with your friends situation, i think that the top ups should give a basic standard of living, people should then decide which they want, a higher standard of living or the chance to stay at home - unless you can afford it I dont think that both should be an option.

 

[Mum2b_Claire]

Ah you see I don't believe it's a right per se, (but I'm not very big on 'rights' - I see things as far more 'grey' than black and white like that) but I think a lot of people DO need to realise just how often it is only beneficial for one parent to work when they have young children. That, to me, is still a 'working family'.

 

[Mum2b_Claire]

I'm sorry that I've had a lot to say on this but it is very 'raw' subject for me atm!

But also, it's not the parent who stays at home's fault that the system wants to support them staying at home but not to support them to work. It's the systems fault.

 

[Mum2b_Claire]

I'll shut up now!

 

[special_kala]

There is a big difference between having children whilst being solely on benefits and being part of a working family where benefits help one person stay at home.

 

[Lightworker]

I think it is essential to provide for your family financially. Having said that- i think you also have to ask- Is it irresponsible to have children if you are lazy, depressed, short tempered, unhealthy, etc- these are equally important considerations but they also illustrate the impossibility of being fully prepared for parenthood. anyway, babies will be born when their time comes, whether ur rich or not.

 

[indy and lara]

The more I read the more it just mashes my head.

I do still come down on the side of agreeing with TennisGal that it is not a right to have someone stay at home. The thing is that the nature of this forum means that we focus on families but there are many other groups in society too who are just as needy/ vulnerable. As we are all more than aware, the benefits pot is not endless and other groups probably feel that they are as deserving. For example, I wonder how a childless couple feel when they are both working FT but their tax contributes towards women staying at home?

I think part of my objection is that fact that I feel that we are supporting a lot of other people with our tax contribution but get nothing back to support our family. I do also wonder if it will be easy for people to get back into the workforce a few years down the line?