Would you let finances determine family size?

[Hanskiz]

For the PP that asked the question about how much benefit is actually paid by the taxpayer. Benefits are the single largest payments. Granted the highest percentage goes to the elderly, followed by the disabled, which in then followed by family.

Actually it's defence. Benefits are pretty minimal compared to a lot of government/taxpayer spending (bailing out banks etc).

Actually its not, Defence comes way down the bottom...

https://www.guardian.co.uk/news/dat...ar/20/budget-2012-how-taxes-spent-interactive

Thanks for the link. I'm confused. We spend loads more on defence as a whole than benefits and if the money doesn't come from taxation....
Totally off topic off course.

Im not convinced we do...thsi is an interesting graph that shows where it all goes:

https://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Guardian/documents/2011/11/08/Public_spending_2710.pdf

I stand corrected!! Interesting stuff. I think my confusion must have arisen from looking just at income support (in which case defence is about 10 times the amount) rather than including state pensions, housing benefit, disability, maternity etc etc.

 

[Lara310809]

The government wouldn't oay for any fertility here. Some people have private insurance that covers it though. It is rare. That is very unfair though, you'd think in the uk it would be across the board.

I agree; healthcare in the UK is the same for everyone, no matter their status, earnings or situation - if you need healthcare, you get it. You may have to wait, but you get it. If anything fertility should be treated the same way.

If the government can't afford to fund three rounds for everyone, which they can't, then they shouldn't offer it to anyone. There should only be a standard grant for fertility treatments, for example (I don't know how much these things cost), £200 per female (for example). It might ot even pay for a cycle, but it helps. Obviously you will have had to have proven you have a condition that makes conceiving harder, or have been TTC for a certain time or whatever, just to ensure fairness across the population. But once a woman has had her grant for fertility treatment, she can't claim again. That way at least it's a bit fairer. At least that way, everyone that needs it gets it. The NHS is supposed to be fair to everyone, yet with something like this it's not at all.

 

[lau86]

[If anyone on benefits is able to save anything at the end of the month, they're getting too much.
I hope I don't get half my paycheck taken away so someone can accumulate a nice savings of my money.
If someone is on benefits, get a job. If someone is unable to get a job, they're probably unable to care for a child. If someone is capable of taking care of a child, get a job.

wow what a horrible thing to say. to those that are saying we spend loads on benefits, i can see 35billion out of our 691 billion budget???? correct me if i'm wrong but its not the biggest pay out is it?
income support and the like i mean

 

[Dk1234]

I'll say it, I don't think people on full welfare or benefits sjould ttc. They should save up while on benefits until they can afford to support their child. Yes they deserve to have children, but I shouldn't have to pay to support them, their parents should. I don't consider having children a right. Lots of people can't conceive and the government doesn't pay for adoption or fertility treatment. It is a privledge IMO and my husband and I had to work very hard to save up for two years to be able to save enough to pay our insurance deuctible and buy the things needed to have a child. Why shouldn't everyone have to support their children.

If anyone on benefits is able to save anything at the end of the month, they're getting too much.
I hope I don't get half my paycheck taken away so someone can accumulate a nice savings of my money.
If someone is on benefits, get a job. If someone is unable to get a job, they're probably unable to care for a child. If someone is capable of taking care of a child, get a job.

100% agree if someone living on benefits has enough left over to be able to save for a baby then they are getting way to much IMO.

Me and my partner work hard neither have much money left over to save a great deal and that's with both working and living at home

But we manage just fine live comfortably and not beyond our means x

Well basically I guess I meant live on benefits til you get on your feet and then save. Here, all the time you see people on welfare with nicer cars than mine and big screens tv's and smoking cigarettes which are very expensive. If the cut all that out they could afford a kid.

 

[Lara310809]

Well basically I guess I meant live on benefits til you get on your feet and then save. Here, all the time you see people on welfare with nicer cars than mine and big screens tv's and smoking cigarettes which are very expensive. If the cut all that out they could afford a kid.

That happens in the UK too, sadly. I knew a couple who were on benefits and they got an Audi TT on hire purchase. I thought to myself "if you can afford that monthly payment, then you're getting too much in benefits".

 

[Hanskiz]

Going back to the original question though... I have let finances play a role in planning my family. I really wanted my children to be closer together but we moved after my first and so I didn't go back to work/ get a new job until she was older so we waited a while before TTC so we would have more money. We *could* have managed on just OH's salary (just about) but we were very skint and it was hard so we waited. It's made life much easier (and I get maternity pay) so I'm glad we did, even though I'd have liked my kids to be closer in age in an ideal world.

I don't know how we'll manage when to comes to university etc, but I guess we'll just have to save up and hope for the best - it's impossible to know what our financial situation will be by then so I try not to worry about it too much!

 

[mummy2lola]

As long as we can pay bills and keep our house then I feel that we can give a child everything they need,security and love,there's always a will to reduce something for an extra little mouth to feed.

The only part of the benefit system that I don't find right is when people have kids and work minimum or not at all and get everything paid and can afford 2-3 holidays a year (I know many like this) whereas my dh works his arse off and we can't afford a holiday.
Also when we wanted to first move out when we first met we couldn't even afford to rent (Brighton prices) but were offered no help,whereas my mate was working minimum and getting her full rent paid.how is that right,they should say,look how hard that couple work,they deserve a little help as they can't work anymore hours but still can't afford rent,not o look at that lazy bugger lets pay her rent (she was perfectly fit and healthy) disability is a whole other subject which I have no problem with,I'm talking about those who can but don't xx

 

[beth_terri]

I think it depends on the situation. If you earn your and your families keep and it would mean tightening your belt to have more children then thats totally fine. But I dont think people who dont work, live in a council paid house and pay for everything they have with benefits should ttc. I think the government should cap things like child benefit, tax credits etc to 2-3 children. If people wish to have more then they need to be in a position to pay for them. (I know then your faced with accidental pregnancies etc etc so its not that easy, but at the same time it shoudnt be so easy for people to get money for having babies iykwim).

Im really not meaning to offend anyone on here though so sorry if I have.

 

[Liesje]

[If anyone on benefits is able to save anything at the end of the month, they're getting too much.
I hope I don't get half my paycheck taken away so someone can accumulate a nice savings of my money.
If someone is on benefits, get a job. If someone is unable to get a job, they're probably unable to care for a child. If someone is capable of taking care of a child, get a job.

wow what a horrible thing to say. to those that are saying we spend loads on benefits, i can see 35billion out of our 691 billion budget???? correct me if i'm wrong but its not the biggest pay out is it?
income support and the like i mean

Why is it horrible to say if someone can take care of a child, they're more than likely capable of working?

 

[honey08]

if everyone was brought up the same it wud be a boring place whoever u are i dnt think anyone seems to have enough, the more u have the more u want i think , it depends on wot u let ur child have ( like i wudnt let my 3yr old have an ipad ) i know a few tht wud, i wud rather keep them as kids for as long as poss, ( i dnt have an ipad anyways ) times change , who knows u might win the lottery !!

as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

 

[beth_terri]

Well basically I guess I meant live on benefits til you get on your feet and then save. Here, all the time you see people on welfare with nicer cars than mine and big screens tv's and smoking cigarettes which are very expensive. If the cut all that out they could afford a kid.

That happens in the UK too, sadly. I knew a couple who were on benefits and they got an Audi TT on hire purchase. I thought to myself "if you can afford that monthly payment, then you're getting too much in benefits".

I have friends who are on benefits. They have a 3 bed house even though they only have one child. Their rent is paid for by benefits. They drive an st. They have lovely decoration inside the house (paid for by a grant from the council), they have a huge tv. They always dress in expensive clothes. They have a dog. They have just been on holiday abroad. And now they are ttc...

 

[sequeena]

Yes. We'll have 1 more then stop. I love being pregnant and having a baby but if we had more than 2 our finances would be severely stretched and we wouldn't be able to provide as much and certainly couldn't afford a bigger home.

 

[My_First]

as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

I think we have all agreed that circumstances like that are what benefits are for, extreme circumstances such as job loss etc. and not a lifestyle choice. No on is denying anyone benefits for circumstances like you mention.

 

[Dk1234]

if everyone was brought up the same it wud be a boring place whoever u are i dnt think anyone seems to have enough, the more u have the more u want i think , it depends on wot u let ur child have ( like i wudnt let my 3yr old have an ipad ) i know a few tht wud, i wud rather keep them as kids for as long as poss, ( i dnt have an ipad anyways ) times change , who knows u might win the lottery !!

as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

They shouldn't ttc anymore is all I'm saying. You can't help certain situations.

 

[XJessicaX]

If I really couldnt afford a child, I wouldnt have a child. If I knew every month would be a struggle, that I would have to rely on dismal benefits and spend my life battling to pay for anything then I just wouldnt do it!

 

[Lara310809]

...as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

People have already mentioned that needs must, and if you have to claim benefits to get back on your feet, you should do. it's the people that live on them when they could go out and work. Besides, when said mother finds herself a new partner, and should they choose to TTC, hopefully they won't need to be on benefits anymore.

 

[Dk1234]

Well basically I guess I meant live on benefits til you get on your feet and then save. Here, all the time you see people on welfare with nicer cars than mine and big screens tv's and smoking cigarettes which are very expensive. If the cut all that out they could afford a kid.

That happens in the UK too, sadly. I knew a couple who were on benefits and they got an Audi TT on hire purchase. I thought to myself "if you can afford that monthly payment, then you're getting too much in benefits".

I have friends who are on benefits. They have a 3 bed house even though they only have one child. Their rent is paid for by benefits. They drive an st. They have lovely decoration inside the house (paid for by a grant from the council), they have a huge tv. They always dress in expensive clothes. They have a dog. They have just been on holiday abroad. And now they are ttc...

Where do I sign up?????

 

[Liesje]

if everyone was brought up the same it wud be a boring place whoever u are i dnt think anyone seems to have enough, the more u have the more u want i think , it depends on wot u let ur child have ( like i wudnt let my 3yr old have an ipad ) i know a few tht wud, i wud rather keep them as kids for as long as poss, ( i dnt have an ipad anyways ) times change , who knows u might win the lottery !!

as for benifits, wot bout someone with 4kids whos bf left them and they have no other choice / someones whos had to go on the sick etc

x

Probably not gonna be very popular for saying this, but women shouldn't plan children they can't take care of on their own. What if one person dies or becomes disabled, etc. I know things happen that no one plans for, but it's really irresponsible to have a bunch of kids and rely on others to take care of them right from the start.
If one goes to the trouble of planning children, they should at least plan to take care of them. Children aren't just pets there for people who 'want' them. They're human beings that should be raised as valuable contributors to society. If people just "want kids" because they like to collect things, I'd suggest stamps or coins or something other than babies (which I'm told grow into adults later).

 

[lau86]

[If anyone on benefits is able to save anything at the end of the month, they're getting too much.
I hope I don't get half my paycheck taken away so someone can accumulate a nice savings of my money.
If someone is on benefits, get a job. If someone is unable to get a job, they're probably unable to care for a child. If someone is capable of taking care of a child, get a job.

wow what a horrible thing to say. to those that are saying we spend loads on benefits, i can see 35billion out of our 691 billion budget???? correct me if i'm wrong but its not the biggest pay out is it?
income support and the like i mean

Why is it horrible to say if someone can take care of a child, they're more than likely capable of working?

It looks like you meant, if you can't get a job you're unable to care for a child? what about people searching for work who can't find any??

 

[My_First]

@DK1234 and I think therein lies the problem. Its not the people who are claiming, but the system that is at fault. Its made too easy to claim. If money was pumped into cheaper childcare, instead of benefits then maybe we would get people working more. A while ago I was having a dabate on here and a lady had been on housing benfit for a long time, yet her husband now earnt over 50k a year and legitimatly they can have that house for life. THAT is where I think its scandalous. Benefits should constantly means tested.