Should the tax and benefits system prioritise families? poll discussion

sphrp2

<P>Shadej - just because you have no self-worth outside of reproduction, don't cast aspersions upon Justthisonce's family set up.</P>

justthisonce_2

shadej wrote: »

Accept for in Justthisonce's case.

Woman loves her husband, husband loves his wife, no one love their children.

Don't be so bl**dy ridiculous. Of course we both loved and cherished our children. Because we love each other does not make any other love impossible. I didn't stop loving my parents when I met my husband.

I would reconsider your chosen career as you obviously have deeply entrenched views of what is right or wrong rather than the open mind I would expect a psychologist to have.

You also sound very young, when you have a bit more life experience you may rethink.

justthisonce_2

shadej wrote: »

Accept for in Justthisonce's case.

Woman loves her husband, husband loves his wife, no one love their children.

I think you may have used accept instead of except. Makes a totally different meaning to your sentence.

shadej

justthisonce wrote: »

Don't be so bl**dy ridiculous. Of course we both loved and cherished our children. Because we love each other does not make any other love impossible. I didn't stop loving my parents when I met my husband.

I would reconsider your chosen career as you obviously have deeply entrenched views of what is right or wrong rather than the open mind I would expect a psychologist to have.

You also sound very young, when you have a bit more life experience you may rethink.

:beer: Ill just take your advice then should I :rolleyes:

shadej

justthisonce wrote: »

I think you may have used accept instead of except. Makes a totally different meaning to your sentence.

Thank you for pointing that out, It does indeed make a difference.

Chrysalis

mitchaa I got no children and I wouldnt call my life fun.

Having children can be very rewarding and make life much more worth it.

Bayblue

Yes, the benefits system should (within sensible limits) prioritise families. Absolutely.

Of course that does mean that those who are childless, either by choice or those who cannot have children are treated slightly less fairly. However, in a civilised society there will always be some people who take on more of the tax burden than others- it isn't 'fair' but at the same time I cannot see any other way to organise it to make it equal. In truth life itself isn't fair full stop, and whatever concessions are made it never will be.

In response to some of the other points raised in the discussion I would however add that:

Having children is not a God given (or any other kind) of 'right'.

In some instances for people who biologically can't have children there really isn't any option. Surrogacy and adoptions are not easily available or suitable for everyone. Some people ARE unfortunately childless through no fault or choice of their own. It's wrong to say that they always have that 'choice'.

And lastly, I'd like to see the benefits system targeted more to encouraging keeping families with children together. I think that the current system somehow favours facilitating life choices of the parents rather than best interests of the children.

Chrysalis

Bayblue interesting point of view, so you see it rather as someone not choosing to have children rather than someone as choosing to have a child, basically people have children by default unless they choose not to.

The problem at current tho is people with children are not slightly favoured they are largely favoured.

I agree with your last comment.

Bayblue

Chrysalis wrote: »

Bayblue interesting point of view, so you see it rather as someone not choosing to have children rather than someone as choosing to have a child, basically people have children by default unless they choose not to.

I'm not quite sure what you mean, unless you referring to the point I made about those who are biologically infertile? In which case I was just pointing out that the medical interventions, surrogacy, and adoptions etc that get bandied around as alternatives are not available to everyone, that's all, but that's a whole other discussion.

Aside from that situation, of course, having a child/ren for most people is an active choice in this day and age.

Chrysalis wrote: »

The problem at current tho is people with children are not slightly favoured they are largely favoured.

Yep. But again as I said, I can't see a way around it without children suffering and, no one wants to see that. To be honest to change this significantly would take more of a moral shift in this country rather than a welfare one.

Natalie6999

When we decided to have children, we didn't know that 8 months into my pregnancy my husband would become seriously ill & unable to work again & that due to the strain of my husband's illness I would suffer a traumatic birth that would send my body into shock causing rheumatoid arthritis.

we did not choose to be in a situation where we have to rely on benefits & tax credits, but as we are we have to make the best of it.