Please help

Oldernotwiser

SomeBozo wrote: »

So don't be down. I see your past threads are talking about buying leather beds and laptops so hopefully your financial situation will continue to be better then others.

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

viktory

jonty1970 wrote: »

I don't know about what you are entitled to , sorry, but the only person who need slating here is the father of the baby!
I may be old fashioned, but women to me, are made to be mums and dads go out and earn money to keep their family! (yes, I am a woman and yes I am now left alone with my kids)
It is not always the womans fault. It is the men who seem to think it's alright to dump their children on benefits.

Your Janet and John ideal that Mum stays at home and Dad goes off to the office everyday is a lovely fantasy but sadly not a lot of two parent families can afford this ideal. Usually both parents have to work just to pay for their children. I find that generally it is only single parents on benefits that have the luxury of staying at home.

In this instance perhaps the OP should have been a bit more prudent and continued to use contraception for a while. Clearly the relationship was rocky as they had separated once and were trying to make their relationship work again.

The Government consultation on changes to the benefit system I have just read and commented on at least gives a nod in the right direction of change, alothough it doesn't go far enough in my opinion. If the changes go through all single parents are in for quite a shock.

kate1983_2

viktory wrote: »

a

In this instance perhaps the OP should have been a bit more prudent and continued to use contraception for a while. Clearly the relationship was rocky as they had separated once and were trying to make their relationship work again.


Contraception was used I have been on the pill since I had my 1st child (never missed a pill to this day) I was just one of the unlucky ones.

viktory

You are very unlucky. The failure rate for the combined oral contraceptive pill (taken correctly) is 0.08 or 8 women falling pregnant out of 10,000 in a year. Those odds are lower than having your tubes tied - only a vasectomy or total abstinence is safer (figures from Bandolier Journal).

Hope you do the lottery.

krisskross

I know this is off the topic of advising the OP how to extract the maximum benefits possible but I just feel so very strongly that a pregnancy should never be even considered if the parents cannot support the child without state help.

I understand relationships break down for various reasons and am totally in favour of supporting them until they are back on their feet but I do wonder how many children would be born to jobless, non committed parents if they knew there was no state support.

bestpud

This is a difficult one and I have to admit my first thoughts were quite critical!

However, the baby is on the way and surely it is better to help the OP access maternity pay (if she can) and child maintenance etc than go over all the reasons she should have known better?

She has said she wants to go back to work so how about helping her with that? I don't know enough to say but there must be people on here who have been in the same situation and can help.

I know there is an argument about having children you can't support but it's done now and it's maybe a little early to assume she will spend 12 years on benefits, isn't it?

Perhaps less would take the 'easy' route if they could access decent advice?