'Kicking' children out at 16...view please

gizmo111

squirrelchops wrote: »

Thanks all. Your replies have really given me an insight into this issue. Just need to find a way of linking it in to my analysis! I will be glad to finish this studying lark!!

What are you studying

Icanandwillsavemoney;32374747

I have becomes friends with a couple of social workers and they echo this comment regularly.

They are so over stretched and most have only enough time to be reactionary whereas if they had lower caseloads, they could spend quality time providing quality support rather than a quick fix.

I've been juggling it so long I feel I could open a circus!

With regards to your original question there are quite a few reasons why. There are class expectations, poverty, lack of education, lack of social exclusion etc. Some parents will object to losing benfits at 16. Others will have been begging for help as the difficult years sarted and spiralled out of control and been let down and can no longer cope.
I expect my children to stay at home until at least 18 when they go to uni or longer if they go locally. I have had freinds kids stay for a while to help them with control issues etc, but Iwould never kick them out at 16 or any age come to that. I stayed home till I was 25 and things went downhill from there!

Oldernotwiser

Nenen wrote: »

It is very interesting how this kind of perceived 'wisdom' come about in society isn't it. From experience, the significance of the age of 16 has been around a very long time - 35+ years at least.

Presumably since 1972 when the school leaving age was raised to 16.

angelicmary85

jackieb wrote: »

I still have a 26yo at home! (and a 21yo, 17yo and 14yo ) The only reason the eldest is still here is because he's saving for a house, but he's looking to buy this year. It would be nice to get the house to myself now and again though - I think that won't be happening for a good while yet, even when the eldest goes.

A woman I work with had a 33year old at home...she says she can't get shot of him :rotfl:

squirrelchops

Hi gizmo......................yeah studying to be one of the 'child snatchers' aka social worker. I am currently on placement with a children and families team and have a job secured with another council when I finish.

gizmo111

Excellent - its all downhill from now then:rotfl:
Seriously though been a sw for about 10 years and love it (most of the time) - presuming you are on final year?

jonty1970

Kick em out at 16!
Any tips? I can't get rid of mine! (being silly, sorry)

Mine stay as long as they need, I could never kick them out.
when my son was 15, he hated us and wanted to get his own place. The local housing sent someone round, to see if we had really kicked him out (he told them we had)
She met a nice family who wanted him to come home (and stop being an idiot, coming in late drunk and getting told off, which he thought was child cruelty)
She told us he would get a home, but in a flat with other teens, who were "streetwise" and would use him and drag him down, if he got in with them.
He came back, is at college now and off to uni in Septemember!

I have heard of people throwing them out at 16. Luckily, they had family to go to.
I think it's a cruel thing to do, unless the teen is really a little monster who is ruining the home for everyone.

jonty1970

I do think it's hard for some families when benefits stop.
In my own case, my son got ema. That went on his bus fare and bits and pieces for college.
I've been keeping him for the 2 years.
I know some teens have had to drop college, because their parents won't keep them.
No benefits for them and they can't afford to keep them, so the teen has to leave and get a job (or sign on)

babymoo

When my brother was 15, almost 16 probably 2 months to go he was always in trouble with police n mum got so fed up she went to social services and was told they couldnt help because mum can just kick him out at 16 anyway.

jonty1970

It's not right is it!
At 16, how can they afford to live? Do they magically get a well payed job and can rent a nice house?
They end up in council flats on rough estates or in hostels.

Why have kids if you don't care what happens to them (not talking about kids who are trouble, even though they still need help at that age)

One family friend said he had had enough and would chuck them out. He used to tell them when they 16 they were on their own.
Luckily, the parents split up and they went with mum. The dad would have kicked them out

thorsoak

jonty1970 wrote: »

I've been keeping him for the 2 years.
(or sign on)

You have been keeping him for 16 years, surely? And do you not still get child benefit and WTC whilst he is still in education?

I think that the OP must look at this historically - in 1922, aged 14, my FIL left home and joined the navy as a junior rating (signing on for 13 years) in 1923 my MIL had to leave home (aged 13) to work as a kitchen maid in a "big house" in London - a job got for her by her older sister who had just been "promoted" to housemaid, my dad was 22 when he left home and went into "digs" when promoted from telegram boy to sorting office in another town - and this was quite common up until WWII - children either contributed to the family budget or left home and worked elsewhere.

I had friends in late 1950s/early 60s who left home and went into bedsits if they were working in London from about the age of 17.

When my own children were teenagers (early 80s) I knew of several girls who became pregnant and who were given council flats - it seemed to be "received wisdom" that at the age of 18, you could go on the council list and get a council flat even if you weren't pregnant! But of course, that was all pre-Thatcher's council house sell-off.

The age of "kicking out" children does seem to go with the school-leaving age - 1920s/30s they could leave at 13 if they had a job, up to early 70s when it was increased to 16, it was 15.