What help is there for Teen parents?

Duncombe

nottslass wrote: »

I would have thought that they will be treated as a "couple" for benefit purposes regardless of living arrangements.

On this point, you thought wrong. If they live together, they would be treated as a couple. If they lived apart, each would be entitled to make single claims for whatever benefits they applied for.

Sam____2

xmumof4:->x wrote: »

Hi All

My son and his girlfriend are both 16 and have unfortunately found themselves pregnant.

They both want to go through college, although she has had to put that on hold for 12 months, and at the moment they don't feel ready to live together.

Firstly what help could she get if she was to live with her mum and dad, who both work, in order to go to college.

Secondly if they decided to both live with me (which could be a possibility) what help could they and I get.

I am a single parent of 4 children (1 now lives with her father so only 3 at home), the 16 year old is the oldest. I claim tax credits etc.

What I would really like for them is to continue at college with her starting next september. There is a very good nursery near my work and my hours would allow me to help alot but i'm not too sure how the tax credits and childcare help etc would work.

thankyou in advance for any advice

nottslass wrote: »

I take the above to mean "they" want to live together.

BTW I would have thought that they will be treated as a "couple" for benefit purposes regardless of living arrangements.

Well I think you've taken it wrong!!
and no if they lived apart they would not be treated as a couple for benefits purposes...

nottslass_2

Duncombe wrote: »

I think it is YOU who have misread the OP.

Go back and read it again. Or if you are feeling lazy, read the bits I have highlighted above.

The couple have 2 choices; the girl lives with her parents, or they both live with the boys mothers.

Nowhere did the OP say her son and his gf were 'planning on living together' as you put it. Infact, she said the exact opposite.

And the boy living apart from his gf and baby may be a preferable situation. If finances are tight for all those concerned, and this is the best option for them then why should they be encouraged otherwise? Because you think that a young family should be pushed into living together?

Your posts seem as though they are just trying to throw a spanner in the works. The OP is happy with the feedback she has received from other posters. If you can't offer anything constructive, dont comment.

'erm you've just managed to contradict yourself - firstly you confirm that the OP was enquiring about benefits if the couple lived together at her house,next you say that its the "exact opposite" and that they shouldn't be pushed into living together !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I think you'll find that they are classed as a couple for benefit purposes and living apart would not be financially beneficial to them.

If you read the OP's subsequent post she refers to be "willing to let them try"(living together ) which would strongly suggest that is what they want ?

nottslass_2

Sam___ wrote: »

Well I think you've taken it wrong!!
and no if they lived apart they would not be treated as a couple for benefits purposes...

WHY ? Can I suggest you search the threads that suggest otherwise.

Duncombe

nottslass wrote: »

I think you'll find that they are classed as a couple for benefit purposes and living apart would not be financially beneficial to them.

You have misinterpreted the OP, thus I will ignore most of your other comments.

However, you are wrong. They would not be treated as a couple if they were not living together.

nottslass_2

[QUOTE=

Duncombe

;36653367]You have misinterpreted the OP, thus I will ignore most of your other comments.

However, you are wrong. They would not be treated as a couple if they were not living together.[/QUOTE]




That is totally inaccurate,and it is quite possible that "the decision maker" could quite easily decide that they are a couple for benefit purposes.

There have been more threads on this very subject that any other.

Duncombe

nottslass wrote: »

Sorry you are wrong - it is quite possible that "the decision maker" could quite easily decide that they are a couple for benefit purposes.

Oh for pitties sake.

This is from the DirectGov website;

" 'Single' means you are not living with a boyfriend/girlfriend, or that you are separated from your spouse or civil partner, or your civil partnership has been dissolved/you are legally divorced."

If the 16 year old girl lived with her parents, she would be more than entitled to make a single claim for any benefits she applied for. She is classed as being single as she does not live with her partner.

nottslass_2

Duncombe wrote: »

Oh for pitties sake.

This is from the DirectGov website;

" 'Single' means you are not living with a boyfriend/girlfriend, or that you are separated from your spouse or civil partner, or your civil partnership has been dissolved/you are legally divorced."

If the 16 year old girl lived with her parents, she would be more than entitled to make a single claim for any benefits she applied for. She is classed as being single as she does not live with her partner.

You are making yourself look very stupid here - why don't you search the past threads on this subject ?

Duncombe

I give up.

DX2

Duncombe wrote: »

I give up.

;)Pointless argument some posters would argue black is white.