2.8 million delaying parenthood due to housing costs

vaporate

ILW wrote: »

Get the impression you really like giving away other peoples hard earned cash. Would you be in the public sector by any chance?

Evidently, the tories are doing just this with the proposed 9k a year tuition fees which will most likely not be paid back before being wiped clean, assuming it will cost 54k for a 3 year degree...

Says it all really.

Lastly, I worked in the public sector for 6 months and witnessed the waste of tax payers money on stupid surveys/posters and what have you.

No lies from me.

PasturesNew

ninky wrote: »

it is possible that people are becoming more rational about parenthood. we're one of the first generations to have effective birth control. plus people are perhaps more thoughtful as to the longterm lifestyle implications both for the child and themselves of bringing another expensive life into the world.

i don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that the delay is occuring - it is interesting though.

Even in my day people were saying "not having kids .... look at the state of the world, who'd want to bring a kid into this". And that was 30 or so years ago.

ILW

vaporate wrote: »

Evidently, the tories are doing just this with the proposed 9k a year tuition fees which will most likely not be paid back before being wiped clean, assuming it will cost 54k for a 3 year degree...

Says it all really.

Lastly, I worked in the public sector for 6 months and witnessed the waste of tax payers money on stupid surveys/posters and what have you.

No lies from me.

9k a year will only be for the highest grade courses, these would tend to be the ones that are the most likely to result in the fees being repaid.

vaporate

6k even,will not be repaid, since there are interest added every month from 35 to 50 quid. Pointless really lol.

treliac

StevieJ wrote: »

I dare say if you dug deep enough you would find similar VI induced survey results from the 60's, 70's and 80's

Yep, there's no change. The responsible think twice and plan, the irresponsible go ahead regardless.

ceridwen

treliac wrote: »

Yep, there's no change. The responsible think twice and plan, the irresponsible go ahead regardless.

You forgot something - ie the phrase that the irresponsible use "If everyone waited until they could afford children then no-one would ever have them....". This phrase is closely followed by "...and the State will give you all sorts of maternity pay/child benefit/Health in Pregnancy grant/etc/etc/etc" - ie the message is "Don't worry about it - I didn't - I just made sure the State (ie other people) paid the costs instead of doing so myself".

As you say - the responsible think twice and plan - must be where the phrase comes from of "Look before you leap". Thankfully - some people do just that...

BTW - I'm waiting for my cheque for £50,000 that PasturesNew proposed we have because we've "done our bit" by not having them and now we're too old to do so...:)

Orpheo

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Some sinister US Charity I think. But good idea nonetheless.

Oh, the irony.

Orpheo

There's only one thing for it, we must legislate for having children.

I propose that you must have a minimum annual income of £40K before you are allowed to have children. That's the only responsible thing to do. Yes, only people who are at least comfortably off should be allowed to have kids. Besides, these are the sensible folk, they're the ones who have put their careers first and left having children to a sensible time like their mid-thirties for women, early forties for men. Strange how autism rates are increasing though. It is vitally important that if you are one of these sensible folk that have got it sussed that you have your sperm and eggs frozen so that when you are old and wealthy enough to have children the NHS have got something to work with other than your pickled and shrivelled genitals. Ugh! Of course, if you are truly responsible, you will go private so that the NHS doesn't have to pay for you to conceive autistic children or octuplets. Me, I'm sick of paying through the nose for those who have missed the fertility boat to have eight kids.

My wife conceived at the age of 24, at the peak of her fertility. I was jobless (final year at university) and my wife was in a low paid job from which she was subsequently sacked for being pregnant. I found a teaching job very quickly indeed, the mind was focused, we moved to Greater London (I sold my 3 beloved guitars to fund the move) and I was working by the time our beautiful daughter was born. It was tough though as a young teacher with a take home pay of £940 per month and £400 per month rent on a one bedroom flat. We claimed no benefits, except for CB. We lived within our means though, we stayed out of debt and we even managed to save up a 10% deposit on our first house. Our daugher is 12 now, lovely, kind, intelligent and paid for by us, not by you. When my daughter is 18 I will be 44 and her mum 43, plenty of life left to enjoy.

Would life have been easier had we waited to have children? I really don't think so. There is only one motivation for having and raising children and that is love.

'Waiting' to have children is a modern indulgence, I wonder what if our ancestors had 'waited' before having children?

It amuses me that many are voluntarily removing themselves from the gene pool while criticising the choices and circumstances of others.

lostinrates

Orpheo wrote: »

It amuses me that many are voluntarily removing themselves from the gene pool while criticising the choices and circumstances of others.

I think there is a lot of validity in what you say...but (there is always a ''but'') I think fewer have ''voluntarily'' removed themselves from having children than it appears. I'd dearly love a child, just one or maybe two, but I', infertile. Like you I think its ''wrong'' for the nation to fund fertility treatment for me (particularly me as I have other health issues, though I think the point about decline in egg quality etc is more valid than is popularly believed) thus I don't have children. Its something my husband and I will always be a little sad about, but life goes on. I think other people form an opinion to cope..whether its to cope with having had children or to cope with not having had them....it almost inevitably colours one's view.


waiting might be a modern indulgence, but so is the lack of physical labour and hardship, and need for numbers for manual work.

As the children of older parents both DH and I knew we wanted our child/ren younger than that. Not just to have life afterwards but to have a time with our children when we were truly up for messing about in trees and mud and swimming pools and ball kicking with them. I love my parents, and there were advantages to people who were older parenting, but personally its not something that would suit us as well.

The pressures on society and within that children and parenting are not the same as they were for our ancestors..to fail to recognise that fails to prepare for children's' impending adulthood.

Orpheo

lostinrates wrote: »

I think there is a lot of validity in what you say...but (there is always a ''but'') I think fewer have ''voluntarily'' removed themselves from having children than it appears. I'd dearly love a child, just one or maybe two, but I', infertile. Like you I think its ''wrong'' for the nation to fund fertility treatment for me (particularly me as I have other health issues, though I think the point about decline in egg quality etc is more valid than is popularly believed) thus I don't have children. Its something my husband and I will always be a little sad about, but life goes on. I think other people form an opinion to cope..whether its to cope with having had children or to cope with not having had them....it almost inevitably colours one's view.


waiting might be a modern indulgence, but so is the lack of physical labour and hardship, and need for numbers for manual work.

As the children of older parents both DH and I knew we wanted our child/ren younger than that. Not just to have life afterwards but to have a time with our children when we were truly up for messing about in trees and mud and swimming pools and ball kicking with them. I love my parents, and there were advantages to people who were older parenting, but personally its not something that would suit us as well.

The pressures on society and within that children and parenting are not the same as they were for our ancestors..to fail to recognise that fails to prepare for children's' impending adulthood.

Forgive me, my entire first paragraph was (I thought obviously otherwise my very last sentence would be hypocritical) verily tongue-in-cheek. I do not begrudge fertility treatment although I do think that it needs to be done a little differently.