No More Sure Start Mat Grant

krisskross

gillianr2 wrote: »

I feel for you. I am in a similar boat to you except that I am having twins so these will be our 3rd and 4th children! I knew about the hip grant being axed and I missed out on it by the same time as you (a week). The sure start was different though as the budget outlayed it would be stopped from April 11 and I called the social fund last Sept to be told that I would def be entitled to it x 2 (£1000) as I would have reached 29wks pregnant wayyyy before April. Then the condems decided to push though the new rules on 24th Jan meaning that we miss out on that now too. It's not so much that they have stopped it that gets me, it's the fact they stopped it so suddenly and with no notice leaving 150,000 families who were entitled to it no longer entitled to it and only weeks from the birth of their children, our family like most who were entitled to it actually needed this money! Now the baby element is being stopped aswell.

You do know that if your baby is born on or before 10th April you will be entitled to the sure start under the old rules (just incase)? As I am having twins I will be having a section around 11th April so I will either just be within the time limits or I could miss out on it by literally a day!

Have you looked at entitledto to check out what benefits you ,may still be able to get? My dh works full time and earns more than 16k and he does get wtc, all be it £1.98 a week!!

This actually makes me wonder if you could really afford to increase your family.

AsknAnswer2

lisabee wrote: »

That doesnt make sense if it was chnaged in January as some women have claimed it and have recieved the grant regardless of previous children!:o

Look up the link I posted - it's the amendment legislation which applies to Sure Start Maternity Grants. They have not stopped entirely, the legislation has just been amended to alter who qualifies for the grant.

24th January to be precise, that it came into force.

Leela

gillianr2 wrote: »

a) That would be none of your business.

b) All I am talking about is what we would have been entitled to under Labour that we are no longer entitled to under the ConDems, yes I said we needed the money (as would most families right now!) but I didn't mention that I couldn't afford a family without it did I????

c) Where's your answer for the op or are you just on to wind up others?

It never ceases to amaze me how people like you think it's everyone's responsibility but yours to work to support your life choices but no-one's business if we are pee'd off about it.

krisskross

gillianr2 wrote: »

a) That would be none of your business.

b) All I am talking about is what we would have been entitled to under Labour that we are no longer entitled to under the ConDems, yes I said we needed the money (as would most families right now!) but I didn't mention that I couldn't afford a family without it did I????

c) Where's your answer for the op or are you just on to wind up others?

To be frank if you have just 1 wage earner on what seems like a pretty low wage if you are getting WTC then you probably can't afford more children without quite a lot of taxpayer funded support.

parsons

krisskross wrote: »

To be frank if you have just 1 wage earner on what seems like a pretty low wage if you are getting WTC then you probably can't afford more children without quite a lot of taxpayer funded support.

I'm a man so obviously don't know much about this subject!

However your comments are very valid.

My daughter (33) and her fiancee (35) have no intention of getting married, living together, having children etc until such time as he is financially stable.
She has her own property on mortgage where she lives, whilst he has his own flat and a house a lets out.
He is a professional man who started his own practice last year and will not entertain any type of responsibility until he believes that he can afford it.
He gave up a salary as an employee of £55,000pa and considers that that will be the minimum he needs to earn. He has told me that he thinks £70,000pa will be nearer the mark!

He expects to achieve this in 5 years.

It is a pity that others in this country don't follow suit and consider a family only and until they can afford one WITHOUT assistance from the government!!!

Gleeful

parsons wrote: »

I'm a man so obviously don't know much about this subject!

However your comments are very valid.

My daughter (33) and her fiancee (35) have no intention of getting married, living together, having children etc until such time as he is financially stable.
She has her own property on mortgage where she lives, whilst he has his own flat and a house a lets out.
He is a professional man who started his own practice last year and will not entertain any type of responsibility until he believes that he can afford it.
He gave up a salary as an employee of £55,000pa and considers that that will be the minimum he needs to earn. He has told me that he thinks £70,000pa will be nearer the mark!

He expects to achieve this in 5 years.

It is a pity that others in this country don't follow suit and consider a family only and until they can afford one WITHOUT assistance from the government!!!

Just thanked your post as we are in similar boats to your future son in law. £53k combined income at the moment, each of us are climbing the scale at the rate of 2k per year, but no property owned unlike your son in law. I'm 29, he's 32. I would love to have a child, but because I won't qualify for maternity leave until 18 months in my current post, we can't afford to have a child for a good few years yet.

I commend your future son in law. Far too many people are having children they could never afford and expecting the state to support them.

You must be so proud, yet frustrated about the lack of grandchildren just yet!

I imagine I'll be told now that I sound bitter. Maybe I am, when some of the pupils I teach can apparently afford to reproduce, yet I cannot, simply because I chose to educate myself, follow a career path and try to be successful.

duchy

Planning on waiting and starting a family at 38 is very brave or very foolhardy -depending on your viewpoint. Fertility issues at that age are far more common -I hope it works out for them.

Gleeful

duchy wrote: »

Planning on waiting and starting a family at 38 is very brave or very foolhardy -depending on your viewpoint. Fertility issues at that age are far more common -I hope it works out for them.

Fertility issues at any age can be common.

Surely society would welcome a child into the world who was loved, wanted, and had a stable family background? Rather than because the parents got 'grants' and 'support' from a state that is stretched to breaking point because of the sheer number of people it is required to support?

gravitytolls

nEVER CEASES TO AMAZE ME ~ oops shouty ~ that folk criticise others for not ensuring they could afford children, even if circumstances change. And let's face it, sometimes babies happen without any planning whatsoever, in fact, despite best efforts not to arrive!

If everyone waited, the decline in population would have a catastrophic effect, not least because there'd be no one to care for us in our old age, via taxes or care.

Right now, folk need all the help they can get to make ends meet. Prices have risen, wages haven't, interest rates will surely rise soon.

Of course the welfare budget needs to be reduced, the status quo needs to be restored, with families actually being able to afford to live on wages without reliance on top up credits, but we're nowhere near that stage yet.

OP and others, good luck with your babies, with regard to grants, ebay, gumtree, the freeads and freegle are always a fair bet.

parsons

Gleeful wrote: »

Just thanked your post as we are in similar boats to your future son in law. £53k combined income at the moment, each of us are climbing the scale at the rate of 2k per year, but no property owned unlike your son in law. I'm 29, he's 32. I would love to have a child, but because I won't qualify for maternity leave until 18 months in my current post, we can't afford to have a child for a good few years yet.

I commend your future son in law. Far too many people are having children they could never afford and expecting the state to support them.

You must be so proud, yet frustrated about the lack of grandchildren just yet!

I imagine I'll be told now that I sound bitter. Maybe I am, when some of the pupils I teach can apparently afford to reproduce, yet I cannot, simply because I chose to educate myself, follow a career path and try to be successful.

Thanks for that. Yes I am very proud of both of them.
Grand children will come along sometime, but what is more important is that they (as a family) will be financially secure and be able to provide for everything that the family will need.

Mind you I can't say that for my wife though! She fully understands and backs them both, but I know she would love to be a grandma sooner!!!

I am so glad that I and my family are not the only ones that take responsibility seriously. It saddens me to see children having children who will have little going for them as they grow up. Probably having to exist for years courtesy of a life on Welfare handouts.