Capping benefits at 4 kids?

Person_one

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

You can be a great parent, yes. But you can't look after a baby all the time on your own. People who can do that can work.

In addition, you aren't being terribly open-minded about disability, either. Being blind, deaf, or having MS doesn't make someone incapable of gainful employment.

My mother in law died of aggressive-progressive MS. She worked until about 6 months before she died. She certainly, though, couldn't have looked after a baby or small child in that last 6 months, she needed constant care herself.

Being blind or deaf might not mean you can't work at all, it does however severely limit your options and makes it a lot harder to convince people to employ you!

MS can be quickly progressive, slowly progressive or relapsing/remitting. People with the second two can make great parents but struggle to stay in work without taking lots of sick time unpredictably or having varying capacity and their employers deciding they aren't worth the hassle. Have a look at this page on the MS society website dedicated to employment with MS:
http://www.mssociety.org.uk/ms-support/practical-and-financial-help/work-and-money/employment


(Also, being a parent doesn't mean looking after a baby all the time on your own if you have a partner or a supportive family.)

neverdespairgirl

My MIL's MS was described as "aggress0ve-progressive" by her consultant, as it wasn't relaping-remitting, and it got worse quickly.

Person_one

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

My MIL's MS was described as "aggress0ve-progressive" by her consultant, as it wasn't relaping-remitting, and it got worse quickly.

That's very sad, sorry for your loss.

meritaten

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

You can be a great parent, yes. But you can't look after a baby all the time on your own. People who can do that can work.

In addition, you aren't being terribly open-minded about disability, either. Being blind, deaf, or having MS doesn't make someone incapable of gainful employment.

My mother in law died of aggressive-progressive MS. She worked until about 6 months before she died. She certainly, though, couldn't have looked after a baby or small child in that last 6 months, she needed constant care herself.

so, you are basing your defination of how people can parent on your MILs MS? There are hundreds of reasons why people cannot work - but it does not stop them from being good parents.
Your MIL would also have been of an age to be a grandparent - NOT a parent. I know someone who suffered with MS for years and still had children - shouldnt she have?

neverdespairgirl

meritaten wrote: »

so, you are basing your defination of how people can parent on your MILs MS? There are hundreds of reasons why people cannot work - but it does not stop them from being good parents.
Your MIL would also have been of an age to be a grandparent - NOT a parent. I know someone who suffered with MS for years and still had children - shouldnt she have?

No, I'm not basing it on that. It's an example, though. She worked for a lot longer than she was capable of looking after a small child.

She was diagnosed when she was 43, so she could still have been a mother, rather than a grandmother. She was 52 when she died.

I think looking after a baby or toddler is a lot harder than working for a living!

DKLS

ceridwen wrote: »

Personally - that struck me as incredibly generous to cap benefit at 4 children.

Personally - I have wondered for years why child benefit still exists - but then remember that the size of the "parent lobby" is huge and apparently blissfully unaware that having children has been a personal choice for about the last 40 years - so is still lobbying away for a "lions share" of resources in blissful ignorance of that fact and their personal responsibilities.

:(:mad::(:(

Well said, I struggle to understand why we should as a society subsidise a lifestyle choice. There are many treads on here usually starting with a wail of I want a baby but can't afford one what shall I do???

Then the usual comments come in chanting like a mantra of "you can never afford a child, but you manage so chuck the condoms out and get "trying for a baby" (love that term why don't they just call it shagging?)

When I read those posts I replace the word baby for Aston Martin Vanquish S, after all I crave an Aston, my life is unfulfilled without having an Aston in my life and I would love and care for it like my own.

Sadly there isn't any benefits to fulfill my desire of having a gentlemans express, so will have to keep moving up the career ladder and saving.

kafkathecat

Hmmm, DKLS I don't think that Aston Martin would be working to pay your pension 30 years down the line do you?
Children are the future. We already have extremely high rates of child poverty in this country and I do not believe for one second that cutting benefits would stop the poor from breeding (that is what we are talking about here after all). Maybe we all need to dust off our Dickens to see what life was like prior to the welfare state. The real issue is that for the last 30 years there have not been enough jobs to go around. Now some people have accepted that they will not find work we are blaming them for that situation.

DKLS

kafkathecat wrote: »

Hmmm, DKLS I don't think that Aston Martin would be working to pay your pension 30 years down the line do you?
Children are the future. We already have extremely high rates of child poverty in this country and I do not believe for one second that cutting benefits would stop the poor from breeding (that is what we are talking about here after all). Maybe we all need to dust off our Dickens to see what life was like prior to the welfare state. The real issue is that for the last 30 years there have not been enough jobs to go around. Now some people have accepted that they will not find work we are blaming them for that situation.

I will sort my own pension arrangements thanks.
"children are the future" do you work in marketing for coca cola?
On a more serious note I would dispute your claims of extremely high child poverty, I have yet to see a child begging for food in this country like I have seen in many countries abroad.

Perhaps the poor of this country should be given incentives in exchange for long term contraception.

Lotus-eater

Person_one wrote: »

Tell that to someone brainwashed by Catholics.

My grandma's a 'lapsed' one but its really hard to shake those teachings.

Oooo yes. Know a few guilty Catholics who often end up going back when they have kids.

jazabelle

Person_one wrote: »

Being blind or deaf might not mean you can't work at all, it does however severely limit your options and makes it a lot harder to convince people to employ you!

Very much agreed. I think many disabled people could work with the right support - but if employers won't give it, or take us on in the first place, what should we do?

For example I applied for a job I could physically do, got it - worked there for over three years with reasonable adjustments in place. Had a supportive manager, low sick leave, and worked really hard.

A company came and took over in July and we were TUPEd across. They took away all my reasonable adjustments, and in fact brought in measures that were the total opposite of what I can do with my conditions. They treated me like crap until the point the stress caused my condition to flare up so badly, I had to go on sick leave. My GP won't let me go back until the basic reasonable adjustments are in place, but they won't.

I've applied for a number of jobs, and always get an interview - but it never goes any further. I have a degree, and a decent CV, but can only work about 18 hours (roughly), but I'm getting no further than the interview. I don't know why - because I walk in with a stick, or perhaps because I find it hard to think of answers on the spot quickly because of my condition?

The problem is a job comes up so rarely that I can do, I feel I'm stuck in limbo.