15 kids and counting

LilacPixie

I watched it with a mix of awe and wonder. The couple with 14 kids plus she was pregnant how on earth did they manage to keep track of all kids while in lanzarote?? Just OMG how do they cope? My food bills are bad enough with 3 kids and I feel it takes a huge amount of organisation to give each child one on one time, I don't physically think I could cope with 5 times the kids I do.

We are actually mid negotiation about baby number 4 and if that will happen and what needs to be acheived first like we need a larger home, a larger car, savings or no mortgage etc etc.

lostinrates

serious_saver wrote: »

I didn't catch the programme but I find people's reactions to large families fascinating. We think of big families as strange these days but it wasn't that long ago that it was quite common. My grandfather, who only passed away recently was the eldest of 14 who survived into adulthood. I suppose it's because we now have more freedom to choose whether we want children or not. Thank goodness for readily available contraception!

It wasn't all that long ago that we didn't really understand global population growth either. Or that we have increasing technology, automation and global competition making it potentially harder for the kids. Or such a well connected welfare system, necessary, but often supporting people who choose not to be provident while those who are feel it's a punative drain....in truth, it's something to be proud of, but sometimes it's very easy to feel the pendulum swings to far while the middle gets buffeted but no relief!


Personally, while I support the fit of people to do as they choose, for me there is a bit of an ethical question of having significantly more than two. Children, or rather gruesomely in terminology, replacement rate.

Re the parents otivation being becUse they were adopted, how much more easy to understand this would be to me if after say two of their own children they had gone on to foster or adopt children who would benefit from the huge amount of love they have to give and could benefit from a family life.

hallmark

scattymam1 wrote: »

Yeah the daily mail article said they have their own bakery business

That explains why she always has a bun in the oven.

SingleSue

When myself and my mum saw the advert for the programme, we both looked at each other and said "Blooming nora, think of the dirty nappies, would be forever blooming changing them, year after year after year!"

We were so immersed in that thought that we didn't think about anything else.....

3 is fine for me, it was supposed to be 2 or 4 (never 3) and as we had had our two, we thought we were done but youngest was a bit of a surprise (contraceptive injection failed) and although we were planning on a 4th, as soon as I heard my nephew crying on a visit to my sister after she had had him when youngest was just over a year, my blood ran cold and all the broody feelings melted away.

Could not imagine having loads of children, I am not the most maternal person in the world.

The-Joker

SingleSue wrote: »

When myself and my mum saw the advert for the programme, we both looked at each other and said "Blooming nora, think of the dirty nappies, would be forever blooming changing them, year after year after year!"

We were so immersed in that thought that we didn't think about anything else.....

3 is fine for me, it was supposed to be 2 or 4 (never 3) and as we had had our two, we thought we were done but youngest was a bit of a surprise (contraceptive injection failed) and although we were planning on a 4th, as soon as I heard my nephew crying on a visit to my sister after she had had him when youngest was just over a year, my blood ran cold and all the broody feelings melted away.

Could not imagine having loads of children, I am not the most maternal person in the world.

No doubt lots of work one way or another. But the issue is could they afford to have so many if they did not get child tax credit and child benefit and all the rest?

The cap per family is a great idea, anyone with more than a few kids wanting to live in a nice area will have to pay themselves they won't be able to rely on handouts.

BigAunty

One of the problems with the approach to child poverty through tax credits is that it didn't really ever resolve the issue of addressing it by ending adult poverty - doing things to increase job opportunities, increase wages/decrease taxes, reduce housing costs and so on.

The benefit board is choked with posts from parents who are stunned when their child tax credits and child benefit ends when their child turns 19 - it strips out a lot of their disposable income which even if the kid gets JSA and hands some of it over for their keep, is very imbalanced.

The Guardian website recently had a very sad article from a couple with 3 autistic children in a housing association flat who are frantic at a potential loss of £50 a week through benefit changes which they say would wipe out the money for their sporting activities. But the forum members identified that if their household was getting a moderate amount of disability and carers allowance for them, they were netting anywhere from £600 to £800 per week disposable income (depending on the levels of DLA for the 3 children) as they qualified for full housing and council tax benefit. Not to envy them their huge responsibilities with raising these children with disabilities, though.

ash28

I thought the family from Morcambe were a normal, if large family. I don't know what they received in the way of benefits (other than child benefits), they had about 6 kids before child tax credits were introduced, they have their own 9 bed house and run a successful business - TBH, I'd rather give a family like that child tax credits and child benefit as opposed to a family with one or two children who have the made the choice not to work. I guess it says a lot that all of the kids still live at home - the eldest is 22.

There was no doubt the parents loved the kids - they all looked happy - the house was clean and tidy and every thing seemed to be run with a military like precision. The kids were all clean and well turned out.

At the end of the day we might get 15 bright young people with a strong work ethic.

The other family featured were a bit like our old neighbours - Catholic with lots of children and home schooled, but the mother is a qualified teacher unlike the mother in the programme - and the father worked. Our neighbours were a bit odd - they didn't want the children to mix with the local children - their choice.

Not for me though - I could hardly cope with 3 let alone 15.

LilacPixie

The-Joker wrote: »

No doubt lots of work one way or another. But the issue is could they afford to have so many if they did not get child tax credit and child benefit and all the rest?

The cap per family is a great idea, anyone with more than a few kids wanting to live in a nice area will have to pay themselves they won't be able to rely on handouts.

Well tax credits only arrived in 2003 so for families with 15 kids in 2011, assuming no multiples they could only of had maybe 7 since the introduction of tax credits. I still wouldnt have 15 kids and my reaction is still !!!!!! but I really do not think tax credits had a baring on thir decision to have so many children.
One of the families had a 9 bed house in a nice are and a sucessful business. For all we know the income they had could be too high for tax credits even with 15 kids.

The-Joker

elvis86 wrote: »

I totally agree that benefits should be capped at 2 or 3 kids and assistance with rent capped on a 2/3 bedroomed house. You should only have more if you can afford them without the state's assistance.

Makes sence what you say. But what to do now? For years girls have been having kids so they can have a home paid for them and enough money to live comfortably without working.

This has pushed up rents and houses prices and until the benefits are capped these high housing benefit payments are holding up high rents and with them high house prices.

Derivative

The entire principle of "means-tested" benefits is broken.

If you have the "means", you can deliberately sabotage them until you don't.
Hey presto, eligible to claim "means-tested" benefits.

In addition, means-tested benefits almost directly cause inflation.

Can't afford the rent?
Congratulations, you're eligible for a means-tested benefit.
Landlord raises the rent.
Can't afford the rent.
Congratulations, you're eligible for a means-tested benefit.
Landlord raises the rent.

Solution.

Basic income for all. £5k or thereabouts should do it, starting at age 16.
No bureaucracy - UK citizen, you get it.
No unfairness.
If you want more money, you can work for it.

This would cost ~240bn pa, given 48 million citizens >16 in UK.
Current benefit budget is £180bn pa - so you'd have to make up 60bn, or the equivalent of taxing every working age Briton an extra ~£1500.
More than made up for. You could knock it up to £6 or 7k if you wanted people to live more comfortable lives.

I really don't understand why we have the maze of benefits we have now. Noone 'needs' to live in the South East. Noone 'needs' any more than to feed and clothe their children, which costs <£1000 per year per child. Noone 'needs' free Council Tax if they have enough money to pay for it anyway.