Homelessness at 34 weeks pregnant?

euronorris

tea_lover wrote: »

What frankly p*sses me off a bit though is the ingratitude. The OP (contrary to her post title) isn't homeless, and isn't going to be homeless. She's been offered a roof over her head, and lots of advice about what her next steps could be. But it seems that whatever is offered isn't good enough and there's an air of entitlement in the first post that may have rubbed a lot of people up the wrong way.

And to that I say, try to bear in mind that she is 18, and been brought up in an era where the entitlement attitude was all around her. For all we know, he Mum have always lived in a council house. Or even encouraged her to get pregnant young for the benefits (as one of my friend's Mum's did! :mad: Thankfully, said friend envisaged more in her life, but her sister's sadly did not).

I agree, the first post has rubbed a lot of people up the wrong way, and I understand why. I just don't think having a go at her for all her mistakes is going to improve things. On the contrary, it may well have the opposite effect.

puddy

tea_lover wrote: »

I don't think it's the situation that has riled some posters (me included), it's the attitude. Of course accidents happen, and people find themselves pregnant in less than ideal situations. Families can be less than helpful at times, and work isn't that easy to come by right now. I understand all of that and genuinely sympathise.

What frankly p*sses me off a bit though is the ingratitude. The OP (contrary to her post title) isn't homeless, and isn't going to be homeless. She's been offered a roof over her head, and lots of advice about what her next steps could be. But it seems that whatever is offered isn't good enough and there's an air of entitlement in the first post that may have rubbed a lot of people up the wrong way.

well this is what i dont understand, we have a welfare state for just this reason, she has found herself potentially homeless and the state has stepped in, just as it should, it shouldnt be down to her partner's parents, its not their responsiblity it is her and her partner's so they willl (or wont as is their want) utilise resources available to all of us in this country

i have suggested that there would be more choice for them if they rented a double room somewhere, she would still be entitled to hb and when she gets vouchers for child care will still be able to go to college, he wouldnt need to give up work whether he lives at his parents or not a long commute is nothing

so i dont know why the doom and gloom, she has somewhere to live, she has choices which she can afford and take if she wants in the private sector and eventually will be allocated more suitable housing if they are overcrowded

FatVonD

tea_lover wrote: »

The OP (contrary to her post title) isn't homeless, and isn't going to be homeless.

Not least of all because, as someone else alluded to a couple of pages back, it's quite likely the b/f's parents have no intention of throwing them out but the couple won't be considered for housing until the parents *say* that they are throwing them out and by which date.

lolly_896

Hey,

I don't feel i'm entitled to social housing, but thought that i would be considered - I was 19 when i fell pregnant (GP changed my pill and i got confused) I had a premature baby who is missing part of his brain. I was living with my parents who both got diagnosed with Cancer within weeks of me giving birth. 6 yrs later we are STILL on the list with letters from Drs, HV Peads etc. With big overcrowding issues. (I worked from 15 1/2, so i had paid my taxes too)

No doubt i will get slated for this, but unless you are in emergency housing the chances of being housed by council are extremely slim. If i had my time again, i would have moved into b&b or hostel and not privately let, just for some security for my family. Twice our Landlords have decided to sell up and we have had to uproot - This has severe consequences on DS1 as change really upsets him (Symptoms of his Brain condition) he needs familiarity.

The only time we will be able to afford to move is when/if we inherit - i feel awful saying/thinking like this but it's the truth.

Do what you have to do for your family

Lolly

ognum

There are so many assumptions on this thread, posters have vilified the OP and her family through assuming this and that.

The OP has come for advice just as many have done before and has had the problems of the welfare state and young people being pregnant thrust down her throat.

She has sadly through youth and neivity written a post that is badly constructed and appears grasping.

Even if you have not been young and pregnant I am sure most people can reflect on things they did at 18 or perhaps their kids have said and done or even what they might do in the future.

Give this young woman a break and make some useful suggestions and hopefully when you, your kids or parents need help in the future others will help them.

Stop condemning and start helping. Give a little it will make you happier and healthier.

Gillyx

Contraception is not 100% I was using it and it failed, I got the morning after pill and I still became pregnant.

Those preaching about how contraception has always worked for them are lucky, if a contraceptive is 99.9% effective, there will always be that 0.01% who are unlucky.

Thankfully I'm glad it didn't work

peachyprice

euronorris wrote: »

That very much depends on what school you go to, and the assigned teacher.

I'm only 29 and my sexual education at school consisted of the biology facts only. ie, have sex, sperm released, meets egg, pregnancy. There was no mention of condoms or STD's. I can remember my friends telling me that they got to practice putting condoms on at their school, but this was not offered at my school. Even after we asked for it (sounded rather fun to a 14 year old!), we were told we would have that lesson in the next year but it never materialised.

Things have come on leaps and bound in the last 10 years Euro, especially in London schools, where the OP is from. Contraceptive advise is much more widely available in school, children are made very much aware of this from yr 10 onwards. Ignorance isn't really an excuse anymore.

peachyprice

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

And plenty where it wasn't. My BF's parents, 44 years ago, for a start. In London, too, not some unwanted area. Not homeless, living with his mum in the house she owned (Dad had died some 15 years previously), married, got their first place 5 minutes off the King's Road, offered 6 weeks after their marriage, aged 18 and 19. BF was born 11 months later. As soon as child no 2 was born, offered a larger place, which they then bought.

Fast forward 44 years and the Chelsea townhouse was sold, a huge property in the suburbs was bought along with a business, then they were subsequently sold and a bungalow in the country was home for both of them until he passed away.


None of which is remarkable - but they were originally just a pair of teenagers, one who worked in a shop, one who worked as a handyman, both left school with no qualifications and got married as soon as nobody could stop them.

It took the State to help them for the first few years to get them in the position they were in at the time of his death - help that their contemporaries appear to resent giving the current teenagers.

And therein lies the problem. Folks were given the right to buy up the social housing stock which hasn't been replaced at the same rate.

Where do the houses for young couples nowadays come from if they've all been sold off?

Dunroamin

Jojo_the_Tightfisted wrote: »

It took the State to help them for the first few years to get them in the position they were in at the time of his death - help that their contemporaries appear to resent giving the current teenagers.

Fortunately the state no longer helps people by allowing them to buy expensive and coveted properties at a fraction of their value. Perhaps if that had never been the case, people like the OP and her child might not be homeless now.

(My parents were on the council waiting list for over 40 years and were eventually offered a flat when I was 35 and had left home 16 years earlier.)

puddy

Dunroamin wrote: »

Fortunately the state no longer helps people by allowing them to buy expensive and coveted properties at a fraction of their value. Perhaps if that had never been the case, people like the OP and her child might not be homeless now.

(My parents were on the council waiting list for over 40 years and were eventually offered a flat when I was 35 and had left home 16 years earlier.)

you obviously havent been keeping up with the news, right to buy is back and with a 70% discount,, roll on more homelessness