Homelessness at 34 weeks pregnant?

jellyhead

For those who questioned why I assumed the bf's mum was in a council house - I just made the assumption that if she owned a house that had at least 2 empty bedrooms that she could downsize or use some of her equity or whatever to give her son a deposit on a flat near his work.

Sorry if that sounds too much, but she could do that. Her son doesn't have to throw himself upon the charity of the council and welfare state when she has the means to help him out.

I just don't get it, sorry. If my son made such a !!!!-up of his life (sorry if that offends anyone - it's not meant to. My own parents were teenagers but it's not what I would hope for for my own children) I'd do everything I could to keep him in his current job and his gf in college.

I really don't understand throwing them out to fend for themselves at 17/18, not if you have the means to give/lend them a deposit and a month's rent.

That's why I assumed a council house, because if she were private renting it would be bonkers to rent a much bigger house than was required, and if she owned it then she'd want to keep her kid in his job, surely?

euronorris

the_cat wrote: »

I think the state should fund accomodation at a truly basic level (in hostels or suchlike) No one should be on the street, especially a young mother and baby

But to subsidise their life to the extent that they can function for the next 18 years in much the same way as someone who works hard, perhaps on low wages is crazy and purely an incentive to do nothing for yourself, except produce more kids

Thanks for this.

I actually think the money would be better spent by putting them into hostels or suchlike (as you suggested), but with support, encouragement and education about how to budget, getting a job, etc etc. Everything they need to actually help them become self sufficient, rather than relying on benefits indefinitely.

Person_one

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

Getting pregnant is still a life choice - and there should be consequences for poor choices in life not the reward of cheap accommodation without working for it.

Even if I agreed with this harsh attitude I'd still think it was lacking compassion in the extreme to think that the completely innocent baby should be the one facing those consequences.

puddy

jellyhead wrote: »

For those who questioned why I assumed the bf's mum was in a council house - I just made the assumption that if she owned a house that had at least 2 empty bedrooms that she could downsize or use some of her equity or whatever to give her son a deposit on a flat near his work.

Sorry if that sounds too much, but she could do that. Her son doesn't have to throw himself upon the charity of the council and welfare state when she has the means to help him out.

I just don't get it, sorry. If my son made such a !!!!-up of his life (sorry if that offends anyone - it's not meant to. My own parents were teenagers but it's not what I would hope for for my own children) I'd do everything I could to keep him in his current job and his gf in college.

I really don't understand throwing them out to fend for themselves at 17/18, not if you have the means to give/lend them a deposit and a month's rent.

That's why I assumed a council house, because if she were private renting it would be bonkers to rent a much bigger house than was required, and if she owned it then she'd want to keep her kid in his job, surely?

i cant remember if its you or someone else but this keeps being raised about the boyfriend not keeping his job,, can i ask why? is 1.5 hours of commuting liable to mean he jacks his job in? my oh travels 2.5 hours both ways to work and back, what would we do if he jacked his job in, we wouldnt get hb because we are mortgaged. why would he stop work because he has a long journey, im genuinely confused

so that is why i would be flabbergasted for someone to suggest that the boyfriend's mum sell her property to give him equity to put a deposit down for a flat!! and then where does the mother live? she may not want to downsize

i find it quite amusing that this is a serious suggestion!!

Person_one

Here's a table showing the failure rates of the various contraceptives for people who seem to think that its possible to prevent every unplanned pregnancy.

The most effective (more so than male sterilisation) is the implant, and still 600 women have had pregnancies while using it in the last ten years.


Edit: Oops, forgot the table!

http://www.cks.nhs.uk/contraception/background_information/effectiveness_of_contraceptives

euronorris

puddy wrote: »

i cant remember if its you or someone else but this keeps being raised about the boyfriend not keeping his job,, can i ask why? is 1.5 hours of commuting liable to mean he jacks his job in? my oh travels 2.5 hours both ways to work and back, what would we do if he jacked his job in, we wouldnt get hb because we are mortgaged. why would he stop work because he has a long journey, im genuinely confused

The only reason I can think of is affordability. I have no idea if it's still affordable to the OP and her bf or not, but his travelling costs will definitely increase.

And for that, I suggest that the OP looks for evening work once the baby has arrived. That way, there is extra income coming in, and none being expended on childcare still.

euronorris

Person One - There is no table in your post, or link. Could you try again please?

baconandcabbage

Oh stop banging on about Breast Feeding! So what if she does not intend to breast feed what does that make her a bad mother?

hope your situation gets sorted out op

irishjohn

The OP has posted about this problem twice - in January and again yesterday. For an 18 yr old unemployed partner of an 18 year old looking for work she sounds quite intelligent and able to express herself well in written form, and perhaps has been able to thrive in education previously. But I am beginning to doubt that she is what she says. I looked back at the January posting and one of the responses seemed to use terminology which the OP then repeated in her opening post here, or am I just too suspicious ?

Written by Elle7 in response in January posting
When you do give birth, if you were kicked out or didn't have anywhere to live, you'd probably find they'd house you in a B&B for a while, but it'd be for just you and the baby - not your partner, who still wouldn't be high priority. Some people do get flats quite fast, but the vast majority its a very slow process even if you get into a high priority band.

Opening words in this post
We live at his parents house in outer west London but we are getting kicked out in about a week.

We've made a homeless application to the council that has been accepted. Our housing officer is saying we will be put in Bed and Breakfast accommodation for up to 6 months until they have found us a housing association flat.

Or there again, maybe the OP did actually take heed of "indirect advice" and decide to get kicked out to help her cause?

peachyprice

jellyhead wrote: »

For those who questioned why I assumed the bf's mum was in a council house - I just made the assumption that if she owned a house that had at least 2 empty bedrooms that she could downsize or use some of her equity or whatever to give her son a deposit on a flat near his work.

Wow, another bizzare assumption!

Would you seriously expect parents who have worked their whole lives and bought themself a house to just give that all up because their son couldn't keep it in his trousers? That's complete madness. Talk about give it to your child on a plate.

No way, no how would I do that for any of my children, nor would I have expected my parents to do that for me.

If (god forbid) any of my sons got themselves into such a mess I would let them use the bedroom they already have rather than see them on the street, but I would not give away everything I have worked for for them. If that wasn't enough for them they would be expected to go get what they want for themselves.