Should People Have Children If They Cant Afford Them

purpleshoes_2

Mojisola wrote: »

But isn't it down to an attitude and/or parenting issue - not strictly a low income problem?

I absolutely agree with this, 100 per cent.

northerntwo1

Mojisola wrote: »

But isn't it down to an attitude and/or parenting issue - not strictly a low income problem?

Of course but those parents are not long term claimants IMO. It's like saying children of addicts do well - yes some do. There's lots of factors but income is one. As I said what happens if tax credits stopped at midnight? If income isn't a factor then they'd all be Ok if all it took was parenting. Not realistic though.

I'd rather a child on poverty with good parents than not with bad parents but overall (not statistic outliers) there's a correlation of income and that's why we fund services, pay tax credits to bridge this gap. To argue otherwise you'd need to remove financial assistance and services to truly see. Which won't happen because they know the outcome,

Before anyone gives anecdotes of when I was a child I turned out fine without benefits I know, but today's parents are living the now not then.

purpleshoes_2

My mum and uncle were the first people from their family to go to uni, my gran and my grandpa on my mums side were both very intelligent people but had to leave school early to go out and work and support their families.

It gets on my nerves when people have a pop at low income single parent families and people who live in council houses. I might not have grown up with money coming out of my ears but I had a good life. My brother and I were encouraged by my mum to go to uni, she wanted us to make something of our lives.

As Ive said, she had less disposable income when I was growing up (Im ten years older than my brother) than many low income families I see now.

Dysfunction and the inability to care for your kids isnt always to do with the money you have in your pocket.

I know this from my own life experience and from almost 20 years experience as a youth/addiction worker.

But its easier to demonise the poor. By the way Im not having a pop at anyone on this thread who works with families on low income.

Im just speaking as someone who people might look at and think, you had an awful life because your family didnt have very much money/ a car etc.

I had a great life.

purpleshoes_2

northerntwo1 wrote: »

Of course but those parents are not long term claimants IMO. It's like saying children of addicts do well - yes some do. There's lots of factors but income is one. As I said what happens if tax credits stopped at midnight? If income isn't a factor then they'd all be Ok if all it took was parenting. Not realistic though.

I'd rather a child on poverty with good parents than not with bad parents but overall (not statistic outliers) there's a correlation of income and that's why we fund services, pay tax credits to bridge this gap. To argue otherwise you'd need to remove financial assistance and services to truly see. Which won't happen because they know the outcome,

Before anyone gives anecdotes of when I was a child I turned out fine without benefits I know, but today's parents are living the now not then.

And there has to be something thats gone wrong because previous generations lived with far less than some parents now who cant manage.

Addiction is an issue. I know that much from the work I used to do.

But Ive also known young homeless people bring up kids on next to nothing and do a great job

Its sometimes about people thinking the world owes them as opposed to going through tough times and being determined to get out of those tough times

As I said, I know folk in their mid 30s who still think the world owes them a living because theyve had it tough at some point.

northerntwo1

purpleshoes wrote: »

As I said earlier in the thread my mum had me at 19. There was no such thing as working tax or child tax credits in those days. She managed. She would have managed better if my dad had contributed but he didnt.

She had far less money to bring me up than some people I see around me where I live and they cant manage. But she did.

But as Ive said before, a lot of people live in dysfunction and thats the issue. The girl Ive spoken about who was my neighbour, wasnt living in poverty, she just made poor choices

I have another neighbour who has 4 kids and who is in and out of jail. Shes 36, shes content to sit her life out on benefits and live the way she lives and her sons are also caught up in the criminal justice system. Its the not giving a hoot about where your kids are and what they are doing that matters as far as Im concerned, I said earlier that Ive worked in places where you cant go out and do youth work alone because the kids are off their face from the money given by their well off parents. I just think the working classes get demonised at times.

The teenager going off the rails could have been my mum, but it wasnt. What the difference is, I have no idea, because there was very little difference in the area my mum grew up in than some of my neighbours, in fact when my mum was growing up in the 50s, her parents probably had less disposable income than some of my neighbours with kids have now

Its not all about money as far as Im concerned, its something else.

No your mum is the one who if living today in today's life would still survive. that's always been and will be. It's not those given money because they had children. That's the point we are different now and it's good in ways but creating bad practice in others.

In your mums generation she HAD to give you values and ethics, she had to want a better life, she realised it wasn't ideal or a choice but a struggle and worked harder than my mum whose a nurse with a husband. She had to go extra, work harder etc.

Now there's no incentive. You being born in 2014 could end differently and mums like yours are not fighting. It's something we can't ignore or pretend that's it's the same as it was years ago.

Mojisola

purpleshoes wrote: »

my gran and my grandpa on my mums side were both very intelligent people but had to leave school early to go out and work and support their families.

My parents were the same - both the eldest in their families so they had to leave school and get a job to support the rest of the family.

Did that mean they didn't achieve their full intellectual potential - yes, they probably would have been in better paid jobs if they had been able to continue with their education; did that mean that they were lesser people or their lives were less valuable, definitely not!

Trying to measure everything by the amount of money you earn or how high up the career ladder you get misses out much of the value of a person. They led fulfilled, good lives and influenced many people for the better and were valued members of their community.

purpleshoes_2

northerntwo1 wrote: »

No your mum is the one who if living today in today's life would still survive. that's always been and will be. It's not those given money because they had children. That's the point we are different now and it's good in ways but creating bad practice in others.

In your mums generation she HAD to give you values and ethics, she had to want a better life, she realised it wasn't ideal or a choice but a struggle and worked harder than my mum whose a nurse with a husband. She had to go extra, work harder etc.

Now there's no incentive. You being born in 2014 could end differently and mums like yours are not fighting. It's something we can't ignore or pretend that's it's the same as it was years ago.

My mum is and was a very gifted individual. As was my uncle. But they didnt have an easy life growing up, not just down to money, my mums mum had one of the hardest lifes of anyone Ive ever known. But they made sacrifices to get my mum and uncle to uni, they were encouraged, they were both gifted and my grandparents wanted them to have the opportunities they didnt have.

My gran left school at 14 to provide for her family, my grandpa, same, he was an electrical engineer who worked his way up and studied hard.

Its a different era. I know this. Im 45 and I see the differences from when I was a teen. I do see it from so many different angles due to the area where I live (poor), the job I used to do and my own upbringing, in a single parent family who didnt have much money

I see people in the area I live in who could work but dont and its not always the people with kids who feel like that. There are people my age who have never worked a week in their life. I overheard someone on the bus a few months ago having a very loud conversation saying if he was made to do a work placement he would have a fake epileptic fit.

There are some people I guess no matter what background they come from that have a sense that the world owes them

But again as you probably know and see yourself there are people who have very little that want to make a better life for themselves. Ive seen it. Ive worked with young people that Ive thought what the hell are you ever going to do with your life and ten years later they find me on facebook and they have a kid or two and a mortgage and a full time job

The want to get out of whatever poverty trap people are in, has to come from within, sometimes people fall on their face ten times or more before life picks up for them, but it does and that can only be a good thing

Some people, people like a couple of neighbours I know will always want life handed to them on a plate and think life owes them a living.

What makes people that way instead of the other I dont know but I dont think it always comes down to having benefits given to them, sometimes people are just plain selfish and sometimes people who are recovering from addiction even ten years on just want to have that label because to get out there and do something with their life is just plain scary

There are no easy answers, all I know is, I hate people being slapped with labels and written off as being useless because they come from families who dont have much cash.

purpleshoes_2

Mojisola wrote: »

My parents were the same - both the eldest in their families so they had to leave school and get a job to support the rest of the family.

Did that mean they didn't achieve their full intellectual potential - yes, they probably would have been in better paid jobs if they had been able to continue with their education; did that mean that they were lesser people or their lives were less valuable, definitely not!

Trying to measure everything by the amount of money you earn or how high up the career ladder you get misses out much of the value of a person. They led fulfilled, good lives and influenced many people for the better and were valued members of their community.

My gran was a piano teacher, grade 8. Someone overheard her playing one day and said that she could have been good enough to be professional. She didnt have the confidence.

She was a remarkable person in so many ways. My mum is also remarkable as far as Im concerned.

I actually saw a lot of the life owes me when I worked in homeless projects. I worked with so many fabulous young people, but I also worked with people who were caught up in the system of life owes me something, such as they couldnt get a bus to play a football match, someone had to drive them, a lot of people expected everything to be handed to them on a plate or they wouldnt do anything apart from lie in their beds all day and I actually wonder if thats the difference, when people get caught up in a support system, they often rely on it, whereas people of my mums and grans generation had to get up and get on with it.

Who knows.

Gavin83

Mojisola wrote: »

Trying to measure everything by the amount of money you earn or how high up the career ladder you get misses out much of the value of a person. They led fulfilled, good lives and influenced many people for the better and were valued members of their community.

Trying to measure the success of someone's life is difficult. Salary is one of the few easily measured elements to do this. You can't compare happiness (the real worth of someone's life) or the broad general term of success.

I'd argue that how far up the career ladder you go or academic achievements mean little either. In my eyes someone with no qualifications with no staff to manage earning £200k is more successful than someone with a masters degree running a business earning £80k a year.

TBeckett100

Money brings choices

New York or Alps for New Year
Or Shall we eat or heat this winter

The latter does not bring happiness