Should People Have Children If They Cant Afford Them

bluelass

moomoomama27 wrote: »

.....and the rest! I doubt a bakery would finance that many people, they probably claim more off the government than a family of 6 on full benefits!

What annoys me about the Radfords is the claims they make that other than child benefit, they are self sufficient, so no working ur child tax credits then.......ummmmmm

I thought only those on low incomes get working tax credits? if the radfords have their own business surely they wouldn't qualify for them.

bluelass

Mrs_Ryan wrote: »

Hey TBeckett are you my ex's Dad? :rotfl:
Because I grew up in a council house with two parents who didn't work he quite confidently stated I would fail my A-Levels and by the age of 21 I would be living in a grotty council flat with three kids and no idea who the father was, and would have no qualifications and no prospects.
I would love to meet him again just so I could see his face when I tell him that I didn't fail my A-Levels, I have no children and the house we live in is mortgaged (and worth more than the one he was living in at the time) oh yes and I'm on my way to being more qualified than him
He was a scumbag. He got fired from his job in a Catholic boys school for having a very public affair with the history teacher and getting her pregnant. And yet he was oh so high and mighty.
Moral of the story- let those without sin cast the first stone or those who bleat inevitably aren't as perfect as they make themselves out to be.

Well Done:T Your ex's dad sounds a right tw**

supermassive

purpleshoes wrote: »

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.

From your first paragraph, your stance should be different. Those people had their lives put on hold because they had children. That's the other side of the page to look at. Why have children if it's going to hinder you? Why not be successful, achieve what's possible - THEN have children? :rotfl: Society's obsession with having offspring boggles.

LilElvis

supermassive wrote: »

From your first paragraph, your stance should be different. Those people had their lives put on hold because they had children. That's the other side of the page to look at. Why have children if it's going to hinder you? Why not be successful, achieve what's possible - THEN have children? :rotfl: Society's obsession with having offspring boggles.

Without it none of us would be here.

I did what you suggested - education, good job, large house, savings - then found that I had issues conceiving. As it is we now have both the highest levels ever recorded of women giving birth in their forties and being childless in the same age group.

Rebel_Cause

LilElvis wrote: »

Without it none of us would be here.

I did what you suggested - education, good job, large house, savings - then found that I had issues conceiving. As it is we now have both the highest levels ever recorded of women giving birth in their forties and being childless in the same age group.

Dammed if you do damned if you don't.

bluelass

LilElvis wrote: »

Without it none of us would be here.

I did what you suggested - education, good job, large house, savings - then found that I had issues conceiving. As it is we now have both the highest levels ever recorded of women giving birth in their forties and being childless in the same age group.

With experts predicting life expectancy will rocket maybe people in the next 50 years or so getting to 120, women wont start the change until their 60s then having children later will be the norm.

Elsewhere

purpleshoes wrote: »

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.

I think some people who have been on benefits for many years become institutionalised, just like some people in prison, or the army or boarding school. They know if they don't rock the boat life will just chug along with food, shelter, money to spend and no decisions to make.

I have no idea what the solution is; I think it is an inevitable side effect of our welfare system.

If one could single out such people (impossible, I suspect) and give them the very minimum in the form of food stamps and a bed in a hostel - and possibly work-based training - while distributing the money saved to people who deserve everyone's support it would go a long way to reducing resentment against those claiming benefits I think.

We have both ends of the spectrum in our own family; cousins who left school at 15, live in council houses but work hard to support theit families - but there are a few layabouts! The one who really gets my goat however was my husband's cousin, She came from a solid middle-class bachground, went to Uni and got a degree then dropped out and proceeded to have 4 children. As far as we know she never lived with any of the fathers and we know she was on benefits all her life,

LilElvis

bluelass wrote: »

With experts predicting life expectancy will rocket maybe people in the next 50 years or so getting to 120, women wont start the change until their 60s then having children later will be the norm.

I've not read anything to suggest that the menopause is occurring any later now that we are living longer. The majority of UK ivf clinics won't treat you with your own eggs past the age of 45 and none will offer donor egg treatment beyond 50.

supermassive

LilElvis wrote: »

Without it none of us would be here.

I did what you suggested - education, good job, large house, savings - then found that I had issues conceiving. As it is we now have both the highest levels ever recorded of women giving birth in their forties and being childless in the same age group.

I think you may find that plenty of children are born without their parents being desperate - or even wanting - to have a baby.

IVF is something I particularly disagree with. First of all, it's ridiculously expensive. Extortionate, even. Secondly, it's un-required. Of course, it's nice to have a baby that's genetically yours, but there are plenty of children out there that can be adopted that, unfortunately, weren't so lucky to have parents that wanted a child so much. Perhaps we should think about clearing out children's homes before we go desperately trying to create more life just because it's blood related.

I understand every woman thinks it's their right to have a child biologically, but nature disagrees in some instances.

Marisco

LilElvis wrote: »

I've not read anything to suggest that the menopause is occurring any later now that we are living longer. The majority of UK ivf clinics won't treat you with your own eggs past the age of 45 and none will offer donor egg treatment beyond 50.

I should think not either!!