Family cant afford Christmas

SingleSue

Poor_Single_lady wrote: »

But if you haven't gone without money then you're not in a position to judge whether love is enough.

If your kids have plenty you are very lucky. Poor kids know they are poor and I imagine that rich kids know they are rich. Not being one I can't judge.

Imagine children going to school knowing that they are poor. Then on Christmas morning no presents. Then they go to school and everyone is talking about what they got.
Imagine being a parent and not being able to provide. Imagine how gut wrenching that would be.

It must be lovely to have so much but please understand choosing not to spoil your children is completely separate from being in a position where your kids have very little and you can not afford to provide them with basic Christmas gifts.

Love can be enough. Love is not buying expensive presents or trying to better your peers in the present stakes, it is about being there for them, having cuddles, having fun and that can be done on very little money and yes, I do speak from experience having been in both situations.

Edit - For clarification, what is classed as 'basic' Christmas gifts?

missbiggles1

Poor_Single_lady wrote: »

But if you haven't gone without money then you're not in a position to judge whether love is enough.

If your kids have plenty you are very lucky. Poor kids know they are poor and I imagine that rich kids know they are rich. Not being one I can't judge.

Imagine children going to school knowing that they are poor. Then on Christmas morning no presents. Then they go to school and everyone is talking about what they got.
Imagine being a parent and not being able to provide. Imagine how gut wrenching that would be.

It must be lovely to have so much but please understand choosing not to spoil your children is completely separate from being in a position where your kids have very little and you can not afford to provide them with basic Christmas gifts.

And only having "basic " Christmas gifts is completely different from being bombed out of your home, being frightened for your life and being totally destitute.

Why do you think that children in the UK, who have so much (even if poor), are worth less than children elsewhere?

Caroline_a

Poor_Single_lady wrote: »

But if you haven't gone without money then you're not in a position to judge whether love is enough.

If your kids have plenty you are very lucky. Poor kids know they are poor and I imagine that rich kids know they are rich. Not being one I can't judge.

Imagine children going to school knowing that they are poor. Then on Christmas morning no presents. Then they go to school and everyone is talking about what they got.
Imagine being a parent and not being able to provide. Imagine how gut wrenching that would be.

It must be lovely to have so much but please understand choosing not to spoil your children is completely separate from being in a position where your kids have very little and you can not afford to provide them with basic Christmas gifts.

I've been poor and I've been comfortable, ie able to afford bills, holidays, etc. Never rich. My children will tell you that one of their best Christmases was when I spent around £20 on each of them on a whole variety of stationery items. I wrapped each one up, even the tiny ones, and put the whole lot in a (wrapped) box. They loved being able to open each one, which took ages. This was at a time when their peers were getting tv/video combi units for their bedrooms - and parents were going into debt for it.

I see so many people spending ridiculous amounts of money on children that they cannot afford. There is absolutely no need at all.

Morglin

I think this is a wind up thread, but if it's not:

I would order an online shop from Asda or somewhere, and get the kids a gift each.

Having worked in benefits, and having seen the chaos, I can assure people that some claimants are left without money!

Especially those with short hour jobs and zero contracts employment, becausecthe benefits get mixed up.....these guys would be better off just staying on full time benefits, instead of making an effort.:mad:.

Other adults will not work, as a choice, and the kids are landed with the parents they have got.

I'm long past the stage of judging others, and none if it is the fault of any children in the home. :wall:

I don't care if they drink, smoke or what size their TV is! :doh:

Christmas, with kids, is a nightmare if you're skint, and whatever the reasons, it is supposed to be the season of goodwill! :whistle:

Food banks are great, but not the answer really.

However, I take our food bank (this time of year) instead of food - some cheap boxes of crackers, some tins of sweets, loads of those cheap chocolate Santas, and some tins of biscuits. The workers said they like to split them and give each family with kids a few "treats" which is a nice idea. :T

Merry Christmas. :xmastree:

Lin

Pollycat

Lunar_Eclipse wrote: »

I'm curious about the £500 mentioned; I think the majority must be for household bills given their circumstances.

The OP didn't make it clear in his first post whether this family asked to borrow £500 or if his wife thinks £500 is an appropriate amount.
He actually posted:

curty510 wrote: »

A friend of my wife has asked if we can lend her some money for Christmas

I doubt that he'll be back to clarify this point.

Poor_Single_lady wrote: »

If your kids have plenty you are very lucky. Poor kids know they are poor and I imagine that rich kids know they are rich. Not being one I can't judge.

My best friend at school was an only child with a Dad with a well-paid job and had her grandad living with them.

She had anything she wanted.
I was the eldest of 3, we lived in a 2 bedroom terrace and we had very little.

It was hard at the time, desperately wanting a record player (or whatever) but knowing that there was no chance.
However, it didn't do me any harm in the long term.

mumps

I knew a family with 12 kids. This was back in the 60s. The dad never worked and his wants were the priority. When the kids were little one of their "treats" was to get lost, taken to the local police station where they would be given a glass of lemonade and a bar of chocolate while they waited to be collected. I think it is really sad to think of a 3 or 4 year old doing this. It doesn't compare to children who are starving or at risk from bombing but I think the lack of love from parents who could provide for them is very damaging.

I don't like the thought of a child waking up on Christmas morning with no decent food in the house and no presents at all. I do a Christmas shop for the local food bank, I always put a dozen selection boxes in and hope it cheers up Christmas for the children who get them.

Christmas doesn't have to cost alot but it does require the adults to make an effort and it really isn't the child's fault that the parents can't be bothered. If I knew a family where the kids got nothing I would buy them presents.

Cloudydaze

Poor_Single_lady wrote: »

But if you haven't gone without money then you're not in a position to judge whether love is enough.

If your kids have plenty you are very lucky. Poor kids know they are poor and I imagine that rich kids know they are rich. Not being one I can't judge.

OK. Let's imagine two 11 year olds on Christmas Day. Both are football mad. One is from a wealthy family. On Christamas morning he gets a replica football kit, new football boots, a new games console with the latest football game. He spends the morning in his bedroom playing on the games console. After lunch, the family all sit around playing with their new expensive gadgets until the kids go off to their bedrooms because they'd prefer to watch a different film on their own TVs.

Child 2 is from a poor family. He gets a £5 football. However, on Christmas morning dad and uncle Bob who's spending Christmas with them take him to the common for a kick around. They come home, mum makes some hot chocolate to warm them up and then the whole family play charades and watch a film on TV crammed into their tiny living room.

I still think love and quality family time is enough. Maybe in today's consumer driven, materialist gadget obsessed age, the 'rich' kids are the unlucky ones.

TBagpuss

OP, I think step one is to discuss this with your wife to see how strongly she feels abut it, abd what, specifcally she is suggesting that you lend and on what terms.

Like others, I would be be very wary of lending £500 to people who are in receipt of benefits and appear to be struggling to manage their finances. They may have good reasons (benefits do get messed up, particualrly when there is a change in circumstances) but equally, this couple may simply be very bad at managing their money and may be equally bad at repaying ny loan.

If you/your wife, so still want to help, then perhaps you could offer to arrange a goft of a box of food (as others have said, there are some fairly good deals available so you couldprovide a 'chrsitmas lunch' for a relatively low cost, and even add in some crackers if you wanted!

If your wife feels that the children will be left with no gifts thenyou could cosnider buying them something, or (if you/she fels that the paretns are genuinely in difficulty) could offer to lend them a smaller amount, specifally for christmasm and on the basis of an agreeed repayment plan. For instnace, if you lonaed them £100 to be paid back at £10 a week, that would be enough to buy food and some small gifts for the children, and the repayments should be affordable. Put smething in writing for them both to sign confirming the amount loaned and the payment schedule.

But whtever you decide, tag it in your own mind as a gift. If any of it repaid, think of that as a bonus, but don't lend it at all unless you are willing to lose it. That way, you will be far less stressed about them paying it back.

Althera tively, give them £x as a gift, tell them that you trust them to use if for the childrne's chrsitmas, and leave it at that.

Person_one

Cloudydaze wrote: »

OK. Let's imagine two 11 year olds on Christmas Day. Both are football mad. One is from a wealthy family. On Christamas morning he gets a replica football kit, new football boots, a new games console with the latest football game. He spends the morning in his bedroom playing on the games console. After lunch, the family all sit around playing with their new expensive gadgets until the kids go off to their bedrooms because they'd prefer to watch a different film on their own TVs.

Child 2 is from a poor family. He gets a £5 football. However, on Christmas morning dad and uncle Bob who's spending Christmas with them take him to the common for a kick around. They come home, mum makes some hot chocolate to warm them up and then the whole family play charades and watch a film on TV crammed into their tiny living room.

That's a lovely Christmas story!

What about child 3 who gets a £5 football but his dad is in prison and his mum is drunk and there's nobody to play with?

This dichotomy of 'materially rich but distant' and 'materially poor but salt of the earth and loving' doesn't actually exist, comforting as it may be to imagine. Most parents are loving, however much or little they have, and if your parents are crap then they're crap and you have a really raw deal however rich or poor they are.

Pollycat

mumps wrote: »

I don't like the thought of a child waking up on Christmas morning with no decent food in the house and no presents at all. I do a Christmas shop for the local food bank, I always put a dozen selection boxes in and hope it cheers up Christmas for the children who get them.

Christmas doesn't have to cost alot but it does require the adults to make an effort and it really isn't the child's fault that the parents can't be bothered. If I knew a family where the kids got nothing I would buy them presents.

I think we should consider whether the adults in this (probably fabricated) story have done everything they can to ensure their children have the best Christmas they can give them.

It shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone that Christmas Day is on 25th December.
Even on benefits, the adults should be able to budget throughout the year for this unmoving date.
A lot of people on benefits are better off financially that someone working for minimum wage would be.

To fund the Christmas of someone who is f e c kless is just putting sticking plaster over a broken leg.