Schools providing Sanitary protection

culpepper

The thing is , the children are not choosing what their parents spend their benefit money on. They are not deciding where they all live etc and they are the issue here, not who is having their nails done or watching netflix.

Sanitary protection is not a luxury ,its a basic need.

To say they should not be able to have access to a basic need if their own family is not able to provide it, is a bit like saying ...those children should just suck it up because its all their parents fault for not being the ideal carer. ..and they should jolly well share in the consequences...

which of course most of them do anyway.

Izadora

Comms69 wrote: »

Rent doesn't need to overlap for a start.

How exactly, with limited availability of places to rent, are you supposed to neatly match the end-date of one tenancy with the start-date of the next?

Comms69 wrote: »

Removals costs can be very cheap, I've moved house for the cost of van hire £40 and a crate of beer for some mates. (and that's a 5 person house full of stuff

£40 and beer for friends (presuming that you have people who can help you relocate) may well be more than a month's food budget. I'd also love to know where you hired your van cos there's nothing near me that cheap.

Comms69 wrote: »

Deposit and rent, yes that is expensive, around £1000-1200 where I am, but council do offer help with that too.

Is that just for council housing (which there's precious little of) or would it be a loan that they then wouldn't be able to afford to pay back?

Yes, we could've moved more cheaply than we have done but I still think that the cost of relocating is far beyond anyone who's already struggling.

Comms69

culpepper wrote: »

The thing is , the children are not choosing what their parents spend their benefit money on. They are not deciding where they all live etc and they are the issue here, not who is having their nails done or watching netflix. - indeed, so we should fine the parents for neglecting a very basic duty of care

Sanitary protection is not a luxury ,its a basic need.

To say they should not be able to have access to a basic need if their own family is not able to provide it, is a bit like saying ...those children should just suck it up because its all their parents fault for not being the ideal carer. ..and they should jolly well share in the consequences... - The issue is how this is implemented and I've always said that

which of course most of them do anyway.

3 times this year your child has required basic sanitary products, your fine is £50.


Because in essence the alternative is forcefully taking money from everyone to pay for this. Which then makes it a 'right', parents will say well im paying for it anyway through my taxes so the school can now pay. And the school will see their estimated requirement go from a handful of girls, to every girl.

Comms69

Izadora wrote: »

How exactly, with limited availability of places to rent, are you supposed to neatly match the end-date of one tenancy with the start-date of the next? - I've literally done in dozens of times. The overlap is usually 1 day to allow for moving.



£40 and beer for friends (presuming that you have people who can help you relocate) may well be more than a month's food budget. I'd also love to know where you hired your van cos there's nothing near me that cheap. - Local firm. Yes it really is that cheap. And well you take it on the chin and don't pay £40 of the rent on your old place. Catch up later


Is that just for council housing (which there's precious little of) or would it be a loan that they then wouldn't be able to afford to pay back? - Some councils guarantee a deposit, some pay it, with the tenant accepting liability to the council should it go wrong.

Yes, we could've moved more cheaply than we have done but I still think that the cost of relocating is far beyond anyone who's already struggling.

Respectfully I disagree, if it means providing the basics for your children, you do what you must, that might mean giving up the deposit in lieu of a months rent so you have it upfront or whatnot.

annandale

The wider part of this discussion is that no one should be in poverty full stop. I remember a poster on here who used to post back to you everything you said in red type. I thought it was unnecessary then and I think it’s unnecessary now.

Just in case you are that same poster who has returned to the boards.

phryne

annandale wrote: »

The wider part of this discussion is that no one should be in poverty full stop. I remember a poster on here who used to post back to you everything you said in red type. I thought it was unnecessary then and I think it’s unnecessary now.

Just in case you are that same poster who has returned to the boards.

passive aggressive post of the week.

Out of interest, how many accounts have you had on here then, annandale? Only asking, as you and your cohorts seem to keep accusing others of being AEs.

Of course you won't be reading this, as you've put me on ignore

Comms69

annandale wrote: »

The wider part of this discussion is that no one should be in poverty full stop. I remember a poster on here who used to post back to you everything you said in red type. I thought it was unnecessary then and I think it’s unnecessary now.

Just in case you are that same poster who has returned to the boards.

I think lots of people do it.

I agree no one should be in poverty; I suspect we don’t agree on how that is achieved

annandale

Now that I've worked out who you are I will be avoiding your posts like the plague. I had more than enough of the red type and everything being dissected the last time you were on the boards.

phryne

annandale wrote: »

Now that I've worked out who you are I will be avoiding your posts like the plague. I had more than enough of the red type and everything being dissected the last time you were on the boards.

OK, so I'm on ignore and you don't like that forum user either.
Any others?

culpepper

Comms69 wrote: »

3 times this year your child has required basic sanitary products, your fine is £50.


Because in essence the alternative is forcefully taking money from everyone to pay for this. Which then makes it a 'right', parents will say well im paying for it anyway through my taxes so the school can now pay. And the school will see their estimated requirement go from a handful of girls, to every girl.

Well no it really doesn't.
Sanitary towel and tampon producers could easily provide the needed protection for free and as I think I said before , it is likely that they could claim it as a tax break. They get every girl who uses the product in the country interested in theirs as early as 10 years old and if the product is a goodun, those girls will buy the equivalent product in the shops when they are eventually earners for the next 30 years or so.
A form could be filled in by the parent to apply for the provision which might put many non needy people off anyway due to the traceability of the request.