State pension : pensioner supporting younger wife

Sterlingtimes

Presumably the non-pensionable widow who is able bodied without dependents by the same logic should also receive nothing from the state.

For consistency, we would say, "Ok, your husband's dead and that really is too bad, but you really do need to find a job. Why should you expect any sympathy from the state? Come back to us when you're 65".

seven-day-weekend

I do think that after a while (a year maybe?) a fit healthy widow of non-pensionable age should look for work, unless she has young children, or looks after elderly relatives, or has some other genuine reason such as sickness not to.

Obviously she should be supported by the State whilst she is looking for work, as otherwise she would have no means of support, but this case is different to those mentioned above, inasmuch as she will be looking for work.

IMHO, if someone is not bound by family commitments, or does not have a sickness or disability that prevents them from working, is not of retirement age and is not looking for work, I do not think they should receive State Benefits.

If they have other means of support (such as a husband/partner) then that's fine, they don't have to work if they don't chose.

Sterlingtimes

I would like to say thank you to the correspondents to this thread.

I have now found what I believe to be the correct answer, and it was far from easy to find. How prospective pensioners can be expected to work out their future entitlement I just don't know.

A simplistic internet search just didn't work. So I read the Pension Act 2007. That provided me with the search text "Abolition of Adult Dependency Increases" which I was them able to pursue.

I then found the explanatory text in the Pensions Bill.

It seems that the right for those who would be entitled to the benefit through to 2010 will be protected until 2020.

For my part, I'm not pensionable until 2022, so I will never receive the benefit.


Abolition of Adult Dependency Increases
Currently, adult dependency increases to a basic State Pension are
available for a spouse or a person having care of the beneficiary’s
children. Such persons are generally deemed to be dependent on the
beneficiary if they have no earnings or earnings below a set limit.
Where the dependant’s weekly earnings are above the limit, no
increase is payable for that week, or, if they have other benefits in their
own right, entitlement to an adult dependency increase can be wiped
out.

Adult dependency increases are payable at the same rate as the
married woman’s Category B pension. There is, therefore, no
advantage in claiming an increase in respect of a dependant who has
reached State Pension age. These increases are less necessary
where both members of the couple are likely to be economically active
and can also act as a disincentive for individuals to work up to State
Pension age. Adult dependency increases will be abolished from 6
April 2010. However, all entitlements existing at 6 April 2010 will be
protected up to 2020.

Sterlingtimes

margaretclare wrote: »

[/b]

The very idea of a woman being classed as a 'dependent' just because she happens to be married, although without children and with all her faculties and capabilities, should be consigned to the history books. I thought it had been.

Margaret

So it seems that from the point of view of the UK state pension, it will be.

But for occupational pensions husbands, wifes, civil partners and possibly partners do receive a pension upon the death of their other half irrespective of whether they are of pensionable age and irrespective of means and irrespective of state of health.

For the traditionalists amongst us, we can die whilst being reasonably assured that our spouses will be provided for irrespective of means For me, that is very valuable.

seven-day-weekend

And also they are Occupational Pensions. Not State benefits . It's private money, not public.

My husband and I will inherit half of each other's Occupational Pension, whichever of us dies first.

That is completely different to receiving money from the Public purse when you are relatively young, fit and unencumbered enough to work.

As I have said before, you certainly have a choice not to work if you are below State Pension age, but if it is solely through choice I don't see why the rest of us should provide funds for you to do so.

bryanb

Hello, Back again after a couple of days without reading this thread. My wife and I have chosen not to work for money since 1986. We have also never claimed any benefit of any kind from any department. We are in UK now due to family commitments. We fulfil these commitments without claiming anything ( for those who don't get it - at our own expense)We have always paid NI contributions, even when long term outside UK. My wife gets nothing from pension dept. However I get an adult dependent's allowance added to my pension, this is because the government says I am entitled to it (reluctantly) Should I return the £54 pw?

seven-day-weekend

No, I agree if it is there you should take it.

We were just debating the issue! However, perhaps we should have done that on the discussion board.

bryanb

Phew! Thanks

shown73

There has been a lot of pompous trumpeting in this thread, but surely it can't be too difficult to imagine the scenario where a wife is dependent on her husband, however distasteful it may be to some. What about, for example , if the good lady is unable to work? Could be through illness, incapacity, or a dozen other things, so let's not be in too big a rush to jump on the soapbox, please.

seven-day-weekend

shown, if you read through my posts carefully you will see that I have said that people who can't work for whatever reason (childcare/looking after parents/sickness etc, or if they are registered jobseekers) should get benefits.

My hueband claims Incapacity Benefit as he is unable to work because of ill health.

I'm talking about those who chose not to work, which of course they are quite entitled to do, but I personally do not see why they should get any State Benefits to enable them not to.

However, the State says they can, so what I think is immaterial really.