Do people have kids for benefits?

[armand.kay]

Now I'm not someone who normally has an opinion about things like this as I don't really know about the benefit system and don't like to generalise.

So a friend of my mothers just came over for a visited. I was listening to them talk about how she's pregnant again (she only just gave birth last year and this will be her third child & neither her or her husband work full time).
She basically started bragging about the money shes getting because of her kids and said she's exited for the third one to come. She then said something like better off staying on benefits than working as a crappy cleaner.
I never actually knew people did stuff like this, I always thought stories like this was just the daily mail exadurating, this it just seems so unfair.

What do you guys think about things like this?

[Samm]

I agree, the benefit system needs sorting out it's ridiculous these people don't try or work hard to get money while other people work extremely hard to get money etc

[Nedusa]

We will only know the answer to that question when the Govt annouces it is suspending all claims for housing from unmarried mothers who have just given birth, preferring instead to bring in compulsory fostering of all newborn babies born to unmarried or single mums who are unable to provide for the baby's needs.

[Pete.]

Some people do and it's disgraceful imo

[armand.kay]

Idk I just think that people should wait until they are financially stable and are working to have kids. I don't understand why she would have more kids when she's already sponging off the state.

[Northern Monkey]

Idk I just think that people should wait until they are financially stable and are working to have kids. I don't understand why she would have more kids when she's already sponging off the state.

I agree 100%.
A family is something that should planned and prepared including being able to afford it.
Yeah condoms split and accidents can happen but benefit babies should not be a lifestlyle choice.
Having kids is a privelidge not a right.

[kirklancaster]

I agree 100%.
A family is something that should planned and prepared including being able to afford it.
Yeah condoms split and accidents can happen but benefit babies should not be a lifestlyle choice.
Having kids is a privelidge not a right.

:clap1::clap1::clap1: I could not agree more. I would have had 20 kids if I could afford them (and my wife didn't wear out :laugh:) but I stuck at three. Then again, I had to work for a living.

[Ninastar]

Absolutely. I know at least 5 people who have purposefully gotten pregnant because they know that they will get a house. It's so wrong and infuriates me. I'll write more about it later though.

[Kizzy]

Do they work part time and share child care? they'll get working tax credits then.

[waterhog]

of course people have kids for benefits. do you want some reasons and benefits

1.its lovely trying to create one - benefit - pleasure
2. when you need a cup of tea - benfit - child will make it for you
3. to help pay the rent - benefit - child we help pay

on all seriousness - people do not have kids to claim benefits but family's from other religious backgrounds often have larger family's. the amount you get for 1 child is peanuts compared to the cost you will spend.

[Ninastar]

I agree 100%.
A family is something that should planned and prepared including being able to afford it.
Yeah condoms split and accidents can happen but benefit babies should not be a lifestlyle choice.
Having kids is a privelidge not a right.

Totally agree with this 100%

[Tom4784]

It's rarer then it's made out to be I think. More of a hysterical image to stir up resentment towards the unemployed than a true image of what life on benefits is like.

[arista]

Some people do and it's disgraceful imo


Yes its a Mess

[RichardG]

It's rarer then it's made out to be I think. More of a hysterical image to stir up resentment towards the unemployed than a true image of what life on benefits is like.

^was going to say the same thing

There's no doubt that this stuff happens, but I reckon it's not very common overall.

[AnnieK]

It definitely used to be more common when I was younger. A few girls I went to school with had kids at 17 simply to get a house which they did. Now I don't think it's half as bad a problem....particularly with housing so limited in a lot of areas

[smudgie]

Wasn't there talk of only paying child benefits for the first two children?
Not a bad idea maybe, providing it is long term claimants.
Anyone can fall on hard times and lose their job, they may already have more than two kids:shrug:

[GiRTh]

It definitely happens but is not as prevalent as some will claim.

It quite ironic cuz many of the girls think they're getting away with something by having kids instead of working but sadly they are too thick to realise by having kids they are actually working far harder than their peers who have jobs.

[user104658]

Probably, but nothing like as many as is made out. Personally I would say, children are MUCH more work than getting a job, so it seems like a flawed plan to me! "I don't want to get up at 7 and go to a normal job, so instead I'll have a kid, get up at half past 5, and do a much harder job relentlessly all day every day."

Good thinking!

Also, I would point out that the number isn't always a "choice". Our first wasn't exactly planned and we weren't in the financial position to have a child at that time either, we were both in our final year of University, but it was a "happy surprise" (... After a few months of panic!). Our second was planned a few years later in a better financial position. We have never planned on more than two (enough work! Especially as my younger daughter has just recently been diagnosed with ASD) but we got pregnant again, completely unintentionally, in November last year. Unfortunately it ended in an early miscarriage, but if it hadn't ended that way we would have just gone with it.

So, "should" children always be planned? Yes, definitely, but I know from personal experience that both first children AND additional children can be unexpected. I personally think a lot of people just try to make the best of the situation when they are probably still a bit in "panic mode" and saying things like "well, at least we'll get extra money!" can be part of that.

[GiRTh]

Probably, but nothing like as many as is made out. Personally I would say, children are MUCH more work than getting a job, so it seems like a flawed plan to me! "I don't want to get up at 7 and go to a normal job, so instead I'll have a kid, get up at half past 5, and do a much harder job relentlessly all day every day."

Good thinking!

Also, I would point out that the number isn't always a "choice". Our first wasn't exactly planned and we weren't in the financial position to have a child at that time either, we were both in our final year of University, but it was a "happy surprise" (... After a few months of panic!). Our second was planned a few years later in a better financial position. We have never planned on more than two (enough work! Especially as my younger daughter has just recently been diagnosed with ASD) but we got pregnant again, completely unintentionally, in November last year. Unfortunately it ended in an early miscarriage, but if it hadn't ended that way we would have just gone with it.

So, "should" children always be planned? Yes, definitely, but I know from personal experience that both first children AND additional children can be unexpected. I personally think a lot of people just try to make the best of the situation when they are probably still a bit in "panic mode" and saying things like "well, at least we'll get extra money!" can be part of that.

Sad to hear that. :hug:

[Kizzy]

Really sorry to hear that TS :hug:

[Jay.]

My cousin has just had a baby and hasn't even thought about benefits. She's going back to work in a few months too. I guess we just had lazy people, who are used to being lazy & getting free money. Obviously not saying that about everyone, just feel I should say this because the debates around benefits bore me to death, because nothing is being done about it.

[user104658]

Thankyou. It was sort of a weird one, we found out about the pregnancy, panicked a bit, accepted it, started to look forward to it, and then had it come to an end all in the space of about a week. A complete system shock really.

[Kazanne]

I agree 100%.
A family is something that should planned and prepared including being able to afford it.
Yeah condoms split and accidents can happen but benefit babies should not be a lifestlyle choice.
Having kids is a privelidge not a right.

Well said Eyeball :clap1:

[user104658]

My cousin has just had a baby and hasn't even thought about benefits. She's going back to work in a few months too. I guess we just had lazy people, who are used to being lazy & getting free money. Obviously not saying that about everyone, just feel I should say this because the debates around benefits bore me to death, because nothing is being done about it.
I think it depends on circumstances really, a lot of people are lucky enough to have parents / siblings / other family who can help with childcare and that makes the decision to go back to work easy. We decided for one of us to stay home until they were school age and one of us to work which works OK for us (we have literally zero help from family, unfortunately), my wife works from home as well, she has run various websites and is currently writing, but now with the youngest being diagnosed ASD it's all a bit uncertain and it may well be that there will never be a time when we can both work outwith the home, as our daughter might need one of us permanently. Or she might be fully capable of being independent and going to school by five or six. She is only 2.5 so it's impossible to know.

Anyway, rambling about myself a bit, my point is that going back to work genuinely isn't an option for everyone. Not everyone has family to help OR a partner. And not even always because they've gotten "knocked up" as a single mum - we know a woman who was with her partner for years, they planned a baby together, and then when he was born the dad just said "I can't do this" and left never to be heard from again other than paltry child support. Another friend was with her husband for several years, they owned a home together, had TWO children, and he arrived home one day and announced that he had been seeing someone else, wanted to leave, and wanted to sell the house. Circumstances vary widely. That's not to say that there aren't people who are "lazy" (although again, if you are lazy the LAST thing you want to do is have children!) and exploit what's available but I personally don't think those people are worth tearing the whole system down for, when some genuine people need it to live normal lives.

[Josy]

Some people do yes.

About three years ago it was reported that there were over 180 non working families in the UK with more than 10 kids, that's not to say those people had their kids for the benefits but the money these people are receiving in benefits per year for themselves and the children plus housing benefits means there really is no incentive for them to go out and work, they would earn less working than what the benefits added up to so why would they bother?

There definitely needs to be (if there's not already one in place I don't really know) a cap on how much child benefits people can claim IMO.

[Jay.]

I think it depends on circumstances really, a lot of people are lucky enough to have parents / siblings / other family who can help with childcare and that makes the decision to go back to work easy. We decided for one of us to stay home until they were school age and one of us to work which works OK for us (we have literally zero help from family, unfortunately), my wife works from home as well, she has run various websites and is currently writing, but now with the youngest being diagnosed ASD it's all a bit uncertain and it may well be that there will never be a time when we can both work, as our daughter might need one of us permanently. Or she might be fully capable of being independent and going to school by five or six. She is only 2.5 so it's impossible to know.

Anyway, rambling about myself a bit, my point is that going back to work genuinely isn't an option for everyone. Not everyone has family to help OR a partner. And not even always because they've gotten "knocked up" as a single mum - we know a woman who was with her partner for years, they planned a baby together, and then when he was born the dad just said "I can't do this" and left never to be heard from again other than paltry child support. Another friend was with her husband for several years, they owned a home together, had TWO children, and he arrived home one day and announced that he had been seeing someone else, wanted to leave, and wanted to sell the house. Circumstances vary widely. That's not to say that there aren't people who are "lazy" (although again, if you are lazy the LAST thing you want to do is have children!) and exploit what's available but I personally don't think those people are worth tearing the whole system down for, when some genuine people need it to live normal lives.

Oh god, that's awful. Hope you are all okay. But I said obviously not everyone, some people do deserve the help obviously, but I know some people, where I live, who have had more children just for more money etc. who have massive families, who could easily look after their children. Now, obviously people are going to look down on that. There ought to be a system where they look into who could look after the children whilst the parent is at work etc. it would just make a lot more sense.

[user104658]

Some people do yes.

About three years ago it was reported that there were over 180 non working families in the UK with more than 10 kids, that's not to say those people had their kids for the benefits but the money these people are receiving in benefits per year for themselves and the children plus housing benefits means there really is no incentive for them to go out and work, they would earn less working than what the benefits added up to so why would they bother?
.

That's not how it works though, the vast majority of those benefits will be child tax credits / child benefits which you still get if working, and probably more as with someone working there's then working tax credits. Housing benefits also scale with income, getting a job doesn't mean losing it (necessarily) unless the job is a high paying one. So long as it's 16 hours a week or more, a household will ALWAYS be better off to some degree if working.

That said, with that much coming in, the difference of a few hundred pounds a month might seem "not worth it" to many. The benefits cap should largely have addressed that, though. The 26k cap effectively caps families at 4 children, having more won't increase anything. I also suspect it might be pretty much impossible to raise 10 kids on 26k per year. I find myself occasionally broke on more than that with just two :joker:.

[Josy]

That's not how it works though, the vast majority of those benefits will be child tax credits / child benefits which you still get if working, and probably more as with someone working there's then working tax credits. Housing benefits also scale with income, getting a job doesn't mean losing it (necessarily) unless the job is a high paying one. So long as it's 16 hours a week or more, a household will ALWAYS be better off to some degree if working.

That said, with that much coming in, the difference of a few hundred pounds a month might seem "not worth it" to many. The benefits cap should largely have addressed that, though. The 26k cap effectively caps families at 4 children, having more won't increase anything. I also suspect it might be pretty much impossible to raise 10 kids on 26k per year. I find myself occasionally broke on more than that with just two :joker:.

Figures released under the Freedom of Information Act show that there are 190 families with at least ten under-18s where one or both of the parents gets an out-of-work benefit.

These families are eligible for £61,183 a year in state support – much more than they could hope to earn if they entered the job market.

A family in work would have to earn £93,000 to be left with this amount of money after tax.

The statistics illustrate the extent to which enormous handouts condemn such families to a life on benefits, because it would not be worth their while to take on work.


This was in 2012, the figures will no doubt have changed now but it still proves the point of my post.

[user104658]

This was in 2012, the figures will no doubt have changed now but it still proves the point of my post.
In the past some of the figures have been mind boggling... I've seen quotes of people in receipt of the equivalent of a six figure salary. That was before the introduction of a "cap" though, and more kids literally just meant more tax credits no matter how many there were.

I'm not sure if the cap has fully come into effect yet or not, I know there is "transitional protection" in many cases, but if / when it does come in I can only imagine that many of those families will be pretty screwed. Which many may celebrate, and yes it might stop the same situations arising again, however sadly I suspect that it's mainly the children who will suffer and the parents will just take what is available mainly for themselves.

[the truth]

Yes of course they do...the solution? 1) pay these beenfits in food vouchers 2) make them work somehours for the benefis when their kids are in school...3) take evry benefit away when their kids areover 16

[jennyjuniper]

It definitely happens but is not as prevalent as some will claim.

It quite ironic cuz many of the girls think they're getting away with something by having kids instead of working but sadly they are too thick to realise by having kids they are actually working far harder than their peers who have jobs.

This is assuming that the people who have kids instead of going to work actually are good parents. The ones who do use kids as a way to get more cash may not give a toss if the kids are fed and changed etc.,
That's the tragedy of funding this kind of parent, because those kids will grow up knowing they are not really wanted, just a means to an end, and later on because of this, they too may become a social problem.
Child benefit should only be paid for the first two children. After that you are on your own.

[kirklancaster]

This is assuming that the people who have kids instead of going to work actually are good parents. The ones who do use kids as a way to get more cash may not give a toss if the kids are fed and changed etc.,
That's the tragedy of funding this kind of parent, because those kids will grow up knowing they are not really wanted, just a means to an end, and later on because of this, they too may become a social problem.
Child benefit should only be paid for the first two children. After that you are on your own.

I agree.

It is the continued disintegration of the traditional 'Family Unit' which is chiefly responsible for the continuous increases in anti-social behaviour and gangs of ignorant,feral kids who have no respect for anything or anyone, because they have not been raised with any kind of discipline and moral instruction. This cuts across all classes of society, but is predominantly 'lower working class'.

[Kizzy]

Cue the lone parent bashing...

[kirklancaster]

Cue the lone parent bashing...

Are you referring to me? Please identify as much before I respond.

[Josy]

Cue the lone parent bashing...

I don't see anyone in this thread bashing lone parents.

Perhaps you would like to add an opinion to the thread?

[Vanessa]

I agree.

It is the continued disintegration of the traditional 'Family Unit' which is chiefly responsible for the continuous increases in anti-social behaviour and gangs of ignorant,feral kids who have no respect for anything or anyone, because they have not been raised with any kind of discipline and moral instruction. This cuts across all classes of society, but is predominantly 'lower working class'.

I agree. Kids should feel wanted and when they don't that's when the problem start.

[Northern Monkey]

:clap1::clap1::clap1: I could not agree more. I would have had 20 kids if I could afford them (and my wife didn't wear out :laugh:) but I stuck at three. Then again, I had to work for a living.Yeah we are sticking with 2 for exactly that reason.We would struggle to afford more than 2 kids.We don't claim any benefits.It's common sense to live within your means.

[the truth]

Cue the lone parent bashing...

cue the victim mentality

[lostalex]

no, they have kids because they get drunk and have sex with losers.

[Kizzy]

I don't see anyone in this thread bashing lone parents.

Perhaps you would like to add an opinion to the thread?

I added my opinion on page 1.

[JoshBB]

I doubt it. It would probably cost more to look after the child than the benefits even cover.

[Amy Jade]

Yeah it happens, there is a girl who lives quite close to me who worked in a supermarket got pregnant and basically carried on getting pregnant once she liked the lifestyle. She's like 28 and got 4 kids all by different dads which I guess is her choice but people say she does it on purpose just to get pregnant which is awful imo.

Her fb is unprotected too and she brags about what she has and I think it's quite sad she lives better than people who work every day.

[arista]

there is a Ch5HD series on this
showing 18 year olds
but is depressing to watch
plus the backing music is crass

[kirklancaster]

Yeah it happens, there is a girl who lives quite close to me who worked in a supermarket got pregnant and basically carried on getting pregnant once she liked the lifestyle. She's like 28 and got 4 kids all by different dads which I guess is her choice but people say she does it on purpose just to get pregnant which is awful imo.

Her fb is unprotected too and she brags about what she has and I think it's quite sad she lives better than people who work every day.

Thank God for another voice of reason speaking from direct experience.

[coffee]

My cousin who is same age as me (23) did this. She still can barely read and her 4 kids have 4 different dads. She left school when she was 15 just by never showing up, didn't turn up to any exams, didn't go to college or even start work ever.... I met her on her 18th birthday and she had signed on that day!!! The day she turned 18, she was so excited!!! :/

[Niamh.]

Yeah it happens, there is a girl who lives quite close to me who worked in a supermarket got pregnant and basically carried on getting pregnant once she liked the lifestyle. She's like 28 and got 4 kids all by different dads which I guess is her choice but people say she does it on purpose just to get pregnant which is awful imo.

Her fb is unprotected too and she brags about what she has and I think it's quite sad she lives better than people who work every day.

That's just a sad way to be though. I don't know why anyone would have kids for an easier lifestyle, they're alot of work and it's 24/7 not just 9-5. ****ing hell i got home from work yesterday at 6:15, had my dinner and then I was out again driving my kids around till 9:30, had to watch Eastenders on the repeat :fist:

[kirklancaster]

That's just a sad way to be though. I don't know why anyone would have kids for an easier lifestyle, they're alot of work and it's 24/7 not just 9-5. ****ing hell i got home from work yesterday at 6:15, had my dinner and then I was out again driving my kids around till 9:30, had to watch Eastenders on the repeat :fist:

:laugh: Sounds so very familiar.

[kirklancaster]

My cousin who is same age as me (23) did this. She still can barely read and her 4 kids have 4 different dads. She left school when she was 15 just by never showing up, didn't turn up to any exams, didn't go to college or even start work ever.... I met her on her 18th birthday and she had signed on that day!!! The day she turned 18, she was so excited!!! :/

Sounds like 'egg on face' time for anyone who denies that such claimants exist Coffee. :laugh:

[Nedusa]

My cousin who is same age as me (23) did this. She still can barely read and her 4 kids have 4 different dads. She left school when she was 15 just by never showing up, didn't turn up to any exams, didn't go to college or even start work ever.... I met her on her 18th birthday and she had signed on that day!!! The day she turned 18, she was so excited!!! :/

I see these 4 x 4's are becoming less rare these days...........lol :joker:

[Jamesy]

I actually know someone (my cousin, in her 40s) that is quite explicit about how they have never wanted to work and that they have had kids just to stay out of work. Most of my family hate her but I find it quite interesting the lengths she (and probably many other 'scroungers') go to just to live a stress-free life and better lifestyle.

Recently the local jobcentre was catching on to her to get into work so she started looking roughed up and persuaded them that she was depressed and struggling, cue being 'ill' for a few weeks. After that she went through some process to say that she was suffering because she had to take care of her disabled daughter 24/7 (her daughter has a speech impairment and is perfectly dependable, she's now 13 and in high school and doesn't need any help). She needed a signature from someone in a professional medical role to confirm she does need to be on hand 24/7 to take care of her daughter, tried to get a signature from my mum (who works in the NHS), my mum refused but my cousin found someone else to write a signature and ta da, she now doesn't have to go to the jobcentre and gets more benefits for 3 or 4 years until there's a reassessment. She has gloated about this loads, how she 'tricked' the jobcentre and how she's so relieved she doesn't have to work and can relax for 3 or 4 years.

My cousin baffles the rest of us (in my family). Her mum and dad worked all their lives, her brother is now in his late 30s and owns a massive cake business with his wife that works with UK brands like Krispy Kreme and Sainsburys. Yet my cousin hasn't lifted a finger her entire life. Pregnant at 16, now has 3 kids, a very big house on a pretty nice estate (usually council areas are rough but she lives in quite a nice area), and all the money she could dream of.

It's quite infuriating when I look at my parents, who have worked their entire lives and gone through a hell of a lot to provide me and my brother with a decent lifestyle, and then I look at my cousin who lives in a similar (if not better) lifestyle and all she did for that was sleep with two different guys and have three kids over 20 years.

The UK system really needs a massive shake-up. When I went to Catalonia (Spain) and spoke to some locals there they told me of the system there which sounds pretty good. If you have a child you get financial support for a certain amount of time (I think it was something like 2 years), then after that the support stops and you're expected to have a job. If you have more children you get support for a less amount of time, so if with the first kid you get 2 years support, the second child you get 1 year, the third child 6 months etc. The locals I spoke to said it works very well there, more people work, less people have children for the sake of it and generally it's managed very well. It's a shame the UK doesn't have harsher systems in place similar to that.

[InOne]

Yeah it definitely happens no doubt. I don't think it's a class or benefit thing though, just the women themselves. Some women just happen to find someone who'll support them throughout life.

[Vicky.]

It happens, its not as widespread as some would have you believe though. And tbh to me, its crazyness. Having kids (and I only have 2 and its staying that way, god knows what its like with more) is so much more work that work is :joker: I had much more energy and free time doing even 60 hours per week than now

[kirklancaster]

I actually know someone (my cousin, in her 40s) that is quite explicit about how they have never wanted to work and that they have had kids just to stay out of work. Most of my family hate her but I find it quite interesting the lengths she (and probably many other 'scroungers') go to just to live a stress-free life and better lifestyle.

Recently the local jobcentre was catching on to her to get into work so she started looking roughed up and persuaded them that she was depressed and struggling, cue being 'ill' for a few weeks. After that she went through some process to say that she was suffering because she had to take care of her disabled daughter 24/7 (her daughter has a speech impairment and is perfectly dependable, she's now 13 and in high school and doesn't need any help). She needed a signature from someone in a professional medical role to confirm she does need to be on hand 24/7 to take care of her daughter, tried to get a signature from my mum (who works in the NHS), my mum refused but my cousin found someone else to write a signature and ta da, she now doesn't have to go to the jobcentre and gets more benefits for 3 or 4 years until there's a reassessment. She has gloated about this loads, how she 'tricked' the jobcentre and how she's so relieved she doesn't have to work and can relax for 3 or 4 years.

My cousin baffles the rest of us (in my family). Her mum and dad worked all their lives, her brother is now in his late 30s and owns a massive cake business with his wife that works with UK brands like Krispy Kreme and Sainsburys. Yet my cousin hasn't lifted a finger her entire life. Pregnant at 16, now has 3 kids, a very big house on a pretty nice estate (usually council areas are rough but she lives in quite a nice area), and all the money she could dream of.

It's quite infuriating when I look at my parents, who have worked their entire lives and gone through a hell of a lot to provide me and my brother with a decent lifestyle, and then I look at my cousin who lives in a similar (if not better) lifestyle and all she did for that was sleep with two different guys and have three kids over 20 years.

The UK system really needs a massive shake-up. When I went to Catalonia (Spain) and spoke to some locals there they told me of the system there which sounds pretty good. If you have a child you get financial support for a certain amount of time (I think it was something like 2 years), then after that the support stops and you're expected to have a job. If you have more children you get support for a less amount of time, so if with the first kid you get 2 years support, the second child you get 1 year, the third child 6 months etc. The locals I spoke to said it works very well there, more people work, less people have children for the sake of it and generally it's managed very well. It's a shame the UK doesn't have harsher systems in place similar to that.

A well written and very informative post Jamesy and yet more direct experience testimony that this practice does exist.

[kirklancaster]

It happens, its not as widespread as some would have you believe though. And tbh to me, its crazyness. Having kids (and I only have 2 and its staying that way, god knows what its like with more) is so much more work that work is :joker: I had much more energy and free time doing even 60 hours per week than now

:laugh: It's harder work raising kids if you are raising them correctly - or at all - Vicky, but that's not guaranteed with all parents judging by the amount of feral kids around.

[JoshBB]

If we had the people at the top paying their taxes properly, false benefit claiming wouldn't matter so much.. and I can't remember whose policy it was, but I liked the one where after the second child benefits would stop (but that cap shouldn't apply for anyone who has more than 2 children currently and is on benefits imo)

[kirklancaster]

If we had the people at the top paying their taxes properly, false benefit claiming wouldn't matter so much.. and I can't remember whose policy it was, but I liked the one where after the second child benefits would stop (but that cap shouldn't apply for anyone who has more than 2 children currently and is on benefits imo)

I agree that proper investigation of tax avoiders and evaders should be implemented by government Josh, and that all the deliberately created loopholes which facilitate such scandalous practices should be closed, but this issue and the one of benefit fraudsters are totally separate, and it should always matter that a system designed to alleviate the plight of the less fortunate in society is being exploited by those who do not qualify to the cost of those that do, as well as to the taxpayer.

I agree that Child Benefits should be capped overall but also think that they should be scrapped altogether for the 'Top Earners' in our society.

[AnnieK]

I think someone else has addressed this but one thing that also needs looking at is childcare costs. I was very lucky that I had my parents around when I returned to work when my son was 6 months old, otherwise I would have really struggled to manage my money if I was forking out £46 per day (what my son's nursery charges and that's fairly cheap) to a nursery. I now get 15 hours per week free child care in term time so he now goes part time to nursery but I still have to rely on help from my dad to care for him when he's not in. If I didn't have that support it would not have been financially viable for me to come back to work and I'm in a fairly well paid job.

I think one of the parties have promised 15 hour free care for 2 year olds (its currently 3) but as Mat pay only lasts for 9 months there is still a shortfall when parents without support have to fund all the childcare which in the private nurseries is very expensive.

[Vicky.]

I think someone else has addressed this but one thing that also needs looking at is childcare costs. I was very lucky that I had my parents around when I returned to work when my son was 6 months old, otherwise I would have really struggled to manage my money if I was forking out £46 per day (what my son's nursery charges and that's fairly cheap) to a nursery. I now get 15 hours per week free child care in term time so he now goes part time to nursery but I still have to rely on help from my dad to care for him when he's not in. If I didn't have that support it would not have been financially viable for me to come back to work and I'm in a fairly well paid job.

I think one of the parties have promised 15 hour free care for 2 year olds (its currently 3) but as Mat pay only lasts for 9 months there is still a shortfall when parents without support have to fund all the childcare which in the private nurseries is very expensive.
Yes my sister is having problems with childcare at the minute. She split from her partner and has a child but works (or worked..) fulltime and wanted to conitnue doing so. She got *some* help with childcare costs but not enough to continue doing fulltime. Because of this, she has had no option but to go part time instead, and she is better off for it too :S The jobcentre actually said to her 'do you not speak to your parents' :o As if grandparents should be on tap babysitters....my parents still both work but even if they didnt its un fair to expect them to watch the grandkids 24/7

On the subject of people having kids for benefits, heres a story thats ****ing disgusting but true, think I have mentioned it before on here actually. When I had just left school, a girl I know purposely got pregnant for a council house. She got the house, then had an abortion a week later. Now THAT is sick. And the system shouldn't allow it to happen, nor make people feel they HAVE to be pregnant to get help either...

[kirklancaster]

I think someone else has addressed this but one thing that also needs looking at is childcare costs. I was very lucky that I had my parents around when I returned to work when my son was 6 months old, otherwise I would have really struggled to manage my money if I was forking out £46 per day (what my son's nursery charges and that's fairly cheap) to a nursery. I now get 15 hours per week free child care in term time so he now goes part time to nursery but I still have to rely on help from my dad to care for him when he's not in. If I didn't have that support it would not have been financially viable for me to come back to work and I'm in a fairly well paid job.

I think one of the parties have promised 15 hour free care for 2 year olds (its currently 3) but as Mat pay only lasts for 9 months there is still a shortfall when parents without support have to fund all the childcare which in the private nurseries is very expensive.

Totally valid points Annie, and something which the government should also be addressing urgently.

[kirklancaster]

Yes my sister is having problems with childcare at the minute. She split from her partner and has a child but works (or worked..) fulltime and wanted to conitnue doing so. She got *some* help with childcare costs but not enough to continue doing fulltime. Because of this, she has had no option but to go part time instead, and she is better off for it too :S The jobcentre actually said to her 'do you not speak to your parents' :o As if grandparents should be on tap babysitters....my parents still both work but even if they didnt its un fair to expect them to watch the grandkids 24/7

On the subject of people having kids for benefits, heres a story thats ****ing disgusting but true, think I have mentioned it before on here actually. When I had just left school, a girl I know purposely got pregnant for a council house. She got the house, then had an abortion a week later. Now THAT is sick. And the system shouldn't allow it to happen, nor make people feel they HAVE to be pregnant to get help either...

I agree Vicky with the first part of your post, and also feel disgusted by the mercenary, selfish, lazy cruel bitch in the second part.

[Northern Monkey]

Yes my sister is having problems with childcare at the minute. She split from her partner and has a child but works (or worked..) fulltime and wanted to conitnue doing so. She got *some* help with childcare costs but not enough to continue doing fulltime. Because of this, she has had no option but to go part time instead, and she is better off for it too :S The jobcentre actually said to her 'do you not speak to your parents' :o As if grandparents should be on tap babysitters....my parents still both work but even if they didnt its un fair to expect them to watch the grandkids 24/7

On the subject of people having kids for benefits, heres a story thats ****ing disgusting but true, think I have mentioned it before on here actually. When I had just left school, a girl I know purposely got pregnant for a council house. She got the house, then had an abortion a week later. Now THAT is sick. And the system shouldn't allow it to happen, nor make people feel they HAVE to be pregnant to get help either...That's disgusting.I don't know how anyone could do that and not have it on their conscience for years to come.

[Kizzy]

That's grim, I remember in the early 90s in east Leeds young people getting pregnant for council properties as it was the only way to get housed.

[Vicky.]

Yeah I don't think it works like that anymore thankfully. Though I do expect if you have kids/are pregnant you get more priority.