[Denver]

Chavs shouldnt have kids so they can bum of the dole and watch Jezza all day

[arista]

Originally Posted by Adam.

Chavs shouldnt have kids so they can bum of the dole and watch Jezza all day

Yes thats Why that old Lady
that Phoned in
Live on Ch5HD , yesterday
was able
shut matt wright UP


the Camera Zoomed round the
small crowd in the small Studio
above Tesco in W2, London
to get some faces of "Shock"
http://princesstv.com/studio/

[Northern Monkey]

I think it's definitely sensible to only plan for as many as you can afford.We've only had two because i think we'd start to struggle with anymore.

[Kizzy]

Drip drip drip, ideas are fed into the public consciousness.

[Crimson Dynamo]

If they stopped women having children and just said only men can give birth this would really cut the numbers down

sadly logical thought is in short supply in this debate

[arista]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

If they stopped women having children and just said only men can give birth this would really cut the numbers down

sadly logical thought is in short supply in this debate

Vicky is OK
she knows the score

[Liam-]

I've always believed that if you have kids and then lose your job, you're obviously entitled to go onto benefits in order to support them because you wouldn't be able to yourself, however, if a person in that situation goes on to have more kids while on benefits, I don't think they should be entitled to more money for those kids, if you couldn't afford to keep the ones you already have, then why would you bring more into the world?

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Liam-

I've always believed that if you have kids and then lose your job, you're obviously entitled to go onto benefits in order to support them because you wouldn't be able to yourself, however, if a person in that situation goes on to have more kids while on benefits, I don't think they should be entitled to more money for those kids, if you couldn't afford to keep the ones you already have, then why would you bring more into the world?

Indeed, yes accidents happen but in the main it's not accidental, it's either down to "taking a chance" or men not taking responsibility because it doesn't feel the same with a sock on it, and they must have the full experience

[arista]

Originally Posted by Liam-

I've always believed that if you have kids and then lose your job, you're obviously entitled to go onto benefits in order to support them because you wouldn't be able to yourself, however, if a person in that situation goes on to have more kids while on benefits, I don't think they should be entitled to more money for those kids, if you couldn't afford to keep the ones you already have, then why would you bring more into the world?

Liam
You Are Most Wise

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by Liam-

I've always believed that if you have kids and then lose your job, you're obviously entitled to go onto benefits in order to support them because you wouldn't be able to yourself, however, if a person in that situation goes on to have more kids while on benefits, I don't think they should be entitled to more money for those kids, if you couldn't afford to keep the ones you already have, then why would you bring more into the world?

Totally agree

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Liam-

I've always believed that if you have kids and then lose your job, you're obviously entitled to go onto benefits in order to support them because you wouldn't be able to yourself, however, if a person in that situation goes on to have more kids while on benefits, I don't think they should be entitled to more money for those kids, if you couldn't afford to keep the ones you already have, then why would you bring more into the world?

THIS ^ is what I think. Dystopian nightmarish scenarios such as compulsory sterilisation by the State should not even be entertained hypothetically. It is rather - surely - a matter for any decent, caring, and mature parents to decide. They should NOT want to breed children that they cannot afford to provide for and give the best possible start in life.

[arista]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

THIS ^ is what I think. Dystopian nightmarish scenarios such as compulsory sterilisation by the State should not even be entertained hypothetically. It is rather - surely - a matter for any decent, caring, and mature parents to decide. They should NOT want to breed children that they cannot afford to provide for and give the best possible start in life.

No
you make it law that if you have more than 2 kids
the state will not fund them at all.



New Labour MP's
agree with that
of course they are due to be deselected
and replaced with Corbyn
MP's

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Liam-

I've always believed that if you have kids and then lose your job, you're obviously entitled to go onto benefits in order to support them because you wouldn't be able to yourself, however, if a person in that situation goes on to have more kids while on benefits, I don't think they should be entitled to more money for those kids, if you couldn't afford to keep the ones you already have, then why would you bring more into the world?

Yup, sounds about right.
However I see flaws in this also...as whilst scummy bastards who do see their kids as a meal ticket exist..some people genuinely try not to get pregnant and just have horrific luck. I am not really comfortable with telling someone who has been careful that they have to have an abortion or be 'punished'. Which is pretty much what the options would be :S

I am especially not comfortable with it whilst sterilization is refused to people who already have kids when they ask for it

However I cannot really think of any other solution than the one you suggested.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Yup, sounds about right.
However I see flaws in this also...as whilst scummy bastards who do see their kids as a meal ticket exist..some people genuinely try not to get pregnant and just have horrific luck. I am not really comfortable with telling someone who has been careful that they have to have an abortion or be 'punished'. Which is pretty much what the options would be :S



I am especially not comfortable with it whilst sterilization is refused to people who already have kids when they ask for it

However I cannot really think of any other solution than the one you suggested.

What's the reason they won't allow you to be sterilised Vicky?

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

What's the reason they won't allow you to be sterilised Vicky?

I am still young and might change my mind Even though I know I won't. They won't accept that I know myself and my body and my last pregnancy/labour absolutely broke me..I am still suffering from whatever pain he brought on that day :S

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I am still young and might change my mind Even though I know I won't. They won't accept that I know myself and my body and my last pregnancy/labour absolutely broke me..I am still suffering from whatever pain he brought on that day :S

What age will you have do be before they agree, and do they refuse men vasectomies

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I am still young and might change my mind Even though I know I won't. They won't accept that I know myself and my body and my last pregnancy/labour absolutely broke me..I am still suffering from whatever pain he brought on that day :S

Most will agree to it fairly easily if you're 30 or over, have two or more kids and can be convincing that you're 100% sure you don't want more... if your GP is being weird about it I'd say just "shop around" GP's until you find one that will give you a referral

[Crimson Dynamo]

some thoughtful men take the responsibility and get the snip

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

some thoughtful men take the responsibility and get the snip

No more mini LTs

In all seriousness though and at the risk of sounding like the female version of the truth men do need to take responsibility, for birth control, and for looking after there offspring however they are conceived, single mothers blah blah, there would be a lot fewer single mothers if men stepped up and literally put a sock on it

[smudgie]

Children are the biggest responsibility you can have, so a lot of thought should go into it.
With that in mind we stopped at two (I would have loved a third), I don't think we were classed as poor at the time as hubby had a job, but with a mortgage and all the rest we had to be careful. As it happened, I could not have carried a third child although we did not know it at the time of our decision.
In this day and age when nobody has a job for life scenario you should be prepared for any circumstances, just the same as accidents can happen, or you remarry, everything isn't black and white.
The decision should be left up to the individuals involved, with the knowledge of how much help or lack of it you will get from the state, working or not.

[Livia]

I agree with Liam. My parents wanted a large family but didn't have the funds, so it's just my brother and me. It seems previous generations planned for families rather than relying on the state to fund them.

[thesheriff443]

in this country people don't need to take resposability for having kids when they know the tax payer will pay for them.

Why do you think most on benefits have more kids, because more kids means more money and they don't have to work as they have kids to look after, also they are entitled to have a home that's paid for by the tax payer

Now before I get jumped on there are genuine people out there.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

in this country people don't need to take resposability for having kids when they know the tax payer will pay for them.

Why do you think most on benefits have more kids, because more kids means more money and they don't have to work as they have kids to look after, also they are entitled to have a home that's paid for by the tax payer

Now before I get jumped on there are genuine people out there.

I'm not about to jump on you Sheriff because you are 1,000% correct.

[arista]

Originally Posted by thesheriff443

in this country people don't need to take resposability for having kids when they know the tax payer will pay for them.

Why do you think most on benefits have more kids, because more kids means more money and they don't have to work as they have kids to look after, also they are entitled to have a home that's paid for by the tax payer

Now before I get jumped on there are genuine people out there.

Genuine People
is not what this debate about.

Work To Make a Dollar
Watch It Melt Hear In My hand