another baby

I will just copy and paste what Doodledog said about foodbanks
"Foodbanks are nothing to do with you, or the state. They are funded by contributions from people who care about others, so the woman concerned isn't costing any of us anything on that score. I think it's a national disgrace that we need them at all, but that's a different discussion."

I think it is horrible to treat human beings like numbers on a balance sheet. Children are a gift and a resource and are worth so much more than cash, quite apart from the fact that, as others have pointed out, we need young people.

Are the same people complaining about babies being born in this country the same people who don't want to welcome young people from other countries either?

Very complex situation - why do poor people have big families they can’t afford?

1) just very uneducated.
2) religion ( do not agree with contraception/ terminations )
3) mental illness.
4) rape in marriage ( yes it still happens )
5) just love kids and have them despite everything.
6) a combination of any of the above.

I agree with Grandmabatty, it is none of our business. People can become pregnant for various reasons. My own son already had 4 children (2 were not his own), My dil was waiting to be sterilised but had to wait due to health reasons with her kidney. She was called forward for the operation and given a pregnancy test and found she was pregnant, she was 5 months with no symptoms or showing any signs. It would seem she had been on antibiotics a few months back and that is then when she fell for the baby. So they now have 5, all are working and contributing towards the future of peoples pensions. So lets stop bleating about people have large families.
As for food banks, most people are in work but on zero hours or low wages.

I'm all for kindness, and being charitable, and I hate to see families struggling, especially in these difficult times. However, couples who choose to have several babies, which they can ill afford, has been a problem since way before Covid came upon us! And, frankly, the amount of young couples I see, with 3 or 4+ children, who don't work (many never have), and rely on benefits, well, I really don't believe it can all be blamed on accidental pregnancies. Lack of education, or stupidity, more likely.

I have no issues with couples having as many babies as they like, as long as they have the means to support them financially, and not expect to have them paid for with tax payer's money. There isn't a bottomless pot and, the way things are going right now, with businesses closing, and people being made redundant, goodness knows where the tax payers slush fund is going to come from in the future to pay out benefits to those who need them!

Someone mentioned that these children will one day grow up to be tax payers themselves, but the way things are going, I can't see there being any jobs for them to earn the money to pay any taxes!

Just my opinion, of course. But the situation really does concern me.

Since 2017 benefits are not paid for any more than 2 children. Apart from families who already had more than 2. Just saying.

It is always a difficult thing to comment on. Personally I would be very disappointed if either of my DDs deliberately became pregnant when struggling to meet existing commitments, were without the prospect of employment etc. I would feel they were being reckless & irresponsible. However my own DD2 was born as a result of a contraceptive failure (IUD) so I know that sometimes it is not all straightforward.

I think a couple of contradictory things.

Firstly, I find people who don't control their fertility intensely annoying. We have a huge range of birth control available, free, in the uk. However, I do understand that accidents happen. And although pro-choice, I don't really approve of abortion. I do support the choice of others to make their own decision about their pregnancy tho. But surely, no one should have more than one accident?

Secondly, food banks were needed BEFORE the pandemic due to the systematic lowering of state help for the poor. So of course the need for them has increased, with many people losing jobs, or those on zero hours contracts losing their income.

If you and I don't need food banks we need to be grateful. And sympathetic towards those who do.

Since 2017 benefits are not paid for any more than 2 children. Apart from families who already had more than 2. Just saying.

A timely reminder, pensionpat, I'd actually forgotten about that.

Thankyou to all who replied to my post....a variety of views on the news item. I`d just like to add that the woman was not pregnant when her husband lost his job. Okay the pregnancy may not have been planned. But wouldn't it have been better and wiser to use contraception, in times of need?

Some agreed with me, others didn't. That`s why we have forums like this...to air our views..otherwise what is the point of them?

A note to Chewbacca.....re someone to wipe my bum...I already have that as I am chronically disabled and pay for my care myself.

Some accused me of being uncharitable. You couldn't be further from the truth, as I help many charities.

I`ll leave it there and wish everyone good health.

Crikey Boodymum. Why be so judgemental about other people's lives?

Esspee says there's contraception (as does oldbat1) - well, yes there is - and it all has a failure rate!

The question of who should be supported by the state is always going to be a vexed one, as the vitriol is always reserved for poor families, or more often for poor women who aren't working, often because the cost of childcare would outstrip their earning potential.

What about middle class women who choose not to work to bring up their families more conveniently? They often claim that their husbands pay for their right to health care, pensions, education, security, etc, but realistically, they don't. The structure of the tax system works against that, and in any case, if the husband is a high earner, he should be paying more tax as a matter of course - not to allow another able adult to avoid contributing their own.

There is also the question of who contributes to society by virtue of their occupation (as opposed to earnings). Arguably, a volunteer who pays no tax but does something like hospital visiting is contributing more than a high earner who 'only' produces profit, but how can that be measured?

Even if we could iron out those anomalies, how can an outsider feel able to comment on someone using a food bank when pregnant? We don't know the circumstances of the pregnancy, or the reason for the mother needing to use the food bank, and nor is she under any obligation to tell us, unless we want to go back to Poor Law conditions where those in need had to plead their case to a panel of 'more deserving' citizens.

I wonder how many people who complain about the 'feckless' poor would actually have any moral right to be on that panel if all things were considered.

Very well said, Doodledog. People just don't realise that the vast majority of working-age benefits go to those who are in paid work.

Pensioners are in receipt of a pension - classed as a benefit - so are 'benefit claimants' too!

So are we to assume then that you have taken more from the state than you have pod in?

Who is your comment addressed to, Bibbity?

Sorry. The OP

The OP pays for her own care. I too get irritated by people having more children than they can afford, but accept it's none of my business, and I try not to judge. Accidents can happen.

That just about sums it up for me too rafichagran

I completely agree but astonishingly stating the fact that people should limit their family to the size of their budget doesn’t seem to go down well on Gransnet as I have found in the past.

Someone actually replied to a post of mine on the subject to say “so do you actually believe people should only have the children they can afford ?”

In an ideal world Jennifer people would have small families and live a nice prosperous life and all be well, but life can be messy and unpredictable.

What is it about having more children than you can afford, is it the cost to the public purse? How is that even measured?

A family could have two children but those children may cost the state a lot of money throughout their lifetimes for a variety of reasons.

Posters can be so censorious of other peoples' choices/circumstances.

I have no idea how far the average person 'pays for themselves'. If you do a cost/benefit analysis, there would be health care from birth to death, education, use of roads, public buildings, protection from crime and terrorism, all local council services for everyone, plus (for those whose circumstances qualify them there would be child benefits, pensions, maternity leave, sick pay, subsidised housing and care in old age in the 'cost to society' column. There would old be tax and NI in the benefit column. Nothing much else can be measured financially, so would have to be discounted in this view of an individual's worth.

I don't know whether Ms or Mr Average would end up in credit or deficit, but it's a horrible way of looking at people's 'affordability'. As I said upthread, I strongly suspect that a lot of people who pass judgement on others would be surprised at how much they themselves cost, particularly if they are assessed on their own contributions only - ie nothing paid by their parents, spouses or children.

The punctuation is all over the place in the above post, and I can't go back and edit, so I hope it makes sense.

Problem is, it’s not much fun being the 4th or 5th child born into a family already stressed & living on the breadline ( or below )
The ‘poor but happy’ line doesn’t always ring true, especially if there’s 7 of you living in a damp, over crowded flat on the 14th floor of a tower block, and mum only has £6.50 in her purse ( to last the week )

She may pay for carers but who pays for
GP visits, Hospital appointments, Scans, treatment, medication etc
If she’s had children that’s another 10s of thousands.
Very interested to hear what work OP does that means she has paid the hundreds of thousands into the pot so that she can judge others.

Yes, quite Bibbity. It may not apply to the OP, but there are plenty of women who didn't work, depending on a husband and therefore paying nothing into the state themselves, that judge poor women for using food banks.

The public purse pays out for treatment of lung cancer in smokers and joint replacements in people who suffer from obesity.
I believe the education system has become so exam focussed that we end up with a lot of kids with low self esteem. Some of them find they are good at having babies. It gives them a role and they feel successful at something.
Just a couple of thoughts, badly expressed!
I have 5 children, by the way!