Universial Credit

Surely the real question has got nothing to do with where the money comes from but whether it is good parenting for a large family on a limited income to be cutting back on their expenditure, possible on food, heat, clothing or educational needs, to the extent of £50 a week in order to spend excessively (£366.66p per child) at Christmas.

There are many, many families with smaller families, and much higher incomes who would not dream of spending so much on all their children's presents, still less on each.

No ab I am NOT wrong about your OP and what you posted but I really can’t be bothered to carry on with this -read the article in the Guardian today about Frank Fields constituency to see what UC really means - this womsn’s case is so far an outlier it tells us nothing.

You want it to be so, no matter you are again, wrong.

But your OP didn’t say that- you were questioning the level of her benefits that allowed her to save and spend the amounts stated.

Why pretend all is well because it's coming up to Christmas? Do you mean give opinions for 50 weeks of the year but not for two weeks?

Nothing changes the fact the interview caused anger for some who expressed that anger, it also brought the usual benefit claimant attackers out of the woodwork and it is benefit claimants who already get treated as if they are sub human without this sort of interview . I wished she had shut up, saved her money, spent her money . How damn helpful was she to those trying to stop the delays in payment of universial benefit

Some horrible attitudes on this thread - some people have really forgotten the true meaning of this time of year? Not much goodwill and charitable attitudes here!

I have ME, fibromyalgia and EDS - not all diagnosed when I had my children 20+ years ago - BUT pregnancy actually gave me a remission from the severity of these conditions which is common for many autoimmune illnesses.

you do understand that SOMETIMES people get pregnat without actually trying.Perhaps thats what happened to her and MAYBE ,just maybe she decided that she couldn't terminate the pregnancy and went ahead with it.YOU nor I know any of the circumstances so her last baby is none of our business.I will say my DD had fertility treatment to have her two eldest children and was told she would need it IF she decided on another ....she got pregnant naturally just months into a new relationship.She and her partner...now husband also decided to go ahead and we have a wonderful third GD ....sometimes life just happens

With her money management skills, that woman should be chancellor of the exchequer!

I agree glam in being critical of her willingness to appear on TV - I don’t think it’s simply about riling others worse off but that it feeds the anti- benefit brigade many of whom are not short of income.

The amount she gets includes rent - a person on minimum wage would be entitled to housing benefit and tax credits.

The family are obviously managing their money very well if they are saving £50 per week,probably cooking everything from scratch and no takeaways/convienence foods etc so good on them.
I do however think it is the wrong time of year to publicise their lifestyle as it will rile many others who are going to have problems over the festive season and for whom I feel very sorry for.

I can both what ?

The question of why you started the thread reflects your question as to why she appeared on TV or can save £50 a week. Both pointless with no reason other than you both can.

Her husband cannot work , he is her carer and has six young children to care for too.

If her husband worked 40 hours a week on minimum wage and paid tax they would have another £100+ a week to live on plus another £200+ with child care costs. Would your opinion change if he worked?

You wouldn't because it doesn't fit with your constant claims of the ill treatment of those benefit claimants.

I think over £800 p w is a wage so many working 40 hours p w on minimum wage and paying tax can only dream of

The OP was nasty and judgemental - I can’t think of any positive reason why the thread was started

I compared her doing the same harm as fraudulent claimants, I did not question her illnesses, and if you take the time and the bother to read the post you will see a question mark, this means what are your views on benefit claimants giving interviews about spending not your views on me, the latter is of no interest to me,

I do think having such poor health and five children the youngest then being three to have a sixth especially with ME was rather silly. Her sex life is of no interest to me, it seems to interest you.

OP you did question her spending in your original post and you implied she was not genuine by comparing her to claimants on another show and harming genuine claimants. Does your comment on having a 22 month old child mean that as a disabled woman on benefits she should not have the energy or right to have sex or children?

There are plenty MP's appearing on TV and claiming expenses way and above their need while denying that Universal Credit is creating poverty. Would your criticism not be better directed at them?

You choose to twist things, I have said what she does with her money is her business, I have not criticised her choices on spending, I criticise her going on TV to discuss how she spends her benefits and at a time this government are putting people on benefits through the hoop with delays on universial credit.

Your final comment Paddyann was extremely childish

do you think we should issue food stamps like America does ,or restrict HOW benefits are spent ? For goodness sake IF hs emanaged to save off her benefit/PIP/carers allowance then good on her...I'm sure being able to buy things for her kids would have put a smile on her face...probably a rare smile if she has even half the health problems my DD has .Annie ,are you SURE you're not a Tory?

So do you think she is lying about her illness then?

The problem is she has given critics of benefit claimants an excuse to attack benefit claimants and I think that is selfish and stupid. How much she saves and what she sends her money on is up to her, I just get annoyed because there was a lot of criticism and this will not garner support for those who have to live on benefits

Of not if

Not sure if your point annie