Benefit's Capped By Number Of Children

[AB Editor]

 

This poll is closed.

Should benefits and government hand-outs be capped after the second child?

• Yes - 470 votes
• 84%
• No - 89 votes
• 16%

See final stats

Stats until: 12:08 Thu 21st Nov 2024 (Refreshed every 5 minutes)

© AnswerBank Ltd 2000 - 2024. All Rights Reserved.

[LoftyLottie]

Unfortunately, we can't afford to keep dishing out benefits and cutting back is always going to cause some suffering initially right through the whole spectrum, including some children. That is life. I think that benefits should be capped initially at todays rate for those that are already in the existing system, including child benefit, and that in future child benefit should only be for the first two children (if at all) Something has to change. People should not have children if they can't afford them. If their circumstances change through redundancy, death, etc. etc. then there should be a benefit system to help their family - but not called child benefit.
I am not hard hearted but we can'[t go on dishing out as we do now.

[starone]

My friend works in a maternity hospital and says the same women come back year after year adding to their family. I have no reason to doubt her word. We brought our two up on very little and had to go without life's little luxuries such as cigarettes and alcohol and - yes, sometimes food - and certainly clothes.

[boxtops]

I remember the days when you didn't get child benefit at all for the first child, on the assumption that you could afford to look after it, or you wouldn't have had it.

[Sqad]

boxy....so can I and in those times the only method of contraception was the condom and certain spermicidal gels.

Since the advent of the revolutionary contraceptive pill, teenaged pregnancies have erupted.......so to speak.

[emmie]

so much for sex education then, ^

[boxtops]

^ I remember them too, sqad.... :-)

[crijo68]

Benefit should be capped after second child.

[zorrodp]

Yes, but ...... it's worth reading some of the background to family allowance (which I benefited from indirectly growing up mid-1950s-early '70s) http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/cabinetpapers/themes/beveridge-report-child-benefit.htm and http://www.revenuebenefits.org.uk/child-benefit/policy/where_it_all_started/ - the objectives have changed over time (subsistence, improving nutrition, substitution for food subsidies, child poverty, selective benefit, universal benefit, to what has become a widespread subsidy in a low pay economy). It's not before time to reconsider the purposes.

[yaiyai]

A yes

[sandyRoe]

I mentioned Old Mother Hubbard in my first answer to this question. It should, of course, have been The Old Woman who lived in a shoe.
Apologies.

[TheOtherHalf]

Im one of 13 and my parents never had benefits apart from the first one in those days. When my Dad died aged 59 my mum still had 5 boys to look after and still didnt get benefits. We elder ones all helped out a bit with clothes etc. But she managed most of the time because she used common sense and didnt spend money for the sake of it. I think all us children feel the same way because of how we were brought up. We are careful with money !! I know circumstances change and some need help, but its the scroungers who want mansion houses that pi** me off !

[linbadd]

The world population is out of control. Britain's population is out of control.

The optimum population for the UK is estimated to be between 40,000,000 and 45,000,000. The current population is well over 60,000,000 and continues to rise. Our economy relies more and more on imports, the number of people contributing to the economy declines, yet the number of people relying on benefits continues to increase . The day when this becomes unsustainable grows ever nearer.

Child benefit shouldn't just be capped. It should gradually be phased out altogether. Of course people shouldn't be having more children than they can afford to feed, clothe and house! The natural world controls its population when there's not enough to go round. We have defied nature by reducing child mortality rates, increasing life expectancy, finding ways of catering for a larger and larger population. Now we must find ways of dealing with the problems this has created.

Yes, there must be assistance for people who are made redundant, become long-term sick, etc., but everyone should be taking the possibility of these factors into account when planning the size of their family.

The problem with the 'feckless' is that planning doesn't come into it!

[jtbear47]

Absolutely

[3penny]

Why should we be paying people to have children in this day and age when our planet is so vastly overpopulated and our resources are running out? I'm afraid I would stop Child Benefit completely.

[barney4444]

The problem is that we as a society cannot see children/babies hungry or in need and parents know that the more children they produce the more benefits they will receive. Apart from taking the children away and then giving the parents no benefits it is very difficult to see a solution.

[linbadd]

I wonder if the small number of people who voted 'No' all have more than two children, or are they just burying their heads in the sand and hoping the problem of having an unsustainable welfare system will go away?

[KatieI]

LL I fully agree with most of your comments,
i.e. "People should not have children if they can't afford them."
What has happened to planning a family and waiting until a child can be afforded. It really isn't up to the state to fund our family choices and the money saved could be put to better use, such as rebuilding our NHS.
I know of several cases of a young girl having a baby in order to get help with getting a house.
Finally, why should responsible couples who chose not to have children be penalised by having to pay tax towards keeping other peoples children?
If you can't afford a family, DONT START ONE.

[Baldric]

Well well, the vote does seem to have gone in favour of capping after all!

[nsayer]

I don't think there should be any child benefits for anyone earning more than a total of £30,000

[yaiyai]

with an ever rising population it's time people acted responsibly and restricted the size of their family to 2 children, regardless of income.