> I did not even know rent and council tax is paid for if you have no job.

In fact if your income is little above benefit levels you can get partial help if your working too, so that no-one in work is worse off than on benefits, other than those with a mortgage.

Many people don't claim help that they are entitled too, and suffer as a consequence.

I worked in the Benefits system and really don't think that benefits are particularly generous, enough to get by on (unless your cheating by working too)..

I planned my children, but didn't expect to end up being a single parent.

Neither did my mum - widowed with 3 kids.  And yet I still stick by my views above.

So what would you have happen in my and your Mum's case when we could no longer afford the children we had?

I certainly agre that at the time one conceives/has a child it should e because one is in a position to do so, secure financially and in a secure relationship.

Havent read all the replies but I do think people should be assessed before having kids, its not a god given right!!!  This is very extreme what I am going to say but we health test dogs and temperament test dogs before breeding and promote 'responsible breeding'.  Why not for people???   Im am expecting a backlash..... people who have kids should be able to afford to feed and clothe them.  I do think benefts should be available to those who fall on hard times through no fault of their own.  But those who have kids to get a free ride is wrong.  People do not plan to be single parents but what is wrong with women/men planning for a life should they end up alone - I would call this being responsible!  To many women expect a man to pay for everything and this is wrong.  Whats wrong with standing on your own two feet and being independant?  So many of my friends 'couldnt cope' without their men, well go our their an do it, we are not a weak species, we can do it.  There are benfits out their to HELP people, which I am all for but when people assume it is there for the taking is wrong.  No wonder our country is in such a mess x

> its not a god given right!!!

Well it is a God/nature whatever ability for most.

It amazes me the effort and money that it is put into planning a wedding. It is a pity that people don't put as much (should be more) effort into planning a pregnancy :( The number of (often) men that will happily get a woman pregnant, but then say that they can't make the commitment to get married :( :( So many have their priorities totally wrong :(

Daisy

> Whats wrong with standing on your own two feet and being independent?  So many of my friends 'couldn't cope' without their men,

In mamy ways womens rights/equality has put us into the situation of needing two incomes to bring up a family, where formerly a man expected to be the bread winner, and married women had to give up their jobs to single women.

These days one wage is needed to pay for the roof over our heads, be that Rent or mortgage and the other to live.

In the past women without a husband had to rely on family, and if they had not family to fall back on many had to give up their children.  Orphanages were not just for children with no parents.

I doubt there are many people of ideal child bearing age (say 20 to 35) secure enough financially to bring up children entirely alone.

My grandmother was widowed by the war.  Luckily her children were older, my Dad old enough to do chores at home while Mum sold the slippers she made, dealt in collectible china etc, and my Aunt was working at 15 and attending night school so the three of them managed.

My former mother in law remembers looking after younger siblings and eating grass to stave off hunger while waiting for her Mum to get in from menial work like cleaning and washing, just to feed her fatherless children, several of whom died of cholera.

This is very extreme what I am going to say but we health test dogs and temperament test dogs before breeding and promote 'responsible breeding'.  Why not for people???

In my world of fantasy I have often thought the same. :-D But in reality we could never control people in such a way, human rights and all.  Children are born of love, or should be and love is nothing to do with how much money people have, or what character people have, we are a much more complex animal to others on this planet but the basics are still there. ;-) Most females have an inner instinct, need/clock whatever you wish to call it as in all species to have a baby and continue their line and the species, just as men have the urge to spread their seed.

We could never have a world where only the chosen who pass all the criteria should have children what kind of world would that be, because there are terrific single parents, parents with no money who shower nothing but love on those children who grow up balanced and good citizens, at the end of the day it is being wanted and loved which makes a fullfilled adult, the rest is just dressing.

Something that your suggesting would cause wars, uprisings and we'd end up with puppyfarms and BYB's in babies just as in puppies because as responsible as most of us on the board are as to breeding dogs and to raising children, there are far more who aren't. :-(

The truth is all the talk we are doing all the ideas it is useless and will never happen, we can't force contraceptives, or having babies only when passing a questionaire. All we can do is cut off the money, but of course that also causes untold problems often to the inoccent like the divorced and widowed. So we'll probably end up doing nothing! as usual. :-D

Just to add I've always thought that the best solution to good parenting and well behaved children was greatly influenced by God, his wrath and the thougths of going to hell used to have a great influence on people's behaviour as well as tighter family bonds and families living closer to one another.

Where there is no fear of reprimand from the grandparent, to the policeman to God, there is no control, money tends to be the evil and savour amongst us today so it is the only control we have.

Those of us who raise our children well shall continue as shall those who don't..................

> This is very extreme what I am going to say but we health test dogs and temperament test dogs before breeding and promote 'responsible > breeding'.  Why not for people???

Because it would be the thin end of the wedge, the state deciding who can breed and who can't and how children should be bought up to be model citizens.  Aldus Huxley wrote a book about where that could lead (Brave New World).

> Something that your suggesting would cause wars, uprisings and we'd end up with puppyfarms and BYB's in babies just as in puppies because as responsible as most of us on the board are as to breeding dogs and to raising children, there are far more who aren't. :-(
>
>

Forced population control has been tried and still practised with limited success in China.

In India many years ago the state were sterilising people, and it caused international uproar..

Strictly speaking I don't think it is forced in China, there are financial penalities if you have more children and these can be severe

Well it is basically forced as the financial penalties are not just for the couple abut the community and they will do abortions right to term, so there is extreme financial and society pressure.

I meant forced as in compulsory.

as the financial penalties are not just for the couple but the community

Having a whole community looking down on you is a very powerful incentive not to have more children.

Forced population control has been tried and still practised with limited success in China.


I wonder why it hasn't worked? As my opinion and blanket view of the Chinese is a very moralistic, polite, hard working and religious nation, if it has not worked there, then we have little hope, as let's be honest the British people we are in general talking about are likely to just go out and rob from others what they don't have.

So if decreasing funds doesn't stop it, I give up!!!!!

Just adding on at the end.

A friend of mine found out she was pregnant, not planned and was going to abort, she had a scan and found out she was having twins.
She decided to go ahead with the pregnancy and moved back home for a short while to start saving money.
She gave birth and was on maternity leave from work. I can't recall when she went back to work part time, but its wasn't long after. He mum thankfully and luckily was able to help out on these days with the twins. Within 6 months my friend had saved up enough money for a deposit on a flat and since then has been supporting herself and her kids on her own. She paid for child minders on the days she worked and with wages and benefits she was entitled to has managed.
She has now met a lovely guy who also contributes to the home, so she is better off now but goes to show what you can do with minimal support for a short period of time without the need to rely all the time on benefits and with twins!!!

I think this thread has drifted somewhat. some "broken" families are well off, innfluentual, white collar workers, plenty of money etc..but bad parenting skills. I am in agreement that it is all too easy to live of the state, I have a daughter and son in law who have two children and have never worked..I do not approve but the system is there for them to abuse and along with many others they do just that. However they love the children and they are well brought up and are not (as so often thought) thieves, boozers or druggies!
However in my job (A&E) I see all too often the results of "Broken" families who are druggies, alcoholics, criminals. I see also the well of working families who also have many children who are unmanagable unruly, foul mouthed individuals. Some of the least expected parents have no idea how to bring up children and they cannot control them. Time and time again we see the reults of a parent who is admitted with drug/alcohol related admissions who's children suffer from it and we see the uncontrolable children of well off parents who have neither the time or inclination to look after their young teenagers properly and so they run wild, get drunk, fight, and are very difficult to deal with in A&E. There is more to 'Selective' breeding than a welth of money, many children of families on benifit are loved cared for and taught respect etc.. and equally as many well of families have no right to be parents and they think by chucking money and mateirial things at thier kids they are doing the job right.
I feel that removing benifits will only kurb so much, yes the system needs overhauling but the main reson for the kind of rude, criminal, bullying behaviour we see in youngsters these days is down to bad parenting and can come from all walks of life.
And yes I think that the system needs a way of teaching good parenting and the abillity to remove children fron bad homes before they too learn to be bad parents...but it will never happen.
Just a though...how would you deal with a teenage single parent, on benifits, living in a B&B with her baby, admitted to hospt with a drug OD, with a small child? Throw your hands up in disgust and remove the child from a loving Mother?
Now consider that teenager was abused by a parent/step-parent, raped by a stepfather, left pregnant, thrown out of the home and addicted to drugs from being "Groomed" as a child to accept that the snorting a line of Coke was acceptable behaviour from her abusive stepfather..with a good job and plenty of funding for his habit?? Life is not black and white I am afraid.
Aileen

How about this then:

At the age of 16 every human male has semen samples taken and stored; they are then vasectomised.

Access to their sample will only be granted if the male and the same female turn up at a specified place every week to sign a document agreeing to parent any child produced. This takes place for *six months and then the sample is released and implanted.

This system doesn't discrimimate on any grounds other than the first necessity for good parenting: commitment.

I'm sure it has many wrinkles that need ironing out but it's got to better than what's going on at the moment.

*(I used to insist the preliminaries lasted a year but TBH I think you could cut it down to a month and it would still weed out most of the disadvantaged children being conceived today.)

> Access to their sample will only be granted if the male and the same female turn up at a specified place every week to sign a document agreeing to parent any child produced. This takes place for *six months and then the sample is released and implanted

Sorry but I rather doubt that system would work either - simply because turning up for appointments and signing paperwork actually tells you nothing about what it is truly like to be a parent. I think that you never really know how you will cope with parenting until you are actually a parent! I am sure plenty of people imagine how they would parent their children but the reality tends to be different. And also, I don't think just being there makes you a good parent in itself, it is all the other unmeasurable things like love, guidance, caring which all the rules in the world can't create! 

>At the age of 16 every human male has semen samples taken and stored; they are then vasectomised.

Semen samples don't last forever. Every few years you'd have to reverse the vasectomy to get fresh material.

Besides, fear of pregnancy is still (in some of the young) a deterrent to promiscuity and all the health implications that involves. Remove the risk of pregnancy and you remove the deterrent.

> I'm sure it has many wrinkles that need ironing out but it's got to better than what's going on at the moment.

LOL :) :) Smacks just a tad of Nazi Germany :) :) Totally unworkable, I'm afraid. I don't think that things are THAT bad that your measures are necessary. If they were, the end of the human race would be nigh :) :)

I'm really not sure what the answer is. Enforced sterilisation is probably the only workable solution, but this is a dangerous path :( I'm not sure if it was on the national news or just our local news, but there was a family that had had all their children taken away - mostly adopted. I can't remember the actual number but it was probably at least 12 children. The mother was pregnant again and said that she would just keep getting pregnant until social services let her keep a baby :( :( :(

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/5935665/Mother-whose-13-children-were-taken-into-care-is-pregnant-again.html

Most parents do manage well - it's again just the small minority that give real trouble :(

Daisy

At the age of 16 every human male has semen samples taken and stored; they are then vasectomised.


Smacks just a tad of Nazi Germany   I have to agree with that.

Muttsinbrum what an idea, I won't quash your inventiveness, nice to think outside the box :-)  But Wow, ** exhales slowley** actually words are failing me :-D  No,no,no,no,no, on so many levels.

> and with wages and benefits she was entitled to has managed.
>

But there you go still needed some support from the system, be it Housing Benefit (rent rebates), tax credits or what have you.  Her mother helped out too, you simply cannot manage bringing up children solely on one wage unless in very well paid work, certainly not on minimum wage..

Also we do need the next generation, and are already facing the issues of an ageing population and decreasing birth rate.

The point i was trying to make was that she refused to rely solely on benefits, which she could of done, but no she got off her back side and worked and made an effort. Sure she got help from the tax man which i don't see being a problem, family tax credit etc are available to most people with kids. Yes she got help from her family but only for a short time.
Yes we sometimes all need some help along to way with many things, but to continually rely on benefits when there is no valid reason for them to do so needs to change.

Further to this i have seen many kids who have been taken away from their parents, whether it be neglect or through heroin abuse, kids need a stable upbringing as best they can and sometimes the parents at some stages are not in a position to do this, so whether kids are removed on a temp basis or permanent its the welfare of the children who should remain paramount.

Well I think babies/children also have rights! The system they are using now has proven beyond doubt that it does NOT work.
Everyone has to be given a chance to prove themselves, and we all make mistakes. But! now it is redicules. Babies are born, say, to drug abusing parents. They are given suport, baby in foster home contact 5 days out of 7. They are then put in a mother and baby unit at a great expense. It fails mom sneaks out stays out with partner who is abusive. Baby put back in foster care, backwards and forwards for years. Moved from foster home to foster home. If they are lucky a Social Worker may advise adoption. By now, you will have a very disturbed child 7-10yrs old, Who! is going to adopt them? There is no where to put them NO money to reopen childrens homes. They leave care at 16yrs old Foster Parents Job done. Were do they go, what will happen to them!!
I beleve, We need to go back to the old system were babies taken in to care at birth, should have a decision made by the time they are 6months old at the latest. Back with Mom, or another member of there family they could vet them the min. the baby is taken into care. Or adoption. What you see now is the break down of a generation, were the authorities, have let them down. They spend to much time covering there backs instead of doing there Job.
It is about to get worse as they are now getting rid of older experienced Social Workers, "old School" who look at the best intrest of the child. They also are not afraid to do what they beleve is right for the child. There is not many left. The Authorities are now Employing newly qualified social workers with NO experience, at a cheaper rate.
Social Workers can't just decide to take children in to care, there is a case file on the family, human rights plays a big part, plus culture.
This is why you see so many failures. If a case file has been done on the family, Then,Yes!! take them into care at birth.

Denese
This is why some poor children fall through the loop holes.

Brainless! There is a Big baby boom now! the system can't cope! NHS is stressed to its limit,  plus they closed all the Schools didn't they!
I have heard today that they are removing our Health visitors, (for Moms,and babies) and giving the jobs to Distric Nurses. That will cause big problems.
"Every Man to his Trade"

Denese

These so called old school social workrs took me from my mum and then tried to take my son from me and i have never touched drugs or harmed myself or anyone else..they had nothing on me and put me in a mother and baby home run by nuns who were to keep an eye on me....i couldnt leave there if i had run away i would have lost him... they get money from the government for each baby adopted!!!!
please please dont think that they hav the babies best interest at heart..its all about targets and paperwork...
i have been through the are system and from first hand experiance i know it didnt work in the 60s 70s and 80s and to be honest i see no change!
i was released from care in the 80s to live on the streets surviving on 1.40 a day....i sorted myself out with no help from the systemand am only here now due to my strong sense of survival..please research the child abuse cases at childrens homes in Wales...some of my friends from back then are sadly no longer here due to social workers blind eyes!!

> We need to go back to the old system were babies taken in to care at birth,

It is very complicated though, I know of people who grew up in the care system and ended up probably worse off than if they had been able to stay with their mother, had their mother been given the support needed. 

This graph is interesting http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?ID=951

It shows the number of births per 1000 in the under 20's has fallen since 1973, falling in the first 10 years then being fairly level, adn falling in the last 10 years.

The 20 - 24 age group has had a marked reduction from about 130 births per 1000 to aroudn half that in 2008.

The 25 - 29 age group were about the same as the above and are now about 130 births of 1000. 

These I would consider to be the prime child bearing years.

What has risen is the number of women having children later in life.

30 - 34 age group from about 65 births per 1000 to around 110. and the 35 - 39 age group from under 30 births to double that.

So it woudl seem that we are not having more and more young irresponsible peopel contributing to the births but more older ones.

The average age of a woman having her first child has been steadily increasing year on year. In 2008, the mean age for giving birth in the UK was 29.3 years, while in 1978 the mean age was almost three years lower (26.7 years).

You are right the birth rate has ben rising sicne 2002, but is still under 2 children per woman.

> Because it would be the thin end of the wedge, the state deciding who can breed and who can't and how children should be bought up to be model citizens.  Aldus Huxley wrote a book about where that could lead (Brave New World).

its terribly Brave New World isn't it?? i am stunned reading some of these posts! we're accussed as pedigree dog people of being into eugenics as it is without folk coming out with stuff about controlling peoples breeding rights!

Personally i won't be having kids because i don't want to pass on what my OH and I probably would, but thats my choice no one elses.

what makes people think their taxes should only go to things they approve of?

i think a lot of the posts have been very much tongue in cheek, I hope. :)

Smacks just a tad of Nazi Germany  

Ah, Godwin's Law! 

But I fail to see the comparison.  There's no discrimination on any grounds other than stability and commitment, the bedrock of good parenting and a minimum requirement before the real work starts. 

And as for the end of the human race being nigh, we are currently - and literally - sowing the seeds of our own destruction by over-population and all its consequences.

Just to add I've always thought that the best solution to good parenting and well behaved children was greatly influenced by God, his wrath and the thougths of going to hell used to have a great influence on people's behaviour as well as tighter family bonds and families living closer to one another.

Where there is no fear of reprimand from the grandparent, to the policeman to God, there is no control, money tends to be the evil and savour amongst us today so it is the only control we have.

Those of us who raise our children well shall continue as shall those who don't..................

I bring my children up without the use of a god as any influence in what we do and I think, we are doing it by common sense and no thoughts and telling them they will go to hell ;-) We have a very good living money wise alot fo the time but that doesn't influence the way we teach them about manners and respecting people. I don't live any where near my family or my OH family and we are far from being disfunctional or suffering because of that or not following 'gods' way.

Brainless   Date 08.09.09 21:32 GMT 

> its not a god given right!!!

Well it is a God/nature whatever ability for most.

For most yes but thats not saying those who can should have kids.  Many should not, and there is many a woman who cant have kids naturally but opt for IVF - which is not a 'god given right'.  We do not live in an ideal world.

I bring my children up without the use of a god as any influence in what we do and I think, we are doing it by common sense and no thoughts and telling them they will go to hell  We have a very good living money wise alot fo the time but that doesn't influence the way we teach them about manners and respecting people. I don't live any where near my family or my OH family and we are far from being disfunctional or suffering because of that or not following 'gods' way.

Oh dear, LJS did you feel I was making my statement towards the parents on CD? Not at all, I'm talking of the disfunctional families, the ones who seem to have lost their way in how to behave in society with no morals or respect for anyone but themselves, the 'broken families' as per the thread.

(Here comes the essay :-D)

We all learn how to behave from our parents/carers, if not from them then from a valid adult in our lives, we learn the basics of what helps us to live as a society a civilized society, just as you have taught your own children, where that is lacking and in many places it is, (which is why we have a growing amount of lawlessness and uncaring people on this planet) religion always was a good tool to build those blocks from. (I'm not talking about the fanatics or far out sects) The basics like the 10 commandments, love thy neighbour etc, whether people believe they came from God or from man, whether religious books are written by man alone or from a God/Gods does it matter? They give a structure to life, to the lonely and lost they offer someone who cares about them, when there is no-one else.

When these such families and children have no influences in their lives at all, what is there for them?  Yes, many of us don't need a God in our lives (hence the closing Churches being turned into flats etc.) we manage fine without and have the building blocks to do that, but I think in doing so, we've forgotten why religion was there in the first place, to control the masses as more and more people turn away and don't need it, it's leaving us wide open to large groups of people, with no instilled morals or care for anyone.

If we had a good, fair and strict legal system to take it's place the country would run fine, but as we know our laws are often too soft and they don't install morals into those with none, schools try, but they are there to teach. Where else can our future generation learn, if they have no adult to look up to? Religion has always been a great tool for just that.

Many of these families could benefit from those tools and the help of a congregation behind them, aswell as social workers, it helps to bring people together and help one another. Just my opinion I know, but I feel God is needed more than ever in some places.

 

>Ah, Godwin's Law!

Maybe so, but as Mike Godwin acknowledged, there are times when such a comparison is appropriate, and a discussion of forced birth control is one of them.

> we've forgotten why religion was there in the first place, to control the masses

I agree that people were better behaved when we were 'God fearing' , but unfortunately many in the Churches have let people down and undermined the authority it used to have . 

> The basics like the 10 commandments, love thy neighbour etc, whether people believe they came from God or from man, whether religious books are written by man alone or from a God/Gods does it matter? They give a structure to life, to the lonely and lost they offer someone who cares about them, when there is no-one else.
>

i see your point carrington but since we now live in a society where many strongly object to the idea that there should be religion in our lives it might be better to advocate a stronger sense of social commandments rather than religious ones? your right, it is often the structure of a faith that gives society some stability but since we collectively no longer have one a faith in society, with some commandments of its own, might be more to everyones tastes :)

Honeybee rent is paid for but if you have a mortgage and fall on hard times (not difficult these days) you get know help for  at least 9 months I believe and then only after any savings has gone. After that it is just the interest or at least when my husband lost his job and then had an accident so we went from jobseekers to statutory sick in 24 hours (bad timing) thats how it was.
some good points you raise carrington whever we get it from (religious or not) we need a strong moral code and at present that seems to be getting lost in many areas of society. I am not religious but respect those who are but have always thought the basic principles of the ten commandments is a pretty good code to teach your kids

Parenting Classes Perhaps?

Oh dear, LJS did you feel I was making my statement towards the parents on CD? Not at all, I'm talking of the disfunctional families, the ones who seem to have lost their way in how to behave in society with no morals or respect for anyone but themselves, the 'broken families' as per the thread

No not at all I was just saying 'Gods' way is a way to bring children up but it is perhaps a bit presumptuous to say you can only bring children up in this way and have a happy family

I would also say CD is not a forum that is exclusive to functional families :-)

you have obviously met my family then...LOL

Louise DDB,
I agree Parenting classes should be taught in Senior Schools to boys as well as girls. As it seems they are not taught in a lot of homes. Cooking and crafts should also be taught. As it might help, if mothers and fathers could cook, so many children, would not be brought up on chips and McDonalds. In the 60's and 70's things were a little diffrent, if young girls or children were placed in Catholic childrens homes, many nasty stories could be told of girls and boys being sold to people, for undesirable lives. In the 70's I helped campaign to close all childrens homes and we mainly succeeded. Then there were a lot of mixed race babies born and placed in care, and adopted. Most babies were placed for adoption by 3-4 months, or back with mom. I beleve it should still be like that now! But! we now have a lot of drug abusive parents, that spend all there time looking for the next fix. Parents or moms that spend there money on drink. Babies and young ones left with inappropriate people. Sex affenders, pedi. that are always willing to baby sit. Moms with abusive partners. These are some of the reasons the babies are removed from moms  care "failing to protect" Many abuse there young ones saying it is there culture or there religion. I personally think this excuse should Not be allowed. Live in the British Isles, we all should have to live by the childrens law.
Social Services do not gain by having a baby adopted, it is easier and cheaper to place the child back within the families.
Then on many occasions, we read about it in the news.
No system is perfect. Someone has to upgrade the system that they are useing, as it is not working.

Denese