FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to The Lounge

6 bed mansion...

Jump to newest
 

By *ixties-duo OP   Man
over a year ago

keighley

what are every bodys thoughts on the lady on benefits with 11 children, thats had a 6 bed house built by the council valued at over £400.000 ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *am123Man
over a year ago

essex chelmsford

i think it pays to have nothing in this country, those that are at work and fall on hard times arn't entitled to anything, yet if u have fuck all ur sorted the country is a sham!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ixties-duo OP   Man
over a year ago

keighley

i just cant understand why someone who has not worked for over 18 years would carry on having kids knowing they could not provide for them...everyone is entitled to children, i get that but 11

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That takes the mick, weve had to work hard and go without for the things we need, not want.

Perhaps a cap should be put on benefits for those who take the piss,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ixties-duo OP   Man
over a year ago

keighley

bit of a kick in the teeth for those genuinley affected by the "bedroom tax"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *am123Man
over a year ago

essex chelmsford

WASNT there talk of a cap on the kids to 2. after that no benefits did i hear that.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I have no opinion on this. Nope not a single one.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *teborahCouple
over a year ago

warrington


"That takes the mick, weve had to work hard and go without for the things we need, not want.

Perhaps a cap should be put on benefits for those who take the piss, "

A cap in her fanny is what is required to stop her having more

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"That takes the mick, weve had to work hard and go without for the things we need, not want.

Perhaps a cap should be put on benefits for those who take the piss,

A cap in her fanny is what is required to stop her having more "

That actually made me lol and I totally agree.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *give2uMan
over a year ago

Oswaldtwistle

I totally agree with Yam. I have worked here for over 40 years, paid higher rate tax, my parents , grand parents & Great Grand Parents all paid into the system, but because I have saved a bit (or not sent it to another country to look after relatives), I don't get a penny now I'm not working.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I have no opinion on this. Nope not a single one. "

Who are you and what have you done with our Jodie!? :-

As for the op, why oh why am I not surprised. Seems this country has had its backbone well and truly ripped out and put into tesco burgers

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

It's disgusting I've worked got my own house , I have two kids and the wife wanted a third but we decided not to for financial reasons .

If they limit the money they give out to say a limit of four maybe these people will stop breeding !

Headlines like this encourage the younger generation to go out an have lots of kids if they want a nice house !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

So what would be the alternative?

It's not an ideal situation to say the least, but a woman with 11 children...what are the alternatives to keep this family together?, where they belong.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Adopt them out to someone who can fund their future with their own money and not mine .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *unloversCouple
over a year ago

rotherham

Either keep her bloody legs shut or use protection

i think the whole situation stinks

Is it the same dad for all the kids and why cant he or the others provide

We would all love a 6 bedroom house but wouldnt have all those bloody kids to get one

I realise they have to live somehwre but where are they now and how are they managing and why should she get all this treatment.....surely there are others in the same boat

Makes my blood boil

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ander_XMan
over a year ago

Greater Manchester

I work in a job where work I'm involved in often end up in the press. Without exception, every time a case I've been involved in has ended up in the press the journalist has either misunderstood, misinterpreted or simply made up the details. I have never read an accurate representation of a case I have been involved in in the press.

The moral of my story... Don't believe anything you read in the press. There will be a lot more to the facts of this case than is being reported.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"So what would be the alternative?

It's not an ideal situation to say the least, but a woman with 11 children...what are the alternatives to keep this family together?, where they belong.

"

They coud begin by providing existing housing for the older children (and their children).

There's those questions you ask yourself when considering another child related to things like space, cost, time, work etc.

You have to wonder that if she thought she could fit that many kids into the space she had - what's she planning to do with an even bigger house?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"The moral of my story... Don't believe anything you read in the press. There will be a lot more to the facts of this case than is being reported. "

No doubt - but it's still fucked up. While most read that story and think 'how awful', others are thinking 'opportunity'.

If you cause your own problems then you should solve them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Stick them all on a workhouse

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *or Fox SakeCouple
over a year ago

Thornaby


"I work in a job where work I'm involved in often end up in the press. Without exception, every time a case I've been involved in has ended up in the press the journalist has either misunderstood, misinterpreted or simply made up the details. I have never read an accurate representation of a case I have been involved in in the press.

The moral of my story... Don't believe anything you read in the press. There will be a lot more to the facts of this case than is being reported. "

Nail on the head, absolutely. Journalists don't care about morality or whats right or wrong, just flogging more papers.

This especially applies to the Daily Mail and the Express. They are like Izal medicated with pictures.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Also , as I understand, the oldest kids are in their twenties .

Are they working or are they also taking benefits and still at home. .

I don't know what part of the story the press could get wrong , eleven kids, not working , six bedroom house especially built .

The woman gave a statement declaring that if the house was too small she would not accept it which was a major faux pas on her part and would not solicit sympathy from taxpayers .

Also I would quibble the costing of the house, it is an ecohouse , which costs 10% more to build than a normal house, has six bedrooms and is in Tewksbury but will only be worth £400,000 !! , yeah right , and my aunty Nellie was a champion jelly juggler .

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I am sick and tired of this simply because the press etc only focus on the very small minority of those on the fiddle.

The vast majority including myself who are on benefits have to put up with being branded spongers apart from last year or so i have worked all my life and find it a struggle to get what i am entitled to.

Anyone who actually says without being out of work claiming jsa etc are not in positon ti judge others really about how easy or difficult things are.

Rant over for now

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *or Fox SakeCouple
over a year ago

Thornaby

A Councillor from the relevant local authority was on R4 yesterday. he said a few things which pick up on the points below.

I don't know what part of the story the press could get wrong

*the press have described it as a mansion, it's not. It's part of a larger development by a housing association and is basicly two houses combined*

Also I would quibble the costing of the house, it is an ecohouse , which costs 10% more to build than a normal house

*all the houses are eco houses on the development, and it cost less than £400,000k, theres no developer trying to make a profit.

The law says they have to be housed, so tell you what, lets split the family up, how much does it cost to put a kid in care?

How many flats would be needed for the kids in their 20's?

It's cheaper to do this than the alternatives.

The family are NOT the issue, it's the way the press portray them and the housing laws.

To be fair, it would have been a lot cheaper to buy her a telly after child number 2 than her to have 11 kids....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I am sick and tired of this simply because the press etc only focus on the very small minority of those on the fiddle.

The vast majority including myself who are on benefits have to put up with being branded spongers apart from last year or so i have worked all my life and find it a struggle to get what i am entitled to.

Anyone who actually says without being out of work claiming jsa etc are not in positon ti judge others really about how easy or difficult things are.

Rant over for now "

Oh mate !!, you are so wrong.

Without going into our life story let me explain.

After too many years in Farming and always living in tythed accommodation , we are in our fourteenth house , I took my employer to court ,packed it all in and threw our selves at the mercy of the council, I mean , we both had been paying taxes all our working lives ,so now was the time for a bit of payback.

There started nine months of bloody hell whilst living in a small caravan with three kids whilst the council moved us on continually and then had to reinspect our lack of facilities to start the process all over again.

We lived in laybys and fields and families back gardens whilst the council wanted us all to go into bed and breakfast in Brighton .

I was one week out of work !!

When the local press got on our side we were eventually offered a house , which we are forever grateful for , but were told that if we did not want it then we will have to go into bed and breakfast. .

That woman's statement made Mrs J livid .

How can someone who has never contributed anything to society get what she wants when she wants when we , were treated as so much shit ?.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ane and J_nnyCouple
over a year ago

Clwyd


"WASNT there talk of a cap on the kids to 2. after that no benefits did i hear that. "

Yes Universal credit will cap her benefits to £500 per week so regardless of how many children she has that's the Max social security money she will get, and that money will include the rent money

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I am sick and tired of this simply because the press etc only focus on the very small minority of those on the fiddle.

The vast majority including myself who are on benefits have to put up with being branded spongers apart from last year or so i have worked all my life and find it a struggle to get what i am entitled to.

Anyone who actually says without being out of work claiming jsa etc are not in positon ti judge others really about how easy or difficult things are.

Rant over for now

Oh mate !!, you are so wrong.

Without going into our life story let me explain.

After too many years in Farming and always living in tythed accommodation , we are in our fourteenth house , I took my employer to court ,packed it all in and threw our selves at the mercy of the council, I mean , we both had been paying taxes all our working lives ,so now was the time for a bit of payback.

There started nine months of bloody hell whilst living in a small caravan with three kids whilst the council moved us on continually and then had to reinspect our lack of facilities to start the process all over again.

We lived in laybys and fields and families back gardens whilst the council wanted us all to go into bed and breakfast in Brighton .

I was one week out of work !!

When the local press got on our side we were eventually offered a house , which we are forever grateful for , but were told that if we did not want it then we will have to go into bed and breakfast. .

That woman's statement made Mrs J livid .

How can someone who has never contributed anything to society get what she wants when she wants when we , were treated as so much shit ?."

Let me be clear the wonan in question needs sorting properly what i am getting at is fact minority get highlighted whilst again majority get tarred with same brush.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

when the children leave home, she may then be rehoused and someone else benefit from the property

Better to build a property, then pay a landlord

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iewMan
Forum Mod
over a year ago

Angus & Findhorn

than*

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *opsy RogersWoman
over a year ago

London


"I have no opinion on this. Nope not a single one. "

Oh but I think you do Jodie. Go on, no need to be shy, pretty please ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"A Councillor from the relevant local authority was on R4 yesterday. he said a few things which pick up on the points below.

I don't know what part of the story the press could get wrong

*the press have described it as a mansion, it's not. It's part of a larger development by a housing association and is basicly two houses combined*

Also I would quibble the costing of the house, it is an ecohouse , which costs 10% more to build than a normal house

*all the houses are eco houses on the development, and it cost less than £400,000k, theres no developer trying to make a profit.

The law says they have to be housed, so tell you what, lets split the family up, how much does it cost to put a kid in care?

How many flats would be needed for the kids in their 20's?

It's cheaper to do this than the alternatives.

The family are NOT the issue, it's the way the press portray them and the housing laws.

To be fair, it would have been a lot cheaper to buy her a telly after child number 2 than her to have 11 kids....

"

Very well put and exactly how I feel...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *am123Man
over a year ago

essex chelmsford

[Removed by poster at 20/02/13 10:57:23]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"A Councillor from the relevant local authority was on R4 yesterday. he said a few things which pick up on the points below.

I don't know what part of the story the press could get wrong

*the press have described it as a mansion, it's not. It's part of a larger development by a housing association and is basicly two houses combined*

Also I would quibble the costing of the house, it is an ecohouse , which costs 10% more to build than a normal house

*all the houses are eco houses on the development, and it cost less than £400,000k, theres no developer trying to make a profit.

The law says they have to be housed, so tell you what, lets split the family up, how much does it cost to put a kid in care?

How many flats would be needed for the kids in their 20's?

It's cheaper to do this than the alternatives.

The family are NOT the issue, it's the way the press portray them and the housing laws.

To be fair, it would have been a lot cheaper to buy her a telly after child number 2 than her to have 11 kids....

Very well put and exactly how I feel..."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Just shows you how out of control the country is, it's totally out of order that this happens, some one don't work and can get all this!! Every one has a little run of no work but 18! Years? Clealy a sponger.

I work 60 hours a week the wife over 40 hours a week, 4 kids and a 3 bed house, but happy. And our kids are happy, and they will all work for a roof over there head when they get older.!!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge


"I work in a job where work I'm involved in often end up in the press. Without exception, every time a case I've been involved in has ended up in the press the journalist has either misunderstood, misinterpreted or simply made up the details. I have never read an accurate representation of a case I have been involved in in the press.

The moral of my story... Don't believe anything you read in the press. There will be a lot more to the facts of this case than is being reported. "

And the fact that it is being repeatedly 'reported' in the Mail also makes me suspicious of all the 'facts' we are being told.

We are all too ready to demonise people.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent


"Adopt them out to someone who can fund their future with their own money and not mine ."

That would be totally unfair to the children splitting them up. It's the parents at fault not the kids

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

*the press have described it as a mansion, it's not. It's part of a larger development by a housing association and is basicly two houses combined*

Also I would quibble the costing of the house, it is an ecohouse , which costs 10% more to build than a normal house

*all the houses are eco houses on the development, and it cost less than £400,000k, theres no developer trying to make a profit.

The law says they have to be housed, so tell you what, lets split the family up, how much does it cost to put a kid in care?

How many flats would be needed for the kids in their 20's?

It's cheaper to do this than the alternatives.

The family are NOT the issue, it's the way the press portray them and the housing laws.

To be fair, it would have been a lot cheaper to buy her a telly after child number 2 than her to have 11 kids....

"

I'm never one to be picky but a mansion is defined as a large and imposing house.

A six bedroomed house is large and if it is two houses knocked into one I would imagine its rather imposing.

Therefore it's description as a mansion is a correct one.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *issHottieBottieWoman
over a year ago

Kent


"what i wanna know is were all the lazy good for nothin fathers who got her in that situation in the first place never mind puttin the blame on her and her children !! secondly i,d like to add have you seen the benefits foreign people get when they move to this country here get off your high horses and remove the blinkkers use are wearing !! rant over thats better lol "

Not sure you can say the fathers 'got her in this situation in the first place' I'm assuming as an adult that she knows how babies are made!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

this kind of thing does piss me off, im a single working mum and i get nothing at all, i get no help with my council tax and no tax credits, and if im honest i struggle like fook to keep my kids, my eldest two are 18 and 20 but both still in full time education so i still keep them and i have no intentions of them coming out of education to work in a dead end job to help me run my home, i do as well as do my proper full time job work in sex club because if im honest i wouldnt get by without that extra money, im not proud of that but im not ashamed of it either, i do what i can to get by and look after my children, then you get people like that who just keep spitting out kids they cant afford and expect us tax payers to pay for them! no fooker pays for my kidfs so why should we hers? other mothers manage to get jobs and work so why should she?

it just peeves me i get no help at all and them some get everything handed to them on a plate

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I have no opinion on this. Nope not a single one.

Oh but I think you do Jodie. Go on, no need to be shy, pretty please ?"

Nope, I have no opinion on this today. There possibly was one, but it flitted right out of my head before I could truly have it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound

I haven't read all the posts.

The children didn't ask to be born. We do not have a cap on the number of children anyone can have in this country. I may think she is mad and irresponsible to have that many children but I know lots of communities where contraception is not permitted and the sexual practices almost ensure a pregnancy every year. No one can forcibly stop this woman from having sex and conceiving.

So, what do you do with the children? Keep them as a family or spend £200,000 pa to have them all in care?

Descriptions like mansions for what is a house with 6 bedrooms make my blood boil. It is designed to make you angry and feel that you don't have something, create division and hate. It looks like it has succeeded.

The value of the property is immaterial. She does not own it and cannot realise the money from it. If circumstances change then it will be used again. Newspapers that report the market value for a property being used in rental situation are fanning the flames that were lit with the description of mansion. I'm in London, the market value of a two bed council flat very close to me is £350,000. It's not real and realisable as cash so the sum is meaningless.

I have been paying tax and earning for over 30 years, I'm entitled to nothing. That is my situation and getting mad about someone else in need getting their basic needs for a roof over their head will not change what I am entitled to. My concern is that we don't lose sight of the fact that some people need help. Giving them a slum to live in because some people feel there are deserving and undeserving poor is not how a modern, civilised society should respond.

My old vicar used to say that if you point an accusing finger at anyone just have a look at your hand and you will see you have 3 fingers pointing back at you.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ixties-duo OP   Man
over a year ago

keighley

it was not in the press i saw this, i was listening to her on "daybreak"

she is entitled to help i agree, but having been having babies since she was "14" , shes never worked..she must have realised at some point that she cud not provide a decent life for all these children she was producing to "3" different fathers.oh and they have a "horse" which to me is not a neccesity ..which is what benefits are there for..

i remember recently watching on tv a programme about a family that like the above had 11 children, in fact i think they had more..the father worked, they only claimed the minimum benfits...the house was spotless the children immaculate and very very well behaved...a far cry for the litter strewn house that the above lives in at the moment....being on benefits doesnt mean u cant keep ur house clean and !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

women get payed to have kids, maybe they should be payed not to have them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

she is 37 and looks about 50.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"this kind of thing does piss me off, im a single working mum and i get nothing at all, i get no help with my council tax and no tax credits, and if im honest i struggle like fook to keep my kids, my eldest two are 18 and 20 but both still in full time education so i still keep them and i have no intentions of them coming out of education to work in a dead end job to help me run my home, i do as well as do my proper full time job work in sex club because if im honest i wouldnt get by without that extra money, im not proud of that but im not ashamed of it either, i do what i can to get by and look after my children, then you get people like that who just keep spitting out kids they cant afford and expect us tax payers to pay for them! no fooker pays for my kidfs so why should we hers? other mothers manage to get jobs and work so why should she?

it just peeves me i get no help at all and them some get everything handed to them on a plate"

Without appearing rude and hope I'm not too intrusive....but if you work full time and have children why do you not get any tax credits?

I know why I have never had them and it's purely based on our income.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *awkeye and HotlipsCouple
over a year ago

Takeley

We live in a welfare state, where those in work, contribute to assist those who are not, including healthcare and support with housing and welfare. It is designed to raise the standard of living to those who cannot provide for themselves. It is the backbone of our way of life and interwoven into the politics of all parties. Such cases, albeit rare do happen and the whys and wherefores are largely imaterial. The bigger issue is taxpayers indignity, not with this case perhaps, however with where our taxes are spent. The misallocation of taxes, our money is at the heart of this, not this case. There will be a thread about false asylum seekers, how our roads are pot holed and not repaired, when we pay road tax, redecorating ministers properties, redeveloped and pedestrianised high streets that are ghost towns. It is the waste of large sums of our taxes that we need to address. Spend our taxes correctly, on who is in need and entitled, instead of those who abuse the system or on schemes that are pink elephants.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"this kind of thing does piss me off, im a single working mum and i get nothing at all, i get no help with my council tax and no tax credits, and if im honest i struggle like fook to keep my kids, my eldest two are 18 and 20 but both still in full time education so i still keep them and i have no intentions of them coming out of education to work in a dead end job to help me run my home, i do as well as do my proper full time job work in sex club because if im honest i wouldnt get by without that extra money, im not proud of that but im not ashamed of it either, i do what i can to get by and look after my children, then you get people like that who just keep spitting out kids they cant afford and expect us tax payers to pay for them! no fooker pays for my kidfs so why should we hers? other mothers manage to get jobs and work so why should she?

it just peeves me i get no help at all and them some get everything handed to them on a plate

Without appearing rude and hope I'm not too intrusive....but if you work full time and have children why do you not get any tax credits?

I know why I have never had them and it's purely based on our income."

because i earn to much to qualify for any benifits so i have to pay for everything myself, which is hard when you have 3 kids and alone, all because my income in above when qualifys for tax credits that does not mean im rich infact far from it, by the time i have payed all my bills and full concil tax etc i probably have less spare money than those who do get tax credits because they get help

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Every last one of us are to blame for the state of this country and the unfair and unequal rules that we always seem to be in uproar about. We. Including myself sit back and let the useless politicians do as they please and not in most cases what the majority of the people want. Until every person can be arsed getting involved in politic and protesting for what they believe then I think fair play to lazy old lady who live in the 6 bedroom shoe. She's played out stupid system very well and won.

Vote for me for next PM ( that's prime minister and not private massage) and ill this country sorted in 4 to 8 working days. Contact Miss longlips in my press department for my manifesto. Thankyou x

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I work in a job where work I'm involved in often end up in the press. Without exception, every time a case I've been involved in has ended up in the press the journalist has either misunderstood, misinterpreted or simply made up the details. I have never read an accurate representation of a case I have been involved in in the press.

The moral of my story... Don't believe anything you read in the press. There will be a lot more to the facts of this case than is being reported. "

Exactly. It doesn't take much to fuel the fire neither, whether that's from the ilk of the Daily Mail or the old nazi favourite Der Sturmer (Very little difference between the two in my eyes). Whipping up hatred to sell papers, they make my blood boil

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ane and J_nnyCouple
over a year ago

Clwyd


"when the children leave home, she may then be rehoused and someone else benefit from the property

Better to build a property, then pay a landlord"

Depends on agreement she has, if assured or secure mom can stay there as long as she wants to, as long as she pays the rent, and that's where she will fall foul to the bedroom tax

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"women get payed to have kids, maybe they should be payed not to have them. "

Unfortunately that won't happen as children are needed to keep up the worlds biggest pyramid scheme - Pensions

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

That we have a welfare state that supports people during times of need is good. That it has become something that allows people to absolve themselves of personal responsibility is not.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"what i wanna know is were all the lazy good for nothin fathers who got her in that situation in the first place never mind puttin the blame on her and her children !! secondly i,d like to add have you seen the benefits foreign people get when they move to this country here get off your high horses and remove the blinkkers use are wearing !! rant over thats better lol

Not sure you can say the fathers 'got her in this situation in the first place' I'm assuming as an adult that she knows how babies are made! "

immaculate conception then you think lmao

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"I haven't read all the posts.

The children didn't ask to be born. We do not have a cap on the number of children anyone can have in this country. I may think she is mad and irresponsible to have that many children but I know lots of communities where contraception is not permitted and the sexual practices almost ensure a pregnancy every year. No one can forcibly stop this woman from having sex and conceiving.

So, what do you do with the children? Keep them as a family or spend £200,000 pa to have them all in care?

Descriptions like mansions for what is a house with 6 bedrooms make my blood boil. It is designed to make you angry and feel that you don't have something, create division and hate. It looks like it has succeeded.

The value of the property is immaterial. She does not own it and cannot realise the money from it. If circumstances change then it will be used again. Newspapers that report the market value for a property being used in rental situation are fanning the flames that were lit with the description of mansion. I'm in London, the market value of a two bed council flat very close to me is £350,000. It's not real and realisable as cash so the sum is meaningless.

I have been paying tax and earning for over 30 years, I'm entitled to nothing. That is my situation and getting mad about someone else in need getting their basic needs for a roof over their head will not change what I am entitled to. My concern is that we don't lose sight of the fact that some people need help. Giving them a slum to live in because some people feel there are deserving and undeserving poor is not how a modern, civilised society should respond.

My old vicar used to say that if you point an accusing finger at anyone just have a look at your hand and you will see you have 3 fingers pointing back at you."
Well said!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"That we have a welfare state that supports people during times of need is good. That it has become something that allows people to absolve themselves of personal responsibility is not."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge


"I haven't read all the posts.

The children didn't ask to be born. We do not have a cap on the number of children anyone can have in this country. I may think she is mad and irresponsible to have that many children but I know lots of communities where contraception is not permitted and the sexual practices almost ensure a pregnancy every year. No one can forcibly stop this woman from having sex and conceiving.

So, what do you do with the children? Keep them as a family or spend £200,000 pa to have them all in care?

Descriptions like mansions for what is a house with 6 bedrooms make my blood boil. It is designed to make you angry and feel that you don't have something, create division and hate. It looks like it has succeeded.

The value of the property is immaterial. She does not own it and cannot realise the money from it. If circumstances change then it will be used again. Newspapers that report the market value for a property being used in rental situation are fanning the flames that were lit with the description of mansion. I'm in London, the market value of a two bed council flat very close to me is £350,000. It's not real and realisable as cash so the sum is meaningless.

I have been paying tax and earning for over 30 years, I'm entitled to nothing. That is my situation and getting mad about someone else in need getting their basic needs for a roof over their head will not change what I am entitled to. My concern is that we don't lose sight of the fact that some people need help. Giving them a slum to live in because some people feel there are deserving and undeserving poor is not how a modern, civilised society should respond.

My old vicar used to say that if you point an accusing finger at anyone just have a look at your hand and you will see you have 3 fingers pointing back at you.Well said! "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

What got my backup about this story was that she seemed to think she was just entitled to this mansion, here quote in the paper was " if the house is not up to my standards then the council will have to start again"

Also she's admited her benefits pay for her daughters pony!

Leave her in the 2 houses knocked through I say and spend the money used for the house to pay for someone more deserving

P xx

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge


"What got my backup about this story was that she seemed to think she was just entitled to this mansion, here quote in the paper was " if the house is not up to my standards then the council will have to start again"

Also she's admited her benefits pay for her daughters pony!

Leave her in the 2 houses knocked through I say and spend the money used for the house to pay for someone more deserving

P xx"

And newspapers take people's quotes out of context - they even lie about it. It may be someone says she has said that and THEY told the paper. Then the paper can say they found out through their 'sources'.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *oulou45Woman
over a year ago

Bucks

It makes me mad as I had 1 child,I would of liked more but knew we couldn't afford it. But for her to say if the house isn't suitable they can build another. Not all forgien people are entitled to benefits. They have to prove they can support theirselves and if they marry their spouses have to support them until they are allowed to work.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *adgeeMan
over a year ago

Sw Scotland


"

To be fair, it would have been a lot cheaper to buy her a telly after child number 2 than her to have 11 kids....

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

I don't for one minute approve of any one woman having 11 kids but.... 11 kids to one woman means we can get them all (for now) in one 6 bedroom house at a cost of £400,000 (I've seen that figure questioned) to build but which will survive long after this daft woman is gone.

If we had 11 women having one kid each - which'd mean 11 houses which are bound to cost more than £400K, maybe it ain't such a bad deal after all.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hetalkingstoveMan
over a year ago

London

What paper was this story in? It wasn't the Daily Mail by any chance?

It's bound to have been made to sound as bad as it possibly can, anyway.

Is it annoying that some people are foolish, selfish, and abuse the system? Yes. Does it mean those children should suffer? No.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I feel sorry for the children its not their fault mommy can't keep her knickers on or at least by some rubbers.Maybe they should sew her pussy up?.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

Apart from the actual story and its truth value... it sells papers. Call it a bit cynical but ...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I don't for one minute approve of any one woman having 11 kids but.... 11 kids to one woman means we can get them all (for now) in one 6 bedroom house at a cost of £400,000 (I've seen that figure questioned) to build but which will survive long after this daft woman is gone.

If we had 11 women having one kid each - which'd mean 11 houses which are bound to cost more than £400K, maybe it ain't such a bad deal after all."

what if we had 11 women having 11 kids?

what state would the country be in if we was all having more kids than we could afford and we all lived on benifits?

Im sorry but i do not agree with people sitting on their arses having kids and expecting to be kept, if your on benifits then there should be a law that says any kids conceived within the time your on benifits will not be paid for, im not one for telling people they cant have kids but i am in favour of saying if you do you find the money yourself to pay for them

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I don't for one minute approve of any one woman having 11 kids but.... 11 kids to one woman means we can get them all (for now) in one 6 bedroom house at a cost of £400,000 (I've seen that figure questioned) to build but which will survive long after this daft woman is gone.

If we had 11 women having one kid each - which'd mean 11 houses which are bound to cost more than £400K, maybe it ain't such a bad deal after all.

what if we had 11 women having 11 kids?

what state would the country be in if we was all having more kids than we could afford and we all lived on benifits?

Im sorry but i do not agree with people sitting on their arses having kids and expecting to be kept, if your on benifits then there should be a law that says any kids conceived within the time your on benifits will not be paid for, im not one for telling people they cant have kids but i am in favour of saying if you do you find the money yourself to pay for them"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"I don't for one minute approve of any one woman having 11 kids but.... 11 kids to one woman means we can get them all (for now) in one 6 bedroom house at a cost of £400,000 (I've seen that figure questioned) to build but which will survive long after this daft woman is gone.

If we had 11 women having one kid each - which'd mean 11 houses which are bound to cost more than £400K, maybe it ain't such a bad deal after all.

what if we had 11 women having 11 kids?."

Thankfully we don't. I'm not in favour of large families. I reckon there are already too many people on the planet.


"what state would the country be in if we was all having more kids than we could afford and we all lived on benifits? "

It'd be an even more serious mess than it is now.


" Im sorry but i do not agree with people sitting on their arses having kids and expecting to be kept, if your on benifits then there should be a law that says any kids conceived within the time your on benifits will not be paid for, im not one for telling people they cant have kids but i am in favour of saying if you do you find the money yourself to pay for them"

I see no reason NOT to tell folks they can't have kids.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I don't for one minute approve of any one woman having 11 kids but.... 11 kids to one woman means we can get them all (for now) in one 6 bedroom house at a cost of £400,000 (I've seen that figure questioned) to build but which will survive long after this daft woman is gone.

If we had 11 women having one kid each - which'd mean 11 houses which are bound to cost more than £400K, maybe it ain't such a bad deal after all.

what if we had 11 women having 11 kids?.

Thankfully we don't. I'm not in favour of large families. I reckon there are already too many people on the planet.

what state would the country be in if we was all having more kids than we could afford and we all lived on benifits?

It'd be an even more serious mess than it is now.

Im sorry but i do not agree with people sitting on their arses having kids and expecting to be kept, if your on benifits then there should be a law that says any kids conceived within the time your on benifits will not be paid for, im not one for telling people they cant have kids but i am in favour of saying if you do you find the money yourself to pay for them

I see no reason NOT to tell folks they can't have kids."

Totally agree if you can't afford to keep them you shouldn't have them ( this is not intended to people who work and fall on hard times but to people who never work and expect us to keep them )

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I think its down to the Government that makes these situations possible, I cant really blame the woman in question, she is not going to say no to what ever our Government offer her, as long as its in her favor.

If she has been on benefits while having most or all of these children, then I feel it is morally wrong on her part to have so many children, and let the tax payer fund her lifestyle.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

There should be no state handouts, other than health and education, for any family with more than 2 kids. Single parents, who have more than 2, should have a time cap on them, of say 5 years, after which, benefits are reduced to the same level as 2 parent families.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


" .........I feel it is morally wrong on her part to have so many children, and let the tax payer fund her lifestyle. "

I can't imagine anyone with 11 kids has much of a 'lifestyle' but I know what you mean.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *thwalescplCouple
over a year ago

brecon

Can anyone tell me roughly what this woman would be getting in benefits?

I'd like to know, as she's stabling one horse, and was looking to acquire and house two more, and we (both working) can't even afford one!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?"

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?"

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?"

I believe if a woman is of natural child bearing years and is unable to concieve for whatever reason then yes it should be funded. I dont think older ladies that wouldnt naturally be able to have children should be funded though.

I think the cut off point shoul be 40 as most people who want to start a family will have started trying before then. Not many leave it until 40 to have their first

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child."

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *iamondsmiles.Woman
over a year ago

little house on the praire


"There should be no state handouts, other than health and education, for any family with more than 2 kids. Single parents, who have more than 2, should have a time cap on them, of say 5 years, after which, benefits are reduced to the same level as 2 parent families. "

What about someone who has become a single parent through no fault of their own. Im not talking about 11 children but up to four children is very common and noone knows whats going to happen in the future

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?"

I'm not suggesting an absolute ban but there should be certain criteria for treatment - a bit like certain operations and procedures being made available to certain patients on psychiatric grounds.

Just wanting another child ought not to be sufficient.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?"

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

The answer to all the above is the same...including the fertility treatment.

It's not THE national health service....it's OUR national health service.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There should be no state handouts, other than health and education, for any family with more than 2 kids. Single parents, who have more than 2, should have a time cap on them, of say 5 years, after which, benefits are reduced to the same level as 2 parent families.

What about someone who has become a single parent through no fault of their own. Im not talking about 11 children but up to four children is very common and noone knows whats going to happen in the future"

Think that each case needs to be looked at. If a couple have children and support them and then something happens to one partner that's not the same as someone grinding out kids year after year and not supporting them

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

The answer to all the above is the same...including the fertility treatment.

It's not THE national health service....it's OUR national health service."

'Cos the things you mention will save money in the longrun.

Fertlity treatment can't make that claim.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"what are every bodys thoughts on the lady on benefits with 11 children, thats had a 6 bed house built by the council valued at over £400.000 ?

"
ok so she's had 11 kids is it not the System that's needs looking into, never mind her, Aslong as the The system bankrolls these ppl more and more will jump on the wagon, beniftts are there to supply those on who need and to give them access to to the basic standard of living, but it has gone well beyond that now, when families on beniftts are better off than those working

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

The answer to all the above is the same...including the fertility treatment.

It's not THE national health service....it's OUR national health service."

Think the word is health service 2 of what you quoted actually save the NHS money and promotes health.having a child is a life choice not a health one

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

The answer to all the above is the same...including the fertility treatment.

It's not THE national health service....it's OUR national health service.

Think the word is health service 2 of what you quoted actually save the NHS money and promotes health.having a child is a life choice not a health one "

And you would deny a woman the chance to conceive a child if she wants one?

For many women the lack of a child affects their mental health and mental well being....that's not always a life choice, it impacts on the health of many thousands of women in this country.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

The answer to all the above is the same...including the fertility treatment.

It's not THE national health service....it's OUR national health service.

Think the word is health service 2 of what you quoted actually save the NHS money and promotes health.having a child is a life choice not a health one

And you would deny a woman the chance to conceive a child if she wants one?

For many women the lack of a child affects their mental health and mental well being....that's not always a life choice, it impacts on the health of many thousands of women in this country. I agree in every aspect

"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There should be no state handouts, other than health and education, for any family with more than 2 kids. Single parents, who have more than 2, should have a time cap on them, of say 5 years, after which, benefits are reduced to the same level as 2 parent families. "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

The answer to all the above is the same...including the fertility treatment.

It's not THE national health service....it's OUR national health service.

Think the word is health service 2 of what you quoted actually save the NHS money and promotes health.having a child is a life choice not a health one

And you would deny a woman the chance to conceive a child if she wants one?

For many women the lack of a child affects their mental health and mental well being....that's not always a life choice, it impacts on the health of many thousands of women in this country.

"

If it was a matter of their mental health being affected that would be another issue if its a case of nature not allowing then that's nature. Sorry if you think that's wrong but if every one had children could we as a planet cope?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Can anyone tell me roughly what this woman would be getting in benefits?

I'd like to know, as she's stabling one horse, and was looking to acquire and house two more, and we (both working) can't even afford one! "

Your post got me thinking, and according to the citizens advice benefit calculator, (took me ages) and I tried to be as close to her circumstances as I could, and had to guess a bit, but if all the children are under 19 and in full time education, she should get roughly £770 a wk in cash and all her rent and council tax paid on top, that does not include child benefit!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay

There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


" ..........

if every one had children could we as a planet cope? "

The planet can't cope as it is and not everyone has kids. The challenge is that too many people have too many kids.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" ..........

if every one had children could we as a planet cope?

The planet can't cope as it is and not everyone has kids. The challenge is that too many people have too many kids."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?"

Thats a very scary thought Jane!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?"

Households don't actually get to kep their Housing Benefit.

It ends up in the mitts of their often greedy landlords.

Did anyone else see the programme last night about Caledonia Rd in London?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

keep.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Thats a very scary thought Jane! "

..............and not so different to the Bedroon Tax.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" ..........

if every one had children could we as a planet cope?

The planet can't cope as it is and not everyone has kids. The challenge is that too many people have too many kids.

"

Agree so do we promote a way of having more children ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?"
I heard that today and I was wondering about it. Then again I do really feel for anybody who wants children and is not successful - must be so hard.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *illycarrolCouple
over a year ago

n/cle on tyne


"I work in a job where work I'm involved in often end up in the press. Without exception, every time a case I've been involved in has ended up in the press the journalist has either misunderstood, misinterpreted or simply made up the details. I have never read an accurate representation of a case I have been involved in in the press. oral of my story... Don't believe anything you read in the press. There will be a lot more to the facts of this case than is being reported. "
bang on a mansion tax deflection

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I work in a job where work I'm involved in often end up in the press. Without exception, every time a case I've been involved in has ended up in the press the journalist has either misunderstood, misinterpreted or simply made up the details. I have never read an accurate representation of a case I have been involved in in the press. oral of my story... Don't believe anything you read in the press. There will be a lot more to the facts of this case than is being reported. bang on a mansion tax deflection "
and the moral of your story don't speak to the press then as you say can't twist your words, if you need to make a statement put it in writing

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Households don't actually get to kep their Housing Benefit.

It ends up in the mitts of their often greedy landlords.

Did anyone else see the programme last night about Caledonia Rd in London?"

If it's the series about the Booth map of London then it's a repeat but well worth watching. I have a copy of the Booth map on my wall. If you overlay it with the current map showing deprivation the poorest areas are still, largely poor.

The very large families on benefits is just under 200, according to an inter_iewee on PM on R4 this evening.

The pony was, apparently, a gift and the 16 year old, working daughter, pays for this pony as it is hers. Some of the children are young adults but still living at home. As they move out the housing needs will be reassessed.

Some of the posts above use the language of the deserving and undeserving poor. How do you make that judgement? Which children are deserving and which aren't? So, if someone you know has more than two children, a choice they made or maybe they had twins or triplets on a second pregnancy, at a time they could afford to support them and their circumstances change they can't send the children back from whence they came. To the casual, judgemental onlooker have they immediately become feckless undeserving poor?

As to those using the "moral" argument, do you say the same when businesses and the wealthy use loopholes to evade taxes? From my reading of the forum, no you don't. You applaud them for using the system appropriately to keep their hard earned money as long as they are not breaking any laws. This family, as far as I can glean, is not breaking any laws.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Households don't actually get to kep their Housing Benefit.

It ends up in the mitts of their often greedy landlords.

Did anyone else see the programme last night about Caledonia Rd in London?

If it's the series about the Booth map of London then it's a repeat but well worth watching. I have a copy of the Booth map on my wall. If you overlay it with the current map showing deprivation the poorest areas are still, largely poor.

The very large families on benefits is just under 200, according to an inter_iewee on PM on R4 this evening.

The pony was, apparently, a gift and the 16 year old, working daughter, pays for this pony as it is hers. Some of the children are young adults but still living at home. As they move out the housing needs will be reassessed.

Some of the posts above use the language of the deserving and undeserving poor. How do you make that judgement? Which children are deserving and which aren't? So, if someone you know has more than two children, a choice they made or maybe they had twins or triplets on a second pregnancy, at a time they could afford to support them and their circumstances change they can't send the children back from whence they came. To the casual, judgemental onlooker have they immediately become feckless undeserving poor?

As to those using the "moral" argument, do you say the same when businesses and the wealthy use loopholes to evade taxes? From my reading of the forum, no you don't. You applaud them for using the system appropriately to keep their hard earned money as long as they are not breaking any laws. This family, as far as I can glean, is not breaking any laws."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

I can swear on here so.....

Fucking pathetic.....some people work their arses off to pay for a house and put off having children cause they can't afford it.

And others just crack on having them and are given that.

Ive at one point held more then one job to afford nice things for my kids and another thing how can you give that many children the right attention.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Households don't actually get to kep their Housing Benefit.

It ends up in the mitts of their often greedy landlords.

Did anyone else see the programme last night about Caledonia Rd in London?

If it's the series about the Booth map of London then it's a repeat but well worth watching. I have a copy of the Booth map on my wall. If you overlay it with the current map showing deprivation the poorest areas are still, largely poor.

The very large families on benefits is just under 200, according to an inter_iewee on PM on R4 this evening.

The pony was, apparently, a gift and the 16 year old, working daughter, pays for this pony as it is hers. Some of the children are young adults but still living at home. As they move out the housing needs will be reassessed.

Some of the posts above use the language of the deserving and undeserving poor. How do you make that judgement? Which children are deserving and which aren't? So, if someone you know has more than two children, a choice they made or maybe they had twins or triplets on a second pregnancy, at a time they could afford to support them and their circumstances change they can't send the children back from whence they came. To the casual, judgemental onlooker have they immediately become feckless undeserving poor?

As to those using the "moral" argument, do you say the same when businesses and the wealthy use loopholes to evade taxes? From my reading of the forum, no you don't. You applaud them for using the system appropriately to keep their hard earned money as long as they are not breaking any laws. This family, as far as I can glean, is not breaking any laws.

"

Seconded

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I can swear on here so.....

Fucking pathetic.....some people work their arses off to pay for a house and put off having children cause they can't afford it.

And others just crack on having them and are given that.

Ive at one point held more then one job to afford nice things for my kids and another thing how can you give that many children the right attention."

you tend to find the older ones help with looking after the younger one

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *B9 QueenWoman
over a year ago

Over the rainbow, under the bridge


"I can swear on here so.....

Fucking pathetic.....some people work their arses off to pay for a house and put off having children cause they can't afford it.

And others just crack on having them and are given that.

Ive at one point held more then one job to afford nice things for my kids and another thing how can you give that many children the right attention."

My mother was one of ten - she had a great childhood from what I could tell of her stories.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Yeah they do and its not fair my parents had 7 myself and my sister spent our teen years looking after younger children and cooking and cleaning as our parents worked full time....and i can tell you it was shit!

My mates were off out having fun we were baby sitting n studying.

And we couldnt afford so much cause there were so many of us and a 4 bedroomed house to pay for.

Each to their own and some people enjoy it,but in my opinion 11 children is far too many to cope with and have your one on one special time with.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There should be no state handouts, other than health and education, for any family with more than 2 kids. Single parents, who have more than 2, should have a time cap on them, of say 5 years, after which, benefits are reduced to the same level as 2 parent families.

What about someone who has become a single parent through no fault of their own. Im not talking about 11 children but up to four children is very common and noone knows whats going to happen in the future"

That's what happened to me. I find myself now a single parent. Currently waiting for a council place but not priority. Plus it's rare that the size of house I need will come up on the housing. No one has ever suggested to me to build me a house.

I get some benefits but that's for being a full time carer for a disabled person. But to be honest only 55quid a week of that is mine. A lot less than it would cost the authorities to place my daughter in sheltered accommodation

I think she was stupid to talk to the papers as they will always make it sound as bad as possible.

I don't know all the details in this case. But guessing it would be cheaper to do this than place them all separate

oh and she will not be given the choice she is claiming. Although for me I just have to bid on houses. But there have not been any big enough for me to bid on recently.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Households don't actually get to kep their Housing Benefit.

It ends up in the mitts of their often greedy landlords.

Did anyone else see the programme last night about Caledonia Rd in London?"

I am very aware where the benefit ends up, my point was to the people on here that were advocating cutting housing benefit for those that have more than Two children....I forgot to quote their post in my haste.

The number of families with Four or more children in England and Wales is a tiny minority of families in general, these 10-11 children families in this day and age in this country are very rare with only a couple of hundred existing I believe.....

It's an unusual case, but it's not common place, one thing for sure though it's fantastic cannon fodder for the Right Wing press and their foaming at the mouth followers.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Households don't actually get to kep their Housing Benefit.

It ends up in the mitts of their often greedy landlords.

Did anyone else see the programme last night about Caledonia Rd in London?

I am very aware where the benefit ends up, my point was to the people on here that were advocating cutting housing benefit for those that have more than Two children....I forgot to quote their post in my haste.

The number of families with Four or more children in England and Wales is a tiny minority of families in general, these 10-11 children families in this day and age in this country are very rare with only a couple of hundred existing I believe.....

It's an unusual case, but it's not common place, one thing for sure though it's fantastic cannon fodder for the Right Wing press and their foaming at the mouth followers.

"

Haven't seem any one mention cutting housing benefits only benefits . Think what winds people up is remarks like if I don't like it the council can start again. And why can't the older kids work? If you haven't paid a penny in why should you take so much out

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Households don't actually get to kep their Housing Benefit.

It ends up in the mitts of their often greedy landlords.

Did anyone else see the programme last night about Caledonia Rd in London?

I am very aware where the benefit ends up, my point was to the people on here that were advocating cutting housing benefit for those that have more than Two children....I forgot to quote their post in my haste.

The number of families with Four or more children in England and Wales is a tiny minority of families in general, these 10-11 children families in this day and age in this country are very rare with only a couple of hundred existing I believe.....

It's an unusual case, but it's not common place, one thing for sure though it's fantastic cannon fodder for the Right Wing press and their foaming at the mouth followers.

Haven't seem any one mention cutting housing benefits only benefits . Think what winds people up is remarks like if I don't like it the council can start again. And why can't the older kids work? If you haven't paid a penny in why should you take so much out "

"There should be no state handouts, other than health and education, for any family with more than 2 kids"

A _iew supported by others in this thread...

Maybe you should read the posts again?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ick and lisaCouple
over a year ago

hull

Fucking scroungers we will all got to work to keep all the work dodgers

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

."

Don't they do that so that they are saving money in the long run?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

When I was 7 or 8 I once told my grandfather that I believed all those "foreigners" (namely Turkish immigrants) shoud be sent home because they took money away from native families (of course it was something I had overheard somewhere!)

My grandfather was a very calm and wise man and he just asked me if I could name any one of them?

The point I am making is this : It is so easy to generalise on most matters but in reality each case is different and deserves to be evaluated on its own merits.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

The answer to all the above is the same...including the fertility treatment.

It's not THE national health service....it's OUR national health service.

Think the word is health service 2 of what you quoted actually save the NHS money and promotes health.having a child is a life choice not a health one

And you would deny a woman the chance to conceive a child if she wants one?

For many women the lack of a child affects their mental health and mental well being....that's not always a life choice, it impacts on the health of many thousands of women in this country.

"

I would say if it came down to a choice of saving someones life or helping someone start a life, then the saving lives would get it for me.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place

You will always get extremes and anomalies in any system,the important fact is why are the papers always reporting it as a state benefit system gone mad.

Seems to me someone is trying to demonise the unemployed and disabled people of this country and set society against each other.

The same thing happened with the public vs private pensions.

Divide and conquer is the name of the game here ,stay strong,stay fair and dont fall for it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

.

Don't they do that so that they are saving money in the long run?"

Drugs....Smoking....Alcohol....

Lifestyle choices when they began on these chosen paths of consuming...

I would hazard a guess that should any future government decide to 'rate' lifestyle choice as a reason for NHS treatment or addiction assistance to be refused....there would be a fair few on here moaning about it.

My point is that a woman unable to conceive naturally is every bit entitled as a smoker/drinker/drug addict to NHS treatment.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"There are currently over 1.5 million households in the UK who receive housing benefit, I am guessing that a great deal those have more than Two children....so what do you think the outcome would be for all these hundreds of thousands of families who would not receive housing benefit?

Tents?

Households don't actually get to kep their Housing Benefit.

It ends up in the mitts of their often greedy landlords.

Did anyone else see the programme last night about Caledonia Rd in London?

I am very aware where the benefit ends up, my point was to the people on here that were advocating cutting housing benefit for those that have more than Two children....I forgot to quote their post in my haste.

The number of families with Four or more children in England and Wales is a tiny minority of families in general, these 10-11 children families in this day and age in this country are very rare with only a couple of hundred existing I believe.....

It's an unusual case, but it's not common place, one thing for sure though it's fantastic cannon fodder for the Right Wing press and their foaming at the mouth followers.

Haven't seem any one mention cutting housing benefits only benefits . Think what winds people up is remarks like if I don't like it the council can start again. And why can't the older kids work? If you haven't paid a penny in why should you take so much out

"There should be no state handouts, other than health and education, for any family with more than 2 kids"

A _iew supported by others in this thread...

Maybe you should read the posts again?"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life "

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

.

Don't they do that so that they are saving money in the long run?

Drugs....Smoking....Alcohol....

Lifestyle choices when they began on these chosen paths of consuming...

I would hazard a guess that should any future government decide to 'rate' lifestyle choice as a reason for NHS treatment or addiction assistance to be refused....there would be a fair few on here moaning about it.

My point is that a woman unable to conceive naturally is every bit entitled as a smoker/drinker/drug addict to NHS treatment.

"

A lot of smokers/ overweight people are refused treatment now until they stop or lose weight and there are people who will argue that addiction is a illness. Not having children is not a illness sad but true

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?"

For me when I see people who don't want to work ( not people who can't work ) that's the point where I lose any respect or pity for them.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?

For me when I see people who don't want to work ( not people who can't work ) that's the point where I lose any respect or pity for them. "

I am really struggling with the word "they" and "them" - not specific to your post but you were the last to post. I hear all the arguments... but I am still asking ... Who are "they"... ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

OK just listening to a bit of what the mum and daughter said when inter_iewed....it looks like they do have a horse and the 16 year old pays for it ( she didn't say how she pays for it )

I personally wouldn't have ended up with 11 kids, but for reasons only known to her she has.

I don't know what the best/ cheapest solution would be for the housing....and I don't know how long she has been claiming , but maybe there should be a shake up of how the benefits work if you can carry on breeding when not having a way of paying for them yourself.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?"

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *atisfy janeWoman
over a year ago

Torquay


"Speaking of having kids; does it really make sense for NICE to suggest the NHS should fund fertility treatment for women aged 42?

Should NHS fund fertility treatment at all?

Yes....for women under the age of 40 who haven't had a child previously despite trying for one or have lost a child.

Not wanting to sound arsey but why 40 and not 41 or 42? And should it be privately funded or NHS ?

Why should the NHS spend hundreds of Millions a year on helping people to stop smoking?.....to lose weight?.....to have better eyesight?....

.

Don't they do that so that they are saving money in the long run?

Drugs....Smoking....Alcohol....

Lifestyle choices when they began on these chosen paths of consuming...

I would hazard a guess that should any future government decide to 'rate' lifestyle choice as a reason for NHS treatment or addiction assistance to be refused....there would be a fair few on here moaning about it.

My point is that a woman unable to conceive naturally is every bit entitled as a smoker/drinker/drug addict to NHS treatment.

A lot of smokers/ overweight people are refused treatment now until they stop or lose weight and there are people who will argue that addiction is a illness. Not having children is not a illness sad but true "

No smoker is refused help to quit smoking (at considerable expense)....no Alcoholic is refused help to stop drinking (at considerable expense)....no drug addict is refused help to stop their addiction (at enormous expense).

These are all lifestyle choices

And as I have said before, for many thousands of women the inability to have a child can and does lead to considerable mental illness...and even suicide in some cases.

I would rather give funding to give life than to save the life of an addict to be honest.....

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?

For me when I see people who don't want to work ( not people who can't work ) that's the point where I lose any respect or pity for them.

I am really struggling with the word "they" and "them" - not specific to your post but you were the last to post. I hear all the arguments... but I am still asking ... Who are "they"... ?"

For me its people who claim benefits rather than work ( not cant find work )

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?

For me when I see people who don't want to work ( not people who can't work ) that's the point where I lose any respect or pity for them.

I am really struggling with the word "they" and "them" - not specific to your post but you were the last to post. I hear all the arguments... but I am still asking ... Who are "they"... ?

For me its people who claim benefits rather than work ( not cant find work ) "
Do you mean all people who claim benefits?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Another being discussed here about women not having children i do believe if a lady can't have a child and desperately wants one and is working and such then the government should help with costs for ivf.

If they can help people who don't want to work live and raise children and they can help countless drug abusers and alcoholics then why not help someone who wants to have a baby...if they were working and could offer a stable upbringing.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


" Not having children is not a illness sad but true "

Really? It's not always a choice. I was pregnant 8 times. I have no living children. I could have gone down the IVF route to improve my chances of a stronger viable pregnancy with a healthy child. I have lupus and antiphospholipid syndrome. I use just my example but I know of many others.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

You may find that the local council may owe a duty to rehouse them through the Housing act 1996 and homeless legislation. If you are accepted as homeless the council owe you a duty to rehouse a person. This council obv had no houses fit for purpose so had to build to discharge duty.

She is one of the lucky ones however I am sure she has spent sometime in cramped overcrowded conditions. I am a believer though that if you have a 2 bedroom house that you only have enough children to fit in that house.. don't keep on having kids and expect to be rehoused because you are having so many children.

I see it everyday in my chosen profession and its an increasing problem.. I hope that she values and cares for her new house and not takes what has been provided to her for granted.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"S

I would rather give funding to give life than to save the life of an addict to be honest....."
I find that so difficult to decide and again it would so depend on the individual case of a woman who perhaps put her career first and left children too late as opposed to a herione addict who is genuinely trying to turn things around. I am struggling with making a generalisation.

I guess that is why we have committees on ethics ...not easy those decisions!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?

For me when I see people who don't want to work ( not people who can't work ) that's the point where I lose any respect or pity for them.

I am really struggling with the word "they" and "them" - not specific to your post but you were the last to post. I hear all the arguments... but I am still asking ... Who are "they"... ?

For me its people who claim benefits rather than work ( not cant find work ) Do you mean all people who claim benefits? "

No I mean people who claim benefits rather than work. I don't mean people who try but can't get work or people unable to work for valid reasons

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"

I would hazard a guess that should any future government decide to 'rate' lifestyle choice as a reason for NHS treatment or addiction assistance to be refused....there would be a fair few on here moaning about it.

My point is that a woman unable to conceive naturally is every bit entitled as a smoker/drinker/drug addict to NHS treatment.

"

Refusing treatment already happens unless it is an emergancy of course or it turns into an emergancy,

Although not being able to conceive is upsetting for the people who want to, it isn't life threatening or potentialy life threatening.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo

emergency*

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"Can anyone tell me roughly what this woman would be getting in benefits?

I'd like to know, as she's stabling one horse, and was looking to acquire and house two more, and we (both working) can't even afford one! "

I'm struggling to feed my cats at the moment

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?

For me when I see people who don't want to work ( not people who can't work ) that's the point where I lose any respect or pity for them.

I am really struggling with the word "they" and "them" - not specific to your post but you were the last to post. I hear all the arguments... but I am still asking ... Who are "they"... ?

For me its people who claim benefits rather than work ( not cant find work ) Do you mean all people who claim benefits?

No I mean people who claim benefits rather than work. I don't mean people who try but can't get work or people unable to work for valid reasons "
I get you, I think. Now my next question would be how do we know who is and who is not? Some people are clever at beating the system but not all... do we treat them all the same?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"OK just listening to a bit of what the mum and daughter said when inter_iewed....it looks like they do have a horse and the 16 year old pays for it ( she didn't say how she pays for it )

I personally wouldn't have ended up with 11 kids, but for reasons only known to her she has.

I don't know what the best/ cheapest solution would be for the housing....and I don't know how long she has been claiming , but maybe there should be a shake up of how the benefits work if you can carry on breeding when not having a way of paying for them yourself."

Yes your right ruggers, also until they change the rules this woman has done nothing wrong, yet is being pilloried by the press.

11 kids is madness but not every claimant of benefits has 11 kids.As they always do they have latched on to an extreme to discredit the many.

Same old press ,playing yet more games ,will they ever learn,more to the point will we.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" Not having children is not a illness sad but true

Really? It's not always a choice. I was pregnant 8 times. I have no living children. I could have gone down the IVF route to improve my chances of a stronger viable pregnancy with a healthy child. I have lupus and antiphospholipid syndrome. I use just my example but I know of many others."

Sorry maybe I put that wrongly. Mot being able to conceive is not an illness ( in my opinion ) not being able to carry to term is.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"

I am really struggling with the word "they" and "them" - not specific to your post but you were the last to post. I hear all the arguments... but I am still asking ... Who are "they"... ?"

'they or them' could easily be any one of us..

we dont choose where, when and to whom we are born..

we are born in 'our time' and deal with what goes in in that time, others before us have had to deal with a lot worse..

we cant control life with its pitfalls, ill health, that unexpected knock on the door by the 'boys in blue' or the silence form ones 'hello love, i'm home' to an empty house and a letter on the table..

we could all be 'them'..

perhaps a day in the life may give us an insight..

and maybe just maybe make us look differently at others..

because as others have said, there but for..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"

I am really struggling with the word "they" and "them" - not specific to your post but you were the last to post. I hear all the arguments... but I am still asking ... Who are "they"... ?

'they or them' could easily be any one of us..

we dont choose where, when and to whom we are born..

we are born in 'our time' and deal with what goes in in that time, others before us have had to deal with a lot worse..

we cant control life with its pitfalls, ill health, that unexpected knock on the door by the 'boys in blue' or the silence form ones 'hello love, i'm home' to an empty house and a letter on the table..

we could all be 'them'..

perhaps a day in the life may give us an insight..

and maybe just maybe make us look differently at others..

because as others have said, there but for..

"
So much better put than I could have done!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Free country I suppose !!!

To be fair though it is not the kids fault. As long as they are loved and cared for. That is the main thing in my opinion.

Who are we to judge ???

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

As I said I haven't seen anyone mention housing benefits and have said cases should be looked at individually. You seem to have decided that everyone who has expressed an opinion means stop housing benefits I don't people have to live somewhere but that dosnt mean I have to pay for luxury items. Smaller house and bunk beds would still give them somewhere to life

So, a roof is all that matters? Over-crowding leads to other social problems. Children do less well at school. Where has our sense of dignity for all gone?

For me when I see people who don't want to work ( not people who can't work ) that's the point where I lose any respect or pity for them.

I am really struggling with the word "they" and "them" - not specific to your post but you were the last to post. I hear all the arguments... but I am still asking ... Who are "they"... ?

For me its people who claim benefits rather than work ( not cant find work ) Do you mean all people who claim benefits?

No I mean people who claim benefits rather than work. I don't mean people who try but can't get work or people unable to work for valid reasons I get you, I think. Now my next question would be how do we know who is and who is not? Some people are clever at beating the system but not all... do we treat them all the same? "

Good point have to treat them all to start with and then either out the ones playing the system and stop payments or prove someone does deserve it and start payments. Harsh maybe but ?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"OK just listening to a bit of what the mum and daughter said when inter_iewed....it looks like they do have a horse and the 16 year old pays for it ( she didn't say how she pays for it )

I personally wouldn't have ended up with 11 kids, but for reasons only known to her she has.

I don't know what the best/ cheapest solution would be for the housing....and I don't know how long she has been claiming , but maybe there should be a shake up of how the benefits work if you can carry on breeding when not having a way of paying for them yourself.

Yes your right ruggers, also until they change the rules this woman has done nothing wrong, yet is being pilloried by the press.

11 kids is madness but not every claimant of benefits has 11 kids.As they always do they have latched on to an extreme to discredit the many.

Same old press ,playing yet more games ,will they ever learn,more to the point will we."

She is quite happy giving inter_iews, the words are out of her mouth and true by the looks of it. You can't blame the press if they are reporting the truth.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 20/02/13 22:20:04]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow


"

Haven't seem any one mention cutting housing benefits only benefits . Think what winds people up is remarks like if I don't like it the council can start again. And why can't the older kids work? If you haven't paid a penny in why should you take so much out "

Cutting Housing Benefit is Tory party policy. It's commonly known as the Bedroon Tax.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ouple in LancashireCouple
over a year ago

in Lancashire


"Hopefully we will pull out of the EU then some of they will get back on there boats and row like fuck "

'they' have their own boats...?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *icketysplitsWoman
over a year ago

Way over Yonder, that's where I'm bound


" Not having children is not a illness sad but true

Really? It's not always a choice. I was pregnant 8 times. I have no living children. I could have gone down the IVF route to improve my chances of a stronger viable pregnancy with a healthy child. I have lupus and antiphospholipid syndrome. I use just my example but I know of many others.

Sorry maybe I put that wrongly. Mot being able to conceive is not an illness ( in my opinion ) not being able to carry to term is. "

Not being able to conceive may be an indicator of a health problem that may be addressed by IVF. As Jane stated, don't underestimate the mental health aspects of not being able to have a child. For those that feel that biological imperative it can eat away at you.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

Can I just say losing a child is the most devastating experience.. I lost one in pregnancy and I am scared that I will never have the chance to become a mum and you know what its a daily battle that I have...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *xodussxMan
over a year ago

sheffield

Keep them coming

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" Not having children is not a illness sad but true

Really? It's not always a choice. I was pregnant 8 times. I have no living children. I could have gone down the IVF route to improve my chances of a stronger viable pregnancy with a healthy child. I have lupus and antiphospholipid syndrome. I use just my example but I know of many others.

Sorry maybe I put that wrongly. Mot being able to conceive is not an illness ( in my opinion ) not being able to carry to term is.

Not being able to conceive may be an indicator of a health problem that may be addressed by IVF. As Jane stated, don't underestimate the mental health aspects of not being able to have a child. For those that feel that biological imperative it can eat away at you."

Agree and said effecting mental health should be looked at in a different light. But as someone mentioned save a life rather than create a life. I personally would rather see more money spent on cancer research but that's my _iew it dosn't make me a bad person

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"what are every bodys thoughts on the lady on benefits with 11 children, thats had a 6 bed house built by the council valued at over £400.000 ?

"

I need to get 11 children

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland

Lickety and Mischeeky - I consider myself lucky to not have experienced your problems and I understand from knowing people who have not been able to conceive, who have undergone fertility treatment after fertility treatment (had to sell their home to do so) just how much this can matter to a person, a couple's life and happiness. I personally would rank it amongst the same priorities as any other physical or mental health matter.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ig jugsWoman
over a year ago

somewhere

yes but people choose to start smoking in the first place or choose to get fat by eating junk food.NO ONE chooses to not be able to have children because there body cant.Those who choose not to be a mum is there choice but to have that choice taken from you when you desperately want kids is soul destroying.

I bet most of you on here who are saying fertility treatment should not be allowed or restricted are those fertile and/or sitting with kids.Trust me the day you find out you cannot have kids and need IVF is the day your life changes forever.If people can have 3 or more kids then why cant i be given the chance to have one..I am 35, have a degree,good job but cannot get IVF on nhs. They are very strict.You can get it until aged 38 and there's a 4 yr wait.So figure it out for be being 35 eh...can only go private if I ever want to be a mum.Costing over 4000 grand a time.

So yes not being able to conceive is an illness as it something medically wrong with your body.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *leasureDomeMan
over a year ago

all over the place


"OK just listening to a bit of what the mum and daughter said when inter_iewed....it looks like they do have a horse and the 16 year old pays for it ( she didn't say how she pays for it )

I personally wouldn't have ended up with 11 kids, but for reasons only known to her she has.

I don't know what the best/ cheapest solution would be for the housing....and I don't know how long she has been claiming , but maybe there should be a shake up of how the benefits work if you can carry on breeding when not having a way of paying for them yourself.

Yes your right ruggers, also until they change the rules this woman has done nothing wrong, yet is being pilloried by the press.

11 kids is madness but not every claimant of benefits has 11 kids.As they always do they have latched on to an extreme to discredit the many.

Same old press ,playing yet more games ,will they ever learn,more to the point will we.

She is quite happy giving inter_iews, the words are out of her mouth and true by the looks of it. You can't blame the press if they are reporting the truth."

Would they have reported a women with 3 kids and a 3 bed-roomed house ,they love the extreme of it ,it divides and is controversial,that generated anger transfers and helps promote a stereotype for all claimants.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


" Not having children is not a illness sad but true

Really? It's not always a choice. I was pregnant 8 times. I have no living children. I could have gone down the IVF route to improve my chances of a stronger viable pregnancy with a healthy child. I have lupus and antiphospholipid syndrome. I use just my example but I know of many others.

Sorry maybe I put that wrongly. Mot being able to conceive is not an illness ( in my opinion ) not being able to carry to term is.

Not being able to conceive may be an indicator of a health problem that may be addressed by IVF. As Jane stated, don't underestimate the mental health aspects of not being able to have a child. For those that feel that biological imperative it can eat away at you.

Agree and said effecting mental health should be looked at in a different light. But as someone mentioned save a life rather than create a life. I personally would rather see more money spent on cancer research but that's my _iew it dosn't make me a bad person"
Of course it does not make you a bad person - we all are entitled to have our opinions and priorities anyway. I can see if a decision had to be made between saving a life and helping to create a new one that many people might think that there is no question - it should be saving the existing one. All I would say is that this maybe down to the fact that mental health has only quite recently become an acceptable topic of conversation.

Everybody who is personally affected by (any) illness, physical or mental deserves treatment and help.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"yes but people choose to start smoking in the first place or choose to get fat by eating junk food.NO ONE chooses to not be able to have children because there body cant.Those who choose not to be a mum is there choice but to have that choice taken from you when you desperately want kids is soul destroying.

I bet most of you on here who are saying fertility treatment should not be allowed or restricted are those fertile and/or sitting with kids.Trust me the day you find out you cannot have kids and need IVF is the day your life changes forever.If people can have 3 or more kids then why cant i be given the chance to have one..I am 35, have a degree,good job but cannot get IVF on nhs. They are very strict.You can get it until aged 38 and there's a 4 yr wait.So figure it out for be being 35 eh...can only go private if I ever want to be a mum.Costing over 4000 grand a time.

So yes not being able to conceive is an illness as it something medically wrong with your body."

Not every overweight person gets so by overeating in many cases its a medical condition. Also I have no kids and was told at 25 I couldn't have any but I chose to accept it as a fact of life

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *nnyMan
over a year ago

Glasgow

When I pointed out the NICE recommendation, I was looking closer at the 42 years of age limit than at the principle of IVF as such.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


" Not having children is not a illness sad but true

Really? It's not always a choice. I was pregnant 8 times. I have no living children. I could have gone down the IVF route to improve my chances of a stronger viable pregnancy with a healthy child. I have lupus and antiphospholipid syndrome. I use just my example but I know of many others.

Sorry maybe I put that wrongly. Mot being able to conceive is not an illness ( in my opinion ) not being able to carry to term is.

Not being able to conceive may be an indicator of a health problem that may be addressed by IVF. As Jane stated, don't underestimate the mental health aspects of not being able to have a child. For those that feel that biological imperative it can eat away at you.

Agree and said effecting mental health should be looked at in a different light. But as someone mentioned save a life rather than create a life. I personally would rather see more money spent on cancer research but that's my _iew it dosn't make me a bad personOf course it does not make you a bad person - we all are entitled to have our opinions and priorities anyway. I can see if a decision had to be made between saving a life and helping to create a new one that many people might think that there is no question - it should be saving the existing one. All I would say is that this maybe down to the fact that mental health has only quite recently become an acceptable topic of conversation.

Everybody who is personally affected by (any) illness, physical or mental deserves treatment and help. "

True. Every one deserves treatment but there's only so much cash in the pot so hard decisions have to be made

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *phroditeWoman
over a year ago

(She/ her) in Sensualityland


"

True. Every one deserves treatment but there's only so much cash in the pot so hard decisions have to be made "
Sorry I cute the post to stop it from overloading the thread - I realise this, of course and it is a sad fact that choices need to be made. I am not familiar exactly how funds are allocated within the NHS - I understand that ethics committees are part of it?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *isscheekychopsWoman
over a year ago

The land of grey peas and bacon

It is what it is she is going to get housed.. regardless what a bunch of horny swingers are saying on a public forum...

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"

True. Every one deserves treatment but there's only so much cash in the pot so hard decisions have to be made Sorry I cute the post to stop it from overloading the thread - I realise this, of course and it is a sad fact that choices need to be made. I am not familiar exactly how funds are allocated within the NHS - I understand that ethics committees are part of it? "

No idea either. I work in mental health and I do see some of the distress talk of cutting their benefits cause.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rokengirlWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere

[Removed by poster at 20/02/13 22:53:37]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ugby 123Couple
Forum Mod
over a year ago

O o O oo


"

Would they have reported a women with 3 kids and a 3 bed-roomed house ,they love the extreme of it ,it divides and is controversial,that generated anger transfers and helps promote a stereotype for all claimants."

If there was something to report in the story then yes.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *rokengirlWoman
over a year ago

Somewhere


"Can anyone tell me roughly what this woman would be getting in benefits?

I'd like to know, as she's stabling one horse, and was looking to acquire and house two more, and we (both working) can't even afford one! "

She will be getting a week £71 income support, £130 child benefit and probably around £400 to £500 a week tax credits if claims for 9 kids as understand oldest two now non dependants... Plus full rent and council tax paid... Not forgetting free school meals etc she probably equates to an income around 40 grand a year

She stables and maintains a pony no doubt flat screen TVs all over house every kid with latest game station etc... People like her are by no means poor believe me I deal with the day in day out... Amazing how much stuff they have compared to a working family... Sadly you can't blame this women tho it the governments fault got allowing her to to this by funding it every step of the way.... She's probably claimed as a lone parent too since day one of her claim at 14 yet had 10 more babies with 3 different fathers... Not something of class as a lone parent but hey that's my warped _iew of the system thanks to the job I do!!

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ixties-duo OP   Man
over a year ago

keighley


"

Would they have reported a women with 3 kids and a 3 bed-roomed house ,they love the extreme of it ,it divides and is controversial,that generated anger transfers and helps promote a stereotype for all claimants.

If there was something to report in the story then yes.

"

the point is at some point this woman did only have 3 kids (her first at 14) she had never had a job was on benefits...but carried on and had 8 more ..and at the grand old age of 38 she cud have more

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *andm288Couple
over a year ago

oxford

I believe that in America if your on benefits ! The state will not support any further children !

Sounds like a good idea to me !

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"I believe that in America if your on benefits ! The state will not support any further children !

Sounds like a good idea to me ! "

they have got the right idea.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"That takes the mick, weve had to work hard and go without for the things we need, not want.

Perhaps a cap should be put on benefits for those who take the piss, "

There is going to be a cap on benefits coming in this year or early next year

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago


"You will always get extremes and anomalies in any system,the important fact is why are the papers always reporting it as a state benefit system gone mad.

Seems to me someone is trying to demonise the unemployed and disabled people of this country and set society against each other.

The same thing happened with the public vs private pensions.

Divide and conquer is the name of the game here ,stay strong,stay fair and dont fall for it."

Best post on the thread mate

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Whilst no doubt this is an extreme and therefore great fodder for the tabloids there is an underlying problem of a benefits system that is not fit for purpose

Whilst no fan of the current government at least they are attempting to address the issue albeit in a crude way

As is tthe norm with Labour they ran away from such difficult issues - the lesson is never put a Labour government in power as the reallity is inept and uncontroled spensing

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top