My fairer child benefit;

[Plain Talker]

Personally I'm not religious, so I don't value marriage any more than cohabitation, but I can see the benefits of promoting it, when we have large Muslim and Christian populations. And atheists can get married too. (I think the big-society is supposed to encourage marriage?) It also makes it a little harder for couples with children to split up.

 

And yes, at which point it would be cut. (Or I suppose with Universal credit, it could be even be administered along with tax breaks, so a worker with children gets more than a non worker)

 

A marriage is a contract between the couple.

 

As above, does a piece of paper or a wedding ring mean that they are any more devoted to each other or their children?

 

I know of a couple where the man only married the wife in order to ensure his rights to the children, and to legitimise the child. (this was 30 years ago, when the father, and particularly the UNMARRIED father, didn't have as much right to a say in the custody or care of the children, incidentally.)

[willman]

It still founders on the same problem as every other reform. Withdrawing, or reducing, child benefit will punish the child because of something the parents have, or have not, done.

 

Why is it a punishment?

[chem1st]

A marriage is a contract between the couple.

 

As above, does a piece of paper or a wedding ring mean that they are any more devoted to each other or their children?

 

I know of a couple where the man only married the wife in order to ensure his rights to the children, and to legitimise the child. (this was 30 years ago, when the father, and particularly the UNMARRIED father, didn't have as much right to a say in the custody or care of the children, incidentally.)

 

So you do not want to encourage marriage.

 

Would you set the rate at 1.1 the same as cohabiting?

 

would that rate of 1.1 be a 'fair' rate?

[poppins]

Sorry...daft question, but does all this mean that people in England get paid something when they have a child ? if so when did all this start

[chem1st]

sorry...daft question, but does all this mean that people in england get paid something when they have a child ? If so when did all this start

 

1945!............

[Plain Talker]

With 15 children you would struggle immensely. It would be (620pw) £36 per person per week after income tax is taken into account. £35pppw after council tax. £25pppw after rent?

 

They'd have less than half of a person on the dole!

 

a family that size would be ridiculous. granted. (fortunately we don't have that many families of that size today!).

 

It's down to the ethics of being responsible, and not having more children than you can reasonably take care of, isn't it?

 

In the US (not that I'm a big fan of the US) the system for welfare is that they will pay for the children in existence (And/or pregnant -with) at the time of the claim. If you subsequently get pregnant then you don't get any support for that child whilst on welfare. I think that this is a good system to have in place.

 

I know of one woman who claimed as a single parent, and had umpteen kids to the same bloke. I marvelled at the fact that the DSS (or whatever they call themselves this week) never cottoned on... "How many kids? All to the same person? Erm... just how much of a single parent are you?". She was on about £400 a week.

 

But anyway, that rant's about "dole" benefits, and not about universal child-benefit, so here we are... back to your regularly scheduled topic? "family allowance" child benefits

[Plain Talker]

So you do not want to encourage marriage.

 

Would you set the rate at 1.1 the same as cohabiting?

 

would that rate of 1.1 be a 'fair' rate?

 

I think folk should be able to have the right to marry, or not to marry as they feel fit. And I don't think they should be penalised just because they're not wearing a wedding ring.

 

I'd set the levels the same for a couple whether they are married or not.

[HarmOKnee]

Sorry...daft question, but does all this mean that people in England get paid something when they have a child ? if so when did all this start

 

:hihi:

Yep that's right, been going on for decades. You don't get paid for having kids over there?

[willman]

I think any benefit for a child conceived and born whilst claiming benefits should be forfeited. If you're out of work with no prospects why keep having kids and claiming benefits.

[Rupert_Baehr]

Sorry...daft question, but does all this mean that people in England get paid something when they have a child ? if so when did all this start

 

1945!............

 

Not quite. - CB may have started in 1945 and various governments may describe it as 'the universal benefit'but it isn't paid to everybody.

 

My son (a British citizen) was born and brought up in England. I am a British Citizen (and I pay UK income taxes and NIC) but my wife (we were married before he was born and still are) was not a British citizen, did not live in the UK for some of the time and did not pay British income tax (there are 'dual taxation' agreements between the UK and a number of countries, so she wasn't obliged to pay twice.)

 

I did not receive a penny in child benefit, because I was told "It is payable to the child's mother."

 

"Universal benefit"? - Not quite.