bobbie Posted January 1, 2011 Share Posted January 1, 2011 OK, a serious answer. Many under 30s who work, do not bring in enough after tax income to provide for themselves. Many need to live in shared accomodation, or if they do take on a mortgage, need 2 full time wages to meet basic living costs. Yes, 30 years ago, it was feasable to have a family when you were under 30, a mans wages would meet the costs of a family, and back in 1984 the average house price was £24,000. Today it is over £160,000 General outgoings, cost of fuel (and insurance which I highlighted on another thread), tax etc... means your average under 30 in full time employment is unlikely to have enough spare cash to afford to purchase their own home. I can see the problem only getting worse, as the expenses that todays 18 year olds have to meet is dire, the increase in student fees for any young person who does decide to do something with their life, given the fact that the country is broke and there are fewer and fewer real job opportunitys. Putting off the kids until a later age will become the norm. Alternatively, we could simply fund a section of our society who never work, pay them to breed like wildfire and provide them with enough money so they never have to work, thats the only solution. Or import people to breed and not work. Thats the only way to increase the birth rate. If you expect the working class to start having kids forget it, they can't afford to Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted January 1, 2011 Author Share Posted January 1, 2011 OK, a serious answer. Many under 30s who work, do not bring in enough after tax income to provide for themselves. Many need to live in shared accomodation, or if they do take on a mortgage, need 2 full time wages to meet basic living costs. Yes, 30 years ago, it was feasable to have a family when you were under 30, a mans wages would meet the costs of a family, and back in 1984 the average house price was £24,000. Today it is over £160,000 General outgoings, cost of fuel (and insurance which I highlighted on another thread), tax etc... means your average under 30 in full time employment is unlikely to have enough spare cash to afford to purchase their own home. I can see the problem only getting worse, as the expenses that todays 18 year olds have to meet is dire, the increase in student fees for any young person who does decide to do something with their life, given the fact that the country is broke and there are fewer and fewer real job opportunitys. Putting off the kids until a later age will become the norm. Alternatively, we could simply fund a section of our society who never work, pay them to breed like wildfire and provide them with enough money so they never have to work, thats the only solution. Or import people to breed and not work. Thats the only way to increase the birth rate. If you expect the working class to start having kids forget it, they can't afford to The financial pressures facing young people are immense, and the traditional path of life is full of perverse work disincentives. Can you imagine a young working man supporting a family, a wife and 2 children on one wage at 25 years of age (perhaps after a degree). Pulling £10k after tax in a minimum wage job. Some 50 years ago this was possible, and at that age you could buy a house, in a nice area too. Nowadays the car insurance you need to legally drive a car costs £3k+ per year, the rent on a 3bed council house would be £5k+, public transport 1.5k+. Fair do's food is cheap and clothes are too, but everything else, especially housing and legal permissions to drive/work are ridiculous. All you need to do is look at parkhill to see the problem with today's society. £180k+ for an ex council flat, only the richest in society can afford it. I think I preferred society when parkhill was heroin central and a young family could actually get a place to live and had a chance of making to the 'burbs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isabelle Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/dec/31/pregnancy-mothers-fertility-children This is welcome advice to the population, for too long now people have been putting off having children when they are at the best age in their life to have them. After 35 the rate of birth problems and defects increases. People will moan about inbreeding, yet champion breeding past prime. Perhaps times are changing and young mothers (normal age) will be congratulated rather than be scorned upon by the media and general public. I didn't think young mothers were scorned, just underage and possibly teenage mothers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mafya Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 I didn't think young mothers were scorned, just underage and possibly teenage mothers? My bold= Teenage mothers are young mothers aren't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 Tax breaks, benefits and what have you aside, the article isn't as accurate as it could be. It only focuses on the one extreme:- the older mother. Yes, the risks of complications can raise if the mother is older, and there is a correlation between a rise in incidences of birth defects like Downs or Spina Bifida and a mother who is older. However, there is also a raise in risk with younger mothers, too, which ought to be pointed out. If you are a teen mum, and a younger teen mum, particularly, your chances of having a baby with Downs or similar problem is raised. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isabelle Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 My bold= Teenage mothers are young mothers aren't they? I interpreted young mothers to mean 18-25 year olds, possibly up to age 30 maybe. I believe that having a baby before the age of 18 is not ideal, obviously it depends on the individual situation though, but a lot of girls will not be in a stable financial and living situation at that age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loubbe Posted January 2, 2011 Share Posted January 2, 2011 http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/dec/31/pregnancy-mothers-fertility-children This is welcome advice to the population, for too long now people have been putting off having children when they are at the best age in their life to have them. After 35 the rate of birth problems and defects increases. People will moan about inbreeding, yet champion breeding past prime. Perhaps times are changing and young mothers (normal age) will be congratulated rather than be scorned upon by the media and general public. There would have to be some serious changes to society to encourage this. The attitudes of 40 years ago, when a woman would get married, become a home maker and start a family just aren't there any more. We are all encouraged to work work work. If this is going to turn into a serious problem, then families will need to be supported in order to reproduce. As other posters have stated, the financial situation for many dictates they cannot be parents until they are secure in job and home. Many of my friends are now having first babies in their thirties, for these very reasons. Regarding birth defects, I think most women are aware of the impeding 35th birthday, but it is a choice, like any other, that has to be made. Is it more irresponsible to try to become pregnant after 35 when you are and your partner are in a stable home and a steady job? Or to fall pregnant at 17, with no financial means of supporting your baby, no home of your own, and minimal life experience? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyBunny Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 Tax breaks, benefits and what have you aside, the article isn't as accurate as it could be. It only focuses on the one extreme:- the older mother. Yes, the risks of complications can raise if the mother is older, and there is a correlation between a rise in incidences of birth defects like Downs or Spina Bifida and a mother who is older. However, there is also a raise in risk with younger mothers, too, which ought to be pointed out. If you are a teen mum, and a younger teen mum, particularly, your chances of having a baby with Downs or similar problem is raised. I was under the impression that having a baby with Down Syndrome is very rare if you are under a certain age, as it's not influenced by diet or environmental factors but the degrading of otherwise healthy eggs in a womans ovaries? I was 19 when I got pregnant (planned and in a stable/financially sound relationship). I am now 22 and have an almost 3 year old daughter who has Spina Bifida. I couldn't possibly have gotten pregnant any younger, but my daughter is still disabled. I haven't read the article but NOT all disabilities are age related. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 I was under the impression that having a baby with Down Syndrome is very rare if you are under a certain age, as it's not influenced by diet or environmental factors but the degrading of otherwise healthy eggs in a womans ovaries? I was 19 when I got pregnant (planned and in a stable/financially sound relationship). I am now 22 and have an almost 3 year old daughter who has Spina Bifida. I couldn't possibly have gotten pregnant any younger, but my daughter is still disabled. I haven't read the article but NOT all disabilities are age related. hi Bobby. With Downs syndrome, (particularly) the graph for probability shows high incidences at both extremes of age. However since testing came in, and the choice to terminate, the figures are skewed because there are not as many pregnancies being carried to term. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plain Talker Posted February 2, 2011 Share Posted February 2, 2011 to add, yes, research has found that Spina bifida is more commonly seen in teenage mothers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.