Kids as meal tickets

[kidneystone]

Don't forget his long lost gladiator brother maxmaximus..

 

:hihi:

[MrSmith]

I doubt he actually deliberately had them for 'meal tickets' (I doubt anyone really does to be honest), probably more like he just didn't give a toss about the possibility of bringing a child into the world when he was banging his missus (es) and neither did they.

 

The sad reality is that many do.

[skinz]

Public opinion all aided and abetted by the likes of The Sun, the Daily mail etc

 

 

And Mr smith on SF

 

 

Then sad reality is that many do.

 

 

Bang on queue.

[gnvqsos]

Bang on queue.

 

As in snooker cue or bus queue?

[Olive]

Why the hell would you put yourself through the torture of having that many kids just to feed yourself? I would rather live on baked beans and corn flakes.

 

I know! If you add up all the hours it takes to (properly) look after a child and divide it by the benefits you would get, then it would be a pretty poor return. But then, if you're not bothered how you drag up the poor kids, and leave them to more or less fend for themelves........

I used to naively believe that no-one in their right mind would have a child just for benefits, but I'm coming round to the thought that there are people out there who don't see bringing up kids as being that much of a responsibility, and therefore the benefit gains are worthwhile. That and they don't have their sights set any higher.

 

Philpott takes it to another level. No doubt this misogynistic bully would have left a trail of abused women and unloved kids in his wake with or without benefits, but I also think the system has helped him carry on.

[bassy]

Did you actually hear him say this or are you going on what you've read in a right wing Tory supporting newspaper? Sun/Mail/Express/Telegraph.

 

i didnt read it anywhere, it was a comment made by ann widdicome after she spent a week with the family last year or so, before the tragic case involving the children, she said the comment at the time and repeated it again when interviewed on tv

 

---------- Post added 03-04-2013 at 23:11 ----------

 

You are using this exceptional case as the basis for reforming a system which does work for millions of responsible families.Even given this weakness it is very hard to understand your point.

 

im not making a point, nor am i using this exceptional case for anything, it was a comment made by someone in relation to this mans reasoning behind having so many children and all i did was simply ask peoples opinion on the matter, im not out to reform any system, i just asked a question, if you dont feel it a valid question you've no need to answer, but please dont make assumptions, i clearly stated at the bottom of my OP that i hadnt made my mind up and formed an opinion yet

[Ms Macbeth]

I don't think many people have children as meal tickets. I do, however, think too many are born to parents who don't have a clue about responsibility, and in some cases are unwilling to put their children first.

 

In the old days (my young days and earlier) there were large families who weren't properly cared for, who were stigmatised. There were few benefits if any, and child mortality was much higher. The women had to rely on their husbands to provide, and some weren't too keen on providing for their families. At least the benefits system, even when it is abused, does offer some hope that the children of feckless parents will get some money spent on them.

 

As for Philpott, he was an abuser of both his family and the benefits system. A few generations ago he'd have probably been made to toe the line by the father of one or more of his female victims. But since families have become much more broken, its possible that these women didn't have anyone to stand up for them.

 

There is little reason for any family on benefits to expand other than personal selfishness. Once a family does fall on hard times, they should make every effort not to introduce another life into an already difficult existence. I don't think there is a simple answer except for our society to perhaps be a bit more supportive of children who have to try and survive in dysfunctional families. Perhaps schools and social services should have a bigger part to play in identifying and helping those children. Lets not forget the Philpotts children who are left in the aftermath of this horrific case. I hope they don't get targeted because of their father.

[MrSmith]

I don't think many people have children as meal tickets. I do, however, think too many are born to parents who don't have a clue about responsibility, and in some cases are unwilling to put their children first.

 

 

A child is the easiest way for a young person to get a house, many young girls want to leave home but can't unless they have a child.

[s2 blade]

Did you actually hear him say this or are you going on what you've read in a right wing Tory supporting newspaper? Sun/Mail/Express/Telegraph.

 

So you think what the op said is wrong ?

[JFKvsNixon]

A child is the easiest way for a young person to get a house, many young girls want to leave home but can't unless they have a child.

 

Do you think that the young girl has more disposable income after they've had the child or before they got pregnant?