Too many young mums knocking about
Scroll to see replies
Original post by F6053721
What is your dealing with people on benefits first hand other than passing judgement on people you happen to have live near you, or the assumptions you seem to make about "Asain and African immigrant families"?
I would love to know where your thoughts come from as I actually deal with benefit day in day out and can safely say that the stereotypical assumptions you just made are in fact. False.
Go hard or go home.
I would love to know where your thoughts come from as I actually deal with benefit day in day out and can safely say that the stereotypical assumptions you just made are in fact. False.
Go hard or go home.
I told you where my thoughts, and you've repeated them - from living with them.
So go on, tell us how my stereotypes of them are wrong. Please explain to me why there are so many young single mothers and broken homes.
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
Except that's not really how they are. They have made being on benefits a lifestyle choice. They get child support because they get knocked up in some drunken one-night-stand or FB relationship, or they don't have the resolve to keep a family together. That's what the kids are like around here - they have little contact with their father (if they even know them at all).
I live with these people and went to school with them - single parent families are the ****ing norm. And they were like this through good economic times not just the bad.
And it is a cultural thing because, funnily enough, Asian and African immigrant families don't seem to be as ****ed up. Of course you get benefits cheats from them too, but they are overt benefits cheats, as in they lie about illnesses and whatnot whilst at the same time working. They can work and they too should have their benefits taken from them. However, it was not a lifestyle that got them their benefits salaries, it's wilful deception. They often earn money on the side doing other things.
I live with these people and went to school with them - single parent families are the ****ing norm. And they were like this through good economic times not just the bad.
And it is a cultural thing because, funnily enough, Asian and African immigrant families don't seem to be as ****ed up. Of course you get benefits cheats from them too, but they are overt benefits cheats, as in they lie about illnesses and whatnot whilst at the same time working. They can work and they too should have their benefits taken from them. However, it was not a lifestyle that got them their benefits salaries, it's wilful deception. They often earn money on the side doing other things.
http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/21/single-parent-benefits-poverty-fear?cat=commentisfree&type=article
I think you'll find the people you know ARE the minority. 3% of single mothers are teenagers, not all of those teens will be benefit cheats.
57% of single mothers work, which rises to 71% when the child is over 12, the national average even for married women. Don't turn this into an attack on single mothers. They can be just as good at parenting as married couples. Also, do you not think that it's better for a child to grow up with one, loving parent than a father who doesn't want to be there/ doesn't love them? Do you not think that the 46% of single parents below the poverty line (of whom at least 43% aren't teen mothers) deserve to be able to raise their child properly? Also, if you took away benefits, would you be taking away the money that goes to parents of disabled children?
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
I told you where my thoughts, and you've repeated them - from living with them.
So go on, tell us how my stereotypes of them are wrong. Please explain to me why there are so many young single mothers and broken homes.
So go on, tell us how my stereotypes of them are wrong. Please explain to me why there are so many young single mothers and broken homes.
I wasn't disputing that there are young single mothers who exploit the benefit system. I am highlighting that you cannot culturally define a benefit cheat. It doesn't matter what age/race/class etc you are. If you have it in your character to commit fraud then that is what matters.
Broken homes exist in all aspects of civilisation. Madonna and Guy Ritchie's children for example technically now come from a broken home. That doesn't mean she is any less of a mother. But because she isn't working class or young she avoids stigma.
Teenagers can make capable mothers. They can also make capable employees who decide to work hard in a job and support children. (I've encountered many).
I'm not denying that there are young mothers who have a child for benefits. And that there are people who lie about their health to claim benefits.
But it can't be stereotyped. Not every young mum is a work dodging, money grabbing whore, and not every person on disability is lying about their health. Just like you can't stereotype the kind of fraud based upon their cultural heritage.
Go hard or go home.
It’s the responsibility of both the man and the woman to have safe sex, that’s it. Personally speaking I wouldn’t consent to sex with a man who didn’t use protection (I would use it too). I am twenty and I want to go to university without the possibility of pregnancy; everyone has their own beliefs and standards.
Original post by Garrow1564
It’s the responsibility of both the man and the woman to have safe sex, that’s it. Personally speaking I wouldn’t consent to sex with a man who didn’t use protection (I would use it too). I am twenty and I want to go to university without the possibility of pregnancy; everyone has their own beliefs and standards.
Exactly I agree. Either party has the option to say no because there's no protection.
Go hard or go home.
Original post by Sheldor
http://m.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/may/21/single-parent-benefits-poverty-fear?cat=commentisfree&type=article
I think you'll find the people you know ARE the minority. 3% of single mothers are teenagers, not all of those teens will be benefit cheats.
57% of single mothers work, which rises to 71% when the child is over 12, the national average even for married women. Don't turn this into an attack on single mothers. They can be just as good at parenting as married couples. Also, do you not think that it's better for a child to grow up with one, loving parent than a father who doesn't want to be there/ doesn't love them? Do you not think that the 46% of single parents below the poverty line (of whom at least 43% aren't teen mothers) deserve to be able to raise their child properly? Also, if you took away benefits, would you be taking away the money that goes to parents of disabled children?
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
I think you'll find the people you know ARE the minority. 3% of single mothers are teenagers, not all of those teens will be benefit cheats.
57% of single mothers work, which rises to 71% when the child is over 12, the national average even for married women. Don't turn this into an attack on single mothers. They can be just as good at parenting as married couples. Also, do you not think that it's better for a child to grow up with one, loving parent than a father who doesn't want to be there/ doesn't love them? Do you not think that the 46% of single parents below the poverty line (of whom at least 43% aren't teen mothers) deserve to be able to raise their child properly? Also, if you took away benefits, would you be taking away the money that goes to parents of disabled children?
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
To be clear, I'm not attacking only women, I'm attacking a culture which men contribute to as well. The men are just as culpable for this as they are.
So..
Only 3% of single mothers are teenagers,
So? obviously it's going to be small % since people stop being teenagers at 20.
a number to make misogynists gawp; 55% had their children within marriage;
So believing children are best had in marriage makes one a misogynist!? That would make a lot of people - women included - misogynists! Stupid Guardian leftardedness
It means 45% weren't in marriage, which is a huge proportion. Now, what is the percentage of those that are on benefits that had their kids out of marriage compared to those that didn't!?
Regardless, I don't much care whether people have kids in marriage or not, I care about benefits paid to them. The point about marriage is that it correlates with a stable family life and planning whereas some Essex tart knocked up in the toilets of a nightclub obviously did not have kids in mind.
57% of them work, an increase of 12% since 1997, and as soon as their children reach the age of 12 this figure rises to 71%,
So they should not be getting benefits. I'm not bothered with people looking after themselves. I'm talking about people on benefits. But I bet they resent having to shell out their income tax supporting people just like them who don't work.
Here's what I'll summarise, since I've said what I've had to say: There are consequences to actions, and an individual is responsible for his/her actions. They should be suffer/enjoy the consequences if they are bad/good. This is the natural world.
What we have is a phenomenon where people who want to live a certain lifestyle manage to offload some of the consequences of their actions on to the rest of society. It is not sustainable, because those who struggle through the difficulties of working and raising children in a strong family environment - who generate their own wealth and productive members of the next generation are told, well, despite your laudable efforts, there are these chavs who lived for the day (probably screaming out YOLO
) then when it came to reaping what they sowed they couldn't and now you have to support them.Like I say, there are far more deserving of charity than these people. I'm, happy to keep all the tax expended on them and instead send it to some place that suffered an earthquake or tsunami or something.
Original post by Skill
Yes and you're Welsh.
your point?
Original post by madders94
Was this in Rhyl? 
EDIT - Just seen it was in Bangor. The Bangor accent isn't that dirty, if you want a dirty Welsh accent, either go to the south east where even the women sound manly, or Rhyl where they all talk like Scousers. The accents along the west side of Wales (i.e, proper Wales
) are gorgeous. That said, Bangor is full of chavs. Again, Rhyl is much worse.
EDIT - Just seen it was in Bangor. The Bangor accent isn't that dirty, if you want a dirty Welsh accent, either go to the south east where even the women sound manly, or Rhyl where they all talk like Scousers. The accents along the west side of Wales (i.e, proper Wales
) are gorgeous. That said, Bangor is full of chavs. Again, Rhyl is much worse.Oh god... Rhyl... *shudders*
I'm against teenage pregnancy as much as the next person because it just doesn't work as well as having kids when you're older. However, one girl I went to school with had a baby at the age of 16 and she is by far one of the best mothers I have ever seen. You can't generalise to all teen mothers. I've never seen somebody spend so much time loving and taking care of their child.
It's the teenagers that don't bother with protection, sleep around, get knocked up and expect the system to take care of them that piss me off. Finish school, get a job and THEN you can have a family.
It's the teenagers that don't bother with protection, sleep around, get knocked up and expect the system to take care of them that piss me off. Finish school, get a job and THEN you can have a family.
Original post by Dirac Delta Function
To be clear, I'm not attacking only women, I'm attacking a culture which men contribute to as well. The men are just as culpable for this as they are.
So..
Only 3% of single mothers are teenagers,
So? obviously it's going to be small % since people stop being teenagers at 20.
a number to make misogynists gawp; 55% had their children within marriage;
So believing children are best had in marriage makes one a misogynist!? That would make a lot of people - women included - misogynists! Stupid Guardian leftardedness
It means 45% weren't in marriage, which is a huge proportion. Now, what is the percentage of those that are on benefits that had their kids out of marriage compared to those that didn't!?
Regardless, I don't much care whether people have kids in marriage or not, I care about benefits paid to them. The point about marriage is that it correlates with a stable family life and planning whereas some Essex tart knocked up in the toilets of a nightclub obviously did not have kids in mind.
57% of them work, an increase of 12% since 1997, and as soon as their children reach the age of 12 this figure rises to 71%,
So they should not be getting benefits. I'm not bothered with people looking after themselves. I'm talking about people on benefits. But I bet they resent having to shell out their income tax supporting people just like them who don't work.
Here's what I'll summarise, since I've said what I've had to say: There are consequences to actions, and an individual is responsible for his/her actions. They should be suffer/enjoy the consequences if they are bad/good. This is the natural world.
What we have is a phenomenon where people who want to live a certain lifestyle manage to offload some of the consequences of their actions on to the rest of society. It is not sustainable, because those who struggle through the difficulties of working and raising children in a strong family environment - who generate their own wealth and productive members of the next generation are told, well, despite your laudable efforts, there are these chavs who lived for the day (probably screaming out YOLO) then when it came to reaping what they sowed they couldn't and now you have to support them.
Like I say, there are far more deserving of charity than these people. I'm, happy to keep all the tax expended on them and instead send it to some place that suffered an earthquake or tsunami or something.
So..
Only 3% of single mothers are teenagers,
So? obviously it's going to be small % since people stop being teenagers at 20.
a number to make misogynists gawp; 55% had their children within marriage;
So believing children are best had in marriage makes one a misogynist!? That would make a lot of people - women included - misogynists! Stupid Guardian leftardedness
It means 45% weren't in marriage, which is a huge proportion. Now, what is the percentage of those that are on benefits that had their kids out of marriage compared to those that didn't!?
Regardless, I don't much care whether people have kids in marriage or not, I care about benefits paid to them. The point about marriage is that it correlates with a stable family life and planning whereas some Essex tart knocked up in the toilets of a nightclub obviously did not have kids in mind.
57% of them work, an increase of 12% since 1997, and as soon as their children reach the age of 12 this figure rises to 71%,
So they should not be getting benefits. I'm not bothered with people looking after themselves. I'm talking about people on benefits. But I bet they resent having to shell out their income tax supporting people just like them who don't work.
Here's what I'll summarise, since I've said what I've had to say: There are consequences to actions, and an individual is responsible for his/her actions. They should be suffer/enjoy the consequences if they are bad/good. This is the natural world.
What we have is a phenomenon where people who want to live a certain lifestyle manage to offload some of the consequences of their actions on to the rest of society. It is not sustainable, because those who struggle through the difficulties of working and raising children in a strong family environment - who generate their own wealth and productive members of the next generation are told, well, despite your laudable efforts, there are these chavs who lived for the day (probably screaming out YOLO
) then when it came to reaping what they sowed they couldn't and now you have to support them.Like I say, there are far more deserving of charity than these people. I'm, happy to keep all the tax expended on them and instead send it to some place that suffered an earthquake or tsunami or something.
I was staring the facts, not agreeing with the authors choice of words. Those who are working aren't receiving benefits(Excluding child benefits, which everyone earning under 40k gets anyway, something which I think should be changed to help only those who need it), so I really don't know what you mean. You're stereotyping and making far too many assumptions. How would you know that they resent paying income tax? Do you know every singke parent?(9% of whom, I must note, are men?) You keep stereotyping, and the worst thing is you're so narrow minded you don't even seem to realise and take it as fact. Also, and I don't know how many times I have to say this, but not all single mothers "got knocked up in a nightclub" and not all marriages "show planning". Many people who get married rush into it, or do it because they are pregnant and don't want the stigma people like yourself present with single parenthood. Again, do you think a loving single parent home is worse than a marriage where the mother is depressed and the father abusive, or adulterous, or absent from the home?
I know that the "YOLO" single parent chavs exist, I'm just saying that they are a minority and people shouldn't be punished for the minorities carelessness. What about the 46% living below the poverty line? Do you not agree that someone who is that poor should receive help? I don't know how many times I'm going to have to ask you this, but do you agree with a voucher and coupon system which allows those single parents living under the poverty line to give their children a better life? Vouchers for food, clothes, electricity and heating, which would allow for no exploitation by the minority of frauds. Also, you presented the teen mother as the average single parent, which is why I had to give that statistic.
Having a child in or out of marriage doesn't affect wether you receive benefits in terms of the type of person. It depends on wether that person can find work, if they get payed well in a divorce and if the father has custody, as well as if he pays child support/towards the children's upkeep.
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
this thread is depressing
Original post by rubber-dam
It is the OP's problem if he is working and is paying towards the benefits that these young teenage parents receive.
Just because he is paying for them to survive, does not mean he is paying to control their lives and how they behave. He does not own their lives and he did not buy their lives
Original post by Eboracum
Ok. The sterilisation media comment...a bad joke. I apologise if it caused offence. That was never the intention. It is not the direction our country needs and would make us one of the worst human rights offenders in the world. I was fishing.
I also don't believe it is about class, as you mentioned. 90% or above of the working classes are really great people. They work hard, they pay their way and shouldn't be demonised as simply "scroungers". The book called "Chavs" highlights this and is a great read for how the working classes have been demonised.
What I would say though is that, I believe there are some problems that need to be addressed. I think that we have an unsustainable welfare state, and we have an entitlement problem. And governments cannot hide from the fact that amoungst a very small percentage of all classes, there is a view that the state will pay for as many children as possible. And it's unfair to everyone else. That's why I couldn't understand the uproar when George Osborne announced his child benefit cut. It is not unreasonable to ask somebody earning over 40k a year to fund their own children.
If I was in government, I would do nothing from my original post. But what I would do is look at ways that further cuts can be made to child benefit. And I don't believe that it is a minority that want that. I've worked with people from all different walks of life. A tougher welfare state particularly with policies to children are what a lot of people want, left and right of the political spectrum.
I also don't believe it is about class, as you mentioned. 90% or above of the working classes are really great people. They work hard, they pay their way and shouldn't be demonised as simply "scroungers". The book called "Chavs" highlights this and is a great read for how the working classes have been demonised.
What I would say though is that, I believe there are some problems that need to be addressed. I think that we have an unsustainable welfare state, and we have an entitlement problem. And governments cannot hide from the fact that amoungst a very small percentage of all classes, there is a view that the state will pay for as many children as possible. And it's unfair to everyone else. That's why I couldn't understand the uproar when George Osborne announced his child benefit cut. It is not unreasonable to ask somebody earning over 40k a year to fund their own children.
If I was in government, I would do nothing from my original post. But what I would do is look at ways that further cuts can be made to child benefit. And I don't believe that it is a minority that want that. I've worked with people from all different walks of life. A tougher welfare state particularly with policies to children are what a lot of people want, left and right of the political spectrum.
We certainly do. Politicians who think they are entitled to fiddle expenses. Banks who think they are entitled to have their losses paid for by the tax payer. Businesses who think they are entitled to have wages subsidised by the taxpayer. Politicians who think they are entitled to sell off the national infrastructure to their mates.
morals and social concepts come and go so i pay attention to biology which says humans should breed at 15-25
you cant pick science its a fact
what i hate is women that put the career first and then at 40 decide they want a family so they go through ivf and dilute the gene pool with genetic conditions such as downes (nothing against people with the condition) which is seriously increased by breeding past the natural breeding ages, its selfish and stupid to even risk it
if you chose you career you cant later play nature
you cant pick science its a fact
what i hate is women that put the career first and then at 40 decide they want a family so they go through ivf and dilute the gene pool with genetic conditions such as downes (nothing against people with the condition) which is seriously increased by breeding past the natural breeding ages, its selfish and stupid to even risk it
if you chose you career you cant later play nature
Original post by Skill
Honestly it's actually ridiculous. There are far too many young mums, be it teens or early twenties who are uneducated, having a bad attitude and many ugly as people all round. They literally have kids just to create their lifestyle. I don't get why women love to blame the man who 'did a runner' - clearly by the amount of young single mums out there it is not a mistake (the baby). As a woman you carry responsibility of pregnancy. It is your job to ensure that the man is protected (seeing as you are too arrogant to use protection yourself). I really don't get it. Blame the man etc, if you don't want to get pregnant don't have sex with some toerag! It generally just annoys me. I work in retail and the mum with baby in tow combo is the most common to visit my store. All I see all day is young mum with child, young mum with child - and I can instantly tell most of these young girls are single mums etc.
Seeing all these uneducated, poorly mannered, stuck up, ugly women rolling down the street or park with their babies in tow living with this victim mentality. Ugly. They deserve nothing.
Discuss.
Seeing all these uneducated, poorly mannered, stuck up, ugly women rolling down the street or park with their babies in tow living with this victim mentality. Ugly. They deserve nothing.
Discuss.
have to totally agree, i see this all the time
i dont want to hear that 'accidents happen' - there is a MAX 7 day window for a woman to conceive, the egg is there to be fertilized for 24 hours and then it dies, the fact is getting pregnant is not usually THAT easy, you have to have sex at the right time etc
i think many people who describe 'accidents' actually intended to get pregnant but didnt want to admit it because their life was not in the right place and they dont want looking down on for their morally corrupt decision
these mothers who have children this young tend to be stupid, uneducated, yes ugly looking and to be honest dont have anything else going on in their life, so they want to be 'mummy' because it gives them a purpose in life which they lack
the sad thing is these kids will grow up to be wastes of space like their mothers
i dont care if anyone dislikes this post, i have a huge problem with the lack of regard for a stable childhood with two loving parents, you cannot replace it and many of these selfish bints just do not care what they are doing to their childrens lives
Original post by kiss_me_now9
23 years old and pregnant is very different to 15 and pregnant.
23 is very different to even 19, 20 with regards to maturity
im in my mid late 20s and have a little girl, both me and my girlfriend had our own house and worked at this point, and still do
imo people need mum and dad together and stable first before any babies should come
some people are so selfish
Original post by badcheesecrispy
have to totally agree, i see this all the time
i dont want to hear that 'accidents happen' - there is a MAX 7 day window for a woman to conceive, the egg is there to be fertilized for 24 hours and then it dies, the fact is getting pregnant is not usually THAT easy, you have to have sex at the right time etc
i think many people who describe 'accidents' actually intended to get pregnant but didnt want to admit it because their life was not in the right place and they dont want looking down on for their morally corrupt decision
these mothers who have children this young tend to be stupid, uneducated, yes ugly looking and to be honest dont have anything else going on in their life, so they want to be 'mummy' because it gives them a purpose in life which they lack
the sad thing is these kids will grow up to be wastes of space like their mothers
i dont care if anyone dislikes this post, i have a huge problem with the lack of regard for a stable childhood with two loving parents, you cannot replace it and many of these selfish bints just do not care what they are doing to their childrens lives
i dont want to hear that 'accidents happen' - there is a MAX 7 day window for a woman to conceive, the egg is there to be fertilized for 24 hours and then it dies, the fact is getting pregnant is not usually THAT easy, you have to have sex at the right time etc
i think many people who describe 'accidents' actually intended to get pregnant but didnt want to admit it because their life was not in the right place and they dont want looking down on for their morally corrupt decision
these mothers who have children this young tend to be stupid, uneducated, yes ugly looking and to be honest dont have anything else going on in their life, so they want to be 'mummy' because it gives them a purpose in life which they lack
the sad thing is these kids will grow up to be wastes of space like their mothers
i dont care if anyone dislikes this post, i have a huge problem with the lack of regard for a stable childhood with two loving parents, you cannot replace it and many of these selfish bints just do not care what they are doing to their childrens lives
Ok, women don't know when that seven day window is unless they are actively trying to conceive and using charts and whatever, plus you can still get pregnant outside that window (eg.,during menstruation, if the egg had not left the uterus.)The 7 day thing is assuming the woman has a 28 day cycle, which is an average. Many/most women have irregular cycles, shorter or longer menstruation times, shorter or longer wait between fertility windows. It's incredibly hard to predict these things unless you have a regular cycle. Not every woman has the same 7 day window, some have longer, some have shorter. Also, sperm can survive for a certain amount of time until the egg is ready fit fertilisation.
I know many single mothers(and I've met many), and they all have different stories. One of them was raped. One of them had a fiancé who left when he found out because he didnt want kids. One of them can't take the pill or morning after pill due to medical problems. My friends mother is divorced, another friends mother is a widow, my friends cousins ex husband was abusive and she had to leave because she feared for her future child's life. Don't insist that single mothers are all pariahs, because it's not true. Also, you can't say the kids will be "a waste of space"
http://www.justparents.com/blog/2011/08/celebrities-raised-by-single-parents/ = list of celebrities raised by single parents, including JK Rowling, Lance Armstrong and John Lennon. We aren't even counting academics, doctors or lawyers here.
This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
wow! i just searched single mum hoping to find a thread where i could possible meet other parents studying at my university and the first post i read says "Seeing all these uneducated, poorly mannered, stuck up, ugly women rolling down the street or park with their babies in tow living with this victim mentality. Ugly. They deserve nothing" ...just wow. my mind is blown by just how ignorant some people are
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 5 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 5 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 5 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
