Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Donald J Trump)
    So what do you propose?
    That the state is there for those who are unable to take care of themselves. Children are, by definition, unable to take care of themselves.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by spv)
    I agree, but what happens to the children then? The actions of their mother shouldn't be the kids' cross to bear.
    Should they be ours to bear? If people weren't handed so much free money, then people like her wouldn't have such a big litter in the first place.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katty3)
    That the state is there for those who are unable to take care of themselves. Children are, by definition, unable to take care of themselves.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The children will be looked after whatever happens.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katty3)
    That the state is there for those who are unable to take care of themselves. Children are, by definition, unable to take care of themselves.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So you propose the state hive them 20k a year until they are all 16 years old. The best option is to evict and take x
    Children into social services. 26k is the average wage here in the uk she is getting 20 for sitting on her ass. What about the other struggling families? Who have to live on the goodwill of others throygh cimpanies and people donating to foodbanks. I dont mind low paid workers getting some help along with tbe disabled but she is taking the piss and the father is for not putting up any money
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    As long as the govt and society sanction these peoples lifestyle people will continue to exploit it.
    I'm afraid coerced forced sterilization is the answer.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Good. Thats one change this Tory government have done which was needed, limiting child £££'s to two kids.

    Freeloading scrounger should not have had 8 kids. Pumping out kids for others to pay you for is not a career. I hope she is sterilised and kids put into care of somebody much more responsible
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Donald J Trump)
    So you propose the state hive them 20k a year until they are all 16 years old. The best option is to evict and take x
    Children into social services. 26k is the average wage here in the uk she is getting 20 for sitting on her ass. What about the other struggling families? Who have to live on the goodwill of others throygh cimpanies and people donating to foodbanks. I dont mind low paid workers getting some help along with tbe disabled but she is taking the piss and the father is for not putting up any money
    That's not in the best interests of the child; which is paramount according to the Children Act 1989.

    Foodbanks are disgusting. People should not have to rely on the charity of those who will hold it against them. We should not have people begging for food in one of the richest countries in the world.

    We should have a universal living wage.

    We don't have enough foster carers or places in children's homes to take into care all children with parents on benefits. Nor should we. Families should not be cruelly divided because they are poor. Families shouldn't be divided when there is no cruelty and only love in that household.

    You are turning poor against poorer while the rich sit idly by. They can't hear us screaming across the Great Divide. To paraphrase from one of my favourite musicians.

    The working class keeps less of the profits that they produce than they did in the 1930s.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Not going to advocate children are taken away from a caring mother (for all you know, she is)

    Irresponsible yes but at the end of it a fraction compared to what the corporations are robbing from us
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katty3)
    That's not in the best interests of the child; which is paramount according to the Children Act 1989.

    Foodbanks are disgusting. People should not have to rely on the charity of those who will hold it against them. We should not have people begging for food in one of the richest countries in the world.

    We should have a universal living wage.

    We don't have enough foster carers or places in children's homes to take into care all children with parents on benefits. Nor should we. Families should not be cruelly divided because they are poor. Families shouldn't be divided when there is no cruelty and only love in that household.

    You are turning poor against poorer while the rich sit idly by. They can't hear us screaming across the Great Divide. To paraphrase from one of my favourite musicians.

    The working class keeps less of the profits that they produce than they did in the 1930s.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Who cares? A Living wage-to earn a living wage you need to work she doesn't
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Donald J Trump)
    Who cares? A Living wage-to earn a living wage you need to work she doesn't
    I care. So does the rest of the Trade Union movement and the Labour movement.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Well I'm assuming she must be using the Child Tax Credit +Child Benefit to feed herself and pay the rent which I think is child neglect as that money is to look after the children not to look after you.You receive no income yourself unless you are looking for work or disabled.Classifying this as child neglect would solve issues of people having children to survive.My mam was classed as disabled then got removed of the benefit and then went on JSA and then went onto carer's allowance for her mother and then when she died she went back on JSA.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    She's a weird case, but it seems that the law was in enforced correctly due to her missing payments. The problem she and many upcoming people who do not deserve benefits forget that benefits are a privilege and not a right. I've read some articles about her and after seeing that she failed to pay her housing rent to due to no logical reason, I have to side with law here. Also, the fact that she 8 children in a climate where benefits can change quite rapidly shows me that she fits the term of "benefit scum".

    I want her children to be safe, I really do but If I have to follow the law, so should she.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Katty3)
    I care. So does the rest of the Trade Union movement and the Labour movement.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I think a living wage is good all o said is they need to earn it not expect ot given to them
    Should have her children talk away like the alchy who hits his kids down the street its influence, what if her kods have 8 each- how does the state sustain that
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Slutty Salafi)
    Sell them for medical experiments.
    Good idea, or we could sell them as food?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TSRFT8)
    The people with your views are the ones who are paying little to no tax and therefore just dont care. Your point is actually comical that we should let others like her open her legs and breed like their is no tomorrow and expect tax payers to pay with their earnt money. In addition this isnt in London it is in Birmingham, so that sob story isnt going to wash. Furthermore no one is forcing "poor" families, this lady is just scrounging on benefits and has done several interviews saying she doesnt need to work and she gets enough from the welfare state.

    To say that the tax payers should keep funding this parasite is quite comical as the kids would receive much better care and quality of life if their useless mother was taken out of the equation. And no the reason why their mother has so many kids is NOT irrelevant as otherwise whats stopping every woman on the planet having 10 kids and putting their hands out to the government to give them some more money.

    I can't believe anyone would be so daft as to have 8 kids in ******* Birmingham!!

    Should have had em in the Big Smoke.



    As regards your question,I see no reason why the taxpayer shouldn't pay for others children as being a mother is a far more important job than most.

    In fact I'd say it's one of the best uses of your money.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by YaliaV)
    Should they be ours to bear? If people weren't handed so much free money, then people like her wouldn't have such a big litter in the first place.
    Got any proof that would be the case?


    When it comes down to it, this is about a person who.desperately needs the money being denied it so those that don't can feel better about themselves.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Slutty Salafi)
    Sell them for medical experiments.
    They're not worth much if they're not twins.

    You can do a lot with a set of twins.


    Apparently.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Donald J Trump)
    I think a living wage is good all o said is they need to earn it not expect ot given to them
    Should have her children talk away like the alchy who hits his kids down the street its influence, what if her kods have 8 each- how does the state sustain that

    Well they could build an extension.

    And maybe add an attic room.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Donald J Trump)
    I think a living wage is good all o said is they need to earn it not expect ot given to them
    Should have her children talk away like the alchy who hits his kids down the street its influence, what if her kods have 8 each- how does the state sustain that
    The working class keeps less of the money that they bring in than they did in 1926.

    Living conditions for the working class remain abhorrent in some quarters.

    It is the wealthy that have a call to answer to, not large, poor families that are just getting poorer.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by moggis)
    I can't believe anyone would be so daft as to have 8 kids in ******* Birmingham!!

    Should have had em in the Big Smoke.



    As regards your question,I see no reason why the taxpayer shouldn't pay for others children as being a mother is a far more important job than most.

    In fact I'd say it's one of the best uses of your money.
    I think the dad should be forced tp pay something. They probably split after the eighth so the state would pay for the kids. They need to tax the father 60 percent until everything is paid back
 
 
 

1,697

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should universities take a stronger line on drugs?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.