BS: Generous Britain

Subject: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Martin
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 06:03 AM

Teenage girls are getting pregnant on purpose to giv them a better standard of life.

Young mums reckon having a baby will let them escape a drudery of taking a low paid job.
It will give them a home of their own and they can collect generous state benefits and enjoy a better life.

Researchers who carried out the survey shows a quarter of pregnancies to girls under 18 are second ones proving soaring numbers of teens are having children by choice.

Researchers spoke to young mums and dads aged 13 to 22 living in Britain and found the vast majority did not regret having a child.

Dr. Lester Coleman who headed the survey by the Trust for the study of Adolescence said, These youngsters accounts will be of great value. Many that we spoke to laughed at just how soft the government policy on state benefits really are, one said it's like money from America ! We get a house, it's also fully kitted out for us top to bottom and with two kids you can rack in at least 200.00 pounds for yourself after all the bills are paid, it's great.

Goes to show how leeches can live of the rest of us.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 07:50 AM

It just goes to show that the quality of the average British male is so low that girls would rather be single parents than put up with a low quality man in their lives.

In "the old days" girls got pregnant on purpose so that the father would have to marry them they then got a home and income for minding the kids. The only thing that has changed is that now they have the choice of if they take the man or just the home and income and a lot of them are chosing to just have the home and income, why?

I do not see where you get the idea that because a teanage pregnancy is a second one that it "proves" that they are going it on purpose. there is a level of sex education provided that would enable most people to know that unprotected sex will cause pregnancy, so if it is a first or second pregnancy hat is the diffference.

I do not think that if you asked any Mum or Dad if they regretted having a child they would say yes.

If teenage girls are getting pregnant on purpose just to give them a better standard of life, then something should be done to improve the standard of live that they have...

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Sooz
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 08:20 AM

From BBC News
"The study, for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation suggested girls as young as 13 choose motherhood to be independent and to create "a loving family".

The researchers said their findings show teenagers are not ignorant about contraception, as is often assumed, and actively plan to have a baby.

The study found that many of those who became pregnant as teenagers had wanted to compensate for their own bad experiences as childhood.

They said that if they had not become a parent, their life would become worse because of continued family disruption and unhappiness.

In many cases, teenagers understood how contraception worked but did not know that their age group had a high fertility rate."

I'll second what Kara said: "If teenage girls are getting pregnant on purpose just to give them a better standard of life, then something should be done to improve the standard of live that they have... "

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Beth.
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 08:27 AM

Most are little tramps. Why should we provide for them ? Keep their legs closed would be sound advice. If you know any, ignore them and make them feel like the tarts they really are.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 08:36 AM

Nonsense Cara, at least if those figures are correct. How many decent young men do you think would be able find a job that would support all that and give the female £200 spending money?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Dave Hanson
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 08:53 AM

An article in todays Yorkshire Post quted a recent survey of late teens/early twenties young women, number one ambition..................
to be a footballers wife, most admired woman..............Victoria Beckham, who recently admitted to never having read a book, I despair.

eric

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 09:24 AM

A mother and baby hostel instead of a council flat might lessen the appeal of the independance via a baby route. They could, have a central creche, and the girls could go to work, college or school as required to complete their education/growing up. Communal living and eating and a little pocket money for those not earning, would give them friends and support when they most need it.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 09:37 AM

Good thinking Giok.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: jacqui.c
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 09:45 AM

Agreed Giok - I think that a lot of the problem here arises from the environment that many of these girls come from. not just the home but peer groups and home location can have a lot of influence.

I got pregnant at 17, due to ignorance - there was very little sex education at that time and my mother told me virtually nothing. I came from a family where affection was non-existent and any attention from others was sought, whatever the cost. As a result I took my father to court to get permission to get married. Looking back I could have gone a different route but I do not regret any of my life. I was lucky - I was able to go into further education when my kids were at school and have done quite well, overall.

However, I do understand where these kids are coming from - if we can't, or won't make much of an effort to remedy the cause then re-education of the 'problem' seems to be the most sensible way to go, if only to try and break the vicious circle of the children of these mothers believing that this is the easiest way of life.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 10:15 AM

No chance of ever buying a house. No chance of finding a man who can provide a roof and support. No education worth speaking of. A society that worships people from similar backgrounds who become celebrities. Educated, high earning women opting not to have children. What do we as a society expect?
The saddest thought though is of the resulting children...no father.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Grandmother
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 10:47 AM

Motherhood is a natural function of any woman. Mothers should be supported - it is a very difficult job. To denigrate young women who give birth is pretty low. Why not question the refusal of absent fathers to provide for their children?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 11:40 AM

There is a surprisingly large percentage of these young Mothers who will not give the name of the father, and in some instances actively do not want the father in their lives. If we adopted the route I suggested prviously, and these mothers were not automatically catered for and housed as they are now, then perhaps they would have more need of a father for their child. If they are housed, furnished and provided for by the council and the government, of course they don't need a partner. That's the way some of them want it, as having the the child means an escape from the family home, and often inadequate parent/s.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST, Topsie
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 11:57 AM

The original post starts by talking about teenage girls, then girls under 18. The next statement is about researchers speaking to young mums AND DADS aged 13 to 22.
It doesn't say whether those over 16 were married or not, but the fact that the 'dads' are included suggests that at least some of them had partners, whether or not they had married them.
Yet many of the susequent posts have assumed the girls had not stayed with their children's father(s). Does this tell us more about the girls' critics than about the girls themselves?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 12:32 PM

Kara was the poster [second post]who introduced the anti-male aspect of this thread, and subsequent posts have responded to that.
G..

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 01:09 PM

Yhe biggest critics of these girls are probably childless or men who have abandoned their own children.

Guilt and envy make bitter people.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 01:58 PM

In many parts of the US, in order to receive social services money from the government, it is required that mothers not only inform their social services agency of the father's identity, but to also help the government (when possible) in its efforts to collect child support from the child's father. I wonder if something like that would help in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 02:32 PM

They are supposed to do so here Carol, but if they say they had lots of partners, and don't know all their names, or any of their names, then what do the social services do?
We have a government agency called the Child Support Agency, and their job is to chase absentee fathers for maintenance, the whole agency is an inefficient shambles, and it is costing about £12000 for every £3000 collected, or something rdiculous like that.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: CarolC
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 03:25 PM

I see. Sounds like a difficult situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 03:41 PM

What teen-aged girl would give up her freedom for a life of servitude? Thats what you're saying when you state that, "Teenage girls are getting pregnant on purpose to giv them a better standard of life." Being a mother is not an easy way out and the amount of money you receive on welfare is not enough to raise anybody's standard of living significantly. If it happens to raise the standard of living in a girl's life, you have to look at the reason why she is living so far below the poverty line. I know alot of single mom's and not one of them got pregnant so they could live off the dole.

Dead beat dads is another topic entirely but I will comment on it since it has come into the thread. When a young girl is pregnant and her boyfriend is unwilling or unable to care for her and the child, its not a good idea to turn him into the authorities if you want your child to have any kind of relationship with the father. There is always the possibility that as the young man matures and bonds with the baby, he may, at a later date provide support when he is able. Once you 'turn him in' there is no chance for a healthy relationship between the father and his family. Besides that, most teen-aged fathers aren't able to support themselves, let alone a family.

There is a also very real possibility that by 'turning him in' you might be making things worse. Men can become extremely violent when it comes to 'their' money. In fact, most people wouldn't want you to give their name to the authorities for any reason what-so-ever. If there is is any hope that these young women might be able to salvage their lives, turning in the names of the fathers will not help.

...and if these girls are, in fact, teen-agers; responsible parents would help them out. I think these young girls have enough to worry about without being condemned by society, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: jacqui.c
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 03:56 PM

Dianavan

That's the problem in a lot of these cases.

Quite often the mother of a girl had her children in her teens, maybe unmarried as well. There are a lot of feckless parents around as well - they don't do the job that they should be doing and so the circle goes round.

There have a been a number of interviews with these single mothers and, in the UK, this DOES happen. Trust me, at 15, 16, 17... you really don't think about the 'burden' that a baby or babies will be. It is seen as a way to make a living without having to find a job, to get away from an unsatisfactory home life, maybe to have someone who will show you some love. Putting that kind of load on a baby is not good but since when did most teenagers think about the real consequences of most of their acts?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 04:11 PM

You're right, jacqui, they have no idea how much work is involved in raising the child. In Canada, many teachers give their students an egg or other object that needs to be cared for as if it were a baby. The object has to be fed and the diapers changed at set times. There are other built-in needs so that they get 'the idea'.

Perhaps they should also introduce the financial component. In other words they should be given the same amount of money they would get on welfare and then have to pay for all the necessaties for two lives. Seems to me this would be a good course for all teen-agers.

The problem, of course, is that most of these pregnant girls have probably dropped out of school long ago. Seems to me that the real issue here, is education. What are they doing having unsafe sex anyway?

Instead of wasting time and money on trying to collect from 'dead-beat dads' they should transfer that money to the education system for educational programs aimed at stopping this trend. Is it just Britain or is this problem rampant in other countries with welfare systems? Just how prevalent is this problem or is it just another means of scapegoating?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 04:22 PM

"What are they doing having unsafe sex anyway?"

Quite often, knowingly getting themselves pregnant.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 04:26 PM

I have absolutely no doubt that educating young girls is the way to go. I worked with pregnant 'teenage' girls and subsequently teenage mothers for over ten years....Almost a third of those girls were pregnant by their own father and the majority were pregnant by men over 35 yrs of age....The reason that they all gave was to do with where the 'LOVE' came from in their lives. Almost without exception they believed that they would gain independence and a flat of their own with the child they were going to lavish love on...In most cases and realising that they had been taken advantage of, they ended up giving up the baby they could not manage for adoption .
Let's educate girls from an early age as to what is right and what is wrong on the sexual front....in my mind the younger the better to prevent abuse and the taking advantage by older predatory males. Also let's teach those young girls what the reality of motherhood is in an effort to prevent the eventual rejection of their child.
Am I making sense here?
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: number 6
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 04:35 PM

Mike (you are making sense) ... Saint John NB has the highest percentage of unwed teenage pregnancies in Canada ... they have an extensive program just what you proposed here ... unfortunately it doesn't make an impact.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 04:39 PM

Unfortunately, whilst there are 'unconventional' Dads and predatory men in Canada as well as the UK...it will persist....does that also make sense? The education should be specific as to when sex is permissible.....if that is at all possible.
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 05:00 PM

"The education should be specific as to when sex is permissible....."

In B.C. we do teach our children (from K-12) that its O.K. to say no and how to get help if you needed. I think thats a very different topic than concensual sex. Trouble is, when they get to be teen-agers, the hormones do not pay any attention to what is socially permissable.

I, too, have worked with teen-agers and have found that most of these kids need a 'reality check'. They need to understand that a baby is not a 'get home free' card. The best way to do that is to give them a 'fake' baby for a couple of weeks and see if they can keep it alive.

Number 6 - Can you please explain in more detail the programs that are available in NB? I would also be interested in the stats before and after the program was introduced. When I talk to kids about the 'fake baby' program and the 'roots of empathy' program, I have heard only positive comments. The kids actually get attached to the babies and begin to care about the needs of others.

I don't think the problem will ever vanish but I do think that we can do alot to educate kids about the realities of parenthood. Perhaps another positive step would be to make a parenting course mandatory for anyone receiving social assistance. I think we are guilty of throwing money at these kids and then sending them away to deal with their problems in isolation. Its just a little too easy to give them money and think that this will solve their problems.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 05:42 PM

What teen-aged girl would give up her freedom for a life of servitude?

They don't see it as that, they see it as having something to love and be loved by unconditionally.
As for the question on unprotected sex, we also have one of the highest figures for STDs in the UK as well, so it's no wonder we have so many pregnancies.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: number 6
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 06:03 PM

dianavan ... check the blue clicky ... as per stats I'm not aware of them but will make an effort to get some ... my knowledge is 'from what I hear' and even see on the streets ... many, many young child mothers .. one positive aspect of the program is 'post care' on dealing with motherhood (care, health, and advice).

SJ Teen Pregnancy

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: number 6
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 06:07 PM

Mike ... "Almost a third of those girls were pregnant by their own father and the majority were pregnant by men over 35 yrs of age"

that is disturbing ... very disturbing.

sIx

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 06:23 PM

The sad thing is Number six that many girls who are looking for love...to be cared for...to feel protected....are given that by much older men and actively seek it in a so called 'Father figure'...some find it in their own Father but the 'closeness' develops into something more than one would expect and others find someone they admire...often appearing as a powerful person but who may be weak and/or predatory and the relationship 'happens'. The saddest thing of all is when the teenage girls actually realise what they have done and how it can affect the rest of their lives.....some tried suicide...some ran away...some made a decision to 'grow up' with whatever help they could muster. Many gave up their children for adoption, being unable to cope with the stresses and strains of motherhood and in spite of all the help they were given. At the end of the day they have been taken advantage of by older men....perhaps weak men who found difficulty in their own lives and relationships.
Life happens but aint it crap for some..sometimes.
There were times when my heart bled for those kids...especially a twelve year old..pregnant by her own father....he went to prison..but hey..did that help her?
Best wishes. Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 18 Jul 06 - 06:29 PM

I would like to apologies to all the men in the UK who are not useless and take responsibility for their acts.

Single parent hostels are not great. I lived in one for a year with 5 other single mother, durring that time 3 of them became pregnant and two became crack addicts.

I would be very interested to know if this figure £200 spending money is a week, a month or a year. I suspect it is a month and frankly any "decent young man" who can't earn enough to run a house hold and come up with some spending money shouldn't be getting people pregnant.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 02:59 AM

Totally agree with that Kara but for one thing..it takes two people!
Can't imagine the amorous young (or older) layabout will stop and say..."oops better not do this (with or without protection) because I won't have enough money to support you if you get pregnant" or the girl asking "If I get pregnant would you be able to support....?"
Maybe that should happen but in reality not everyone is that careful.
Best wishes, Mike.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 03:07 AM

I lost a couple of posts to this thread in last nights Mudcrash.

A lot of this thread really looks like a load of old farts upset because some people are having sex and it isn't them.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 05:20 AM

You may say that Richard, but I couldn't possibly comment.

Kara I am at a loss to follow the reasoning about decent young men who can't earn enough to run a household, shouldn't be getting girls pregnant.
I'm afraid that married or otherwise, if people waited till they could afford to bring up a child and keep a house properly ,the population decline would get even steeper.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Sooz
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 05:37 AM

In my school we use a computerised virtual baby to give young people a weekends worth of what it is like to be a parent. Some sail through the weekend and others find it hell. (Isn't it the same in real life?)
Coupled with good sex and relationships education this has meant that we have very very few pregnancies. However, many girls seem to become pregnant during the year after they leave school when the grown up world doesn't keep all the promises they have been mad during their education

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 05:54 AM

There are two comments in all this that have not been viewed in connection with each other.

Somebody mentioned the fact that high flying career women are choosing not to start families. Giok mentioned the decline in population.

Add to these the fact that the UK is rapidly becoming a nation of old age pensioners, and it becomes obvious that, far from being an expensive liability, these young women may be essential in securing the future of the UK.

They are, for whatever reasons, raising the taxpayers and voters of the future, whose revenue will support those who bitch about them in THEIR old age.

Surely then it is right and proper to give them reasonable support, while ensuring that their kids will be educated into better ways of living.

'tain't rocket science, is it?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 06:52 AM

Yes Don is right.

And can hormones be that wrong. Some people do want to have a baby in their teens and make great parents.

I had a baby at 19, her father aged 21 could not cope and became violent so I left him. I did not wish to risk turning him in to the authorities and he was not forth coming with maintenence payments. Not because he could not pay just because he did not want to give me money.
I lived in poverty with my daughter but consider that the time and love I was able to give her vastly outweighed anything money could buy. She is now in her third year at University studying Psychology.

I now own my own home, have a fantastic husband, and 3 more kids all of whom I stayed with for the first 5 years of their lives.

At 41 I would not want to be looing after small kids, where as at 21 I loved it!

Women can chose to have kids or not have kids, to have a husband or not, to have a job or not, these are right that have been fought for and should be given the up most respect, God knows they have put up with a load of shit over the years. Being lock up in the looney bin for getting pregnant out of wedlock. Seeing their kids die poverty because the father would not acknowledge them. Being slaves to horrible husbands who they had to marry because they had become pregnant.

These girls need all the support they can get not slaggin off.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 06:58 AM

So at least we now understand where your hang up on men comes from, Kara.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: The PA
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:12 AM

I understand that this is a very volatile subject. I have worked full time all my life (30+ years) and raised a family and paid my dues.

But really Beth to describe them all and tramps and tarts is really going too far.

That is simply too much. I am assuming you do not know all of the people in this situation personally. How do you know each individual persons circumstances or social history. What gives you the right to describe people in such a way.

I hope you will think again before reacting in such an unfair manner.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 08:33 AM

Maybe some of you should read freakonomics:
http://www.freakonomics.com/ch4.php

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 10:00 AM

freakanomics



There's the link. Of course there are lies, damned lies, and statistics....

But I like it.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: freda underhill
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 10:11 AM

Young single mothers perform a very important function in society. They give a lot of grumpy peope something to bitch about. They should be appreciated for the role they play. They take people's minds off important things like tax breaks for the ritch, government corruption and how to get rid of your dog's fleas.

It's very, very important to keep bitching on about single mothers - it shows you have your priorities right. you can pick on their children too, doing that will help develop your debating skills and build your self esteem.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Grab
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 10:24 AM

Young mums reckon having a baby will let them escape a drudery of taking a low paid job. It will give them a home of their own and they can collect generous state benefits and enjoy a better life.

Well, that's what they think. Are they right?

We get a house, it's also fully kitted out for us top to bottom

A "fully kitted out" council house means intact windows - back in the real world, that's the best you're going to get. Turn it down, and you'd better have somewhere else to live, bcos it takes a year to get anywhere else.

and with two kids you can rack in at least 200.00 pounds for yourself after all the bills are paid, it's great.

This sounds like some teenager who's yet to find out how much things cost. £200 a month ain't too bad for providing food and clothing for a mother and two babies. For providing food and clothing for a mother and two school-age kids, it's pretty damn short.

And I'd like to know where the £200 figure came from. If it's from getting a second job whilst also claiming benefits - well, you can get away with it for a bit, but these days it's all computerised and they'll catch up with you eventually, and the result is often jail time.

Researchers spoke to young mums and dads aged 13 to 22 living in Britain and found the vast majority did not regret having a child.

And what were people expecting? That they'd say, "I hate having a child", in the presence of people who are recording what they're saying and could pass the results on to the welfare services? Even then, the basic fact of parenthood is that no matter how horrible their kids are, there's very few parents who regret having them, bcos it's too deeply embedded in the animal fact of parenthood.

Also remember that they're young. There's plenty of people who get the midlife crisis thing of reaching 35-40 and realising that they're working themselves to death for no benefit to themselves. If they're going to, *that's* where these girls are likely to regret it, not when they're 15-20 and it still looks like a big game.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: The PA
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 11:56 AM

HERE, HERE, FREDA UNDERHILL !

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 12:31 PM

I'd like to know more about the crime vs unwanted pregancy theory (link above). It makes sense to me because the point is really whether or not a woman wants a child. Could it be true that abortion has reduced the crime rate? If so, it seems that the only thing we have to worry about is whether or not a woman wants a baby because unwanted children have more of a chance of becoming criminals.

As Don said, caring and educating children is security for your old age. If they do not receive adequate food, shelter and clothing, they will not be able to contribute to society in a meaningful way.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 01:19 PM

"As Don said, caring and educating children is security for your old age. If they do not receive adequate food, shelter and clothing, they will not be able to contribute to society in a meaningful way."

If as appears to be the case in so many different ways, the child/Mother/person gets food shelter and clothing in return for no apparent input other than occupying space. Then the person resulting is likely to be lazy shiftless, and unmotivated.
People who get something for nothing very rarely appreciate it. Producing a child is not a magic trick, whereas producing a good citizen is a labour of love.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 02:05 PM

We should stop throwing money at people who have babies. When my first wife and I had our children there was no such thing as paid maternity leave and we had to take responsibility for our actions by financing them all by ourselves (other than approximately £5 per week 'child allowance'. This is a perfect example of the ridiculous 'nanny state' we've got here in the UK now, where people behave in any feckless way they choose and expect the taxpayer to pick up the tab. Maybe if these daft lasses had to finance their sprogs themselves they'd think twice before opening their legs and expecting to have a good living paid for out of my hard-earned taxes. It makes my blood boil.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: kendall
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 02:19 PM

Bitch and complain all you want, you can not legislate morality.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 02:34 PM

To GUEST 06.58am...I personally admire someone who can speak up about their own experience of life and so I do with Kara. You however are such a put-down merchant you can only make a ridiculously negative comment about 'hang-up'. You need to grow up and show people who bare their sould encouragement, not try to ridicule them.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 02:41 PM

Teach your children that what's between their ears is more important than what's between their legs, and you're more than 99% towards improving both their future and ours.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 03:51 PM

Having children young has it's positives. By the time the kids are off their hands the mothers are still young enough to contribute 25 years of tax into the system.

Next time you sneer at a teenager pushing a pram try and remember one day they'll be paying for your incontinence pads.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: jacqui.c
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 04:02 PM

Unless they are very lucky they won't be paying much into the system. A lot of these girls will have no training for employment and, in the present system, with the cost to the student of further education in the UK, it is likely that all they will be fit for are menial jobs at minimum wage.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 04:35 PM

Yes, Jacqui, and minimum wage is not enough support for a single parent family when you include the cost of daycare. Its far better for these women to stay home and care for their children than shuffle them off to daycare so they can work for money that will never cover their expenses. When the children start school, the govt. should fund their training and/or education to enable them to work for a living and have some hope. Chances are that the single mom will become a taxpayer and her children will escape the cycle of poverty.

Giok is wrong when he says that they have "no apparent input other than occupying space. Then the person resulting is likely to be lazy shiftless, and unmotivated."

Not so. Being a single parent is a full time job. If you work, you need daycare and no minimum wage job is going to pay those expenses.

My guess is that you never raised a child on your own, Giok.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 05:00 PM

Dianavan you are completely right apart from just a couple of facts, the sentence you selected to quote from started with the word IF! Also,I was brought up as the only child of a single Mother, and I DO know what I'm talking about.
I still believe that not enough is expected from these recipients of the government's/our money in return for the support they receive, regardless of what if anything, they have paid into the national exchequer.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 05:05 PM

As the only child of a single mother, Giok, who took care of you while your mother worked?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 05:17 PM

My Grandmother when I was small, and myself when I was old enough to know how to light the fire, and prepare the tea for my mother coming home from work. I was what some newspapers disparagingly called a 'latchkey kid'.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 05:25 PM

Most single moms don't have grandma's nearby who are able to babysit and, in Canada at least, you should be at least 12 before you are given a latchkey. So what do you suggest a mother should do with a child from infancy to 12 years of age while she goes to work at a minimum wage job?

Not every single mother has the same circumstances. You're mom was lucky enough to have the support of family. Many do not. Thats why we have social services.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 05:38 PM

Sorry but do you really think that parents adhere to the 'rules' about what age kids are given doorkeys, [hollow laughter].
My Mother also worked in 'live in' jobs where she could have me with her where she worked. I know that not all Mothers have the option or the training to do what my Mother did, she was a trained cook, but so many appear to expect to be 'looked after' while they contribute nothing.
Can't you see that all people, not just single Mothers need to realise that you don't get 'Nothing for nothing' and featherbedding these feckless people teaches them nothing, and only lays up troubles in store, for future generations.
People don't just have rights, they also have responsibilities, unfortunately many of them know their rights, and shirk their responsibilities.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:07 PM

Giok - I agree that rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. I also know that if a child is left with a latchkey and is underage, as a teacher, I am obliged to call social assistance. Times have changed and if you have no family babysitters and can't leave you child alone, what are the options?

I, too, found work and took my children along. I was a net mender. Not everyone has this skill and I thank my dad for having the forsight to teach me a skill I could fall back on if needed. Not everyone has these options.

Sure, there are some who abuse the system but the majority do not. Most single moms really do need the help and for many of them it is only temporary. I think there is plenty more to worry about than supporting single moms with your hard earned tax dollars. If I were you, I'd be far more concerned about corporate tax breaks and subsidies. I'd also look into how much your government is spending on the military. There are some real culprits out there. Picking on single moms is picking on the most vulnerable in our society.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 07:47 PM

Dianavan, I don't think this is a "ripping the tax payer off issue". I also don't think it's an excuse for a "sex bashing thread".

One fact though seems to be that some young girls (and couples) are finding having babies attractive for rather dubious reasons. (And yes, bad relationships, etc. happen AS WELL).

Couldn't we be asking why for example some should consider themselves financially (including having a home) better off by having kids?

Is for example the price of property anything to do with it in some cases? I'd guess owning one's own home could be an incentive the other way but how in the hell do young people start on the property ladder in some areas now? Is a minimum wage realistic? Do issues like this work against a desire for what I will call for want of a better term, a "conventional family and home"?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 08:23 PM

Actually Jon, this thread began as a ripping the taxpayer off, issue. It has evolved into people asking some pretty good questions. Your question is absolutely valid. Is the 'welfare' system contributing to the destruction of the 'nuclear' family?

I don't think so. Many other factors have contributed to the destruction of the nuclear family but it is social services who are attempting to provide for those who do not have such a family. It certainly is no incentive to remain single. The monthly allowance is sufficiently low to discourage most from trying to "live off the dole."

...and yes, minimum wage jobs definitely contribute to the inability of uneducated and untrained parents from supporting their families. In B.C. it used to be that young men without training and education could go fishing or logging. Now these resource jobs have all but dried up. For a long time there has been little or no work. Young women could find minimum wage employment much more easily than young men. Unfortunately, minimum wage is not enough for a family. Social assistance keeps them alive.

Of all the types of stereotyping and discrimination that occurs, I think poor-bashing is the most destructive. Its bad enough to not have enough money to feed the kids but for you and your children to endure social scorn for the crime of having no money is just plain ignorant. It can happen to anyone for a variety of reasons. If its never happened to you and you have never had to ask for assistance then consider yourself lucky. Someday you might.

Are women getting pregnant for money? I doubt it but if they are its due to ignorance on their part. What is really needed is education but the same people who do not want their tax dollars going to social assistance, do not want their money to go toward education either. Basically, these are people who do not understand that as a civilized society we must take care of those who cannot take of themselves.

Myself, I have more respect for single parents than I do for those who were born with all the advantages in life but think they have 'worked hard' for everything they have. Try raising kids on a welfare check and you'll know what hard work it is to raise those kids.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 08:24 PM

Come on folks. Aren't we forgetting that we are talking about support for two people here. The mother may indeed be feckless, 'tho many are not. But the child doesn't bear any responsibility for the situation,and we are also supporting him/her.

Giok, I did say that education in better ways ahould be a part of this package.

O.K. let's examine the alternative. Put the kid in care, and send mum out to work. That'll save us a lot of tax money! THE HELL IT WILL.

Look into the cost of keeping a child in care (housing, feeding, clothing, educating, and something extra to make it a life, not an existence) and you will find that the current system is economically viable.

I'd be interested if one of our internet wizards could find statistics relating criminal activity to being brought up in care. Anyone feel like betting on whether it's better or worse than being brought up in a single parent home?

Half this nation is currently obsessing about ensuring that carers get sensible recompense for their services in taking the load off the taxpayer, and like it or not, these young women are doing a 24/7 job of caring for the country's future.

I don't feel inclined to denigrate them for the unconventional way in which they have become carers, and if I'm out of step with the rest of the country, so be it.

Don T

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 19 Jul 06 - 08:54 PM

"Is the 'welfare' system contributing to the destruction of the 'nuclear' family?"

I wasn't quite asking that dianavan, although I do question the effect of the welfare system apparently makeing one better off materialy for having kids. I'm really not sure about the figurs in the first post but I do know people who have had better property because of having kids. They have needed it of course but does a sort of "on my own I'd be stuck in a bedsit but with kids I might get a 2 up 2 down house" ever influence a decision to have children? I honestly don't know although no-one I know has done that.

Let me try another way for the rest. In some parts of the UK, there is concern about shortages of people such as paramedics, firemen, etc. because they can't compete in the property market. What are the effects of knowing you can't enter the property ladder?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 02:11 AM

Well, Jon, thats happening in Vancouver, too. Property prices are so high that it takes two professionals to even hope to own their own property. I'd say that other than exceptionally motivated young people, the most that young people can hope for is a condo or a live-work space and that means both parents work and your children are in daycare.

It also means that only those youngsters with rich parents, who provide the downpayment, will ever own property.

The gap between rich and poor grows even wider and the middle classes will, of course, blame the poor.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 07:06 AM

John Groik, if you consider that bringing up a child is "no apparent input other than occupying space", then I hope you don't have any for the mothers sake.

The issue here seems to have become good parenting and citizenship. A single parent who had a child at a young age can be just as good a parent and citizen as a married person if they are not stigmatized by the rest of society. Single parents are more likley to spend time with their child that a married mother who has 6 months off work then puts the child into day care so as to maintain the double income in the house. The child is then compensated for lack of time with materiel things, but does that make them into a better citizen?

I do not know what benefits a single parent gets now days but 20 years ago they were minimal, as a suspect they are today.

If the question is are teenage girls choosing to become pregnant?
The yes I think teenage girls do choose to become pregnant and some of them as single parents, and yes they need the support of society, just as married mothers need support.

If the question is why are young mothers choosing to be single, then the answer is because either the father will not play the game, or it is because, the young mother finds that life is better on her own with her child than with a man.

People do not become good members of society if they are told by that society that they are crap.

I too was looked after by my Granny then become a latchkey kid, because both my parents were at work. I choose to stay at home with my kids , not go out to work, live of very little money, but at the end of the day I think home made cakes are better than shop ones.

I think that what John Groik disliked about being a child of a single parent was the stigma, so why go on to sigmatise these kids?

People do not become good members of society if they are told by that society that they are crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 07:26 AM

Sorry Kara but please reread the post which you took your quote from. I said If as appears to be the case in so many different ways, the child/Mother/person gets food shelter and clothing in return for no apparent input other than occupying space. Please note the word IF which I have underlined, it qualifies the whole sentence, and makes it a postulation not an accusation.
As for the supposition on your part that I felt stigmatised, I assure you that at no time have I ever felt inadequate as a result of my status, either as a child or in later life.
I was brought up better than most of my contemporaries, and feel that many of them lacked for things that I had, and not the other way round. Stigma is a grown up concept, and the child will only feel stigmatised if their parent or a responsible adult tells them they are.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: jacqui.c
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 08:48 AM

When I did teacher training one of my practice sessions was in a school in a sink area of North London.

I was in charge of a class of 14 year olds and found that it was very difficult to motivate them to do anything. I asked them what they were going to do when they left school. There were quite a number who told me that they would get a job in Woolworths, or the equivalent. (I told them that you have to take a test to get a job there - been there done it in the 60s). Some of the girls, even at that time in the late 70s, were saying that they wouldn't have to work as they were going to have babies.

Part of the problem is that a lot of these kids are bought up in homes where no real effort seems to be made to give them some idea that they can achieve something more. These are homes where the TV is on full time, meals are snatched events and parents either don't have the ability to or interest in spending time with their children. Having lived for the first 30 odd years of my life in sink areas I knew many families like that. My own parents were very similar, although considered themselves to be 'respectable'.

Kids bought up in homes like that, and in neighbourhoods that contain numbers of these families, are as likely to fall into the mould, unless they get a real push somewhere along the line. My push came in seeing, where I lived, the number of single mothers with teenage children still taking benefits. I decided that I was not going to fall into that rut and went back and got the education that I hadn't got at school, (partly because I was left feeling that I was a failure and that no-one really cared about how I did at school).

In my case I married the father of my children but the marriage lasted only five years and that was it. I don't regret the way things worked out but can see the sense of Giok's idea which would allow for education and training to try and break the vicious circle. As I said previously, these days further education is beyond the means of a lot of these kids. Whilst I am aware that the present day hostels are no always good places maybe more money should be put into the system to make them more than stopping places. They should be places that give support, to enable girls to get further education, even if it is only in childcare but also to make it clear to all that getting pregnant is not an open sesame to housing and benefits.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,maryrrf
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 09:04 AM

Jumping in late here but I think it IS a significant problem, and I don't know how to overcome it, when you have a "welfare cycle" where two or three generations have been brought up on benefits and you have kids who have not lived in a household or seen an adult regularly get up and go out to work. Under those circumstances it will be very hard to convince kids that they can and should get an education and go out and make their place in the world, earning their own keep. I want the safety net to be there, and wish that we in the US had a better one, but it should be just that - a safety net and not a way of life. The way it worked for Jacqui C is the way it's supposed to work - helping people to get on their feet after a rough patch. It isn't being used in the right way when it just becomes a rut where people make a lifestyle of living off benefits.   The issue now, where housing is so expensive that there's almost no point in seeking a low paying job because you won't be able to afford to live anywhere, complicates things even more.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 01:49 PM

Single parents living on welfare while they raise their kids isn't the problem. If they have their child at 18years old they are back in the work field by 36 years old. Lots of years for them to contribute. Welfare isn't paid for them once the child reaches 18 years old. If they go on to have a couple more, they will still have 30 years left to contibute to the tax pot.

They have a choice to start further education as mature students. Student loans are available and the repayments easier once their own children are not financially dependant on them.

There seems to be some snobbery regarding menial jobs and minimum wages too? We need people to clean hospital floors and sell bread at the bakers. The people doing those jobs are contributing as much as they can and shouldn't be looked down on or pitied. To some of them that is an enormous achievement.

The problem, if people want to find one, is in the main due to the burden on welfare systems by the intentionally and unintentionally unemployable. The alcohol and drug dependents. The long term sick. These people can claim for a life time without ever contributing.

A study in UK recently showed that children starting school who have been kept at home actually perform better than those farmed out to nurseries and child minders. If these children do well and play an active role in society in their adult years then the stay at home mum has done us all a favour.

Like kara and dianavan I dislike poor bashing. It is easy and often disguises other peoples own insecurities and short comings. And the most vitriolic have never raised a child, which says it all really.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,maryrrf
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 03:10 PM

I don't think anybody was bashing the poor or looking down on those who earn minimum wage. It is more a concern that many menial or minimum wage jobs don't pay enough for a person to survive on, much less a family.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 03:17 PM

The UK government pays additional benefit to those in work and on low wages.
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 03:37 PM

I opened this rather hoping it was a celebration of one of my favourite pubs. However no such luck. I read through the posts and was quite interested by some of the ideas, and as always attracted by the vehemence of expression.

When it comes down to it though, what we are really talking about is a major failure in the education system in England.

"Teach your children that what's between their ears is more important than what's between their legs, and you're more than 99% towards improving both their future and ours."
Giok

all very well mate, but what if the parents haven't got much between the ears - do we just say, well theres another generation are going to follow in the same path? I don't think it can be an option for much longer, although its the soft option that ahs been picked up by one load of politicians after another. You sometimes think - well perhaps the self perpetuating mess that is the education system WILL go on forever.

it works for the nice middle class kids, but when will it EVER come to grips with the new generation. They know all about interior decoration - you don't have books in the house, it makes clutter.They know all about politics, its on the other channel when the soap opera getting into gear. fashion and Art, well if its got the right logo on.....Music, they can tell which bands will appeal to Simon Cowell before he knows himself.

In short they are the products and victims of our apalling culture. And the truth is that we're all too busy fighting our own corner and making our own livings for our families, to really give a damn.

The thing about our culture is that it works, it makes money.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 06:22 PM

Unless they are very lucky they won't be paying much into the system. A lot of these girls will have no training for employment and, in the present system, with the cost to the student of further education in the UK, it is likely that all they will be fit for are menial jobs at minimum wage.

This is what I was referring to maryrff.

It implies 'lucky' people pay adequately into the system and unlucky ones won't be paying much, because all they are 'fit for' is to earn the minimum wage.

Student loans are at the moment a fact of life. Whether the student is 18 or 38 they are just as capable of repaying. They are all as capable as each other to get a part time job to ease their burden. There is help for those with rent/mortgages during the summer holidays. The reckless students of the previous generations who abused the grant system are now forcing the present generation into forking out tuition fees.

Luck isn't measured by earning ability surely? With all the money in the world people are individuals with individual abilities. Someone with limited learning ability may feel they are the luckiest person alive to be able to actually work at all. Some others who are college educated may lead wretched lives where they burn out with the pressure of a high powered job.

It is all relative. People who contribute, NO MATTER HOW BIG OR HOW SMALL, are all worthwhile contributing members of society.

And bringing children into the world and caring for them and ensuring the next generation exists are doing a 'job' that is beyond monetary value.

Go bitch about the wars/ the tax dodges/ the price of oil/ the cost of public transport, but bitching about mothers is ultimately biting the hand that will spoon feed you in your dotage.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: jacqui.c
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 06:39 PM

I have lived next door to a woman who had four different children by four different men, over a period of about ten years. She was on benefits but could always find money for cigarettes even while her children were underfed and clothed from jumble sales. Her babies had permanent nappy rash and the older children always had runny noses and cold sores.

The children were effectively left to their own devices for the majority of the time. TV was on permanently and there was no check on what was showing. A regular bedtime was non existent and hygiene -none whatsoever.

Social services made sporadic visits but these kids weren't in any real danger - just neglected - so nothing was done. Last I heard the oldest daughter was pregnant for the second time at 17 and one of the boys was already on probation. Rita was one of the worse that I knew but there were others in similar circumstances. My babysitter, the product of a single parent family, was pregnant at 16 and waiting to hear when she would get her flat.

Unless the cycle is broken in some way this problem will always be there. I'm not knocking - just stating a fact of life. There needs to be some sort of way of persuading these kids that there is a better way of life.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 07:21 PM

Picking extreme examples of bad parenting doesn't really help. Some of the girls pushing prams at 18 years old are excellent mothers who will become tax payers once they have raised their children. Is anyone patting them on the back and congratulating them on the sterling work they are doing?

No, they are all tarred with the stereotypical hysteria shown in this thread.

There are as many examples of extreme bad parenting being displayed by two parent families with working parents.

The truth is none of us know what they will become in ten years time so are we in a position to judge them based on their life now?

I know a man who beats his wife in front of their kids, but he isn't a typical male or husband or father.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 07:38 PM

Perhaps someone should ask why there is (if there is) a class of people to whom it is more attractive to claim benefits than to work.

If you say it is because benefits are too generous, then I will say to you you have never lived on them, nor truly known anyone who has lived on them.

I remember my late wife telling me of the period when she was a student in the 69s and 70s, in the days of the "madly generous" student grants - after she had been deserted by her husband, who was somewhere in Nepal with his guitar - how she had had to ration eggs for breakfast for her children.

The problem is not benefits. It is the fact that at entry level all there is is McJobs. There is no economy other than servility, no manufacturing, only "service industries". If your efforts will not benefit you, you will not exert yourself. Check the "forced helplessness" thread.

And, for the benefit of Mrs Mary Shitehouse, and the occasional passing Catholic priest, the human race exists because it has a sex drive. It is too late to take it away.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: jacqui.c
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 08:05 PM

Guest - read my post again. I am giving examples that I have personally known about a problem which has been around for years and is not going away.

If you read the whole of my post you will note that I am saying that something needs to be done to break the cycle - not just feed the problem, as is the case with the present system.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 08:33 PM

Read my post again - you gave examples of bad parenting to prove what exactly? That it exists? Yes, it does and always will. I fail to see your connection with the examples you give and single parents, unless you are saying the problems you cited are exclusive to that section of society I do not see it's relevance.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 09:08 PM

Visited Britain in 2002, niece of mine pointed out all the houses in the area that had single moms living in them, told me she was friendly with a lot around her own age and yes it was planned to get a home and an income from the government. Sadly the down side was they all appeared to want out at the weekends and live the life of what kids that age should do and took any kid in the area in to babysit.

Little girls of 14 were babysitting and brought their boyfriends in. Saw many kids having drinks parties while they were supposed to be in charge of kids not much younger than themselves. The young moms brought guys home who used them for a night. My sister told me it's normal over there and no one seems to mind.

What will these poor kids growing up in these homes think is normal family life ? The benefits system in the UK is a joke, you fill in forms you get in a postal office and the money arrives. You get 90.00 dollars extra a week if your kid suffers from hyperactivity. They get a date to have the kid assessed at home. When the medic comes out the child has been given one of three brands of undiluted fruit juice for three days and they pass the test as the kid is hyper ! UK streets paved in gold I say.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Jul 06 - 09:09 PM

The only way to break the cycle is to make sure that pregnant women and single moms are given, in addition to food, shelter and clothing the education or training they need to beome productive members of the work force. It does no good to give them only the bare necessities of life. It just traps them and their kids with no way out.

Happy and healthy moms = happy and healthy children

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: jacqui.c
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 06:49 AM

'Luck isn't measured by earning ability surely? With all the money in the world people are individuals with individual abilities. Someone with limited learning ability may feel they are the luckiest person alive to be able to actually work at all. Some others who are college educated may lead wretched lives where they burn out with the pressure of a high powered job.

It is all relative. People who contribute, NO MATTER HOW BIG OR HOW SMALL, are all worthwhile contributing members of society.

And bringing children into the world and caring for them and ensuring the next generation exists are doing a 'job' that is beyond monetary value.'

Guest 8.33pm - this is the post that I was answering. This post seems to say that these girls will, at some point, suddenly turn into productive workers. In a lot of cases THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN. Their kids also have more of a tendency to follow the only example that they have. Many of these girls, at least in the areas I have lived, don't want to work or don't even consider that there is an alternative to their lifestyle. If the cycle isn't broken in some way this will continue. I think that Giok's idea of properly run hostels would be an excellent idea.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 07:29 AM

Give these girls some respect and they become respectable. treat them like tramps and they'll act like tramps.

These girls are productive workers, they are bringing up the next generation and should helped to do so in best possible conditions.
If you are a working Mum the state will pay for your child to be looked after, so why should the state not pay for you to look after your own child.

You do not have to be a single teenage parent to get a council house and collect benefits because you have a child, you can be married and you get the same benefits.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 08:38 AM

jacqui things have changed in the UK. Single parents are not paid to sit at home once their children reach 18 years old. In fact once they hit primary school age they are guided towards study and work. The days of the life long hand out is over. Lone parents are the smallest group of benefit recipients. Pensioners actually are the largest.

People should get up to date to back up their irrational prejudices.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 09:29 AM

"You do not have to be a single teenage parent to get a council house and collect benefits because you have a child, you can be married and you get the same benefits."

People in need jump the queue for council housing, while married couples with one child, still find themselves a long way down the list behind families with sveral children, or families with 2 children of different sexes who's children are too old to share a bedroom, and need a bigger house. It's this short circuiting the system that causes a lot of the resentment in some quarters.
They could always come up to the highlands where there are short, or no waiting lists for council accommodation in some villages. Of course there's no work, no decent public transport, and damned little entertainment that you can get to without a car.
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: jacqui.c
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 10:34 AM

Guest 8.38 am

If you read my posts you will note that I am agreeing with Giok in suggesting a more sensible solution to this problem, not displaying an 'irrational prejudice'. I'm not saying that this is the only problem to be dealt with but it is the one under discussion here.

Kara - respect has to be earned, not given. I would respect anyone who makes an effort to better themselves, whatever their situation.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 11:09 AM

Personally I prefer to give everyone respect until they prove they are not worthy of it. Which very few ever do.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 11:15 AM

Agree with that 100% Kara, and from the POV of the children, does anyone really think they would be better off in hostel accommodation?

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 01:54 PM

Don T. -

I don't know what you mean by hostel accomodation but when you are single mom, the best thing you can do for your family is to connect with other single moms. I was a single mom with two kids in university. There were other single moms in the same dorm. We helped each with childcare, cooking and transportation. We all feel that we couldn't have succeeded without each other.

It isn't necessary for anyone to live in a single family dwelling.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 02:32 PM

Its good for single mums and the kids to have contact with non single mums and dads too.
Although hostel type accomodation maybe OK for mums with little babies it is in not a good thing to have kids in institutions.

I think house sharing is good as you get the support of others as Dianavan says help with childcare, taking turns with cooking, but it does give the kids a very one sided view of live with no men in it.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Allen.
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 02:37 PM

Tax payers are paying out far too much to maintain their lifestyles. This way of life is a profession. They are laughing at the system. Treat them as cheap little sluts as really most are.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 02:43 PM

Tripple taxes for all men who can not PROVE that they have never had sex???

I do not consider myself to be a cheap little slut infact I do not know anyone I would describe or treat as a cheap little slut.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 02:53 PM

respect has to be earned, not given.

That depends if you think there is a problem with young mums on welfare. If you don't then they are on a level footing with everyone else. I suspect the very fact they are young mums on welfare is a cause for their critics in this thread to deny them respect.

Unless of course they farm their children out to a nursery and 'better' themselves. It all depends where you stand on farming children out. Personally I have more respect for the stay at home mother who raises her family then finds her working vocation when they are grown.

A lot of the mothers who can't wait to hand over their children to day care are not actually up to the job of child rearing them selves. It leaves them feeling guilty and inadequate and they kick back at any who choose the other route.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 02:59 PM

Kara -

Who said there were no men in our lives? Just because we're single doesn't mean we don't have male friends and relatives.

You sound like the prof. who said that more men were needed in teaching so as to provide role models for kids from single parent families. What a joke! Most of the men in the teaching profession I would not want as role models for my children. Besides that, I am quite capable of finding men that serve as positive role models. If not, they aren't allowed in our home.

Patronizing people, deciding what it is they need, doesn't help anybody to gain independence.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 06:42 PM

Dianavan

As far as shared houses is concerned I was speaking more of my own experiences. If as a kid you are living in a house with 5 women you are going to have more female role models than male.This may not be a bad thing, but is not really going to encourage kids to grow up and set up a nuclear familly.

I do not doubt that you are capable of finding positive male role models, but when you are living in shared accomodation it is not just you who says who can and can't come into your home. Not everyone has the same idea of positive.

To be honest I don't think it is a problem strictly with the teaching profession, most men I would not consider to be a positive role model. Although there are many who are.

Guest Allen
Bringing up children has always been a profession that women have done and men have paid for. I don't think you should be giving these girls a hard time because the men won't or can't pay.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Martin.
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 06:59 PM

Just driving home tonight and saw the flock of these little breeding machines that live in my area heading out drinking and having a really good time on our taxes and no doubt plan to bring home some bloke without asking his name and probably burden us in nine months with another scrounger ! I agree with you, look upon them as what they really are and make sure they know your views, well said Allen, just ignore the bra burners above.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 07:11 PM

Oink

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 07:16 PM

Is it all females who are enjoying themself that you object to or did these girls have their bastard offspring with them in the pub.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 21 Jul 06 - 08:06 PM

You are being a bit hard on these kids mate, these young girls have lives too. Good luck to them looking forward to a night out, getting ready, feeling and looking good about themselves, fair play to them.

I would imagine if you were able to spot and know they lived in your area you have been looking at them in other ways too !

Wonder would you take an invite, maybe that's the problem you don't !
Get of their back and let them enjoy themselves. Their youth is short enough.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 02:23 AM

Don't know whether that was intentional Divis, but funny all the same - "Get off their back and let them enjoy themselves". Wasn't it getting ON their backs and enjoying themselves that started this thread! :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 04:01 AM

Funny enough, after I posted I saw that myself, must be the dirty old man in me !

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Strollin' Johnny
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 04:47 AM

LOL! Keep 'em coming mate!

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 06:52 AM

We have a wonderful example here of moderates vs Guests here, almost a textbook case.

Guests come in and say something one sided, and various members try to be reasonable, and acknowledge that the point Guest XYZ makes may be true in a few cases, but is being very harsh. It is seen over and over again

In this case, there is a full spectrum of people, from the few who are the feckless layabouts though to those who settle down in a loving, stable relationship for life and manage to bring up healthy, normal, educated children and work their way up to a reasonable job themselves.


people are too variable to lump together, as has been done too much here, especially if you do so at an extreme.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 07:04 AM

Good point Bunnahabhain, sadly what I do notice where I live, is a lot of these young girls are used and you see wasters come and go to their houses. It's maybe hard to get a young guy prepared to get involved in a relationship with someone else's kids in it. It can be a knockback for some girls hoping that they think they found Mr. right and he's off again once fed. Sadly the phrase, A woman gives sex in search of love and a man gives love in search of sex comes to mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 07:08 AM

Bullshit. The first MEMBER post was about as one sided as anything else:

It just goes to show that the quality of the average British male is so low that girls would rather be single parents than put up with a low quality man in their lives.

I know I for one have at least tried to be reasonable in my GUEST posts.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 09:17 AM

"It's maybe hard to get a young guy prepared to get involved in a relationship with someone else's kids in it."

The real problem is that its hard to get a guy involved in a relationship with his OWN kid in it, or a least to get him involved in a way that is beneficial to "the family"

Sure there are plenty of guys who want someone to cook for them clean up after them and wash their socks, they might even be willing to move in with you (once you've got a council flat) but are not willing or are not capable of giving anyting in return, now why would a young girl with a baby to look after want to or be encouraged to put up with that?

I remember one day a young man (father of one of the kids) coming round to a shared house to see his son. Telling us how he would never take a govenement hand out, but was quite happy to have his ex and mother of his child feed him out of her single parent benefit.

I have unlimited respect for men who fulfil their rolls as fathers,and husbands and provide a loving home for their familly, but I don't know many of them.

For every single mother who is taking the responsibility for her actions there is a man who is not.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: hilda fish
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 10:29 AM

Ahhhhhhhh! Personally I'm really happy if my taxes are used to support kids. I don't care where or how they were conceived. It means that they matter and they need to know that they matter. 'These girls' are part of our human race, not some"thing" separate. So spend my money gals, and do the best by your kids. Happy to pay - sooner pay you than pay for the bombs that are killing people in Lebanon and Iraq. Personally I find children, wherever, whoever, however, a joy and an affirmation of hope in this world of ours. Spend big, gals, on the measly amount the government gives you, either here in Australia, England, America, wherever, and let me know how 'cos I'd like to stretch that dollar too. Mostly these kids turn out to be wonderful adults and mostly, despite the smoking and drinking (and the odd round of sex, the bitches!) the mothers manage to love and raise some pretty good human beings.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 10:37 AM

Thanks hilda fish!

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 10:53 AM

Sorry Kara only made an observation from what I seen. Did my bit, paid for all and never was on benefit myself, but I do give understanding and agree to the support these young mums get. Yes there are fathers not worth a toss, but there are good ones too and many don't get to see their kids even though they want to. Some here are clearly anti young mum, but don't go anti man to give a balance.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: freda underhill
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 11:00 AM

yay hilda fish! let's fight the oppressive economic rationalist misogymnastic women-hating running dogs that are barking up the wrong tree! castrate all men who serially whinge about women and sell their balls to the International Chinese Tabletennis Association. More money to help kids get by and then get ahead! Jacuzzis in every home and rent out Westminster palace for homeless people.

compassion rules, ok.

freda

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 11:12 AM

Clearly I am reading the words here of a couple of old rough tarts who men dumped along the line with good reason I imagine. Probably suffered fallen ass, when their tailgate falls ! or when you look at them beside you in the morning and know you could do so much better. Men are never stuck with women, it's common knowledge we can and do move on to younger models which hits them hard ! Ah lovely to read the words of twisted women who can't accept age or truth !

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 11:19 AM

divis sweeney, if that had been a Guest post, it would have been considered an outrageous statement.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: freda underhill
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 11:20 AM

woof!

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 11:49 AM

And for every sad man who moves on to a 'younger model' there are a dozen people watching him and laughing. The hair dye is bought, the car traded up, the paunch ill advisedly concealed in clothes designed for a much younger guy...and one morning she wakes up and realises she could do much better. And you are left on your own.

And then you have an awful lot of life left to wonder where it all went wrong. Despised by your kids, loathed by your family and ridiculed by your colleagues.

More power to all mums whatever their age. They are giving us the future. Only those unhappy with their present can't appreciate that.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 12:35 PM

And so said madam swinging gut!

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 12:45 PM

Now play nice children, this was a fairly intelligent thread, with no name calling until recently. Can we try to keep it that way please?
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 12:54 PM

You are right Giok, leave it to women to raffle off on one. This was reasonably intelligent until female bitterness took hold and attacked men and fathers. My views on these women have changed somewhat since their arrival I now see the situation in a different light. They can stew in their own bile.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 01:11 PM

Divis,(I can not see anything that might be considered outrageous in your post) I agree there are great fathers,(my husband for example) I am really not at all anti men,just anti tossers and as Guest 11.12 so aptley points out "Men are never stuck with women, (OR CHILDREN FOR THAT MATTER) it's common knowledge we can and do move on"

But that is not what Martin (who spends his spare time cruising the local talent from the safety of his car)is alarmed about, but that girls are choosing to become pregnant and realising that they are so much better off they are without Mr, "oh I'll hang around till you get a bit flabby them swap you for a fitter model" and deciding to become a single parent. (moving on)

Basically its the women who have the power on this one, she can decide that the Father can not see the kid, in most cases there is a reason, even if it is just because he has pissed her off. Im not saying this is a good thing as I believe that a good Father is an invaluable thing and I would not have liked to have had to bring my kids up without one. But a bad Father is not worth the effort.

What I am trying to say is that I think being a Father can be as rewarding as being a Mother. Men do seem to be more ready than women to decide that they can turn their backs on the opportunity, or less ready to decide that they are wiling to give the Mother the support and love she requires to let them stay.


Some posts back Dianavan talked about getting support from other single Mums, how they helped each other with childcare, cooking and transport, I wonder if she had been getting that help and support from her childrens Father if would she ever have become single parent?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 01:25 PM

any by the way bile if it is me you are referring to as a "old rough tarts who men dumped along the line with good reason I imagine. Probably suffered fallen ass, when their tailgate falls!"
I'm the one in the dress

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 03:06 PM

Guest Jon and Kara I am not here to fall out with anyone, I agree there are bastards out there who get a clap on the back from morons as to their actions for being a "he man" it's the girls get the rough end of the stick, don't allow some old tosser to try and derail the issue here. Not all kids are out to screw the system. Sorry if you found my remarks offensive, I never meant it come across in that way Jon, big big sorry to you. Kara you look great, really mean that.
Divis

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 03:46 PM

NP DS, I guess (while I don't dispute the are Guest posters here for the fun of winding others up) I get more than a little pissed of with the slag guests off bit.

I also am a little bit touchy ofer comment like the one Kara opened with I've only had 2 girlfriends, neither long lived though I've always tried to be decent (can't claim young any more). First one in bed with another man, second turned out to have a boyfreind in prison. I don't however feel the need to start laying the blame for all life's woes on women because of my experiences...

Fact of the matter is there can be problems caused by either party and IMO there are possible issues raised in this thread that could even cause the "ideal couple" to take free accomodation rather than work, issues such as minimum wages, availability of work, etc. It doesn't seem to surprising to me that some might simply not want to bother.

As for supporting people, yes I believe we should. I'm long term sick and these days with alcohol problems - I always liked a drink too much perhaps but really hit the bottle hard after the second girlfriend problem and have never properly established control since, though sometimes I get close, and a label (I'm on no meds BTW) "schiz" from many years back has not helped matters, etc. and draw on the state anyway so I couldn't be begruging anyone else support could I? Besides that, when I was working believe it or not I was one of those who didn't begrudge paying taxes - at least with one job I even felt quite lucky to have one with good prospects and felt aware that others would have liked the same...

You know, when I worked in this factory, I had a conversation with the chap in charge of the training school where people had to learn certain tasks and get up to speed before getting onto the line. Not everyone could do it (and I in fact failed but got a position as a shop floor labourer before getting promoted to the offices). He didn't feel safe to go out for a drink in his home down because of threats from people he had no choice but to fail.

One can't condone such actions but the company was one of the few payers in the area with much of the work being seasonal in a tourist area and I think it might just give an indication as to just how desperate some people are for steady reasonable paying work.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 04:06 PM

Jon, I worked as a Therapist in mental health for 26 years, retired there in March on my pension age 46. I worked with so many that you could relate to. Life sometimes seems to deposit a load of sh1t on individuals who least deserve it. I saw so many young mums battered and living in fear. We have a duty to care for everyone and I know some abuse the system, people abuse everything in life that can be, it's not just benefits. I know that the pension I paid into for all those years was worth it now, was hard to see at the time. Please don't respond to the wind up brigade here, ignore is the order of the day !

Really do hope all works out for you in life. Take care and best wishes
Divis.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Kara
Date: 22 Jul 06 - 06:27 PM

Thanks DS, I hope Martin doesn't mind that I appear to be having a good time dispite having been on single parent benefit for a couple of years!!!

Guest Jon, if my opening comment was a bit scary it really was aimed at the original poster and I did apologies to all nice men.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: hilda fish
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 03:45 AM

Ah, leave each other alone. Where would all these kids come from without a man and a woman finding something pretty good about each other. Forgive everything is what I say, and do the best you can, but also take up the slack for some of us who don't do as good as we would probably like to do. We've all been there at one time or another. Kids need to be surrounded by a caring (at various levels) community and we all need kindness and forgiveness in our lives - don't we? (from a rough old tart with a fallen ass (what is an ass? a small horse?) who men dumped along the way - I don't think so! Really!)

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 04:11 AM

Ah come on Hilda, bet your a young filly in fine shape ! Credit given for above post, well said.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 04:54 AM

She is at that Divis, she's a lovely lady, wears high heel's with jeans too!
Giok

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST,Jon
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 05:36 AM

OK, Kara.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 06:19 AM

Giok, please think of my blood pressure !

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: clairerise
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 06:28 AM

If teenage girls are getting pregnant on purpose just to give them a better standard of life, then something should be done to improve the standard of live that they have...

Sadly some people can't be helped no matter how much you try to improve their lives

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: freda underhill
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 08:46 AM

alright, alright, i take back the castration bit. maybe a bit of slow torture by compulsory childcare..

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: John MacKenzie
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 09:00 AM

Do I have to choose now Freda?
G.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 01:33 PM

For all those who say children don't need fathers, watch the last moments of Tiger Wood's win in the British Open, his first since the death of his mentor and father.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 02:11 PM

Guest -

Nobody said children said children do not need fathers.

Children do not, however, need 'dead beat dads'.

Something else, just because mom and dad don't live together, doesn't mean the child has no father.

What are you so worried about?

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 02:14 PM

oops - a case of the stutters.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 02:31 PM

guest 1.33 now if you had said tiger had failed at every shot and collapsed in a heap without sinking a ball you would have made your point stronger.

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: GUEST
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 06:00 PM

They don't need deadbeat mothers either, but try telling that to the courts when you're a man trying to get custody of your kids!

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 06:20 PM

Sorry Jon, I lost a phrase somewhere. Those I meant to criticise were the guests who come in for a post or two, and don't listen or respond, not those like you who actually do. My mistake....

Subject: RE: BS: Generous Britain
From: dianavan
Date: 23 Jul 06 - 09:50 PM

You're a deadbeat, GUEST.

The courts decide who gets custody based on what is best for the child. Custody does not always go to the mother. You just don't want to pay child support.

Loser!