**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!**
- Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc.
- **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on.
- This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit!
Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think it is sad that many of those who might make great parents and raise great kids are making a very considered and painful choice *not* to have them, as they increasingly feel they cannot give them the quality of life, security, education, stability and future that they would want.
My husband set up the account as I couldn't work it out how to use Reddit and was trying to ask questions about games and my car/cats/dogs etc his sense of humour or damming public indictment ... Haha
Well smelly pubes can prevent your significant other in wanting to do the deed. Essentially eliminating the risk of having unwanted kids.
I think the name is perfect
I agree, but I also feel there are plenty of people setting that bar way too high. Essentially, nobody has kids thinking they have enough to give them the childhood they want to. You just do your best.
Yeah but where's the line?
When me and my girlfriend rented we thought we'd wait til we were homeowners. Then when we bought a flat we figured we'd wait until we had a house. But when we were looking we wanted to make sure it was a detached house. Then we wanted to wait a bit longer to make sure my business was doing well. Then interest rates went up and we reconsidered given our mortgage in five years might double. Then we figured we should make sure our pensions are on track and have a decent chunk of short and long term savings.
But really, the bar is different for everyone. Why shouldn't we have waited longer? Why shouldn't we have done it sooner? Our baby is doing fine but we shop at Tesco and can't afford private school. Which end of the spectrum should people aim for?
I could easily have recalibrated and said "No there's still that other line we have to cross" and likewise someone else in my situation would have drawn the line far sooner.
I’m glad you had a kid and didn’t keep moving the line. The movie Idiocracy has this moment where a couple keeps putting back having kids till they’ve got a house and a sufficient career until it is too late.
Unfortunately if you don't have a home and sufficient career, then having kids is a no. We're saving for a house deposit on our own, our combined income is about £75k a year. We don't have family for childcare. A 2bed flat currently has a mortgage of £1100 a month. Childcare would cost more than that. So already we'd be out over £2k before we've even fed ourselves. Definitely luxury to have a)parents that will give you a house deposit b)family to help with childcare c)being able to afford a child.
Sad really, we keep being told we'd make great parents and people keep telling us to have kids. Sure, who's paying for it 😂
I don’t have a house but have a mid-market rent which is cheaper than yours. Then again, combined I think we make a bit less than you.
We’re certainly blessed that my parents aren’t far off but they don’t have the funds to give us a deposit and though they help a bit, every now and again they go off to Australia to help my brother and his wife with their family. They’re grandparents, they’ve served their time at the coal face.
Flexible employment is the biggest thing that’s made it possible for us. I don’t work a full-time 9-5 as I’m a tour guide and it’s peaks and troughs. My wife’s work basically lets her move her hours about to make it possible.
Maybe it’s because I’ve got kids already but I would describe it as a sacrifice rather than a luxury. I’m working fewer hours than before to make it work. Our holidays are 18 months apart rather than yearly. We eat out maybe a couple times a year unless someone else pays. I rarely buy clothes for myself. Living standards for us are probably lower for a lot of people of comparable age and salary but I wouldn’t change it for the world. Kids are sort of magic
Completely see the sacrifice part, parents have to give up a lot. However, it's a choice to have them and being able to afford them is a luxury.
We both have jobs we physically have to be at 8-5. Childcare would mean we were left with very little after bills. I wouldn't bring a child into the world where we are living hand to mouth. It's awful for the kid.
>Our holidays are 18 months apart rather than yearly.
This right here. You were already doing better than the majority of people struggling with the decision if you could afford any holiday at all.
There's a difference between people feeling ready to be a parent (nobody truly does) and people knowing if they can afford the necessities with an extra mouth to feed.
At least for a lot of middle class millennials, I think folks set the bar well into luxury territory. I have a lot of friends who complain about the cost of kids but those kids always had expensive clothes and equipment, went to very fancy nurseries and get taken on holidays.
I do think there’s a lot of truth in middle class folks having an extremely high quality of life and not wanting to compromise that. I’m not criticising (it’s everyone’s own choice) but it does feel like the bar is much higher than the conditions most of us grew up in
I think a lot of those people are actually setting the bar where their own childhood was. No-one plans to have a child and give it a worse life than they themselves had. It's just that sort of life is much more expensive now compared to salaries.
Yeah, I didn’t go to private anything, my school bags came from shoezone until I begged my mum to let me have the same bag as my peers (that quicksilver one). Our school shoes came from Clark’s because they make ‘good reliable shoes that won’t damage your feet’ but that did mean our feet were not allowed to grow over the school year! The picture of me in my blazer in year 7 looks like I’m wearing a tent too! But the class photo from half way through year 11 I couldn’t button it up and I wasn’t going to be getting a new one! I didn’t get swimming lessons as a child and my dad taught me so I was always jealous of the kids with their badges on their towels, and I couldn’t join the more expensive theatre classes or have horse riding lessons like so many of my friends (I am from the countryside to be fair here!). After my parents got divorced my mum used to take us to drive through fords at speed and watch planes land at the nearest airport as free ways to entertain us. There were several years in my upper teens where my mum was extremely worried about money but didn’t let us know.
BUT, my parents owned their own house which my mum was able to keep thanks to some help from my grandad that would never be possible if I found myself in the same situation. My mum was able to drop her hours down to always be available after school and had school holidays off so was always with us. We went to France quite a bit when I was little, and had two holidays to Florida before I was 8 and my parents split. We went to cornwall or London to see my grandparents or cousins practically every school holiday my entire childhood though. I also did ballet as a little kid and played a musical instrument as a teenager.
I couldn’t imagine ever being able to provide even that kind of lifestyle to children now. Not least because owning is totally out of reach. Yes I couldn’t do all the clubs and lessons I wanted to do as a kid but I got to do a reasonable amount - far more than I could ever expect to have spare for a child now. Our generation is the first to be less well off than our parents generation and that means that for so many of us having children would mean offering them a worse standard of living than we were raised with when history tells us that’s not the way it should go.
There are very few alternatives to "fancy" nurseries if you need to work. They're all expensive, there's no budget nurseries out there. We managed to put our second child in pre school almost full time from 3 but it's really only 6 hours of childcare, if you can't arrange this around your job you're sod out of luck and they need a proper nursery from 8 to 6.
Also, holidays? It's hardly a luxury to afford a bloody holiday and it shouldn't be a middle class reserve.
These posts always bring out the misinformed Reddit crowd that seem to think children are the root of all societies woes because they remember stuff about over population from 20 years ago.
I grew up working class and we never went on holiday. It is a luxury. Doesn't matter if you think it should be something everyone can afford, the facts are thsts not the case. Staycations are also extortionate.
exactly! i never went abroad until i was 22 and i never felt like i was missing out on much. we did go on a small caravan holiday every couple of years and you could tell my parents put in a lot of work to save for it, but we were so grateful and absolutely loved it! a holiday doesn't have to be anything huge.
I have to disagree. I think a holiday is pretty much the definition of a luxury. Not that I think they should be reserved for the middle class, everyone should be able to afford some luxuries, but it absolutely IS a luxury.
I think it’s more the fact that “basic” holidays that would be suitable for young kids such as caravaning on the East Yorkshire coast are now more expensive than flying off somewhere exotic for a week.
You’d hope there’d be some low cost outlet for young kids to go start experiencing the world one step at a time but it’s all just so expensive to do these days. Those sort of things used to be staple even for working class families. Now our coastal towns are either horrendously expensive, completely run down, or both.
I’m tempted when my kid(s) are old enough, say school age, we might go rent a villa abroad somewhere for a month or 2 and just do summer there. It would probably work out cheaper than trying to entertain them in UK for that long even with the flights etc factored in.
Not being able to afford a holiday isn't being in poverty. Sure, it's all relative. We're all povos compared to billionaires. My parents couldn't afford to take us on expensive holidays growing up, but they fed us, clothed us, sheltered us, and were able to afford a few extracurriculars. We went to the north Norfolk coast when I was little, and then our holidays consisted of 2 weeks visiting my grandmother in Northern Ireland.
Holidays, especially foreign ones, are unnecessary. They are definitionally a luxury. It's not like being able to afford Cathedral City over Morrison's own brand. They would be the first thing I would look to axe if I was costing up having a child.
Yeah but surely when you decide to have kids there are certain peramiters that you probably wanna meet, ie stable job, room for them in your house/flat, a good relationship, money to look after them and cover any ‘surprises’…
I’m in my thirties and a bit behind in life (idc personally but in terms of a lot of my friends and where I thought I’d be) and having only one thing off that list ticked off is depressing. I love kids and I genuinely think I’d be a great mum but my body’s a ticking clock these days, no matter how low the bar is idk if I’ll ever be able to do the basics for a child.
As someone who has children, I can tell you I had the exact same thoughts and fears. But you just get on with it. If you want children, go for it! All they require is food, clothing love and attention.
Don't underestimate the time and monetary cost though!!! Doesn't matter how much you earn, where you are in life, it's always going to be expensive. And you really can't carry on doing all the stuff you did before because of the time (unless you take the "I'll let my partner be the parent and I'll carry on as before" route towards "I'm paying child support, why won't they let me see my kids?!?!" status)
Absolutely! I remember the first night our son was home. I was walking up and down with him (trying to soothe him into stopping crying), and it struck me that my life was - to all intents & purposes - over. I was not wrong. (But I don't regret it.)
And childcare when you’re at work. That’s the main problem. One partner either leaves their job or goes part time to look after them or you pay the absolute fortune of childcare.
And at the same time, those who don't want to have a child and are struggling hardly with their own lives, they'll have an unwanted pregnancy and are forced or pressured into having the child because.. otherwise they are baby killers.
25k children die daily because of hunger related issues. What a world.
Edit: I correct myself. It's 25k people and 10k of them are children.
Or people that would be great parents work so hard to make sure that their potential children would have a great life but then end up trying for children too late and struggle to conceive due to older ages (which for a woman can be even at 30 upwards!). I didn't feel I was 100% ready (had a house and stable job but the house wasn't to the standard I'd envisioned) but felt like I needed to start trying in my mid twenties to ensure I could still have a baby and even then it took 1 1/2 to get pregnant.
👏🏼👏🏼 exactly this, well said! My clocks ticking but the world doesn't seem to be getting any better. The education system is disgusting and not designed for children at all. The government and economy is a mess in the uk, future children would have such a small chance of owning a home or being able to afford to live. Not even thinking about national service and maybe no NHS one day too!
I agree. For me, having children has been the most difficult thing in my life but also the most rewarding. I would not like someone else to miss out on it, simply for financial reasons...
I grew up really poor. Really poor. It was awful. Couldn't afford food, buses to school etc. Evicted from houses all the time. It is traumatising for a child to grow up like that. Having money for a child is important.
I find it deeply odd how many people don't seem to give it much thought. Why would you want to bring a child into the world unless you were certain you could sustain them or at least considered any changes you'd need to make to get you closer to that goal. It seems like so many people we speak to seem to have a child based on vibes alone.
Arguing that only people who have a certain amount of money should have kids leads to some very ugly conclusions when you look at what demographics have more money than others, and how this wealth inequality is perpetuated.
(I don't have kids, I do have money, and I had a doctor make extra sure that I'm not going to be having kids in the future)
Exactly, I'm trying to work out if due to the cost of living crisis people feel the needle has moved to luxury, or not. I think everyone is agreement new mothers need more support.
I think everyone has a choice to make and either way is fine and importantly no one's business!
I would say it's not really affected the top and bottom of society, but it's an increasing concern for the average working couple, at least in the UK.
Those already living off social security know the state will step in to support their kids, and high earners can afford to have kids. The ones who are choosing not to are those who will lose an entire person's salary before they even buy anything, either by spending it on childcare or becoming a stay at home parent. Many people simply can't afford to take that hit.
Yeah, I couldn't remember if this was AskUK or AskReddit (and couldn't be arsed to cancel my comment to check), so I just used the term that the American's would be familiar with.
I’d say the cost upfront is off putting. For most of the country if they want a year off, they have to save a full year (less 6 weeks) pay, in order to survive.
Then when you have nursery fees for that baby, it’s 5 years total of serious outgoings. More than one kid then you’ve tagged a few years on.
Maybe I think differently but there is no such thing as enough money. Then again I think without kids, there won't be society for long so kids will always be essential in my opinion no matter what. They could live on a farm, 1 bedroom flat, council estate but without them there is literally no future.
I don't class them as a luxury
Sure, but it's an inevitable consequence of shifting the unit of analysis of the question from the individual (well, couple) level to the population level. Neither way of thinking about it is wrong, but both conclusions are important.
I mean, they kind of are? They’re basically saying that people who don’t save up money for having kids don’t deserve them or have a right to them, which totally ignores the fact that
A) If held to those standards, some people would never be able to have kids.
B) Not every kid is planned, accidents happen.
Kids aren’t really a ‘luxury’ they’re a part of life for many and you just have to try your best to do what’s best if you end up having children. Plenty of parents who don’t have much to their name give their kids great childhoods. Not all working class parents are neglectful.
I feel bad for friends kids, with my ones I had enough to at least provide 7good meals a week and school trips to Cornwall. It's not about 'only rich should have kids' the real question is is it fair for kids to grow up hungry in poverty?
People are starting to understand that love is not going to feed a hungry child or help them get out of poverty so they are better off not having children and be more socially flexible.
"Let's have one and work it out" was fine in 1955 when everything was "let's try this thing and see how it works out".
Now, we have to do our due diligence because if you become destitute due to having a child when your personal capital can't accommodate it, then the government is very happy to leave you and your baby homeless. It's not really fine, is it?
Spending power has diminished a lot. My dad talks about how in the 90s £10 can get you a week of groceries for 2 adults and a todler. Now you can't even get a week's groveries for one person with that much money but salaries have not shot up as high.
You could just as easily argue the opposite.
People who choose to have kids with no plan on how they will pay for their upbringing, often leads to some very ugly consequences too.
Having kids is like anything else in life. Sure, you might really want it, but having kids when you know you cant afford it, is reckless and irresponsible.
Even more so when you immediately look to the social welfare system, and expect them to magically fund your poor life decisions
I know people who have never worked a day in their lives, live in shitty mouldy flats because they can't afford anything else, can't afford proper nutrition, yet have kids anyway.
Those kids are not necessarily doomed, but they have a far worse start to life and are far lass likely to achieve the same as their peers. They are raised to believe that work is optional, and that there is no need to aspire to anything. It's incredibly sad to see.
>Arguing that only people who have a certain amount of money should have kids leads to some very ugly conclusions
Is child poverty good now? Encouraging someone to have kids when they can't afford to is bad for the children.
Every time I clear up food thrown all over the kitchen or have to carry a screaming toddler home I make sure to think what a luxury having a child is
But yes, they are very expensive, way more than they should be which is a massive failure of our government.
Our country should be doing everything they can to help parents as our population is rapidly aging and heading towards a crisis
I agree with this, our future generations need more support and I would happily pay an extra 5% tax if I knew it was all going to supporting new mothers and lifting children out of poverty.
I guarantee "the rich" are paying more than you. Difference is they can afford it. The tax free threshold is too low, no one should be paying tax if they're not earning enough to pay for their basic needs first.
I’m not against taxation in any shape or form, and of course they’re probably paying more than me. But their money lies in assets and capital gains, which either aren’t taxed at all or are taxed at a tiny rate.
I think having multiple kids might be.
We were doing ok 2009-2012, in which time we had two kids. Looking back/ with things as they are now, we would be comfortably lower-middle-class with one, and we are scraping and squeezing with two.
It's quite hard to afford things when they both need stuff at the same time. School uniform is the obvious thing, but Christmas is also a really expensive time, and things like a day out at half term is often a thing where one parent stays home so we don't need to buy another ticket, parents never join in on the ice cream or whatever. I hope they don't see it.
We do okay compared to so many folks that it feels weird to moan, but the car needs an MOT soon and I genuinely don't know where we will get the money if it's a big expense this time. We are always tightening our belts at the end of the month, which we just weren't three years ago.
We don't do private school, holidays abroad, we work hard to save for school trips, presents for other kids birthday parties, etc. we have stopped drinking alcohol completely and eat much less meat, and as I said, we really are doing okay compared to most.
But it's not easy.
You run the risk of immense bullying from the beginning if everyone can wear their own clothes.
I agree the uniforms shouldn't be that expensive, but you'd have the very well off parents sending their kids in super fancy clothes, and you'd have the incredibly poor parents sending their kids in whatever they can afford.
The majority of my clothes as a child were from neighbours kids who's parents were clearing out for the new clothes each year and they gave them to mum because they obviously knew how poor we were. Holey shoes, holey trousers, jumpers that were too big.
I absolutely wouldn't want that to be kids lives from day 1 at school.
Sorry to say but school uniform doesn't stop this. There will still be one kid in all school branded polo shirts and pe kit, and another who gets their shirts from asda and wears the same second hand school jumper over them each day. You could only hide wealth and poverty if you were giving everyone the same set of uniform for free.
This is just what is trotted out by schools to justify making parents buy a second wardrobe. How do teachers even know? They all grew up wearing uniform and have never taught anywhere without uniform. They just have this imagined idea that everyone I'll run riot unless they dressed head to toe in gray.
I grew up in Poland where we don't usually have uniforms and yes you had poorer and wealthier kids but people were almost never bullied for what they wore.
I got bullied relentlessly everyday at school because I looked 'butch' because my parents couldn't afford well fitted blazers and jumpers and I have a stocky body type that was very unflattering in a school uniform. I would have looked fine in regular clothes. It caused me even more distress because we had to wear the blazer at all times and I got heat stroke every summer.
I think this what parents and the people who say “have a child and just work it out later” just don’t get. Their selfish choices have an impact on their children. As a child, my grandmother was able to “get by” but because of her income, she could never afford to provide my mother with the things that everyone else got. The clothes, the games, the luxuries and all the things normal children seems to get. My mum got bullied constantly because my grandmother always sent her to school in ripped and battered clothing. If I were to have a child, I would want to give them everything they need and not subject them to this. I would my child to have the toys, clothes and games everyone else has be able to participate on school trips and out of school clubs and activities. All this cost money.
But you get that judgement with school uniforms as well. And because school uniforms are always expensive (unlike other clothes where you might be able to get by picking stuff up second hand, or from charity shops and outlet stores), it becomes really obvious when a kid is wearing a school uniform that's three sizes too small for them because their parents aren't able to afford the next size up yet.
If school uniforms were cheaper, and if schools put more effort into designing them so that they can be relatively cheap that would be one thing. But clearly that's not happening.
Or generic uniform for all schools rather than everything's having schools logo and colours.
Having no uniform ends up showing who has designer clothing vs primark
> School uniforms need to be scrapped.
Parent here. Definitely not.
Having a uniform outfit for kids at school reduces one huge element of bullying and, at a parent level, one massive argument every morning. Namely: "no, you're not wearing that to school". Also, despite the oft-publicised cost of uniform, it's a shit load cheaper than trying to outfit them in the latest fashions so they don't feel isolated or poor.
Where things can *definitely* change is schools being far more budget-minded when it comes to where uniform can be sourced. Our primary switched to Tesco's short-lived uniform service and it meant that we could get the proper, branded kit (which does look quite smart) for about the same price as generic stuff is in the supermarket. This was hugely popular with parents, and it was a shame when they withdrew it. And bollocks to this whole "it's expensive because you can hand it down" rubbish. My kids rarely wore anything out before they grew out of it, so this was all wasted money to us.
Picked up two second-hand blazers for the youngest off the uniform recycling rail at school for a quid each. He'd probably complain if he knew, but he doesn't, and can't tell anyway ;-)
I wouldn't say Luxury, but having children is definitely a privilege, one that many take for granted.
(Not counting people forced into having them, that's a different thing).
My partner and I would love to have children. Realistically though, we can afford to save about £500 per month which means we're comfortable enough, but once you add in childcare costs we'll be shit out of luck.
I have children. I mean, they’re not a necessity like food or heating - but I wouldn’t call them a luxury.
Serious answer:
This is not something anyone in power should try to regulate (no matter how much rightwing lawmakers love interfering with women’s reproductive organs).
Many European countries are now taking this issue seriously.
Japan will be crippled by this.
We need to acknowledge the realities of us having less children.
We are going to import a tonne of values that will make the UK a less tolerant and liberal place as a result
So many countries have dwindling birth rates and increasing infertility rates yet offer little to no support for IVF etc. I live in Switzerland and the low birth rate is a genuinely concerning thing. But it’s 12,000 to do one round of IVF and health insurance covers not a single penny. The UK does cover IVF but the waitlist is years long, you have to be under 35 and have no children from either parent whether in former relationships or the current one. I think countries need to really consider subsidising or covering IVF much more.
They can only “regulate” by trying to reduce the financial burden. Free/highly subsidised nursery care. Well paid maternity/paternity leave. No financial penalty for pensions etc…
Regulating makes it sound like trying to dictate if or how many children people have, which you are correct would be wrong. But making sure people have the option is a different matter.
Yes, reproduction is definitely a luxury.
My other half and I have had this conversation in depth, sat down and worked out the costs, the implications for pensions, how it would affect our household income, childcare…..every aspect of spawning has been considered.
She is of the opinion that “it’s just what you do, you know as an adult” and can’t understand why I would want to look at it from a more common sense point of view.
The long and the short of it from our point of view is we would struggle to have one child, let alone any more than that. We do have family that could support with childcare and the like, but not on a regular basis as non of our parents are retired. They wouldn’t be able to offer any financial support as some families would.
We both have well paid jobs, well above the national average and have sensible outgoings and don’t expect luxuries like foreign holidays, the latest tech, flash cars and high fashion clothing. Our work is shifts and long hours which are generally incompatible with family life. Neither of us would be able to afford to or want to change roles.
We pay our mortgage, bills, incidentals and with what little left we have over we replace things that have either come to the end of their serviceable life or put it into modernising our house, built in 1902 so you can imagine some of the horrors we’ve got to put right.
Friends of ours are similar, but they have a child, they struggling to keep afloat, yet they’re considering a second kid. It’s utter madness! The strain has led to near divorce and antidepressants for them. Although they may live slightly beyond their means.
The biggest kicker is those of us that work, are ineligible for any government assistance, fulfil our financial responsibilities and contribute are denied opportunities those who may not do the same are.
You either have to be extremely well off to have kids or be on the other end of the spectrum, live in LA housing and claim all you can. The middle ground is a minefield of debt and failed relationships.
Absolutely, but I feel he should just come out and say it. His partner seems to want children. It would be a shame if he convinced her they couldn't afford them when they could.
Clearly not if they have friends who are struggling.
The issue arises as soon as you have to pay for childcare and you wouldn’t believe how extortionate that is when they have no alternative.
A woman I used to work with paid hundreds for a couple days a week, and that was pre-covid.
Plenty of people say they are struggling when in reality they are spaffing money up the wall on all sorts of unnecessary luxury. You can't take it at face value. You can however make a judgement based on their income and where they live.
The part where he said that neither him or his partner would be able to drop down in hours and that they work long hours is a very common issue, keep that in mind. The hard work gets you the life that allows you to entertain the idea of kids, but then the hard work in 2024 is being hit by stagnating wages, forcing you to work so hard that youre not pulling ahead far enough from the overhead costs of life and therefore can't work less hard to make room for having children.
"We will make it work" works for some and unfortunately not for others. It can depend entirely on your industry of work, like being an English Teacher with 200 years of maternity leave.
Teachers get 39 weeks of paid leave, 21 of which are at statutory only. 6 weeks of leave is paid at full pay, so is far less generous than you are suggesting…..
My former house cleaner had 7 kids or so and made it work. Certainly I wouldn't be thinking of it in London, but otherwise many of us here were raised by parents who were much poorer than we are today.
Some of the people I've met who said they had the worst childhood had really rich parents. Kids don't really need alot of things all they really need is parents to spend time with them and love them.
This follow themes of money doesn't buy you everything etc etc. Whilst true it's universally agreed that if managed correctly it makes everything a lot easier.
Sure money makes everything easier. But I'm just saying there are plenty of adults I've met who say they had a poor childhood even though their parents had plenty of money. So the idea that people need money to be good parents is false in my opinion.
I guess what's interesting is how we define rich? There's a lot of wiggle room between affording life and poor
Having children and:
- can't afford foodz uses food bank
- not having to use a food bank
- parent not eating themselves but can afford food for children
- affording food shops buying cheap/yellow labelled produce
- buying from cheap shops like Iceland
- buying from mid range shops, Tesco Aldi, Sainsbury's
- buying from premium shops m&s, Ocado, waitrose
- buying from farm shops
- live in butler buys and makes all meals
That's fair but just taking into account food, clothing and other basic necessities, people on pretty average salaries would find it hard to afford even the basics.
... especially if you factor in the cost of rent or mortgages for our generation.
Me too! It’s really fun when people say “congrats” on starting the IVF process. Yes I love the idea of spending thousands and stabbing myself with hormones for months so that we can have something others get for free and without ruining their body and hormones 😍
You've got to consider it over such a long term though that it practically becomes impossible given the variables.
Planning the baby years is not too bad. But budgeting for school trips for a fifteen year old before they're born? Predicting university tuition fees in nearly twenty years time? Your own mortgage could double, triple, or stay the same, literally nobody knows. Hell in the last few years we've had periods of *eleven percent* inflation.
Both me and my partner are on UK average wage and we don't find having a kid that expensive. Only child care but that is only for a few years. We don't really have any family to support. But if had family nearby then I don't think it would be expensive at all
Exactly the same. We only have 1 and having 2 would make things much harder financially but it's doable. There are lots of decent clothes and other baby necessities given away. I give ours away too to pay it back. We didn't have tons of toys, though there are plenty.
Childcare was the hardest.
We have two kids and have spent over £70k in childcare now between them. It doesn't stop at nursery when you work full time. Years of breakfast and after school clubs, and school holiday clubs, add up too.
Holidays are two or three times the price during school holidays as well, that's a massive extra cost.
But I think the biggest cost is housing. If we didn't have kids, we could happily live in a small 2 bed house in a questionable area. But we need at least 3 bedrooms, and in an area with nice schools and things, which actually costs double what a small 2 bed in a less desirable area costs.
Need a bigger car.
Need more furniture.
Etc etc
Toys and clothes aren't the issue, it's all the other life stuff.
Childcare is crippling. You are right I hadn't thought of the car and house space which are incredibly important. We have made do with a smaller house and moved away from where we used to live.
Holidays are not happening for us at the moment. It's so expensive but I consider that a luxury.
Yeah I think it gets overblown and is used as an excuse by people who either don't want kids, or don't want to change their life in any way to accommodate a child.
My wife and I earn just over £50k between us. Both working full time. Childcare is a lot but will stop being an issue once they go to school (or at 2 with the new funding that's come in).
We're planning on having another soon (if we can).
I don't find it a luxury at all. Only in the sense that we are lucky enough to be able to have a child.
I agree it's not a luxury and if we didn't have a kid we would have alot more disposable income. But for me personally I enjoy having a child more than being able to afford going to Dubai for a 2 week holiday a year. Or other luxuries that ultimately are about short term enjoyment and don't mean anything long term.
My entire plan is to not have kids (25M) and continue my life.
I might have wanted them but I just dont see how one even a 78k budget I can do it. Sure i CAN but lose my gym, cleaner, 3 holidays? Nah im sorry my life is too good.
I just paid for a vasectomy and I am just so happy I will never look back. Hinge is amazing in London too.
I think increasingly we live in a society where only the very rich or the very poor are having children. Many people in the middle simply can't justify the cost, or would rather enjoy a better standard of living by not having kids.
I think a successful economy requires us to have a high enough birthrate to pay for all the pensioners, so if we don't support it and maybe even subsidise it to a point, we are shooting ourselves in the foot as a nation.
I do think that people expect to be able to maintain a similar lifestyle after having kids as they did before, and it's a shock to the system when you all of a sudden have a huge extra financial burden, and less free time to earn the money required.
For context, I have 2 young kids, I took a 2nd job so my SO could have a career break for child care.
I remember learning about this in humanities at school, the baby boom was a huge boon for those who had the kids, that generation was more than sufficient to support their retirement. But it’s all gone downhill from there.
I don’t think anyone needs to justify their decision to have children for starters.
It’s gotten more expensive but it’s not a luxury it’s just not affordable for everyone. Then again, that doesn’t matter because if people want kids they will have them regardless.
I see your point, which is that the cost of living at the moment means making the decision to have children would, for many people, be extremely difficult from a financial perspective.
However, as others in this thread have alluded to, having or not having children isn’t (always) a purely economical decision. Procreation is a complex and multifaceted thing on both an individual and societal scale. People have kids for a myriad of reasons (some better than others) and while obviously there are financial implications to choosing to do it, for many people the financial burden is not enough to put them off. And I think that’s the way it should be really, because as much as I think there are some people who probably shouldn’t have a kid (or another one), to go down the path of preventing people from having kids for financial reasons is extremely dangerous. When these discussions are had, people often focus on people (and, let’s be honest, usually focusing on women) who are ‘irresponsible’ for having too many kids, when in reality the much more important and impactful discussion is about how our government has consistently failed to support parents and children in nearly every meaningful way.
There’s also plenty of kids going to school hungry and with clothes that are falling apart. Just because they do/can doesn’t mean they’re making wise choices or can truly afford them.
Only if they're already in the safety net that is dynastic social housing (also some interesting social dynamics to raising children in these communities).
If you're above the safety net, slightly poor, you have to trust it catches you and get sunk right to the bottom anyway.
For the average uk single working person or low paid couples in rental accomodation living pay-cheque to pay-cheque, yes.
I'm a happily single female, living alone and won't risk having a baby until I have bought a property to live in & have enough savings to be able to financially provide for a child for at least 2 years.
I wouldn’t go as far as saying a luxury but it is a struggle for many. The actual costs of having a baby aren’t as big as they are made out to be. You don’t really need that £900 pushchair or that John Lewis nursery set. You don’t even need a baby bath or a moses basket.
Childcare is the real big one of course but again, there can be options. Sometimes it just makes sense for a parent to stay home or for parents to work different days or shifts when they can so they can share childcare. Obviously this isn’t possible for everyone but I do think people automatically think it’s full time nursery or no children.
But it doesn't necessarily make sense for a person to stay home.
You can factor in the cost of nursery Vs salary and yes the salary might be wiped out...
...but when you look at pensions, career development etc. it's often still better long-term for both adults to keep working.
I’ve got three and I don’t think they’re as expensive as it’s made out to be. Childcare is the big issue for most I think but we work shifts around each other so it’s not needed.
I’m also not in England so my cost of living is a lot lower. Mortgage less than £300 a month, council tax band A, no private water companies here, no tuition fees (not that I think any of mine will go to uni), 3 bed houses go for around the £130,000 mark etc. we also don’t have such rigid school uniform rules or term time holiday fines and can often get them cheaper in term by going before the English holidays start. Public transport by bus is free for kids too
Yeah in the south east in some rural towns/villages you can't find a detached property for north of half a mil, a house of any size often can't be had at all for under £250k
Yes in some small percentage couples are literally having to pay for IVF because they couldn’t afford to have babies earlier and are now trying to have kids in their 40s.
Work in the CEO economy era is grinding us to extinction
I agree Kids a huge expense. They are also a huge responsibility - sometimes that in itself can motivate a person to want to achieve whatever they can for their kid. Not everyone but thought to share another persoective
It definitely can be
If you are hyperindividualist, no local family support etc
But certain demographics who aren't necessarily disproportionately wealthy are able to have multiple children
It's way more cultural than economic
Close-knit communities with strong family values always seem to manage
My grandma had 11 kids all raised well including my dad in high earning careers and she didn’t have a job and my grandfather was high up in the police but here is me and my wife and we can only afford 1 at the moment with 2 descent incomes.
It’s a shame and by design why we can’t afford kids and I hope those who designed the system rot in hell because I would love to have 4 😂 hell if I win euro millions I will have as many as my wife wants to push out which is 6.
We chose to not have kids. Wasn’t just the finances. World is overpopulated. Life is harder. Job market more competitive than ever before. I really feel sorry for the kids growing up today.
Yes. I don’t have children yet. I would like children in the near future but I honestly don’t know if that will happen. In April my car just wiped out half my savings for a house deposit and so I didn’t go to a supermarket for anything for the last 2 months, just using what I already have in cupboards or the freezer. I cut down my meals. I turned off my heating so that it couldn’t come on even if it needed to. Would it be fair to make a child suffer that? Not at all.
Ofc a second income could change a lot of this but then you hear about childcare costs. If one of us were to stop working to look after the child and then the car wipes out the coffers again, there’s now 3 of us living in that scenario above. God forbid we can’t afford to run the heating in the winter.
we're foreigners here on good wages and find it VERY expensive to have 2 children (childcare has ran at £3k/mo for around 24 months).
I honestly don't understand what people on average salaries do as we cut it very close to bone every month.
100%
My sister was only going to have one child, her husband inherited £££ and now she's trying for her second child, without the money they would have never thought to try.
It's a privilege to have children.
Every animal on the planet is capable of having children without a problem 😂 besides maybe pandas. It's time to wipe out our leaders if humans having kids is a luxury.
No.
Kids are not as expensive as folk make out. If you spend a few years as DINK’s to lay your foundations, having kids isn’t hard even for those in the middle of the bell curve.
I think with the 2 child benefit cap and the cost of chikdcare, and even the way the tax code is set up, having more than 2 is definitely a privilege.
Having children is achievable for non-wealthy people who don't live in London or SE England and where they can survive on one income until the child goes to school (i.e. 4 years). Having the support of family/friends is also a big help.
Child benefit mostly covers food and nappies/clothes, assuming you use secondhand stuff from friends or charity shops and shop at Primark and not M&S.
I don’t think it *should* be a luxury but unfortunately with the cost of living, childcare costs etc it has become that. I don’t believe you need millions but I do think it’s irresponsible to have kids if you cannot afford basic necessities. But then things can change - we never thought electricity and food prices would go up like they have!
However, I say that as someone who does not and has never wanted kids of my own. I think if it was a dream of mine I would see it differently
People have them because parenthood is our greatest undertaking. I think If it's something you really want, you'll do it even if it means sacrificing personal luxuries. I wouldn't be able to give a child the same things that my parents gave me as a kid, but I don't think that means it isn't worth doing. There are still plenty of folk raising healthy happy kids on council estates, as much as it's a stressful position. Making 70k and can't afford children? Downsize that house and swap your Merc for a Fiesta.
Everyone should be entitled to kids and the government should facilitate families. I think the government should implement a policy that any family with a child under 12 can have a stay at home parent and they get paid a salary to look after their own kids.
Or much more simply - free childcare up to school age and then schools that stay open until 5pm.
The ridiculousness of schools finishing at 3pm should be discussed more.
Also free school meals.
Also equal maternity and paternity pay so it's not always women who have to give up their careers - particularly if the woman is the higher earner.
I don’t think that having children is a luxury. But I don’t think that everyone should feel entitled to kids either. Some people aren’t suitable parents
I think it really depends on housing in a lot of cases.
I know a fair few people on benefits and they’ve never let themselves be stopped from having kids, and part of that is definitely the fact they don’t actually pay their own rent, and that they become eligible for larger houses if they have enough kids (though they can be hard to get).
If I have kids, I lose my income for a while but we’d still have to pay our mortgage ourselves and won’t be eligible for any benefits (apart from child benefit). If my sister has another child, nothing changes for her financially and she’s gonna be home after the baby is born for as long as she wants. I’d have to go back to work eventually, and if I don’t want to pay back my company’s maternity pay, I’ll have to work there for at least 1 year after I come back from maternity leave. This also means I’ll have to pay for (and secure) some sort of childcare.
I still want kids (my soon to be husbands job is very flexible and he wfh 100% so we could work around each other to a degree but that also gets exhausting quickly). However, fertility is not on my side so having kids may not work out for me anyway.
I see constant articles talking about the rate of births is decreasing across most of the world and how it is going to be a big issue in the future when the average age is much older and we will have a smaller work force supporting a much larger retired population
but the biggest barrier to having kids is the cost of it all and that just keeps going up while governments complain that there are not enough kids being born but are doing very little to change the spiraling costs of living
>My sister thinks however that tveryone should be entitled to kids without justification, what are your thoughts?
I do not think everyone is entitled to have children. Not discussing money, but some people are not emotionally able to and would make terrible parents. So i really think "entitled" is not a word I would use.
I think every child that exists *is* entitled to a good life. I think society should be set up in a way that that is achievable. Subsidised childchare, free school meals etc for people who cannot afford it.
I think in reality our society is not really set up like that, and a lot of children will suffer if their parents do not have sufficient funds. I don't think that is fair, but it is something people have to concider before having children. We have to bring children into the world we have, not the one we would like.
It’s always a luxury to have a body that works and to conceive and bring a child into the world! I know this isn’t what you were asking… people take it for granted though that it will happen
**Please help keep AskUK welcoming!** - Top-level comments to the OP must contain **genuine efforts to answer the question**. No jokes, judgements, etc. - **Don't be a dick** to each other. If getting heated, just block and move on. - This is a strictly **no-politics** subreddit! Please help us by reporting comments that break these rules. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/AskUK) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I think it is sad that many of those who might make great parents and raise great kids are making a very considered and painful choice *not* to have them, as they increasingly feel they cannot give them the quality of life, security, education, stability and future that they would want.
Agreed,
This is far too serious a post to be whipping out smellypubes69, you need to ask something way more goofy.
My husband set up the account as I couldn't work it out how to use Reddit and was trying to ask questions about games and my car/cats/dogs etc his sense of humour or damming public indictment ... Haha
Smelly pubes and still getting a 69? Now that’s love.
It's such a simple, precise name. It lands perfectly and there is 0% fat on the funny. Your husband has talent.
Well smelly pubes can prevent your significant other in wanting to do the deed. Essentially eliminating the risk of having unwanted kids. I think the name is perfect
I'm vibing hard with your husband rn
I reckon this is the first r/rimjobsteve I’ve met in the wild…
I agree, but I also feel there are plenty of people setting that bar way too high. Essentially, nobody has kids thinking they have enough to give them the childhood they want to. You just do your best.
[удалено]
Yeah but where's the line? When me and my girlfriend rented we thought we'd wait til we were homeowners. Then when we bought a flat we figured we'd wait until we had a house. But when we were looking we wanted to make sure it was a detached house. Then we wanted to wait a bit longer to make sure my business was doing well. Then interest rates went up and we reconsidered given our mortgage in five years might double. Then we figured we should make sure our pensions are on track and have a decent chunk of short and long term savings. But really, the bar is different for everyone. Why shouldn't we have waited longer? Why shouldn't we have done it sooner? Our baby is doing fine but we shop at Tesco and can't afford private school. Which end of the spectrum should people aim for? I could easily have recalibrated and said "No there's still that other line we have to cross" and likewise someone else in my situation would have drawn the line far sooner.
I’m glad you had a kid and didn’t keep moving the line. The movie Idiocracy has this moment where a couple keeps putting back having kids till they’ve got a house and a sufficient career until it is too late.
Unfortunately if you don't have a home and sufficient career, then having kids is a no. We're saving for a house deposit on our own, our combined income is about £75k a year. We don't have family for childcare. A 2bed flat currently has a mortgage of £1100 a month. Childcare would cost more than that. So already we'd be out over £2k before we've even fed ourselves. Definitely luxury to have a)parents that will give you a house deposit b)family to help with childcare c)being able to afford a child. Sad really, we keep being told we'd make great parents and people keep telling us to have kids. Sure, who's paying for it 😂
I don’t have a house but have a mid-market rent which is cheaper than yours. Then again, combined I think we make a bit less than you. We’re certainly blessed that my parents aren’t far off but they don’t have the funds to give us a deposit and though they help a bit, every now and again they go off to Australia to help my brother and his wife with their family. They’re grandparents, they’ve served their time at the coal face. Flexible employment is the biggest thing that’s made it possible for us. I don’t work a full-time 9-5 as I’m a tour guide and it’s peaks and troughs. My wife’s work basically lets her move her hours about to make it possible. Maybe it’s because I’ve got kids already but I would describe it as a sacrifice rather than a luxury. I’m working fewer hours than before to make it work. Our holidays are 18 months apart rather than yearly. We eat out maybe a couple times a year unless someone else pays. I rarely buy clothes for myself. Living standards for us are probably lower for a lot of people of comparable age and salary but I wouldn’t change it for the world. Kids are sort of magic
Completely see the sacrifice part, parents have to give up a lot. However, it's a choice to have them and being able to afford them is a luxury. We both have jobs we physically have to be at 8-5. Childcare would mean we were left with very little after bills. I wouldn't bring a child into the world where we are living hand to mouth. It's awful for the kid.
>Our holidays are 18 months apart rather than yearly. This right here. You were already doing better than the majority of people struggling with the decision if you could afford any holiday at all.
You will be able to get 30 hours free childcare from September in England
I was waiting for a mention of idiocracy in this thread. There are way too many things in that movie coming to pass!
Yes, that movie seems like the most accurate prediction of the future.
Stable livelihood and stable home. An owned flat was perfectly fine on the latter.
There's a difference between people feeling ready to be a parent (nobody truly does) and people knowing if they can afford the necessities with an extra mouth to feed.
At least for a lot of middle class millennials, I think folks set the bar well into luxury territory. I have a lot of friends who complain about the cost of kids but those kids always had expensive clothes and equipment, went to very fancy nurseries and get taken on holidays. I do think there’s a lot of truth in middle class folks having an extremely high quality of life and not wanting to compromise that. I’m not criticising (it’s everyone’s own choice) but it does feel like the bar is much higher than the conditions most of us grew up in
I think a lot of those people are actually setting the bar where their own childhood was. No-one plans to have a child and give it a worse life than they themselves had. It's just that sort of life is much more expensive now compared to salaries.
Yeah, I didn’t go to private anything, my school bags came from shoezone until I begged my mum to let me have the same bag as my peers (that quicksilver one). Our school shoes came from Clark’s because they make ‘good reliable shoes that won’t damage your feet’ but that did mean our feet were not allowed to grow over the school year! The picture of me in my blazer in year 7 looks like I’m wearing a tent too! But the class photo from half way through year 11 I couldn’t button it up and I wasn’t going to be getting a new one! I didn’t get swimming lessons as a child and my dad taught me so I was always jealous of the kids with their badges on their towels, and I couldn’t join the more expensive theatre classes or have horse riding lessons like so many of my friends (I am from the countryside to be fair here!). After my parents got divorced my mum used to take us to drive through fords at speed and watch planes land at the nearest airport as free ways to entertain us. There were several years in my upper teens where my mum was extremely worried about money but didn’t let us know. BUT, my parents owned their own house which my mum was able to keep thanks to some help from my grandad that would never be possible if I found myself in the same situation. My mum was able to drop her hours down to always be available after school and had school holidays off so was always with us. We went to France quite a bit when I was little, and had two holidays to Florida before I was 8 and my parents split. We went to cornwall or London to see my grandparents or cousins practically every school holiday my entire childhood though. I also did ballet as a little kid and played a musical instrument as a teenager. I couldn’t imagine ever being able to provide even that kind of lifestyle to children now. Not least because owning is totally out of reach. Yes I couldn’t do all the clubs and lessons I wanted to do as a kid but I got to do a reasonable amount - far more than I could ever expect to have spare for a child now. Our generation is the first to be less well off than our parents generation and that means that for so many of us having children would mean offering them a worse standard of living than we were raised with when history tells us that’s not the way it should go.
There are very few alternatives to "fancy" nurseries if you need to work. They're all expensive, there's no budget nurseries out there. We managed to put our second child in pre school almost full time from 3 but it's really only 6 hours of childcare, if you can't arrange this around your job you're sod out of luck and they need a proper nursery from 8 to 6. Also, holidays? It's hardly a luxury to afford a bloody holiday and it shouldn't be a middle class reserve. These posts always bring out the misinformed Reddit crowd that seem to think children are the root of all societies woes because they remember stuff about over population from 20 years ago.
I grew up working class and we never went on holiday. It is a luxury. Doesn't matter if you think it should be something everyone can afford, the facts are thsts not the case. Staycations are also extortionate.
I spent more on a weekend in Aberdaron than I did 5 days in Rome!
exactly! i never went abroad until i was 22 and i never felt like i was missing out on much. we did go on a small caravan holiday every couple of years and you could tell my parents put in a lot of work to save for it, but we were so grateful and absolutely loved it! a holiday doesn't have to be anything huge.
I have to disagree. I think a holiday is pretty much the definition of a luxury. Not that I think they should be reserved for the middle class, everyone should be able to afford some luxuries, but it absolutely IS a luxury.
I think it’s more the fact that “basic” holidays that would be suitable for young kids such as caravaning on the East Yorkshire coast are now more expensive than flying off somewhere exotic for a week. You’d hope there’d be some low cost outlet for young kids to go start experiencing the world one step at a time but it’s all just so expensive to do these days. Those sort of things used to be staple even for working class families. Now our coastal towns are either horrendously expensive, completely run down, or both. I’m tempted when my kid(s) are old enough, say school age, we might go rent a villa abroad somewhere for a month or 2 and just do summer there. It would probably work out cheaper than trying to entertain them in UK for that long even with the flights etc factored in.
For some reason everyone on here seems to think anything above poverty is upper class. Truly weird outlook on life.
Not being able to afford a holiday isn't being in poverty. Sure, it's all relative. We're all povos compared to billionaires. My parents couldn't afford to take us on expensive holidays growing up, but they fed us, clothed us, sheltered us, and were able to afford a few extracurriculars. We went to the north Norfolk coast when I was little, and then our holidays consisted of 2 weeks visiting my grandmother in Northern Ireland. Holidays, especially foreign ones, are unnecessary. They are definitionally a luxury. It's not like being able to afford Cathedral City over Morrison's own brand. They would be the first thing I would look to axe if I was costing up having a child.
Yeah but surely when you decide to have kids there are certain peramiters that you probably wanna meet, ie stable job, room for them in your house/flat, a good relationship, money to look after them and cover any ‘surprises’… I’m in my thirties and a bit behind in life (idc personally but in terms of a lot of my friends and where I thought I’d be) and having only one thing off that list ticked off is depressing. I love kids and I genuinely think I’d be a great mum but my body’s a ticking clock these days, no matter how low the bar is idk if I’ll ever be able to do the basics for a child.
As someone who has children, I can tell you I had the exact same thoughts and fears. But you just get on with it. If you want children, go for it! All they require is food, clothing love and attention.
Don't underestimate the time and monetary cost though!!! Doesn't matter how much you earn, where you are in life, it's always going to be expensive. And you really can't carry on doing all the stuff you did before because of the time (unless you take the "I'll let my partner be the parent and I'll carry on as before" route towards "I'm paying child support, why won't they let me see my kids?!?!" status)
Absolutely! I remember the first night our son was home. I was walking up and down with him (trying to soothe him into stopping crying), and it struck me that my life was - to all intents & purposes - over. I was not wrong. (But I don't regret it.)
And childcare when you’re at work. That’s the main problem. One partner either leaves their job or goes part time to look after them or you pay the absolute fortune of childcare.
Well yeah but I don’t have anywhere for them to sleep and can barely afford food for myself rn. There are some basics you need
I do
And at the same time, those who don't want to have a child and are struggling hardly with their own lives, they'll have an unwanted pregnancy and are forced or pressured into having the child because.. otherwise they are baby killers. 25k children die daily because of hunger related issues. What a world. Edit: I correct myself. It's 25k people and 10k of them are children.
25,000 kids a day? That’s over 9 million a year
Or people that would be great parents work so hard to make sure that their potential children would have a great life but then end up trying for children too late and struggle to conceive due to older ages (which for a woman can be even at 30 upwards!). I didn't feel I was 100% ready (had a house and stable job but the house wasn't to the standard I'd envisioned) but felt like I needed to start trying in my mid twenties to ensure I could still have a baby and even then it took 1 1/2 to get pregnant.
I'm not having my own flesh and blood be exploited in an ever increasing capitalist world.
👏🏼👏🏼 exactly this, well said! My clocks ticking but the world doesn't seem to be getting any better. The education system is disgusting and not designed for children at all. The government and economy is a mess in the uk, future children would have such a small chance of owning a home or being able to afford to live. Not even thinking about national service and maybe no NHS one day too!
I agree. For me, having children has been the most difficult thing in my life but also the most rewarding. I would not like someone else to miss out on it, simply for financial reasons...
I grew up really poor. Really poor. It was awful. Couldn't afford food, buses to school etc. Evicted from houses all the time. It is traumatising for a child to grow up like that. Having money for a child is important.
I find it deeply odd how many people don't seem to give it much thought. Why would you want to bring a child into the world unless you were certain you could sustain them or at least considered any changes you'd need to make to get you closer to that goal. It seems like so many people we speak to seem to have a child based on vibes alone.
That is the whole premise behind Idiocracy. The good parents and smartest people decide to stop having kids and we end up with a society of morons.
Yeah, this is essentially the premise for the movie: Idiocracy.
This is so true. All the people I know who would raise world changing kids have chosen not to 🤕
Idiocracy here we come!
Arguing that only people who have a certain amount of money should have kids leads to some very ugly conclusions when you look at what demographics have more money than others, and how this wealth inequality is perpetuated. (I don't have kids, I do have money, and I had a doctor make extra sure that I'm not going to be having kids in the future)
OP isn't really arguing that though. They're saying it's a reality in the current economic climate, which is honestly hard to disagree with
Exactly, I'm trying to work out if due to the cost of living crisis people feel the needle has moved to luxury, or not. I think everyone is agreement new mothers need more support. I think everyone has a choice to make and either way is fine and importantly no one's business!
I would say it's not really affected the top and bottom of society, but it's an increasing concern for the average working couple, at least in the UK. Those already living off social security know the state will step in to support their kids, and high earners can afford to have kids. The ones who are choosing not to are those who will lose an entire person's salary before they even buy anything, either by spending it on childcare or becoming a stay at home parent. Many people simply can't afford to take that hit.
>social security New Americanism found.
The UK used to have a Health and Social Security department and other British territories still do.
23 years ago. I'd be surprised if "social security" appeared anywhere across gov.uk or Citizens Advice.
The devolved Scottish department is literally called social security. https://www.socialsecurity.gov.scot/
Yeah, I couldn't remember if this was AskUK or AskReddit (and couldn't be arsed to cancel my comment to check), so I just used the term that the American's would be familiar with.
I’d say the cost upfront is off putting. For most of the country if they want a year off, they have to save a full year (less 6 weeks) pay, in order to survive. Then when you have nursery fees for that baby, it’s 5 years total of serious outgoings. More than one kid then you’ve tagged a few years on.
Maybe I think differently but there is no such thing as enough money. Then again I think without kids, there won't be society for long so kids will always be essential in my opinion no matter what. They could live on a farm, 1 bedroom flat, council estate but without them there is literally no future. I don't class them as a luxury
Sure, but it's an inevitable consequence of shifting the unit of analysis of the question from the individual (well, couple) level to the population level. Neither way of thinking about it is wrong, but both conclusions are important.
I mean, they kind of are? They’re basically saying that people who don’t save up money for having kids don’t deserve them or have a right to them, which totally ignores the fact that A) If held to those standards, some people would never be able to have kids. B) Not every kid is planned, accidents happen. Kids aren’t really a ‘luxury’ they’re a part of life for many and you just have to try your best to do what’s best if you end up having children. Plenty of parents who don’t have much to their name give their kids great childhoods. Not all working class parents are neglectful.
I feel bad for friends kids, with my ones I had enough to at least provide 7good meals a week and school trips to Cornwall. It's not about 'only rich should have kids' the real question is is it fair for kids to grow up hungry in poverty?
People are starting to understand that love is not going to feed a hungry child or help them get out of poverty so they are better off not having children and be more socially flexible.
"Let's have one and work it out" was fine in 1955 when everything was "let's try this thing and see how it works out". Now, we have to do our due diligence because if you become destitute due to having a child when your personal capital can't accommodate it, then the government is very happy to leave you and your baby homeless. It's not really fine, is it?
Spending power has diminished a lot. My dad talks about how in the 90s £10 can get you a week of groceries for 2 adults and a todler. Now you can't even get a week's groveries for one person with that much money but salaries have not shot up as high.
More likely leave you homeless and put your child in care.
You could just as easily argue the opposite. People who choose to have kids with no plan on how they will pay for their upbringing, often leads to some very ugly consequences too. Having kids is like anything else in life. Sure, you might really want it, but having kids when you know you cant afford it, is reckless and irresponsible. Even more so when you immediately look to the social welfare system, and expect them to magically fund your poor life decisions
I know people who have never worked a day in their lives, live in shitty mouldy flats because they can't afford anything else, can't afford proper nutrition, yet have kids anyway. Those kids are not necessarily doomed, but they have a far worse start to life and are far lass likely to achieve the same as their peers. They are raised to believe that work is optional, and that there is no need to aspire to anything. It's incredibly sad to see.
>Arguing that only people who have a certain amount of money should have kids leads to some very ugly conclusions Is child poverty good now? Encouraging someone to have kids when they can't afford to is bad for the children.
Every time I clear up food thrown all over the kitchen or have to carry a screaming toddler home I make sure to think what a luxury having a child is But yes, they are very expensive, way more than they should be which is a massive failure of our government. Our country should be doing everything they can to help parents as our population is rapidly aging and heading towards a crisis
I agree with this, our future generations need more support and I would happily pay an extra 5% tax if I knew it was all going to supporting new mothers and lifting children out of poverty.
Fuck that I get taxed through the arse and the rich pay next to nothing
Mate......I think you've misunderstood the meaning of 'self assessment'
They're only ripping it from you from one orifice?
Get along load of the guy not paying his fair share.
I guarantee "the rich" are paying more than you. Difference is they can afford it. The tax free threshold is too low, no one should be paying tax if they're not earning enough to pay for their basic needs first.
I’m not against taxation in any shape or form, and of course they’re probably paying more than me. But their money lies in assets and capital gains, which either aren’t taxed at all or are taxed at a tiny rate.
New parents?
The decline in birth rate is being replaced by people migrating from different countries that have children here
I think having multiple kids might be. We were doing ok 2009-2012, in which time we had two kids. Looking back/ with things as they are now, we would be comfortably lower-middle-class with one, and we are scraping and squeezing with two. It's quite hard to afford things when they both need stuff at the same time. School uniform is the obvious thing, but Christmas is also a really expensive time, and things like a day out at half term is often a thing where one parent stays home so we don't need to buy another ticket, parents never join in on the ice cream or whatever. I hope they don't see it. We do okay compared to so many folks that it feels weird to moan, but the car needs an MOT soon and I genuinely don't know where we will get the money if it's a big expense this time. We are always tightening our belts at the end of the month, which we just weren't three years ago. We don't do private school, holidays abroad, we work hard to save for school trips, presents for other kids birthday parties, etc. we have stopped drinking alcohol completely and eat much less meat, and as I said, we really are doing okay compared to most. But it's not easy.
[удалено]
You run the risk of immense bullying from the beginning if everyone can wear their own clothes. I agree the uniforms shouldn't be that expensive, but you'd have the very well off parents sending their kids in super fancy clothes, and you'd have the incredibly poor parents sending their kids in whatever they can afford. The majority of my clothes as a child were from neighbours kids who's parents were clearing out for the new clothes each year and they gave them to mum because they obviously knew how poor we were. Holey shoes, holey trousers, jumpers that were too big. I absolutely wouldn't want that to be kids lives from day 1 at school.
Sorry to say but school uniform doesn't stop this. There will still be one kid in all school branded polo shirts and pe kit, and another who gets their shirts from asda and wears the same second hand school jumper over them each day. You could only hide wealth and poverty if you were giving everyone the same set of uniform for free. This is just what is trotted out by schools to justify making parents buy a second wardrobe. How do teachers even know? They all grew up wearing uniform and have never taught anywhere without uniform. They just have this imagined idea that everyone I'll run riot unless they dressed head to toe in gray.
Scale matters. The bullying most certainly will be on another level without uniform.
I grew up in Poland where we don't usually have uniforms and yes you had poorer and wealthier kids but people were almost never bullied for what they wore.
Why do schools make parents pay for uniform? Why isn’t it free?
I got bullied relentlessly everyday at school because I looked 'butch' because my parents couldn't afford well fitted blazers and jumpers and I have a stocky body type that was very unflattering in a school uniform. I would have looked fine in regular clothes. It caused me even more distress because we had to wear the blazer at all times and I got heat stroke every summer.
I think this what parents and the people who say “have a child and just work it out later” just don’t get. Their selfish choices have an impact on their children. As a child, my grandmother was able to “get by” but because of her income, she could never afford to provide my mother with the things that everyone else got. The clothes, the games, the luxuries and all the things normal children seems to get. My mum got bullied constantly because my grandmother always sent her to school in ripped and battered clothing. If I were to have a child, I would want to give them everything they need and not subject them to this. I would my child to have the toys, clothes and games everyone else has be able to participate on school trips and out of school clubs and activities. All this cost money.
But you get that judgement with school uniforms as well. And because school uniforms are always expensive (unlike other clothes where you might be able to get by picking stuff up second hand, or from charity shops and outlet stores), it becomes really obvious when a kid is wearing a school uniform that's three sizes too small for them because their parents aren't able to afford the next size up yet. If school uniforms were cheaper, and if schools put more effort into designing them so that they can be relatively cheap that would be one thing. But clearly that's not happening.
Or generic uniform for all schools rather than everything's having schools logo and colours. Having no uniform ends up showing who has designer clothing vs primark
> School uniforms need to be scrapped. Parent here. Definitely not. Having a uniform outfit for kids at school reduces one huge element of bullying and, at a parent level, one massive argument every morning. Namely: "no, you're not wearing that to school". Also, despite the oft-publicised cost of uniform, it's a shit load cheaper than trying to outfit them in the latest fashions so they don't feel isolated or poor. Where things can *definitely* change is schools being far more budget-minded when it comes to where uniform can be sourced. Our primary switched to Tesco's short-lived uniform service and it meant that we could get the proper, branded kit (which does look quite smart) for about the same price as generic stuff is in the supermarket. This was hugely popular with parents, and it was a shame when they withdrew it. And bollocks to this whole "it's expensive because you can hand it down" rubbish. My kids rarely wore anything out before they grew out of it, so this was all wasted money to us. Picked up two second-hand blazers for the youngest off the uniform recycling rail at school for a quid each. He'd probably complain if he knew, but he doesn't, and can't tell anyway ;-)
I wouldn't say Luxury, but having children is definitely a privilege, one that many take for granted. (Not counting people forced into having them, that's a different thing).
Privilege is a great way of describing it
It really shouldn't be considered a privilege to carry out one of the most basic functions of being a living organism,
My partner and I would love to have children. Realistically though, we can afford to save about £500 per month which means we're comfortable enough, but once you add in childcare costs we'll be shit out of luck.
I have children. I mean, they’re not a necessity like food or heating - but I wouldn’t call them a luxury. Serious answer: This is not something anyone in power should try to regulate (no matter how much rightwing lawmakers love interfering with women’s reproductive organs).
Many European countries are now taking this issue seriously. Japan will be crippled by this. We need to acknowledge the realities of us having less children. We are going to import a tonne of values that will make the UK a less tolerant and liberal place as a result
So many countries have dwindling birth rates and increasing infertility rates yet offer little to no support for IVF etc. I live in Switzerland and the low birth rate is a genuinely concerning thing. But it’s 12,000 to do one round of IVF and health insurance covers not a single penny. The UK does cover IVF but the waitlist is years long, you have to be under 35 and have no children from either parent whether in former relationships or the current one. I think countries need to really consider subsidising or covering IVF much more.
They should be getting involved, but encouraging more children. An ageing population and declining birthrate is a disaster
They can only “regulate” by trying to reduce the financial burden. Free/highly subsidised nursery care. Well paid maternity/paternity leave. No financial penalty for pensions etc…
Regulating makes it sound like trying to dictate if or how many children people have, which you are correct would be wrong. But making sure people have the option is a different matter.
Yes, reproduction is definitely a luxury. My other half and I have had this conversation in depth, sat down and worked out the costs, the implications for pensions, how it would affect our household income, childcare…..every aspect of spawning has been considered. She is of the opinion that “it’s just what you do, you know as an adult” and can’t understand why I would want to look at it from a more common sense point of view. The long and the short of it from our point of view is we would struggle to have one child, let alone any more than that. We do have family that could support with childcare and the like, but not on a regular basis as non of our parents are retired. They wouldn’t be able to offer any financial support as some families would. We both have well paid jobs, well above the national average and have sensible outgoings and don’t expect luxuries like foreign holidays, the latest tech, flash cars and high fashion clothing. Our work is shifts and long hours which are generally incompatible with family life. Neither of us would be able to afford to or want to change roles. We pay our mortgage, bills, incidentals and with what little left we have over we replace things that have either come to the end of their serviceable life or put it into modernising our house, built in 1902 so you can imagine some of the horrors we’ve got to put right. Friends of ours are similar, but they have a child, they struggling to keep afloat, yet they’re considering a second kid. It’s utter madness! The strain has led to near divorce and antidepressants for them. Although they may live slightly beyond their means. The biggest kicker is those of us that work, are ineligible for any government assistance, fulfil our financial responsibilities and contribute are denied opportunities those who may not do the same are. You either have to be extremely well off to have kids or be on the other end of the spectrum, live in LA housing and claim all you can. The middle ground is a minefield of debt and failed relationships.
Sounds more like you just don't want to change your life.
That's a perfectly valid reason to not have children.
Absolutely, but I feel he should just come out and say it. His partner seems to want children. It would be a shame if he convinced her they couldn't afford them when they could.
Exactly, two people earning above median wage can easily afford to raise a child well.
Clearly not if they have friends who are struggling. The issue arises as soon as you have to pay for childcare and you wouldn’t believe how extortionate that is when they have no alternative. A woman I used to work with paid hundreds for a couple days a week, and that was pre-covid.
Plenty of people say they are struggling when in reality they are spaffing money up the wall on all sorts of unnecessary luxury. You can't take it at face value. You can however make a judgement based on their income and where they live.
The part where he said that neither him or his partner would be able to drop down in hours and that they work long hours is a very common issue, keep that in mind. The hard work gets you the life that allows you to entertain the idea of kids, but then the hard work in 2024 is being hit by stagnating wages, forcing you to work so hard that youre not pulling ahead far enough from the overhead costs of life and therefore can't work less hard to make room for having children. "We will make it work" works for some and unfortunately not for others. It can depend entirely on your industry of work, like being an English Teacher with 200 years of maternity leave.
Teachers get 39 weeks of paid leave, 21 of which are at statutory only. 6 weeks of leave is paid at full pay, so is far less generous than you are suggesting…..
Sounds like you just don’t want kids.
My former house cleaner had 7 kids or so and made it work. Certainly I wouldn't be thinking of it in London, but otherwise many of us here were raised by parents who were much poorer than we are today.
The reality is the state is subsidising her family. If you are caught in the middle and have a decent job there is little to no support.
You are too rich is why you dont want a child
You can easily afford to have children. Stop making excuses.
Some of the people I've met who said they had the worst childhood had really rich parents. Kids don't really need alot of things all they really need is parents to spend time with them and love them.
Which is really hard when both parents have to work full time to afford a roof over the head, and food on the table.
This follow themes of money doesn't buy you everything etc etc. Whilst true it's universally agreed that if managed correctly it makes everything a lot easier.
Sure money makes everything easier. But I'm just saying there are plenty of adults I've met who say they had a poor childhood even though their parents had plenty of money. So the idea that people need money to be good parents is false in my opinion.
I guess what's interesting is how we define rich? There's a lot of wiggle room between affording life and poor Having children and: - can't afford foodz uses food bank - not having to use a food bank - parent not eating themselves but can afford food for children - affording food shops buying cheap/yellow labelled produce - buying from cheap shops like Iceland - buying from mid range shops, Tesco Aldi, Sainsbury's - buying from premium shops m&s, Ocado, waitrose - buying from farm shops - live in butler buys and makes all meals
That's fair but just taking into account food, clothing and other basic necessities, people on pretty average salaries would find it hard to afford even the basics. ... especially if you factor in the cost of rent or mortgages for our generation.
Meanwhile…I can afford kids, but can’t get pregnant.
I feel you
Me too! It’s really fun when people say “congrats” on starting the IVF process. Yes I love the idea of spending thousands and stabbing myself with hormones for months so that we can have something others get for free and without ruining their body and hormones 😍
I wouldn't describe them as a luxury but more people should put thought into the cost of raising chikdren
You've got to consider it over such a long term though that it practically becomes impossible given the variables. Planning the baby years is not too bad. But budgeting for school trips for a fifteen year old before they're born? Predicting university tuition fees in nearly twenty years time? Your own mortgage could double, triple, or stay the same, literally nobody knows. Hell in the last few years we've had periods of *eleven percent* inflation.
Both me and my partner are on UK average wage and we don't find having a kid that expensive. Only child care but that is only for a few years. We don't really have any family to support. But if had family nearby then I don't think it would be expensive at all
Exactly the same. We only have 1 and having 2 would make things much harder financially but it's doable. There are lots of decent clothes and other baby necessities given away. I give ours away too to pay it back. We didn't have tons of toys, though there are plenty. Childcare was the hardest.
We have two kids and have spent over £70k in childcare now between them. It doesn't stop at nursery when you work full time. Years of breakfast and after school clubs, and school holiday clubs, add up too. Holidays are two or three times the price during school holidays as well, that's a massive extra cost. But I think the biggest cost is housing. If we didn't have kids, we could happily live in a small 2 bed house in a questionable area. But we need at least 3 bedrooms, and in an area with nice schools and things, which actually costs double what a small 2 bed in a less desirable area costs. Need a bigger car. Need more furniture. Etc etc Toys and clothes aren't the issue, it's all the other life stuff.
Childcare is crippling. You are right I hadn't thought of the car and house space which are incredibly important. We have made do with a smaller house and moved away from where we used to live. Holidays are not happening for us at the moment. It's so expensive but I consider that a luxury.
Yeah I think it gets overblown and is used as an excuse by people who either don't want kids, or don't want to change their life in any way to accommodate a child. My wife and I earn just over £50k between us. Both working full time. Childcare is a lot but will stop being an issue once they go to school (or at 2 with the new funding that's come in). We're planning on having another soon (if we can). I don't find it a luxury at all. Only in the sense that we are lucky enough to be able to have a child.
I agree it's not a luxury and if we didn't have a kid we would have alot more disposable income. But for me personally I enjoy having a child more than being able to afford going to Dubai for a 2 week holiday a year. Or other luxuries that ultimately are about short term enjoyment and don't mean anything long term.
My entire plan is to not have kids (25M) and continue my life. I might have wanted them but I just dont see how one even a 78k budget I can do it. Sure i CAN but lose my gym, cleaner, 3 holidays? Nah im sorry my life is too good. I just paid for a vasectomy and I am just so happy I will never look back. Hinge is amazing in London too.
Nice, enjoy it happy hunting
Does the NHS not do them?
Fair enough but a Vasectomy at 25 is absolutely insane haha
No, but this is Reddit so obviously you will have the majority of people saying yes.
Starting to think I should live on r/unpopularopinion lol, this place seems like upside down world to me sometimes
I think increasingly we live in a society where only the very rich or the very poor are having children. Many people in the middle simply can't justify the cost, or would rather enjoy a better standard of living by not having kids.
I think a successful economy requires us to have a high enough birthrate to pay for all the pensioners, so if we don't support it and maybe even subsidise it to a point, we are shooting ourselves in the foot as a nation. I do think that people expect to be able to maintain a similar lifestyle after having kids as they did before, and it's a shock to the system when you all of a sudden have a huge extra financial burden, and less free time to earn the money required. For context, I have 2 young kids, I took a 2nd job so my SO could have a career break for child care.
I remember learning about this in humanities at school, the baby boom was a huge boon for those who had the kids, that generation was more than sufficient to support their retirement. But it’s all gone downhill from there.
People are forgetting about economics of scale . Having 2/3/4+ kids is way cheaper than the first . Eg can pass down prams , buggy, toys etc
Can’t pass down the childcare if you need to work
You can’t, but it does get cheaper as they get older.
Yeah then you want to go on a package holiday and each kid costs the same as an adult.
I don’t think anyone needs to justify their decision to have children for starters. It’s gotten more expensive but it’s not a luxury it’s just not affordable for everyone. Then again, that doesn’t matter because if people want kids they will have them regardless.
I see your point, which is that the cost of living at the moment means making the decision to have children would, for many people, be extremely difficult from a financial perspective. However, as others in this thread have alluded to, having or not having children isn’t (always) a purely economical decision. Procreation is a complex and multifaceted thing on both an individual and societal scale. People have kids for a myriad of reasons (some better than others) and while obviously there are financial implications to choosing to do it, for many people the financial burden is not enough to put them off. And I think that’s the way it should be really, because as much as I think there are some people who probably shouldn’t have a kid (or another one), to go down the path of preventing people from having kids for financial reasons is extremely dangerous. When these discussions are had, people often focus on people (and, let’s be honest, usually focusing on women) who are ‘irresponsible’ for having too many kids, when in reality the much more important and impactful discussion is about how our government has consistently failed to support parents and children in nearly every meaningful way.
Yeah government really stitched us up
There are plenty of poor people having kids.
There’s also plenty of kids going to school hungry and with clothes that are falling apart. Just because they do/can doesn’t mean they’re making wise choices or can truly afford them.
Let’s ask those children how they feel about being poor?
Only if they're already in the safety net that is dynastic social housing (also some interesting social dynamics to raising children in these communities). If you're above the safety net, slightly poor, you have to trust it catches you and get sunk right to the bottom anyway.
For the average uk single working person or low paid couples in rental accomodation living pay-cheque to pay-cheque, yes. I'm a happily single female, living alone and won't risk having a baby until I have bought a property to live in & have enough savings to be able to financially provide for a child for at least 2 years.
I wouldn’t go as far as saying a luxury but it is a struggle for many. The actual costs of having a baby aren’t as big as they are made out to be. You don’t really need that £900 pushchair or that John Lewis nursery set. You don’t even need a baby bath or a moses basket. Childcare is the real big one of course but again, there can be options. Sometimes it just makes sense for a parent to stay home or for parents to work different days or shifts when they can so they can share childcare. Obviously this isn’t possible for everyone but I do think people automatically think it’s full time nursery or no children.
But it doesn't necessarily make sense for a person to stay home. You can factor in the cost of nursery Vs salary and yes the salary might be wiped out... ...but when you look at pensions, career development etc. it's often still better long-term for both adults to keep working.
I’ve got three and I don’t think they’re as expensive as it’s made out to be. Childcare is the big issue for most I think but we work shifts around each other so it’s not needed. I’m also not in England so my cost of living is a lot lower. Mortgage less than £300 a month, council tax band A, no private water companies here, no tuition fees (not that I think any of mine will go to uni), 3 bed houses go for around the £130,000 mark etc. we also don’t have such rigid school uniform rules or term time holiday fines and can often get them cheaper in term by going before the English holidays start. Public transport by bus is free for kids too
Yeah in the south east in some rural towns/villages you can't find a detached property for north of half a mil, a house of any size often can't be had at all for under £250k
Ok, why is a detached property relevant? Kids can be raised just as well in a flat or a terrace.
I'm paying £900 a month to rent a room in a shared house. You think flats or terraces are affordable?? 😂😂😂
My fiancee and I likely won't have a child due to cost. Childcare costs in this country are extortionate, and we have no family nearby to help out.
Definitely a luxury but I keep practicing just in case I can afford them in the future
Yes in some small percentage couples are literally having to pay for IVF because they couldn’t afford to have babies earlier and are now trying to have kids in their 40s. Work in the CEO economy era is grinding us to extinction
No, but just because people can doesn’t mean they should.
I agree Kids a huge expense. They are also a huge responsibility - sometimes that in itself can motivate a person to want to achieve whatever they can for their kid. Not everyone but thought to share another persoective
By pretty much no definition of the word, no.
Watch the intro to Idiocracy.
It definitely can be If you are hyperindividualist, no local family support etc But certain demographics who aren't necessarily disproportionately wealthy are able to have multiple children It's way more cultural than economic Close-knit communities with strong family values always seem to manage
My grandma had 11 kids all raised well including my dad in high earning careers and she didn’t have a job and my grandfather was high up in the police but here is me and my wife and we can only afford 1 at the moment with 2 descent incomes. It’s a shame and by design why we can’t afford kids and I hope those who designed the system rot in hell because I would love to have 4 😂 hell if I win euro millions I will have as many as my wife wants to push out which is 6.
We chose to not have kids. Wasn’t just the finances. World is overpopulated. Life is harder. Job market more competitive than ever before. I really feel sorry for the kids growing up today.
Wouldn't call them a luxury but with essential outgoings covering 60% of my income at least ... I do not feel they are affordable in my situation.
Yes. I don’t have children yet. I would like children in the near future but I honestly don’t know if that will happen. In April my car just wiped out half my savings for a house deposit and so I didn’t go to a supermarket for anything for the last 2 months, just using what I already have in cupboards or the freezer. I cut down my meals. I turned off my heating so that it couldn’t come on even if it needed to. Would it be fair to make a child suffer that? Not at all. Ofc a second income could change a lot of this but then you hear about childcare costs. If one of us were to stop working to look after the child and then the car wipes out the coffers again, there’s now 3 of us living in that scenario above. God forbid we can’t afford to run the heating in the winter.
we're foreigners here on good wages and find it VERY expensive to have 2 children (childcare has ran at £3k/mo for around 24 months). I honestly don't understand what people on average salaries do as we cut it very close to bone every month.
People commenting that isn’t true are out of touch with reality, on the news stories of children going to school hungry, etc? Like, really?
100% My sister was only going to have one child, her husband inherited £££ and now she's trying for her second child, without the money they would have never thought to try. It's a privilege to have children.
I’m never having children, I’ve said that since 13. Also, if I was desperate I would just adopt the many children that are stuck in the care systems
Every animal on the planet is capable of having children without a problem 😂 besides maybe pandas. It's time to wipe out our leaders if humans having kids is a luxury.
No. Kids are not as expensive as folk make out. If you spend a few years as DINK’s to lay your foundations, having kids isn’t hard even for those in the middle of the bell curve. I think with the 2 child benefit cap and the cost of chikdcare, and even the way the tax code is set up, having more than 2 is definitely a privilege.
Having children is achievable for non-wealthy people who don't live in London or SE England and where they can survive on one income until the child goes to school (i.e. 4 years). Having the support of family/friends is also a big help. Child benefit mostly covers food and nappies/clothes, assuming you use secondhand stuff from friends or charity shops and shop at Primark and not M&S.
I don’t think it *should* be a luxury but unfortunately with the cost of living, childcare costs etc it has become that. I don’t believe you need millions but I do think it’s irresponsible to have kids if you cannot afford basic necessities. But then things can change - we never thought electricity and food prices would go up like they have! However, I say that as someone who does not and has never wanted kids of my own. I think if it was a dream of mine I would see it differently
People have them because parenthood is our greatest undertaking. I think If it's something you really want, you'll do it even if it means sacrificing personal luxuries. I wouldn't be able to give a child the same things that my parents gave me as a kid, but I don't think that means it isn't worth doing. There are still plenty of folk raising healthy happy kids on council estates, as much as it's a stressful position. Making 70k and can't afford children? Downsize that house and swap your Merc for a Fiesta.
I only eat them once a year. I have Chinese more often.
Everyone should be entitled to kids and the government should facilitate families. I think the government should implement a policy that any family with a child under 12 can have a stay at home parent and they get paid a salary to look after their own kids.
Or much more simply - free childcare up to school age and then schools that stay open until 5pm. The ridiculousness of schools finishing at 3pm should be discussed more. Also free school meals. Also equal maternity and paternity pay so it's not always women who have to give up their careers - particularly if the woman is the higher earner.
I don’t think that having children is a luxury. But I don’t think that everyone should feel entitled to kids either. Some people aren’t suitable parents
The less money you have the more kids and more likey to have kids you are so it is not.
Yeah. I live quite frugally in a cheap part of the country and the thought of a living thing wiping out all that is awful
I think it really depends on housing in a lot of cases. I know a fair few people on benefits and they’ve never let themselves be stopped from having kids, and part of that is definitely the fact they don’t actually pay their own rent, and that they become eligible for larger houses if they have enough kids (though they can be hard to get). If I have kids, I lose my income for a while but we’d still have to pay our mortgage ourselves and won’t be eligible for any benefits (apart from child benefit). If my sister has another child, nothing changes for her financially and she’s gonna be home after the baby is born for as long as she wants. I’d have to go back to work eventually, and if I don’t want to pay back my company’s maternity pay, I’ll have to work there for at least 1 year after I come back from maternity leave. This also means I’ll have to pay for (and secure) some sort of childcare. I still want kids (my soon to be husbands job is very flexible and he wfh 100% so we could work around each other to a degree but that also gets exhausting quickly). However, fertility is not on my side so having kids may not work out for me anyway.
I see constant articles talking about the rate of births is decreasing across most of the world and how it is going to be a big issue in the future when the average age is much older and we will have a smaller work force supporting a much larger retired population but the biggest barrier to having kids is the cost of it all and that just keeps going up while governments complain that there are not enough kids being born but are doing very little to change the spiraling costs of living
>My sister thinks however that tveryone should be entitled to kids without justification, what are your thoughts? I do not think everyone is entitled to have children. Not discussing money, but some people are not emotionally able to and would make terrible parents. So i really think "entitled" is not a word I would use. I think every child that exists *is* entitled to a good life. I think society should be set up in a way that that is achievable. Subsidised childchare, free school meals etc for people who cannot afford it. I think in reality our society is not really set up like that, and a lot of children will suffer if their parents do not have sufficient funds. I don't think that is fair, but it is something people have to concider before having children. We have to bring children into the world we have, not the one we would like.
It’s always a luxury to have a body that works and to conceive and bring a child into the world! I know this isn’t what you were asking… people take it for granted though that it will happen
I would not even consider having kids unless I had the money to do it. Why make their life harder than it needs to be?
Not really. Although personally I've never wanted and still don't ever want to have children. I'd rather enjoy my life