Peer tells the poor: have fewer children
Discussion
www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-1389348,00.html
Peer tells the poor: have fewer children
Sarah-Kate Templeton
ONE of Britain’s leading family planning experts has risked outrage by saying the poor should avoid having large numbers of children.
Baroness Flather, a former president of the Family Planning Association, wants health clinics to advise parents from deprived areas against extending their families.
The Tory peer, who is a director of Marie Stopes International, the sexual health charity, believes poor people like television’s The Royle Family should focus their resources on two or three children.
Recent research has shown that the cost of bringing up a child from birth to university is £164,000. The less well-off have, on average, 2.7 children compared with two for middle- class parents and 2.3 for the top social class.
Parents of large families accused her of advocating eugenics. They argued it was beneficial for children to grow up with several brothers and sisters.
Speaking last week, Baroness Flather, who has two sons, said a mother should be told by health clinics to weigh the costs of having a large family after the birth of her first child.
She said: “People should be thinking more about how much they can offer five children compared to how much they can offer two or three.
“Perhaps parents (with large families) cannot give their children the education they would like to be able to give, or do not have the time to educate the children themselves. Perhaps they do not have the space for them to study.
“If you want the best for your child, you have to think about how many children you can look after. If you had two or three children, maybe you could have higher aspirations for them.” She says smaller families that focus on the education of their children would be more beneficial to the economy.
“We need people with skills, and large families are not always focused on that. In Britain, the highest achievers among immigrants are the Indians, who have smaller families. We know that the Bangladeshis, who tend to have larger families, are not as high achievers.”
Baroness Flather says it is easier for smaller families to go on educational outings such as visits to museums and galleries.
While the peer is careful to point out that decisions about family size are up to parents, she says women must realise they have a choice over how many children to bring into the world. “We are not saying ‘you will only have three children’. We just want women to think about the children’s future.”
Flather adds that while the middle classes have greater resources to bring up more children they are choosing to have smaller families.
She is backed by John Guillebaud, emeritus professor of family planning at University College London. But he cautions health professionals against being seen as interfering or patronising. He said: “It is relevant to discuss with parents their ability to give the best possible life to their children. It all depends on how this is said. I could never be pushy.”
Marie Stopes International, one of Britain’s largest abortion providers and a leading family planning organisation, is considering publishing leaflets for women detailing the financial costs of bringing up children. Some of the women the clinics treat have abortions because they do not have enough money to look after another child
Marie Stopes chief executive, Tim Black, said: “We should make this information available but we must not patronise people. I do not think people understand that having a child is a costly exercise.”
The suggestion that mothers should give more consideration to how much they can spend on each child has, however, angered parents of large families.
Eileen McCloy, a mother of 10 from Govan, a deprived area of Glasgow, argues that children from large families learn qualities that money cannot buy, such as sharing and consideration for others. She also points out that these children benefit from the family support brothers and sisters can offer.
McCloy, 45, a full-time mother, graduated last year from Strathclyde University in Glasgow as a mature student. Her husband, Kevin, 54, is a joiner.
Although the children have been brought up in a rented house, the McCloys pride themselves on the fact that their oldest children have gone on to buy their own homes.
The McCloys’ eldest son, Kieran, 25, is a computer engineer with the local health authority, while their eldest daughter, Claire, 22, has an honours degree in marketing. Gillian, 18, is on a gap year before university, while Martin, 16, is sitting four highers — the Scottish equivalent of A-levels. There are six younger children aged between three and 14.
Mrs McCloy said: “Bringing up children may cost a fortune if you want them all to go to private school and have a PlayStation each. Our children know how to share and they know how to take their turn. Thanks to being part of a large family, they also know how to have consideration for each other and for others that are less privileged than themselves.
“What Baroness Flather is suggesting is eugenics. I would like to see her going into Knightsbridge and suggesting that families there have fewer children.”
Nazrul Islam, a waiter, and his wife, Asma Begum, a full-time mother, have five children aged between three and 14. They are from Bangladesh but now live in Tower Hamlets, east London, one of the poorest communities in Britain.
He said: “It is a decision that should be left to each family. I don’t think official bodies should really get involved. I certainly don’t feel my kids have missed out.”
Peer tells the poor: have fewer children
Sarah-Kate Templeton
ONE of Britain’s leading family planning experts has risked outrage by saying the poor should avoid having large numbers of children.
Baroness Flather, a former president of the Family Planning Association, wants health clinics to advise parents from deprived areas against extending their families.
The Tory peer, who is a director of Marie Stopes International, the sexual health charity, believes poor people like television’s The Royle Family should focus their resources on two or three children.
Recent research has shown that the cost of bringing up a child from birth to university is £164,000. The less well-off have, on average, 2.7 children compared with two for middle- class parents and 2.3 for the top social class.
Parents of large families accused her of advocating eugenics. They argued it was beneficial for children to grow up with several brothers and sisters.
Speaking last week, Baroness Flather, who has two sons, said a mother should be told by health clinics to weigh the costs of having a large family after the birth of her first child.
She said: “People should be thinking more about how much they can offer five children compared to how much they can offer two or three.
“Perhaps parents (with large families) cannot give their children the education they would like to be able to give, or do not have the time to educate the children themselves. Perhaps they do not have the space for them to study.
“If you want the best for your child, you have to think about how many children you can look after. If you had two or three children, maybe you could have higher aspirations for them.” She says smaller families that focus on the education of their children would be more beneficial to the economy.
“We need people with skills, and large families are not always focused on that. In Britain, the highest achievers among immigrants are the Indians, who have smaller families. We know that the Bangladeshis, who tend to have larger families, are not as high achievers.”
Baroness Flather says it is easier for smaller families to go on educational outings such as visits to museums and galleries.
While the peer is careful to point out that decisions about family size are up to parents, she says women must realise they have a choice over how many children to bring into the world. “We are not saying ‘you will only have three children’. We just want women to think about the children’s future.”
Flather adds that while the middle classes have greater resources to bring up more children they are choosing to have smaller families.
She is backed by John Guillebaud, emeritus professor of family planning at University College London. But he cautions health professionals against being seen as interfering or patronising. He said: “It is relevant to discuss with parents their ability to give the best possible life to their children. It all depends on how this is said. I could never be pushy.”
Marie Stopes International, one of Britain’s largest abortion providers and a leading family planning organisation, is considering publishing leaflets for women detailing the financial costs of bringing up children. Some of the women the clinics treat have abortions because they do not have enough money to look after another child
Marie Stopes chief executive, Tim Black, said: “We should make this information available but we must not patronise people. I do not think people understand that having a child is a costly exercise.”
The suggestion that mothers should give more consideration to how much they can spend on each child has, however, angered parents of large families.
Eileen McCloy, a mother of 10 from Govan, a deprived area of Glasgow, argues that children from large families learn qualities that money cannot buy, such as sharing and consideration for others. She also points out that these children benefit from the family support brothers and sisters can offer.
McCloy, 45, a full-time mother, graduated last year from Strathclyde University in Glasgow as a mature student. Her husband, Kevin, 54, is a joiner.
Although the children have been brought up in a rented house, the McCloys pride themselves on the fact that their oldest children have gone on to buy their own homes.
The McCloys’ eldest son, Kieran, 25, is a computer engineer with the local health authority, while their eldest daughter, Claire, 22, has an honours degree in marketing. Gillian, 18, is on a gap year before university, while Martin, 16, is sitting four highers — the Scottish equivalent of A-levels. There are six younger children aged between three and 14.
Mrs McCloy said: “Bringing up children may cost a fortune if you want them all to go to private school and have a PlayStation each. Our children know how to share and they know how to take their turn. Thanks to being part of a large family, they also know how to have consideration for each other and for others that are less privileged than themselves.
“What Baroness Flather is suggesting is eugenics. I would like to see her going into Knightsbridge and suggesting that families there have fewer children.”
Nazrul Islam, a waiter, and his wife, Asma Begum, a full-time mother, have five children aged between three and 14. They are from Bangladesh but now live in Tower Hamlets, east London, one of the poorest communities in Britain.
He said: “It is a decision that should be left to each family. I don’t think official bodies should really get involved. I certainly don’t feel my kids have missed out.”
Sound thinking, and more 'Tabs' for bairns to smurk in council house between them...
Mrs McCloy said: “Bringing up children may cost a fortune if you want them all to go to private school and have a PlayStation each. Our children know how to share and they know how to take their turn. Thanks to being part of a large family, they also know how to have consideration for each other and for others that are less privileged than themselves
Mrs McCloy said: “Bringing up children may cost a fortune if you want them all to go to private school and have a PlayStation each. Our children know how to share and they know how to take their turn. Thanks to being part of a large family, they also know how to have consideration for each other and for others that are less privileged than themselves
warmfuzzies said:
Neuter them, China won't allow more than one, as the state cannot afford to support this, so why do people complain ;-)
k.
I may have misheard, but I thought there was something on the radio about the Chinese now being encouraged to have more children. Sadly, there is evidence that if the first born is a girl, it "disappears".
All he is saying in effect is "don't live a lifestyle beyond your means".
This seems to be sensible advice.
People who have children and then complain that they can't afford them have clearly not thought things through (ignoring those who fall on hard times later obviously).
Such people are as stupid as those who run up big credit card bills and then complain that the credit card company is to blame for giving them credit.
This seems to be sensible advice.
People who have children and then complain that they can't afford them have clearly not thought things through (ignoring those who fall on hard times later obviously).
Such people are as stupid as those who run up big credit card bills and then complain that the credit card company is to blame for giving them credit.
Why do they always find the rare one-off exception to the rule to 'comment' on these matters, ie the McCloys, who are obviously good parents.
It's not only about not living beyond your means, it's about realising your abilities, If you can't bring up children properly, don't have them! And it doesn't matter how much money you have!
It's not only about not living beyond your means, it's about realising your abilities, If you can't bring up children properly, don't have them! And it doesn't matter how much money you have!
towman said:
Neuter them, China won't allow more than one, as the state cannot afford to support this, so why do people complain ;-)
k.
I may have misheard, but I thought there was something on the radio about the Chinese now being encouraged to have more children. Sadly, there is evidence that if the first born is a girl, it "disappears".
Its a really big problem for the future of Chinese society as well. Its not good to have an imbalance in the population between men and women, imagine what never having a girlfriend would do to many mens mental well-being.
If it continues I think a womens place in Chinese society will be elevated, but murdering a first born girl child is just not healthy for a society.
This is all eminently common sense. So it will naturally be decried by the liberal minuteority.
The simple problem is that the Chav's assume and know that the state will pay - so they don't give whether or not they can personally afford it a second thought.
Meanwhile, the missus and I, on £100k + per annum are doing our sums and working out the cost of maternity leave, childcare and schooling with a view to starting a family next year. We've waited until we can afford it, but even so are going to take a huge financial hit in the process.
The simple problem is that the Chav's assume and know that the state will pay - so they don't give whether or not they can personally afford it a second thought.
Meanwhile, the missus and I, on £100k + per annum are doing our sums and working out the cost of maternity leave, childcare and schooling with a view to starting a family next year. We've waited until we can afford it, but even so are going to take a huge financial hit in the process.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
ergo the chavs can afford however many children they decide to have. There is nothing irrational or stupid in deciding to raise children in these circumstances if that is your desire
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Be real; There are lots of perfectly well balanced families being brought up without the help of the state earning a third of this amount, without being impoverished.
towman said:
Neuter them, China won't allow more than one, as the state cannot afford to support this, so why do people complain ;-)
k.
I may have misheard, but I thought there was something on the radio about the Chinese now being encouraged to have more children. Sadly, there is evidence that if the first born is a girl, it "disappears".
Not just China, it also goes on to some extent in India and the Middle East
tony.t said:
ergo the chavs can afford however many children they decide to have. There is nothing irrational or stupid in deciding to raise children in these circumstances if that is your desire
anonymous said:[redacted]
Be real; There are lots of perfectly well balanced families being brought up without the help of the state earning a third of this amount, without being impoverished.
In response to your comment about the chavs - that's the problem. They don't need to think about it. I made no comment on their "irrationality or stupidity". The system actually encourages it.
Of course lots of families do very well on less, but we are still doing the responsible thing and working out the financial implications - along with a high income tends to go a higher mortgage and lifestyle costs, along with one hell of a lot of tax. For my wife to take six months maternity leave will cost us at least £15k, not to mention all the other kiddie related costs.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Quite, the system does nothing to discourage those with no hope of being personaly able to finance their own children. However, it's the system that's at fault.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Trust me, there is never a good time finacialy to have children and it goes downhill from there on.
>> Edited by tony.t on Monday 6th December 01:11
pesty said:
seems like comon sense to me. Why have 6 children when you can only afford 2 or 3?
In the case of Catholic families it's religious indoctrination.
No amount of preaching by peers on either side of the house is going to make a scrap of difference.
The issue is down to the Pope and leaders of the church.
Common sense has no place in this problem, unfortunately.
Its like I said in another post recently, I could probably scrape together enough to buy an old Ferrari but the upkeep would financially cripple me so I don't do it.
Children should be the same, if you can't afford to keep them then don't have them.
[particularly
as I have just worked out how much tax I have paid so far this year to support chavs and speed humps]
Children should be the same, if you can't afford to keep them then don't have them.
[particularly
as I have just worked out how much tax I have paid so far this year to support chavs and speed humps]Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff