this is a pretty controversial topic. People should really care about the children that they already have and focus on raising wonderful people

One way would be for Drs. agree to tubal ligation if a Mum requests it. They are reluctant to agree if the Mum is young enough to maybe decide she wants more children. I know one Mum who already had 4 children and asked for a tubal ligation. These days there is more risk of it being faulty becuase they no longer cut and tie the tubes. They put clips on them which can come open. I personally know of one Mum who now has an an additional baby because one of her clips came open. She has an xray showing one clip open and the other one still closed.

I can understand the idea of having no more children if you can’t afford to look after them yourself. Not sure how they are going to implement the idea though.

I totally agree with this. It is not fair for families to have children when they cannot afford them. They expect everyone else to pay for them! Why should the rest of the population slave away to pay taxes which go to help support people who just keep popping out one kid after another? Some are only doing it for the child support payments and so that they can stay on the dole. I am saying this as a sister of a brother who has 5 kids of his own, plus his partner has 2 older children who were taken from her at a young age because she couldn’t care for them. I think if you aren’t prepared to be able to support your family and have no means to do so then you should be politely asked to have contraceptive implant.

It definitely needs discussion.
I know a family who have no jobs and cant support themselves yet keep having children, pregnant with a 5th child now. They don’t even look after the children they already have, They rely on other people

I saw this discussed on Studio 10 the other day. One of the panellists said if you have one child and require welfare to live, then you should be told no more children until you are in a position of being able to support them without welfare. Which is a brilliant idea, if you can’t support the kids, don’t have them. But very difficult to put into practice

There are certainly too many children born to disadvantaged and unfortunate situations, however I don’t know how we control this and/or if we can, really. Capping seems too strict a rule on something that is a human right. It’s more about educating people so they have other options, and to learn that you can change the culture.

It seems wrong to me, so punish those who can’t afford things but cutting down they money they receive if they have more than 2 children. How about tax the rich more who have more than 2 children!!

Hmm, I don’t know. Being a fostercarer ourselves I sure see the problem.
But capping child support benefits for up to two children as a strategy to reduce the number of those in out-of-home care sounds to me absolutely not the right way.

Definitely a topic which needs further discussion especially in light of the fact that the world in general needs to slow population growth – we are fast outgrowing our planet.

An interesting topic, that is for sure.

I think it’s a great idea as the result clearly speaks for itself that the children suffer from neglect and poverty.

Government baby bonus should be restricted to 3 babies maximum. You want more, you can pay for the rest. Dumbing down of Australia started with the baby bonus. 1 baby a year and over 6 kids means income for 30 years on family support funded by tax payers. Also parents then have to stop work to look after them…..and so the cycle repeats itself creating generations of welfare dependent parasites.

In my experience, working among families who now find themselves homeless and also among the kids now living on the streets who’ve fled their family home (surprisingly most from “well to do families”, I don’t believe this is well founded.
The children of those families who are homeless are extremely well cared for, their parents insist that they attend school, although because of their circumstances, few readily admit to anyone that they have no structure to call a house around them. Home is far more than having a building around one after all.
The children who’ll I refer to as “street kids”, often come from well to do families I’ve discovered. Some report horrific abuse (most from personal investigation afterwards prove to be fact).
I believe that there are few children from well to do families in care because these families have the ability to challenge child services legally, with high powered lawyers, whereas those with a lower income do not have this advantage. So, their children are taken into care.
Again, from my experience, a child can live in a wealthy neighbourhood, attend a high class school, and live in an exceptionally clean home, but they still suffer abuse, the parents are just better at hiding the abuse from others.
To even begin to equate one’s income to one’s ability to raise children is fraught with danger, I hope that it never happens. Haven’t we given the Government enough control over our lives???

• • 
  • • mom81879 replied
    • 24 May 2017 , 7:02 pm

  ---

  I don’t think you get the issue. They’re simply saying if you can’t afford kids without being on welfare, then you should be limited to the number of kids you have whilst dependent on welfare. That’s a good thing

This is sounding more like a communist country everyday, why not stop the generous baby bonus to everyone, that might save a few dollars which could then go to helping disadvantaged people. Sounds also to me like the rich want to control the poor. All on welfare spend all their money so it only goes back into the system anyway and keeps the economy going. Most of it on rent helping those who have investment properties and supermarkets.

• • 
  • • mom81879 replied
    • 24 May 2017 , 7:03 pm

  ---

  The baby bonus has been stopped

This is a tricky question, as we all like to feel that we have rights.
I think that there is a large grey area when it comes to this but there are certain minorities that should be restricted. I have heard of countless women giving birth to a large amount of children only to have each one taken away because of the lack of care or abilities as a parent. If a person has failed to give appropriate care several times, then perhaps limits are for the best, and if they aren’t imposed than strict supervision should be given for a period of time.
I also believe that although money is not the answer that a lack of it can exacerbate some circumstances, but a poor person can be just as caring if not more so than a rich one. I understand that this is about limiting births to those who can’t afford it and get the logic but i also feel the need to stand up for those less fortunate and say that sometimes love is the most important factor. Yes this is about budgets etc but some “well off” people probably shouldn’t be parents even though they can afford it also

There is no reason why children from disadvantaged families can’t go on to become valuable members of society. I mean Australia is still looking to improve its economy by population growth, using immigration; and there is no reason why kids from poor Aussie families can’t fill the gap. So long term that ‘welfare’ cost of poor families needn’t be so bad since the kids will give back and build Australia. You just need the right interventions to make sure that the families and kids are supported and kept on track so that today’s ‘disadvantaged kids’ become a positive asset for tomorrow.

It might be a good idea to make it easier to adopt in Australia too, so those children who are affected have a chance at a stable loving home. I think there are people out there willing to adopt but it is so much harder to do in Australia that some abandon the idea or look overseas for children, when we could be helping those here first.

Tend to agree with the sentiments of Mom206279 here. Consistently saying that the government will fix things is wrong and has led to this welfare society which this country just can’t afford.

• • 
  • • musicmum replied
    • 22 May 2017 , 11:37 pm

  ---

  We can afford welfare, all money goes to keeping business going, no one on welfare keeps their money. Welfare spending keeps the wheels turning. What we cannot afford is the continuous payments of high pensions paid to pollies for life when they are already rich and all the perks of 5 star everything. Not to mention the billions not paid by multi -national companies that pay no or very little tax, or the subsidies they get.

Well. I wouldn’t flat out cap the number of children, but I do think there may be value in looking at why people make certain choices, and whether society wants to try to influence those choices.