http://uk.news.yahoo.com/5/20110405/tuk ... dbed5.html


About time someone said what I'm sure a lot of people have been thinking. In this country, there's a segment that seem to see children as a means to a nice house and lots of benefits.

If you're on benefits, a tax break to not have kids isn't really much of an incentive though is it? What you'd have to do is something like a hard limit on the amount of child-related benefit someone can have, so if they want to have more kids they'll have less for themselves. Sadly I'm sure there are people who would carry on having more kids anyway. They're not having lots of kids because they want to, they're having lots of kids because they're too stupid to avoid not having lots of kids.

If we want to limit family sizes in general, we have to do something that applies across the board. And it's got to be something that's valuable to everybody. That's pretty tricky.

I'd be happy if they were to implement it like, but that's just pure self-interest.

Jon

Personally I think your income tax should increase / child

Really?

So, people stop having families, on order to save some money. Then, years down the line, and when there is a huge shortfall of younger workers, you'll be moaning that the aren't enough workers paying tax to cover the burden of pensions on the state.

Well that will not happen in the UK for a while as we have a birth rate only slightly lower than a sustainable rate.

Oh yes, Great Britain is definitely responsible for the world's overpopulation.

+1

Roughly (not allowing for accidents etc) if every couple had two children, you'd expect the worlds population to stay about the same.
People complain (rightly so) about China's one child policy, but at least they've recognised that population growth has to be stopped.
I would never suggest the same plan here. But if we stopped child benifits for the 3rd child onwards, and only considered the first 2 children when it came to awarding housing/housing benifits, I'm sure a lot of these work shy chavs would stop producing vast amounts of offspring that they can't afford to look after. If silimar policies to either that (or the exrtereme policies of China) were global, we'd have a much better chance of helping the environment.

The fundamental point that human overpopulation is bad for the ecosystem is a pretty reasonable argument : overpopulation of any species is generally bad for the ecosystem, we've seen many examples of the fact. The problem is humans being humans, we have found ways to use technology to alleviate the natural rebalancing that would occur.

The problem is that, especially in the developed western world, we tend to see the ability to have children as a right, so any measure which is seen to limit that is thought abhorrent. So we get the paradox of IVF being paid for by an NHS that can't afford the maternity staff to look after the babies when they are born. A moment's objective analysis will tell you this is insane - there's no 'right' to produce as many children as you like, especially if you can't support them yourself. Still, the problem remains - any politician who suggested a law or regime which did anything to limit the 'right' for couples to have children effectively at will would be be calling up the devil himself's amount of trouble.

Jon

Rather than try and save very premature babies which are invariably a huge drain on the NHS through out their adult lives we should have a much later start to when doctors assist the newborn.

Again, is it the developed Western world that's responsible for the overpopulation of the globe? Ah, that'd be a "no" then.

Western populations are fairly stable, in fact many are shrinking. It's places like India, China and Indonesia that have to tackle this problem.

Blighty makes up just 0.9% of the world's population.

China and India alone make up more than a third of the world's population. A THIRD!

I wasn't meaning to imply that. Merely commenting on the notion of entitlement to procreation and the effect it has on the society we (generally) live in.


I think it's fair to suggest that China and India are consuming an increasing percentage of the available resources, which is more the issue than the simple size of population. The hope is they'd use the available knowledge and experience available to 'hop' some of the stages where the use of resources is most intensive. Sadly, it doesn't appear to be what's happening.

Jon

Why not just ban all medical services and let nature do the rest. Bring back evolution!

Yes lets shut the NHS!

That goes way beyond Tory. That's Republican talk!

Yup. Just like it's completely responsible for "global warming" and CO2 production!


I see the argument - there are far too many people on the planet. Either the birth limit needs to be decreased (reducing the number of babies born) or the death rate needs to increase (increasing the number of people dying). Actively trying to do either is going to cause problems.

IVF on the NHS is limited - the criteria are highly restrictive:

1. aged 23-39 years at the time of treatment
2. one or both partners have a proven fertility problem
3. you have been infertile for at least three years
4. you have been trying for at least one year

Even then, you get only one shot. The issues with midwives isn't so much as pay as retention - not enough are staying/continue training. The amount of stress on them means they don't want to stay on. This leads to fewer people. More midwives are needed. They don't need to be paid more.


We don't try to "save" most of them. By 24 weeks, most of them can be assisted but the risk of neonatal death is high. 27 weeks has a better prognosis. The alternative is to leave them alone, see them struggle to survive. Some will and they will be physically and/or mentally impaired as a result - is this really the right thing to do? The burden on the state would be greater through having to support someone throughout their life than a few extra weeks of care.


Honestly, I've thought about this during medical school and came to the same conclusion - medical advances are retarding mainstream evolution. But the problem is where do you stop? Painkillers? Cough/cold remedies? Warm blankets?