Should there be a test before you get Children's Allowance?

Syth

Just something that I occured to me and I was wondering what other boardsters thought.

Basically, should the State/public not have some say in how you raise your children if you want the state/public to pay for part of it by asking for/recieving children's allowance?

I'm not putting that foward as a way to save money or any stupid reason like that, just that if you want to adopt a child you have to go through a bajillion tests (AFAIK), so should that State not apply some sort of standard to 'natural' parents?

I'm also not saying that we should take the kids away from parents who aren't 1,000% perfect, just that the state/public would say "We're not giving you any money". Also aren't kids the future?

Doesn't the public/state deserve a say if you want their money?

davej

Wouldn't not giving them the money just make things worse then they already are ? Who are you hurting most if the state refuses to hand over the children's allowance? Granted one could argue that some irresponsible parents might waste the money. Maybe there should better checks to ensure that the money is spent appropriately.

I think you are looking at the problem in quite a black and white manner. What if the child has a reasonably good mother but a lout for a father (or vice versa) ? Would they fail the "test" then? Again, in many cases you are punishing the children for the failings of their parents.

davej

Capt'n Midnight

But you need a license to have a dog..

So why not just license people to have kids, you can't have any until you pass the test, and if you do they get confiscated.

Before you can do the practical test you have to pass the theory test. Only problem is there is a 9 month waiting list. ...

Sounds like a new stealth tax / way of cutting down on expenditure..

---

Maybe better health care in the first place. One option would be only pay people who have kids, any kids who were badly treated would be taken into care etc. - look at the civil rights mess that way...

========================================

Unworkable - and would do as much harm as good.

Syth

"Wouldn't not giving them the money just make things worse then they already are?"
Yes I suppose so, but the parent's mite change when they find out they aren't gettin the money. Many family's could do with extra cash. Or maybe I'm being too opptomistic about parent's agreeing with all things the gov says. Most likely they'll just stick too fingers up at the gov...

The thought that inspired this wasn't so much about children's allowance, more along the lines of should the public have a say in what gets done with public money when you give it to a private individual. Children's allowance was the first thing I could think of...