WIDESPREAD, justified opposition to the Child Tax Credit “rape clause” has overshadowed the Victorian iniquity of what produced it: restriction of these credits to the first two children in a family, under the Welfare Reform & Work Act 2016. But this whole Conservative policy must be as vigorously opposed as the “rape clause” by other political parties and organisations.
First, because those who suffer will be children, with many more pushed into poverty and need; secondly because it is class-prejudiced, giving a lower value to the existence of children from, as they see it, feckless families on benefits; thirdly because it is based on absurd assumptions, yet will be discriminatory and damaging to the most vulnerable women in our society.
It’s absurd because there is no evidence that parents sit down, discuss and decide whether to have more children depending on the modest child benefits or child tax credits they will – or will not – receive. It is discriminatory and damaging because the women with the largest numbers of children are most often those with least independence or control over their own fertility. Coercive controlling relationships, traditional religious or cultural pressures and strictures, or past sexual exploitation which can destroy self-confidence and a sense of sexual safety, are the main reasons for repeated pregnancies.
This rational world, which Conservative politicians seem to imagine, only happens when there is relative equality in personal relationships between men and women. I did not think I would see the murky world of eugenics reappearing in my lifetime in British family policy. We must all campaign to get rid of this restriction for good.
Sarah Nelson,
Seacraig Court, Newport on Tay.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here