One surprising fact is that New Zealand has one of the highest rates of child poverty in the world, and both candidates in the general election have promised to half child poverty by 2030. 

KentishAddick said:

At the risk of being shot down is it not the parents job to ensure their kids are suitably looked after? My parents were never well off and we always struggled when I was younger, but they always ensured we had food. Don't see why the government is expected to bail everyone out if I'm being honest

If someone could enlighten me on this then I'm willing to listen

Yes it is the parents’ job, but too often they don’t do it properly or at all. Even if they do have the money, some would rather spend it on phones and clothes than feeding their children.

jacob_CAFC said:

JaShea99 said:

KentishAddick said:

At the risk of being shot down is it not the parents job to ensure their kids are suitably looked after? My parents were never well off and we always struggled when I was younger, but they always ensured we had food. Don't see why the government is expected to bail everyone out if I'm being honest

If someone could enlighten me on this then I'm willing to listen

Yes it is the parents’ job, but too often they don’t do it properly or at all. Even if they do have the money, some would rather spend it on phones and clothes than feeding their children.

Comment straight from the Daily Mail

My wife's worked in education (mainstream and PRU's) for 15 years. Based on what she tells me I'd say a significant minority of parents do behave like that and just because the Mail gets a kick out of highlighting the extreme cases doesn't mean it isn't true.

Even if we do follow the logic that all parents are capable of providing but some choose not to it seems remarkably callous that anyone would be happy to clean their hands of the matter and let innocent children (the actual victims here) go hungry because of their parents choices/situation.
"That kid's health is really suffering due to neglect. Oh well, not my problem."

KentishAddick said:

At the risk of being shot down is it not the parents job to ensure their kids are suitably looked after? My parents were never well off and we always struggled when I was younger, but they always ensured we had food. Don't see why the government is expected to bail everyone out if I'm being honest

If someone could enlighten me on this then I'm willing to listen

I absolutely get where you are coming from, i'm sick to death of my wife spending literally about 1/4 of her wage to feed kids in her class to see the mums (or sometimes dads) outside school smoking and wearing ugg boots whilst Tik Toking on their iPhones. And don't get me onto the number that come into school with out a coat over winter, parent is quite happy to wear a north face jacket themselves though.

But what do you do, let the kids starve just because their parent/s are idiots? Or are some parents behaving like that as they know someone else will pick up the feeding of the child?

I actually agree with all schools providing free meals, it takes away a lot of the stigma as well. What Rashford also tried to get is that continuing during school holidays.

Not sure of the answer but in this day and age kids (nor anyone) shouldn't be going hungry, how you rectify that when it doesn't always come down to money I do not know....

A lot of child poverty is down to bad parenting.

Doesn't mean that we punish the kids for it, though.  It's not their fault that their parents are selfish fuckwits.

Why does everything have to be so binary these days?  IMO Kentish Addick has a point (I have witnessed this countless times), as does Marcus Rashford (children should not be punished for having the misfortune to be born to shit parents).  It does not have to be either or.

Some friends of mine adopted two kids whose parents could not be bothered to care for them; they were not the first offspring from that family to be taken into care.  Last they had heard, their mother was pregnant again with child number six.  The social services workers tear their hair out and watch helplessly as the cycle continues and prepare to take another damaged child into care. This is the problem that no-one wants to address, not least because it is a very difficult issue to confront. Sterilisation, anyone?

Rashford is right, IMO; a civilised society must not punish children for the sins of their parents.

Child Poverty Action Group

The causes of poverty

·         Poverty rarely has a single cause.

·         A range of factors including rising living costs, low pay, lack of work, and inadequate social security benefits together mean some people do not have enough resources. 

·         72 per cent of children living in poverty have at least one parent in work.

·         The long-term deterioration of the terms of employment for workers in the lowest-paid 20 per cent of the UK labour market has been a major cause of enduring poverty in the UK.

·         Low-wages, the high cost of childcare and part-time work all conspire to reduce incomes.

·         Many low-paid jobs offer no opportunities to progress to better work and better wages.

·         Others are insecure, with unpredictable hours and incomes.

·         workers.

·         Since 2006, there has been a 60 per cent rise in the number of people moving repeatedly between work and unemployment.

·         68 per cent of children in families with no working adults are in poverty.

https://cpag.org.uk/child-poverty/causes-poverty

ValleyGary said:

KentishAddick said:

At the risk of being shot down is it not the parents job to ensure their kids are suitably looked after? My parents were never well off and we always struggled when I was younger, but they always ensured we had food. Don't see why the government is expected to bail everyone out if I'm being honest

If someone could enlighten me on this then I'm willing to listen

There was an interview on tv not long ago about all this and they interviewed a kid and parent and some days, she said, she couldn’t feed her kid. This woman was easily 18st. I thought to myself surely they could of avoided that, as all it does is take away from the issue. I think it even went round WhatsApp with people taking the piss.

That would be ignoring the fact of how cheap unhealthy food is, and how expensive and difficult it is to eat clean for a whole month. If you don't earn much money and have an extra mouth to feed, it's a lot easier to eat processed food than it is organic. 

Part of the blame is obviously with the parent, but its important to take a nuanced view on a nuanced issue. I get your point though, it does my head in when obese people can't provide basic food for their kids. 

Rob7Lee said:

KentishAddick said:

Would it not be better to do this on a case by case basis rather than free meals/activities being automatically given to everyone on certain benefits?

If parents/guardians had to give information on their monthly incomings and outgoings and how they spend their benefits and that info was then used to make a decision then I'd have no issue with them receiving further help.

Or is this completely wide of the mark?

Not sure thats feasible, but lets say it was and the parent was told they have enough to feed their child, but still didn't, then what?

It all comes down to it's the child that suffers and has zero control of that situation, whether it's genuine or it isn't.

Good point

KentishAddick said:

At the risk of being shot down is it not the parents job to ensure their kids are suitably looked after? 

Yes it is.  But it is decent society's job to ensure that any children that are not for whatever reason are suitably looked after.

Life is a lottery.  If you are born to feckless, incapable (or just unlucky and destitute) parents you need a helping hand to be put on a footing, that whilst never will be equal to the more fortunate, will still give you a decent crack at taking opportunities that come your way.  Otherwise the cycle will continue.

Many of our parents/ grandparents have come from absolutely nothing and done well without any assistance but that doesn't mean that assistance should not have been given to them and it is not right in 2020 to say that innocent children should be going hungry because of irresponsible parents or responsible parents who can't make ends meet despite doing their best.

Helping the vulnerable in our society might cost us short term but long term it is an investment in the society that we and our future generations all live in. 

Of course there will always be piss takers and wrong uns that abuse the system but that should not detract from the need to help others who do genuinely need it. Which in the case of children will be all of them.