Women forced to consider abortions due to government policy that ‘traps children in poverty’, says report

Mothers have been forced to consider having abortions so they can feed their families because of a government policy which cuts some child benefits for households with more than two children, a new report has claimed.

The two-child limit, which prohibits families from receiving tax credit and universal credit for a third or subsequent child, is “trapping children in poverty” to the point where they cannot eat healthy food or attend sports clubs, according to the research from the Child Poverty Action group (CPAG) and the Church of England.

Based on a survey of more than 430 families affected by this policy, as well as additional evidence from charities, the report found that in some cases, women who had had unplanned pregnancies – often because contraception had failed – had felt obliged to consider a termination.

Campaigners described the policy as "cruel", saying it "sent a message that one child matters more than another simply because of the order in which they are born".

The two-child limit was part of a package of changes to benefits announced in 2015, aimed at reducing spending on working-age families. From April 2017, low-income families having a third or subsequent child lost their entitlement to additional support through child tax credit and universal credit, worth £2,780 per child per year.

An estimated 160,000 families have been affected by the policy to date, while 300,000 children will be pushed into poverty by 2023/24, according to the findings, which also suggested that 1 million children will be pushed even deeper into poverty in the next five years.

The report states that by 2024, more than half of children in families with three or more children are expected to be in poverty.

Alison Garnham, chief executive of CPAG, called on the government to lift the two-child limit, saying: “We wouldn’t turn away a sick child from our hospitals or stop them going to school and yet the two-child limit denies families the support they need from our social security system when they experience tough times, trapping kids in poverty.”

The Rt Revd Paul Butler, Bishop of Durham, said the policy was “going against this fundamental principle and pushing many families and children into poverty”.

He added: “It is simply not right that some children get support and others don’t. The two-child limit must be lifted as part of a concerted effort to reverse the rise in child poverty."

Almost all parents who took part in the survey said they had had to cut back on essentials (95 per cent). One said they hadn’t been able to afford inhalers that week because they were more concerned about their children having food, and that they were "praying" they could make the inhalers last before they ran out.

One mother, named only as Lisa, whose husband works full time, said she couldn't buy the healthy food that she would like to buy for her children, adding: "I would have liked to get them fruit. I can’t remember the last time I made a fresh dinner, it’s all stuff I’ve got in my freezer.”

Another mother, whose partner had become ill and unable to work due to disability, meaning she stayed at home caring for him and their four children, said she and her husband were "not eating at all during the day to feed the children".

Margaret Greenwood, Labour's shadow work and pensions secretary, said: "The government must listen to the damning evidence in this report. It brings home the impact of this cruel policy on families forced to cut back on essentials and pushed into poverty as a result.

"The two-child limit means children missing out not just on toys or school trips, but meals and new clothes when they need them. It sends a message that one child matters more than another simply because of the order in which they are born."

Interviews conducted as part of the research also suggested the two-child limit risked making it harder for women experiencing domestic abuse to leave their abuser and increase the hardship they and their children face if they do manage to leave.

Under the policy, if a woman conceived a child due to rape there is a requirement for disclosure of non-consensual conception to get an exception, which the report said could make it more difficult to leave an abusive relationship and put mothers at increased risk of violence.

The research also states that refugees affected by the two-child limit are likely to have arrived in the UK with next to nothing, and that the two-child limit hinders their ability to rebuild their lives after traumatic experiences.

The financial effects of the two-child limit not only undermine refugee parents’ ability to provide material basics for their children but also reduce refugee children’s access to school activities that could help them to integrate and build social connections with their peers, it said.

One refugee couple have had to stop swimming lessons for their eldest child, though she loves them, in order to cover essentials for the baby. Another refugee couple said: “We just try to pay the bills and buy food because that’s all we can afford, that’s what we have to prioritise.”

A government spokesperson said: “This policy helps to ensure fairness by asking parents receiving benefits to face the same financial choices as those in work. Safeguards are in place and we’ve made changes this year to make the policy fairer.

"Tackling poverty remains a priority - we’re spending £95bn a year on welfare and providing free school meals to more than a million children. We’re supporting families to improve their lives through employment and latest figures show there are 667,000 fewer children living in workless households since 2010.”