The DWP policy that is nothing short of eugenics

The DWP logo and a protest outside parliament by disabled people
Support us and go ad-free

We can now properly analyse the effect of a four-year-old Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) policy. It’s caused poverty to increase. And the policy may also have caused an increase in abortions. But exclusive research by The Canary has also found birth rates among the poorest women have dramatically fallen; potentially also due to the policy. Yet so far, the DWP maintains that there isn’t a problem.

The two-child limit

The two-child limit is a DWP policy. The then Tory government brought it in on 6 April 2017. It meant the DWP would only pay Child Tax Credit and Universal Credit for two children in a family; any more than this the DWP would not count in benefits calculations.

The policy has been controversial. A court ruled in June 2017 that the policy was “discriminatory” against single mothers with children under two. Then, in April 2018, another court said the cap was unlawful. This was in relation to young carers. The so-called ‘rape clause‘, where women have to prove they’ve been raped to get an exception to the two-child limit, also sparked outrage.

Now, four years on, the long-term effects of the two-child limit are clear.

Massive growth

The Canary reported in 2018 that the number of households likely to be hit in the future by the cap would explode. In April 2018, just under 71,000 households were subject to the limit. Now, as of April 2020, the number has rocketed to 250,000:

Two child limit April 2020

In April 2018, around 200,000 children were affected. Now, this figure is over 900,000:

Read on...

Number of children affected two child limitMeanwhile, the DWP has effectively cut over £5bn from people’s social security with the policy. And the real-world impact is very concerning.

Increasing poverty

According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) data on poverty, there has been a four percentage point increase in the number of households below average income where three or more children live; up four percentage points from 43% to 47%. That’s nearly a 10% increase:

Households below average income

As the Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) wrote:

estimates suggest that by the end of this Parliament, more than 600,000 families are likely to be subject to the limit, pushing an estimated 1.3 million children into, or deeper into, poverty.

The CPAG also looked at abortions.

Increasing abortions

It found that there was a “sharp” overall increase after 2017:

Abortions England and Wales CPAG

In 2016 in England and Wales there were just over 185,000 abortions. By 2019, this had increased by 11.74% to just over 207,000.

But crucially the CPAG said that abortion rates for women who already had two or more children increased “most rapidly” after 2017:

Abortion rates by number of previous live births

The Canary analysed the birth rates for women by socioeconomic status; that is for the richest and poorest women.

Poor people: not having kids

Our research found that birth rates fell generally. This was comparing 2017 and 2019 figures. The biggest falls have been among the poorest households. In the table below, 1.1 is the richest, 8 is the poorest:

Live births 2019 vs 2017

We cannot directly say that the falls are due to the two-child limit. But given the effect of the policy on abortion and poverty rates – this additional impact is likely. Moreover, the reduction in birth rates in the poorest groups is sudden.

As The Canary previously reported, between 2013 and 2016 birth rates in groups 5-8 fell overall by 0.9%. Now, between 2017 and 2019 this accelerated to a 12.4% fall. But this drop also correlated with the 11.74% increase in abortions. Because the poorest women are having abortions at over twice the rate of the richest:

Abortion rates SES

There is no comparative yearly data for abortion rates per socioeconomic status prior to the two-child limit being introduced. But abortion rates had been rising across all groups between 2013-2018. It appears from the data that between 2018 and 2019, increases in abortion rates were most marked in the poorest groups (a 0.9 point increase in the poorest versus a 0.4 point increase in the richest):

Abortion Rates 2018

The DWP says…

The Canary asked the DWP for comment. A spokesperson told us:

Universal Credit has provided a vital safety net for six million people during the coronavirus pandemic and is supporting people back into work through our comprehensive Plan for Jobs.

In 2020, 85% of all households had two or fewer children, which is reflected in our policy. There are appropriate exemptions in place.

But the DWP’s own research shows that these exemptions are tiny. In April 2018, the number of households with three or more kids the DWP gave an exemption from the limit to was just over 2,800. By April 2020, the number was around 12,500; an average of 4.75% of households hit by the policy across the UK. This is actually a reduction on 2018, where the percentage was around 8% of the total households having an exemption.

Intentional eugenics?

The two-child limit has been perhaps the Tories’ most noxious policy. It’s hard not to look at it and think that the DWP and government intentionally designed it to stop poor people having children. Because as the CPAG noted:

If these findings are related to the two-child policy, it is horrifying. China’s one-child policy was driven by burgeoning birth rates. We have sub-replacement fertility. There is no other country in history that has adapted social security policy to increase child poverty to reduce fertility or encourage abortion. It is a completely outrageous assault on liberty.

The word for this would be eugenics. And successive Tory governments and the DWP have meted it out, without recourse.

Featured image via The Canary and Wikimedia 

We know everyone is suffering under the Tories - but the Canary is a vital weapon in our fight back, and we need your support

The Canary Workers’ Co-op knows life is hard. The Tories are waging a class war against us we’re all having to fight. But like trade unions and community organising, truly independent working-class media is a vital weapon in our armoury.

The Canary doesn’t have the budget of the corporate media. In fact, our income is over 1,000 times less than the Guardian’s. What we do have is a radical agenda that disrupts power and amplifies marginalised communities. But we can only do this with our readers’ support.

So please, help us continue to spread messages of resistance and hope. Even the smallest donation would mean the world to us.

Support us
  • Show Comments
    1. £43m paid out to DWP staff in 2019 for: non related bonus payments. Essentially they are being paid to cull the disabled, the poor and unemployed from their books. The Conservative & Fascist Party have used the DWP for ten years in The Austerity Cull; rewarding the staff handsomely, where over 100 000 people died from lack of care, humanity, dignity and suicide.

    2. Ironically we do need to reduce the birthrate if we are to tackle the problems facing the human race, but this isn’t the way to do it. Wealthy people consume far more per capita than the rest and its at this end that reductions in birth rate will have the largest beneficial effect. We need to educate all not deprive the poor.

    3. Surely by now it should be obvious to everyone with half a brain that the Tories are the personification of evil; you know when a tory is lying; his lips move! And they even deny that they are a political party; they claimed that they aren’t liable to pay corporation tax because legally “the conservative party does not exist”; (R.vs Conservative Party 1975: the tories were being sued for unpaid corporation tax); when the govt’s lawyer asked who the tenants of no.1 Smith Sq (tory party HQ) were, their lawyer replied “The National Association of Conservative and Unionist Associations”; if the tories are legally not a party THEN THEY HAVE NO RIGHT TO FORM GOVERNMENTS and every tory government since Walpole’s has been illegal!

    Leave a Reply

    Join the conversation

    Please read our comment moderation policy here.