SubscribeUK To Give Pregnant Women $243 - For Veggies
From an approving (and appropriately named) Guardian:
Pregnant women to get cash for good diet
Jo Revill, Whitehall editor
Sunday September 9, 2007
All expectant mothers are to be given a one-off payment of around £120 that they will be encouraged to spend on fresh fruit and vegetables as a way of protecting their children from diseases and incurable conditions later in life.
The plan for a ‘health in pregnancy’ grant will be outlined by Health Secretary Alan Johnson this week in his first major speech outlining how the government plans to tackle the yawning health divide between the richest and poorest in England and Wales.
The payment - the first by a government that is allied to a specific health target - would be given to women when they are seven months pregnant. It would be linked to them receiving professional health advice on how to maintain a proper balanced diet, and give up drinking and smoking. The move comes as the government’s record on improving public health will come under fresh scrutiny this week when Sir Derek Wanless, a former government adviser on the NHS, publishes a major report that will criticise lack of progress on tackling increasingly unhealthy lifestyles which have led to Britain’s obesity epidemic. The report is expected to highlight poor eating habits, people’s increasingly sedentary routines and the growing number of overweight people as areas where more determined action needs to be taken.
The pregnancy measure, to be introduced in 2009, is likely to prove highly controversial as women will be free to spend the money on drink or cigarettes. Sources told The Observer that the government accepts that some of the 630,000 women who become pregnant each year may choose not to spend the money on healthy food. There is also little published research to show that a financial incentive, combined with nutritional advice, is sufficient to persuade mothers from the most deprived areas to change their lifestyle.
It was decided it would be too complex, and possibly unfair, to means-test the payment and give it only to the poorest women. It is likely to be given as an extra child benefit, regardless of income…
Brushing aside concerns about being seen as a ‘nanny state’, Gordon Brown has sanctioned his Cabinet to take a more interventionist approach when it comes to narrowing the life chances between rich and poor. This will include sending more nurses into deprived communities to support women who need the most NHS help but are most likely not to ask for it. A scheme pioneered in America is being trialled [sic] in Somerset under which nurses regularly help mothers who are struggling to cope…
One big health divide opening up is over tobacco, as women from deprived communities are four times more likely to smoke during pregnancy. Johnson will publish a health inequality strategy next summer which will launch a radical programme to try to lower the divide.
£120 is $243.42 at the current rate of exchange. Which is probably about the price of a cartoon (or two) of cigarettes.
But surely this financial incentive will be enough to stop these poor people from smoking, drinking, and lying around and getting fat.
The pregnancy measure, to be introduced in 2009, is likely to prove highly controversial as women will be free to spend the money on drink or cigarettes.
Yes, that is what is controversial about this proposal. Of course it is.
For how could anyone accuse this of being another step towards a nanny state?
6 Responses to “UK To Give Pregnant Women $243 - For Veggies”
Leave a Reply
You must be registered and logged in to post a comment.
September 9th, 2007 at 5:16 pm
Given that the majority of the British public are NOT in dire poverty, and given that there are lots of cheap food supermarkets in the UK, it would make far more sense to give pregnant women tax breaks, and put more money in their pockets that way. However, since when did the ‘libs’ want to put more money in your pocket? As el-Rushbo frequently points out, all they care about is designing utopia, and controlling your life!
Incidentally, the Daily Telegraph thinks it is more like £200 (which is approx $405 at today’s exchange rates).
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/new.....reg109.xml
Just to put this one-off payment into perspective for my American friends:
The UK television licence costs £135.50 per household per year. It is compulsory for anyone who wishes to watch television (i.e. most people in the UK). The TV licence funds the BBC. It is free if you are over 75 years old, and it is half-price if you are BLIND (that’s big of them)! Watching TV without a licence is a criminal offence, and you can face a fine of up to £1000.
If you don’t have a TV, and therefore don’t have a licence, you can expect to be harrassed on a periodic basis by the TV licensing authority (since everyone has a TV … don’t they!) You will receive threatening letters, and may even be visited by them! You will end up buying a TV, and end up getting your news from the BBC which as we all know is a totally impartial broadcasting service.
http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/waystopay/index.jsp
http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/i.....alties.jsp
September 9th, 2007 at 7:04 pm
Amazing stuff, Greg. Thanks for posting those links.
September 9th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
“Cradle to grave” is out. “Womb to grave” is in.
Removing a “fetus” from the womb poses them no problem because it’s simply a “parasite” rather than an individual human being.
September 9th, 2007 at 8:42 pm
When I worked at a Krispy Kreme in the summer a few years ago, we had a deadbeat mom who had two of the r five kids taken away from here, She gets welfare money for food, what does she spend it one? SMOKES. Cares more about her addiction than her kids.
Trust me on this when my generation comes to power, much of this utopian crap will cease. We will be the ones to slash social security and a bunch of other entitlements for the fat indulgant boomers.
We have very little faith in these half-baked liberal ideals. We went to public schools run by this crap and it our lives were miserable because of it. When we take over the school boards expect to see a return of hardcore discpline in the schools. Like bullying other kids, your …GONE! GEN X run school system is not going to give you excuses for you wanting to threaten other kids.
I went to a school system what made excuses for a kid who threaten students and teachers and carried knife to school. He became worse until he picked a fight with my neighbor who kicked his ass across the lobby. When his Dad was called into the office and saw this bully’s inch thick police file. He went apeshit and asked why this kid was still in school, they tried to give him the best “self-esteem bullshit” excuse and he replied I’m getting my attorney, there is going to be a lawsuit. This kid is making a unsafe learning evironment and needs to be expelled.
September 9th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
Wonder why they don’t use something similar to WIC coupons, and start EARLIER in the pregnancy? At 7 months, (3rd trimester) seems to me that most of the damage from drinking and smoking would already have taken the greatest toll on the fetus–a bit like the proverbial closing the barn door after the horse has escaped.
What about prenatal education, as well? Is it lacking, too, in the UK? This is something very revealing about socialized health care.
Even when I had my first baby, clear back in ‘78, when I was still in the Navy, expectant moms had plenty of prenatal education available (concerning proper nutrition, breastfeeding, and avoiding alcohol and cigarettes) via their health care providers—it was included as part of our check-ups. I always left with an armload of reading material, as well. Not only that, there were posters all over the clinic walls addressing these topics.
September 9th, 2007 at 11:55 pm
Some people are just utterly irresponsible, the the lowlife who blew all her paychecks on cigs while her kids starved.