Squeezed Middle Britain: A quarter of children in British homes FORCED to share a bedroom
-
29% of parents think their home is too small for their family to live in comfortably
-
14% of those expecting to become a parent within the next few months are still living in unsuitable homes
Oh, how absolutely horrible, and yes I am sarcastic here.
by Michael Smith (Veshengro)
Nearly a quarter (24%) of children living in British homes are forced to share a bedroom, rising again to 38% for younger families and 35% for those living in London, according to new figures from property website FindaProperty.com.
According to the findings, 29% of parents think their current home is too small to accommodate the size of their family, rising to 40% for younger families where parents are aged 18 – 34.
FindaProperty.com has released these findings to coincide with the launch of its new TV advertisements, the first of which uses a rapping dad-to-be to highlight the issue of household overcrowding for expectant parents.
The study also suggests that just under a million people in the UK are expecting to become a parent within the next few months, and roughly 14% of these are still living in homes that are too small to accommodate their new arrival.
Samantha Baden, property analyst at FindaProperty.com commented: “With the average cost of a three bedroom home in the UK now in the region of £193,000, affordability remains a key issue for families. Very few families can afford to buy or rent a property that meets their exact size and location requirements, and as a result, they are often forced to compromise on one or the other.
“These findings reinforce the importance of investing quality time in the search for a home that meets the needs of the family both now and in the future.”
It absolutely amazes me how much people are out of touch with their really needs and with those of the environment.
Does every child really have to have his or her bedroom? Or as with some people even their own little suites (with on-suite facilities, as some)? I sincerely doubt it.
Homes should be getting smaller again and bedrooms should be just that, bedrooms, used for sleeping and not for other purposes really, and that goes for children as much as adults.
While I must say that I can clutter up a big home as well as a small one I do think that, over the years (my home is from the 1960s), houses have become ever bigger and people have come to believe that every child will have to have his or her own room or, as said, even little suite of rooms.
We have gone from the ridiculous to the sublime, it would seem, though changes are afoot and I have recently come across families who have decided, though not in Britain, to downsize to rather tiny homes.
The few that do not seem to make those demands for separate rooms for each and every child seem to be those that have cut themselves off the mainstream, be that the what we used to call New Age Hippies or the “Traveler” communities.
The size of the McMansions and similar that everyone – at least those who have a little bit too much money – are aspiring to is no good for the Planet and we must reduce the footprint (as in real paw-print) of our homes again, as well.
If you have a nice piece of land and put a small enough home on it you have more land left to grow a good garden to feed your family. Much more important than a room for each of the kids.
The term “unsuitable home” is one that does really get to me. What does this mean? A home where there is not a bedroom for every child. Oh my God, how horrible. Is it not time we woke up to the fact that the Planet cannot support all those huge homes that some seem to desire.
I mean, honest, what makes a home “unsuitable”? It is not the fact that it does not have a bedroom for every child. There are other factors but that, most certainly, is not one of them.
It is time for a serious reality check...
© 2012
