Cheryl Prudham gave birth to twins back in October. Now, it appears she’s pregnant yet again with baby #12. Several media outlets have reported that the mother of 11 may have become pregnant just one month after she gave birth to the twins. If her recent Facebook post is any indication, she may welcoming her 12th child sometime this summer. Prudham recently caught the attention of the media yet again when she shared an ultrasound photo with the caption, “Prudham Baby 12.” However, she claims it was only a joke.
The photo immediately caught the attention of hundreds of users who were outraged by the announcement, even though Prudham later insisted that she uploaded the photo as a joke. But why? Well, Prudham reportedly lives off government benefits in order to care for her staggering number of children. While the procreation of life is always a beautiful thing, many viewers weren’t too happy to learn Prudham could be pregnant yet again. Most have accused her of having children just to capitalize on government benefits.
According to a previous report by the Daily Mail, Prudham has a middle-class lifestyle with an annual income of more than $58,000 that is funded off taxpayers’ money. The 32-year-old mom made headlines for her hefty Christmas savings, which came from the government funding she was able to save each month – approximately $6,100 to be more specific.
The children reportedly received lavish gifts, including iPads and gold bracelets, last Christmas. During an interview with Closer magazine, she shared details about the family’s big Christmases and gifts she was able to purchase with government funds. Prudham even went so far as to discuss how “easy” it is to claim government benefits.
“I love spoiling them at Christmas – and being on benefits means I can do that. I’ve bought four of then iPad minis, costing £250 each, and the twins will get gold bracelets with their names engraved on them.”
So, of course, many were outraged to learn that she may be pregnant yet again. Prudham was repeatedly accused of having children just for money. Here’s what local citizens are saying.
“There should be a limit on how many kids you can have when you are relying on a government support structure…”
“I cannot believe that the accumulation of hardworking citizens’ taxes are given to such people who think they are entitled to free money.”
“If she has managed to save £350 for each of her 11 kids, then that’s £350 each month that she isn’t using and therefore obviously doesn’t need – I can’t even save £350 in one year, and I work full time – This country is a joke and something needs to be done.”
Although the accusations are endless, government officials recently stated that there is no law that states Prudham cannot continue to have children. However, there is a cap on how many the government will support. A spokesperson from the Taxpayers Alliance weighed in on the controversial ordeal.
“It’s not for the state to say how many children anyone should have, but there is a limit to the number of children taxpayers can support. Couples up and down the country face tough decisions all the time when they decide if they can afford another child, and those on benefits should be no different.”
Do you think Cheryl Prudham’s “baby #12” would just a way to capitalize on government benefits? Share your thoughts.
[Image(s) via Facebook]