What’s Wrong with the Current System?
Bereavement Support Payment replaced Widowed Parent’s Allowance in 2017, reducing long-term support to just 18 months. Payments have not been uprated since 2016, meaning they are worth thousands less in real terms. Caroline argues this policy breaches the Equality Act 2010 and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, leaving bereaved children at risk of poverty and emotional harm.
“Grief doesn’t end at 18 months. Children’s needs don’t end at 18 months. Cutting support is arbitrary and harmful,” Caroline says. “Universal Credit is not a substitute—it’s a poverty safety net, not recognition of a parent’s lifetime national insurance contributions.” Supporting a child through bereavement while rebuilding a shattered life is relentless. From breaking the news that destroys their childhood, to managing grief, PTSD, Anxiety, school, homework, and household responsibilities alone—while navigating endless admin (mortgages, pensions, HMRC, insurance)—the burden is overwhelming, all while working and grieving yourself losing your life partner.
Financial stability disappears overnight. Many widowed parents cannot earn anywhere near the salary of the deceased partner, leaving families at risk. Specialist mental health support for children is scarce and costly.
Why This Issue Matters
The government has rightly acknowledged the injustice faced by WASPI women, who paid National Insurance without being properly informed of changes that fundamentally altered their financial security. Bereaved families are in the same position.
Our partners paid NI for decades believing Widowed Parent’s Allowance (WPA) would protect their children. The Government abolished WPA in 2017 without adequate communication, replacing it with a time‑limited payment that ends long before a child’s needs do. This has been challenged ever since.
If WASPI women deserve justice for lack of notice, then bereaved children—who have even less control over their circumstances—deserve it even more.
Universal Credit (UC) is a means‑tested poverty-prevention benefit. It is not—and has never been intended to be—a recognition of the deceased parent’s NI contributions or the long-term financial impact of losing a parent. Therefore, the Government’s repeated response to petitions suggesting UC is an adequate alternative is legally flawed, discriminatory, and incompatible with the purpose of contributory benefits.