Mothers to challenge DWP two-child benefit limit 'rape clause' in High Court

The two mothers who had some of their children as a result of rape or coercion by ex-partners say current the austerity-era policy breaches their human rights

Two mothers have been given the green light to challenge the "inhumane" two-child benefit limit "rape clause" at the High Court.

The parents, who cannot be identified, had some of their children as a result of rape or coercion by ex-partners, say current rules breach their human rights. The Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG), which is supporting them, said the women are challenging the policy on the basis it is "discriminatory and irrational".

The austerity-era policy was introduced by the Tories in 2017 to prevent families claiming additional amounts of Universal Credit or Child Tax Credits for more than two children. A so-called "rape clause" was brought in at the same time as an exemption if a third or subsequent was conceived non-consensually.

One of the women bringing the case against the government conceived her eldest children through rape in a violent and coercive relationship that began when she was a teenager. She has been told she cannot claim the benefit for her subsequent children, who were conceived consensually in a later long-term relationship.

Speaking through the CPAG, she said: "If I had been raped after my first two children were born, the exceptions would be applied, so basically (the DWP) are telling me that I was raped at the wrong time."

The CPAG said "the brutality of the two-child limit is plain to see in what these women and children have been through".

Solicitor Claire Hall, head of strategic litigation at CPAG, said: "Both of these women are subjected to the two-child limit despite the fact that they have conceived children non-consensually.

"And the reason for that is because the exemption only applies to third or subsequent children, and we're saying that they should be able to get the exemption for the non-consensually conceived children, irrespective of at what point they are born."

Chief executive Alison Garnham said: "The families in this case are trying to rebuild their lives after many years of abuse. But their task is made all the harder by inhumane benefit rules that pile more pain on those they should be protecting

"Their experience should focus minds on the need to abolish the policy in its entirety before more damage is done."

A Department for Work and Pensions spokeswoman said: “We cannot comment on ongoing legal cases.” No date has been set but CPAG said it expects a hearing some time in 2025.