The good thing is that we won't stick our noses in the private/family live. Children get usually only seperated from their family if they get beaten or the family is below the poverty line.
Poverty as grounds for removal of children from the family is actually a horrific practice, not to mention economically wasteful. The financial cost of foster care is very high. If poverty is the main problem of the family, it is much cheaper to remedy that with money or coupons.
The problem with that is that we do not want giving birth to be an income method. We already have low class people having, more children to get more money from the state.
Poverty is not officially the reason for removal, more the side effects of poverty like malnurture, crime and too young mothers.
It doesn't make financial sense to have children, subsidies or not. At best the subsidies barely offset the cost. The reasons you mention make perfect sense.