I said when I worked at KMart…past tense dear
(italics mine) That’s pretty cute.
I heard a story similar to this at a La Leche League meeting many moons ago. I think the woman in this case had actually been a member, and was still nursing her seven year old daughter when she dropped out.
I don’t see anything intrinsically wrong with this, but it might be really embarrassing to the child if her/his friends were to find out, because mostly anything that is different gets attacked. It does make me wonder if the need is more the mother’s than the child’s, to defy convention to that extent.
I know, but we’re in the pit, and I couldn’t resist.
You can start making mooing sounds at me if it makes you feel better.
To my knowledge, in the state of Florida there is a 2 year limit to welfare checks. there is a 5 year limit to WIC checks, And there is a 5 year limit to health care and child care. I think 2 years is enough to either educate yourself to get a better job, or figure out another solution.
My sister, who wound up on welfare, moved into my mothers house and went to school. She dropped out and taxi cabs now. She makes enought o pay rent, bills and childcare. She buys spegheti-ohs and frozen suppers because she works 72 hours a week, and wants to spend some time with her son, rather than be cooking and cleaning up.
I think there should be limits to welfare, or otherwise have some type of clause as to having more children. I don’t hink we should lead peoples lives for them, but we shouldn’t be paying for it as well
Lynn…
Is it just me, or would “Vaginal Mucus” be a cool name for a band? Kind of like “Hole”, except more entertaining-sounding.
Chris…
It’s really funny, but the only person who ever brought up that notion in this thread was you. The OP mentioned a family that had really crappy values, standard of living, rules, and ethics. If Homer hadn’t mentioned that they were on welfare, too, I doubt you would have had any problem with the OP.
DING DING DING! BINGO! We have a winner.
May I repeat myself. . . .
“A four year old is much to old to be drinking from a bottle or a tit. Period.”
You can say it repeatedly but there are still many people who will disagree with you.
http://www.prairienet.org/community/health/laleche/detwean.html
has another POV
Mostly, you’re right. Well…I still would have been annoyed at how many times he referred to them as worthless, but otherwise, without the welfare references, I wouldn’t have been so quick to jump in. See, even for the length of the OP, it was still non-descriptive enough that the situation could have been looked at in two different ways. Homer’s reply to my first post better detailed the situation, and I conceded on that case. But then there are other posts to consider…like Tzel’s “Behold the future of the human race.” Excuse me, but a single househould is not the future of the human race. It’s the future of that household, and at this juncture, that can still be changed. As I’ve said over and over again, the DHS and Child Services will investigate all claims of fraud, abuse and neglect.
It was unnecessary to relate my personal experience with welfare to this situation. After all, my household and the ones in the examples of the OP and ValerieBlaise’s post are NOTHING alike. Call it compulsion to stick up for those of us who are using welfare as it’s meant to be used, yet overlooked by the public when it comes time to bitch about yet another welfare abuser. Call it needing to believe the best about people, even when it’s difficult to do so. Whatever. Point still is that, although the system can seem screwed up, the only way to iron out the bugs is to point them out.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChrisCTP *
**
Chris, although it wasn’t directly said in Tim’s OP, I do not believe he was saying all welfare people are scum suckers. His rant was mainly about that particular family. But, there is a type of person on welfare–you are most certainly not it–that uses the system. It is wrong, of course, to generalize that all people on welfare are like that. One problem of this is that others become so furious at the cases of welfare abuse that it winds up sitgmatizing the entire population. Others realize that this is not always the case, or even necessarily the majority of the cases. Your need to defend yourself is understood, but really unnecessary. As far as I’ve seen, no one has personally attacked you as being an “irresponsible welfare white trash.”
About CPS…should it be reported? Absolutely. Will they do something? Maybe. The system is overpoweringly overloaded; case workers in the LA area typically have a caseload of 30-60 children. The paperwork, pressure, and sheer limitations of time make it very easy–and unfortunately, fairly common–for children to “slip through the cracks.” Children have died because of this.
My senior year I interned at a group home for abused girls. The home unfortunately was shut down as the woman who ran it got thyroid cancer–no one’s fault–and the children had to be disbursed. Because of the gaping holes in the system, two (of the six) went right back where they came from. Another child’s mother was pregnant with her 8th child (although only three lived with her), and right in front of me said with a beaming smile, “Yup, I can’t wait, another $800 a month. Just keep having babies, they keep sending the money.” (I am not entirely clear of the amount, but the meaning was clear.)
The girls had been in revolving-door homes. This foster home, that one, this group home (they were unplaceable due to behavior, and thus wound up in the group home I interned at). There was no sense of security or permanence or home, an astonishing contrast to the quote in one of my tezt books that made me laugh out loud: “The theory behind foster care is one of permanence: A child does best in a stable home to permanently call his/her own.” (my summation) That’s the theory, but unfortunately it is not always the practice.
Is the system wrong? No, at least, IMHO. Does it work? Again, IMHO…No. I couldn’t stand to see what was happening to those little girls, couldn’t stand how the system was unprepared for no-fault complications, couldn’t stand the training in manipulation the girls (and some of their parents) were gaining, couldn’t stand the resentment they built against me because I represented Them, couldn’t stand the constant sensation of spinning my emotional, physical, and mental wheels in thick quicksand.
Thus…I teach. Thank God.
Well, perhaps my sky is a different color then.
My experiences with the DHS have been good, essentially. My worker is accessible and knowledgeable. As I mentioned before, I’m petrified of what might happen to me or my kid if I even unwittingly commit fraud, so I make sure that doesn’t happen. However, if there are portions of the system that are notorious for not working, why are they even still in place? How can they be made to work? And is it at all productive for a person to bitch about it if they don’t bitch to the right people?
I know Homer was only illustrating one family. I know I’ve been complaining a little too loudly on a point that’s only semi-related. It seems, though, that there is MORE here to sort out than just Homer’s rant about that woman’s seeming irresponsibility toward her family, herself, and the programs that support them all. This has become a conversation about faults in our welfare system, (with a little sideshow about breastfeeding) and we all seem to agree that there are definitely people who are aggressive abusers of it. I never took this as an attack on me, personally, I simply used myself as an example of the forgotten majority of non-abusive welfare recipients.
This thread has gone off to a place I don’t even understand anymore. (Yeah, I know…it’s almost entirely my fault. C’est la vie.)
Chris… your points are well taken. And no, I don’t think your sky is a different color…
Let me ask you… what kind of an area do you live in? It would stand to reason that there would be certain areas where the welfare system is less strained, resulting in Fraud Investigation that isn’t overworked. However, it could be that in some areas, the system has so much strain that some examples (like Tim’s) manage to use the system to their benefit.
Perhaps it’s not a matter of “the system doesn’t work” (I’m talking to you, Ruffian :D), but so much as it’s a matter of resource management? Perhaps Tim does have an obligation to report the family… even if it doesn’t appear to do any good, at first, eventually the system will catch up with these people and give 'em the shmack upside the head that they deserve.
Very interesting link, and gave me lots to think about. Thanks. 
Gee, I hope no one thinks my posting of another “white trash” family was intended to be an attack on welfare. I have no feelings against welfare at all. I know it helps a lot of people, and I know a lot of people abuse it - it’s not much different than many Government programs. I of course wish that there were ways to stop the people that abuse it, mainly so that additional money could be distributed among the needy members of the program.
:rolleyes: Hyperbole, sir, hyperbole. Because these folks breed more, their genes are more represented in future generations. But you knew that. Perhaps more importantly, their upbringing is more represented as well. No, these folks are not the new family of Noah from whom all of humanity will descend. However, this family, and others like it, that breed for cash, will change the makeup of society. And yes, I agree, measures can and should be taken to ensure that someone cracks down on them. The sooner they get reported the better, and then, sure, their outcome might be different.
I had another thought.
I mean, isn’t the abuse the whole core of the negative feelings people have towards government assistance programs? If I knew that all of the tax money I pay went to people who needed it (and of course, to administration and so forth, I know how the real world works), I would pay more in taxes. I just don’t like feeling like a “chump”, so to speak, when the TV (which never lies) shows another expose of the 90’s equivalent of the stereotyped “Cadillac-driving Welfare Queen”. I’m not saying we should reduce Welfare from it’s current level, but I have a hard time wanting to increase it without reduction of abuse.
The problem in my mind is that there is no real “stick”, or serious penalty, for these people that are stealing money - not just from me, but from people like Chris who need it! People who clearly are found guilty of abusing the system need serious prison time IMO. The family I wrote about are all criminals in various ways - not just welfare abuse. The people I wrote of are dangerous - truly dangerous - and no one in the government cares, so they continue to rob, deal drugs, steal cars, file frivilous lawsuits, and draw government assistance.
Holy cow, I can barely stand to envision it. People would be allowed to keep a substantially greater portion of their paychecks (thus allowing them greater freedom to donate or help more with causes they believe in, if they choose to do so) , and…
[shudder] welfare, charity and other forms of assistance would have to be run by private companies and religious centers!! OH, THE HUMANITY! [/shudder]
I’m just curious, since Homer knows these people pretty closely, and has spent (in his own words) “tons of time at their house,” and has witnessed their particular problems and pathologies up close, what he does done lately to help them. I mean, aside from coming on the Internet and trashing them.
Hi Homer…to be so smart often the folks on the SDMB have a really hard time reading between the lines. (nitpicking is a favorite past time here). But I can see why you are so upset. You were taken in by this girl and her family. I don’t for one minute believe you when you say you’ve been thinking with your tally whacker all this time. You wouldn’t have lasted as long with them if you had. Now you’re angry and feel stupid. Well join the club, baby man. It might be the first time in your life that you wish you could kick yourself in the butt for wasting your time, energy and emotions on the wrong person or thing, but I can bet it won’t be the last.
Your assesment of this family is probably correct. You’ve been around them long enough to know. But so what? I know you’re angry but the time has come for you to move on, emotionally. Don’t dwell on the mistake you’ve made, it will only make it worse. I’m not telling you for forget, just store it away and go about your business. I know it feels really crappy to realize that someone has taken advantage of your good intentions. It’s a hard lesson to learn. But thankfully you’ve learned it young and it hasn’t cost you much. What lesson is it that you have learned? You know. Not everyone will love you for being kind hearted, loyal, and generous. Some people will see these traits in you and think “sucker”. So now you’re armed. Now you know. Don’t harden your heart to people because of this experience. Just be a little more careful next time. It doesn’t usually take people long at all to reveal their true nature. We just have a tendency to turn a blind eye to the signs. We want to believe that everyone has the same values that we do. Well they don’t, and most of them don’t want to change. You’ll just have to keep an eye open for the right kind of girl. She’ll come along eventually. Good luck buddy and leave this family to wallow in their own trashy lifestyle. At least you had the good sense to recognize it, I think that says a lot. Now go out and grab a good life for yourself. Good luck.
Needs2know
One lesson that we learned from the Great Depression was that voluntarism is inadequate–especially in hard times.
Herbert Hoover gets a real bad rap for his response to the early years of the Depression. He deserves criticism, of course, but he was not an evil man. He simply believed, as did many people, that the needy were better served by religious, community, and coporate charities. When the Depression hit, those charities were quickly tapped out. Hoover failed to fully comprehend the massive structural problems in the world economy, and thus believed that the hard times must surely come to an end soon. As we can see in hindsight, it took Roosevelt’s radical plan to start to turn the economy around.
We can’t depend on voluntarism.
And even though I think the welfare system has MAJOR problems, there is one aspect that I agree with: it forces everyone to contribute, even the selfish people who wouldn’t voluntarily donate to charity.
I realize that we are treading into GD territory here (and although I haven’t seen them, I’d bet there are 10 threads filled with people who can more eloquently state my case than I can), but just because people don’t volunteer enough is not justification to force everyone to contribute.
So then, everything (charity-wise) was working fine until the depression hit. There certainly is no depression now. Why wasn’t it reverted back to the private sector when the depression ended? And while I would still disagree with it on a political standpoint, if it ever got to a point where the were needs not being met, the topic can be revisited.
I think that if it was more localized and privately handled that fraud and lazy-asses would be easier to weed out, leaving more money for the people who truly needed a helping hand for a short time.
And I don’t see how we can force it.
And this I see as just one of it’s major problems.