I think not having 11 people share a 1-bedroom apartment isn’t something you can just brush off as an aside. That’s a really freaking important reason to get those children out of that environment all on its own. However, if you want to know how else they’ll benefit, how about the fact that they’ll be with people who actually give a damn about providing these children with the basic necessities and tools for survival – something their mother has proven to be incapable of, or disinterested in, doing.
(bolding mine)
EEK! I would REALLY hope she was on birth control in THAT situation :eek:
Whether or not I agree with her on this topic, I just have to step in here and say that the words “hateful” and “nyctea” do not belong in the same sentence. I say that as someone who has been in close contact with her.
And I don’t think anyone here is suggesting that she [the woman from the article] is typical. The reason people are appalled is because she is such an extreme case.
There is no mandated training or selection process to become a biological parent. There are both to become a foster parent. While each state has it’s own criteria for evaluating someone’s qualifications to become a foster parent, in all instances they tend to look for people who have demonstrated responsibility.
I feel it can’t but help these children, who’ve grown up with an incredibly irresponsible and foolish mother, to have an opportunity to grow up in a home with a role model who can better demonstrate how a responsible adult behaves.
Any parent can tell you that there are times when you HAVE to be there for your children, to offer support and encouragement, a hug, a “Congratulations!”, and so on. I don’t feel it’s possible for any one person to be there for each of ten children, especially when one has special needs. Does she know why John got in a fight at school last week, or why Sarah did so badly on her spelling test yesterday? Does she know who Billy’s best friend is this week? Is she able to provide homework help when it’s needed? All of these are parts to responsible parenting.
I don’t doubt that the mother loves her children, each and every one, but I do doubt that she’s the epitome of responsibility. The kids need a much better role model to emulate, in my opinion.
quote:
Originally posted by The Long Road
As for the 10 kids issues, a few years ago a candidate for governor had a commercial where he bragged that he was from a family of 9 kids, a single mom and was raised on welfare. No shit, that was one of his fucking campaign commercials. He lost and I am still thankful.
I think the Long Road’s point was that bragging that he came from such a background was not a good call. If I had seen that particular commercial, I think my first thought would be that his mother was really an irresponsible cum receptacle. But I think the politician’s ad men just wanted to show the public that he overcame a lot of obstacles to reach a point where he could run for public office. However, I think the ad could have backfired. It’s not too strong of a leap to think that he wouldn’t consider such circumstances as being wrong, and that he would be for much more financial support given to women who put themselves in the situation his mother put herself in.
From a whoosh to food stamp abuse, man have we traveled. 
It’s not possible for a parent to be there at ALL if the kids are taken away. It’s not possible for a child to be supported by their brothers and sisters if the children are separated.
How about some intensive parenting classes and free birth control for that woman, and authorities tracking down the deadbeat dads and some major wage garnishing action?
Typical.
I’m still kinda disappointed in the dope zeitgeist that seems to think that property comes before family.
Continuing to read this thread leaves me with the sad understanding that most dopers (those who’ve spouted in this thread, anyway) believe that a human being’s value is determined primarily by their wealth, and that secretly we’re all grateful to live in an oligarchy ruled at the whim of the richest strata, like children who find a pat on a head from a parent figure makes them feel warm and protected.
Ick.
You shouldn’t keep so many SDMB windows open at one time. It’s hard on the hampsters. Not only that, but then you go and post stuff in the wrong thread, like you did here.
'Cause your post’s a total non sequitur in this one.
Hey lissener, here’s a novel idea:
ADRESS SOME OF THE POSTS DIRECTED AT YOU!
Honestly, you’re being quite obnoxious. You have not addressed a single* point that nyctea has addressed towards you. And they were damn good questions.
If you can’t defend your position, get the fuck out of the thread. You just look like an idiot, and I’ve now placed you in the same box as county and hydrocortisone, because those are who’s debating strategies you’re emulating.
You should be very proud.
There is free birth control available to that woman already through any free clinic in her neighborhood and I guarantee you she knows that. What, do you think any of the doctors who’ve delivered any of her 10 children have never mentioned her options to her? Really. She clearly won’t take the necessary precautions to prevent her dire situation from getting worse. She clearly doesn’t care, or she wouldn’t continue this destructive behavior.
And although parenting classes are absolutely called for, that isn’t going to change her fundamental philosophy on life that prayer, as opposed to work, will get the utility bills paid.
“Just pray.” Yeah, that’ll do the trick. Well, that and getting your sob story published in the newspaper, hoping to elicit sympathy from the bleeding hearts out there to do for her children that which she has refused to do herself. (And before you make assumptions, be it known that I am a registered Democrat who generally supports social programs for the truly needy and does my share of charity work for the poor).
Yeah, I’m picturing that and it disgusts me. But go right on wishing and praying and fucking without protection, honey. I’m sure you’ll better your situation in no time flat!
And yeah, once the State removes those children from this deadbeat mother (because protecting them should be their first priority), they absolutely should hunt down the deadbeat father(s) and force them to pony up their share of support, too.
My parents fostered two toddlers for a short while, because their mother was incapable of taking care of them properly. I believe that in order to get her children back, she had to undergo a certain amount of training (probably a GED and parenting classes, or some such). During that time, she did of course get to visit with her children. The hope was that she would be able to get her life together in order to provide a proper home for her children, and learn to appreciate her children and what needs to be done for them.
I doubt most people in this thread would want this woman’s children taken away permanently, if she could demonstrate responsibility. The state doesn’t even like to take children away from a home permanently.
But something needs to be done.
If she could have six-twelve months without her children to take classes (including getting a GED if needed, parenting and sex education), get a job, and learn to take responsibility for herself, maybe what we’ll end up with are kids who grow up to say, “It was rough at first, but our mom worked very hard to be able to take care of us,” instead of, “My mom was a bitch ass 'ho who couldn’t keep her legs shut. Hell, my oldest brothers had to get jobs just so we could have food on the table after our welfare ran out.”
Forgot to add, the woman whose kids my parents fostered did get her kids back.
Please refrain from posting in my thread again until you respond to the posts addressing you in a non-jerkish manner.
I myself am very liberal when it comes to social programs, and this makes me sick enough i started this thread. Stories like hers overshadow the many other stories of people who get services for only short amount of times while they get their affairs in order. Normally i am against taking kids away from parents, but i would not be opposed in this case. I feel my tax money would be more effeciently spent on the child if it was under government care opposed to this lady’s care, because she has shown little responsibility for her actions. But when it comes down to it, it is not about the money, but about the kids, and her total lack of responsibility for their well being.
There are three points in the article that make me cringe. I will address each seprately…
She is concerned about how she will pay her utilities after December. When asked what she will do, Edrina says: "Just pray."
OK, if she is faithful enough to feel that praying for a solution will do that trick, why the hell did she create 10 children through a sin? There is NO husband in the picture, and from the way the article is worded has not been one yet.
While she has no specific plan yet, Edrina’s wish for Christmas is "that I could better my situation."
Need to better your situation? Start by closing your fucking legs lady. Then get off your butt and find a job.
"There are 10 of us now and I stay in a one-bedroom apartment – just picture that. I wish I could do better."
Someone in that area please call CPS, and get these kids the help they need. The writer of that article was remiss in their humanitarian duties to those children. Instead of writing an article to try and get us to pity the mother, they should have turned her in for neglect and gotten those kids the help they need.
Thanks lez; I’ve addressed everything that seems like it’s worth my time; though you’re right, there’s not much of that in this thread.
It’s not my job to change anyone’s mind, so I’m certainly not going to engage with someone who, in my judgment, is highly unlikely to do so: never try to teach a pig to sing, etc.
When I feel like my efforts will have some effect, I’m likely to apply more energy to a debate. If this thread were in GD, I’d “debate or else get out,” but since it’s in the pit I’m not obliged to do any such thing.
If someone expresses a worldview that disgusts me, in the pit, I’m perfectly at liberty to express that disgust. In this forum I have no further obligation. Start a thread about welfare mothers in GD if you’d like, though frankly I’m exhausted enough by assholes like nyctea that I can’t promise I’d participate in such a thread. But I would certainly stay out of it if I weren’t up for debating the issue. So start that thread if you want a thread you can kick me out of; this one’s open to all comers.
That’s what I was thinking. Those kids are going to resent their mother, problem.
Wow lissener, quite the little weasle you are.
I believe the general rule of “put up or shut up” is valid in all forums. Refusing to address posts directed at you is considered bad form, no matter what forum you happen to be in. It’s also considered an act of an unintelligent, cowardly, and frankly: trollish poster.
The general rule of “don’t be a jerk” is very much always in effect. Calling someone names for having views then refusing to engage in discourse with that person coupled with multiple appearences in the thread for no other reason than to insult those posting within, is considered jerkish behavior in my book.
Don’t hide behind forum titles, it just makes your behavior appear even more childish, if possible.
Mods:
Please note that I was not accusing lissener of being a troll, merely pointing out that his behavior in this thread is getting to the point that it could be considered trollish.
[sub]please don’t ban me[/sub] 
So is your post a cite now, too?