or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Single Parenting › Single Mothers by Choice!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Single Mothers by Choice! - Page 24

post #461 of 515

She's on public assistance and is actively seeking a sperm donor to have another child, who will also be supported by public funds. That's not the purpose of those funds. 

post #462 of 515


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCreamJoy View Post

She's on public assistance and is actively seeking a sperm donor to have another child, who will also be supported by public funds. That's not the purpose of those funds. 


 

Yeah I was in the middle of typing out that I now know what you're referring to.

 

Fraud is not only a very strong word but its also incorrect in this case.

 

Had she mentioned that she had no plans to ever work and was just going to use the government as a handout while she had as many kids I could see your issue but that was never what she said and I'm sure that's not what she intends to do.

 

Had you read further (and maybe you did) you would see that she was planning to use assistance as is it allowed to be used. To supplement when needed. That's not fraud when you qualify, last I checked. Also, while on assistance you will benefit but you will also work your butt off (in my state at least) contributing to what you call the "tax payer's dime" or "public funds" that everyone lives on and what every little thing in this country is supported by.

 

I am an SMC as well and honestly, I'm less bothered (wait, not bothered at all) by her choice to support her growing family and keep them eating/living when she needs to than I am by your incorrect use of the word fraud. Seriously.

 

Anyways, I typed too much and probably out the side of my head.

Sorry for butting in PumpkinPie!

J is ready for bed and I know I need to get to sleep too.

 

post #463 of 515

It may not be something that she can be caught and held acountable for within the current system, but it is fraudulent behavior.  That you are bothered by semantics more than unethical behavior and exploiting loopholes in the system does not change the situation.  People like PP abuse the system.  I support with every ounce of my being programs that help families with children who hit hard hard times unexpectedly, but these funds are not unlimited and do come out someone's pocket. 

 

Spoiled and entitled.  I WANT A BABY NOW!  There's nothing to stop me!  They HAVE TO give me a check.  Yuck.   SMC have a hard enough time trying to create a change in cultural attitudes.

post #464 of 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCreamJoy View Post

It may not be something that she can be caught and held acountable for within the current system, but it is fraudulent behavior.  That you are bothered by semantics more than unethical behavior and exploiting loopholes in the system does not change the situation.  People like PP abuse the system.  I support with every ounce of my being programs that help families with children who hit hard hard times unexpectedly, but these funds are not unlimited and do come out someone's pocket. 

 

Spoiled and entitled.  I WANT A BABY NOW!  There's nothing to stop me!  They HAVE TO give me a check.  Yuck.   SMC have a hard enough time trying to create a change in cultural attitudes.


 

 

Perhaps you don't know the system as well as you think. I have no idea if she's currently on aid but I will say this, if she's on cash aid when she gets pregnant you can rest assured she will NOT be able to collect more cash aid for the child. Under the old rules yes but under the newer maximum family grant rule any child born 9+ months after going on aid can receive medicaid and food stamps but NOT CASH. How do I know so much? I have watched family after family have a baby while on cash aid and get caught in this rule. The only exception pretty much is to show birth control failed as having had a tubal ligation/norplant/injections. Something you can't "forget" to use.

 

 

That said, PumpkinPie, Good Luck! I would urge you to use caution on a known donor due to the possible legal ramifications but I'm sure you have thought it through and not just looked at the cost. In the end, my AI child costed LESS then my "known donor" child who I had to do a TPR on.

post #465 of 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCreamJoy View Post

It may not be something that she can be caught and held acountable for within the current system, but it is fraudulent behavior.  That you are bothered by semantics more than unethical behavior and exploiting loopholes in the system does not change the situation.  People like PP abuse the system.  I support with every ounce of my being programs that help families with children who hit hard hard times unexpectedly, but these funds are not unlimited and do come out someone's pocket. 

 

Spoiled and entitled.  I WANT A BABY NOW!  There's nothing to stop me!  They HAVE TO give me a check.  Yuck.   SMC have a hard enough time trying to create a change in cultural attitudes.

 

You really don't know the system well enough and that is why I'm bothered by use of the word fraud. Its incorrect here. Still.

You have a bit to learn not only on how this system works and what actual abuse of this system is (cause I have seen many people try to get over on it) but also on how to get a point across. Your last few sentences are of a rather juvenile tone and don't add anything to this discussion.

post #466 of 515

Then she's planning a child with even less of a safety net and that's worse.  I worked in social services during the mid-90s welfare reform period but haven't kept up with the nitty gritty.   Regardless of what type of aid she receives (she claims to be on aid currently), I believe to PLAN a child under these circumstances is irresponsible and shows bad character.  And you know what, like it or not, the kids of responsible SMC pay the price.  Don't associate this kind of choice with mine.  You will call me judgmental or whatever, but I am a realist hoping for social change in attitudes.  This board should be encouraging PP to pursue her education or career and become self-sufficient before bringing another child into this world.   

post #467 of 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCreamJoy View Post

Then she's planning a child with even less of a safety net and that's worse.  I worked in social services during the mid-90s welfare reform period but haven't kept up with the nitty gritty.   Regardless of what type of aid she receives (she claims to be on aid currently), I believe to PLAN a child under these circumstances is irresponsible and shows bad character.  And you know what, like it or not, the kids of responsible SMC pay the price.  Don't associate this kind of choice with mine.  You will call me judgmental or whatever, but I am a realist hoping for social change in attitudes.  This board should be encouraging PP to pursue her education or career and become self-sufficient before bringing another child into this world.   

 

That part is not your concern.

 

I'd say that because she does qualify and is using it for the child as she should, that she has a net on hand. Is it because she isn't using an income to pay for it that its not a good enough net? Or because you think it should be bigger? Will the ending result be a fed, housed, clothed child? How's that worse? Children have been raised on far less and have done well to become well rounded adults. Is it something a parent should strive for? No, not exactly but is the child going to be uncared for in the end?

 

Sure it would be better if we could all support our family without any outside help but that's not the case in many instances hence the creation of many social services. Again I say, not your concern on how long someone uses the help they need or plans a child, uses help to bridge a gap or when anyone chooses to conceive and in what financial position they choose to do it in.

 

You may think you're doing your part to encourage someone to live up to their potential but when you start by accusing them of fraud, of being entitled, spoiled, irresponsible and of bad character you're not doing a good job at all. Did you really think that was the way to go? There are plenty of ways you could have handled your concern here but you chose to do it in the most accusatory way possible. Wow. Maybe if you care enough, you should go back and start the conversation over with ways that may help instead.

 

Just a thought.


 

 

post #468 of 515

I'm not concerned.  I'm disgusted.  I'm not this woman's cheerleader or social worker.   She's exploiting the system by planning to have and support a child on public assistance.  That is not the same as a woman who receives aid because she's hit a tough patch in her life and needs temporary help supporting the kids.  If you can't see the distinction, I can't help it.   I'm not making a legal argument but an ethical judgment.

post #469 of 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCreamJoy View Post

I'm not concerned.  I'm disgusted.  I'm not this woman's cheerleader or social worker.   She's exploiting the system by planning to have and support a child on public assistance.  That is not the same as a woman who receives aid because she's hit a tough patch in her life and needs temporary help supporting the kids.  If you can't see the distinction, I can't help it.   I'm not making a legal argument but an ethical judgment.


 

You don't care and so all the ranting and raving and calling people out of their name and assuming on your part will just continue, I'm sure, leading us nowhere and fixing nothing. I'm slightly disgusted too but it has nothing to do with her.

post #470 of 515

I think I hit a nerve with you.  Are you on public assistance?

post #471 of 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by Satori View Post




 

 

Perhaps you don't know the system as well as you think. I have no idea if she's currently on aid but I will say this, if she's on cash aid when she gets pregnant you can rest assured she will NOT be able to collect more cash aid for the child. Under the old rules yes but under the newer maximum family grant rule any child born 9+ months after going on aid can receive medicaid and food stamps but NOT CASH. How do I know so much? I have watched family after family have a baby while on cash aid and get caught in this rule. The only exception pretty much is to show birth control failed as having had a tubal ligation/norplant/injections. Something you can't "forget" to use.

 

 

That said, PumpkinPie, Good Luck! I would urge you to use caution on a known donor due to the possible legal ramifications but I'm sure you have thought it through and not just looked at the cost. In the end, my AI child costed LESS then my "known donor" child who I had to do a TPR on.




She is on public assistance.  I do not claim to know the ins-and-outs of the welfare system.  I still object ethically to someone who would plan a child knowing she'd take government hand-outs to support the child.

post #472 of 515

if a hypothetical person were to introduce themself to a forum just to poor-bash that would be pretty lame. good thing everyone around here is too awesome for that type of crap.

post #473 of 515

I am a SMC (a professional, hard-working woman who resents the stereotypes about single mothers and how they may impact my children's lives as well) and was reading through the thread.  Apparently it's "poor bashing" to hold people accountable for their choices.  To me, it's unethical and irresponsible to plan a child when one already has a child and hasn't managed to get off public assistance.    It seems that this particular community supports anyone who wants to have a baby on her own, no questions asked.  It's not the place for me.  Best of luck to all.

post #474 of 515

Icecreamjoy, MDC does ask that you respond to posts in a respectful manor and some of your responses have been very disrespectful to the members on this thread.  However, this is a common thing that single women hear and so I would appreciate feedback from the members who were offended as to what they would like done to this thread (via pm or report button, not on the thread).  We could have it edited to keep it as a supportive thread or we could keep it up and talk about all of the "isms" involved in this type of thinking and make it productive.  Adaline's mom has started a spin-off thread in Talk amongst ourselves if you'd like to contribute there with your thoughts as well. 

 

However the rest of this conversation goes, it needs to stay respectful. 

Thank you

 

 

 

 

 

 

post #475 of 515

Judging by your post count it looks to me like you just joined specifically to berate this woman- I would be very surprised if you are actually an SMC. But just in case you are, remember those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. SMC's have enough to contend with, without turning on each other as well. Remember that society is making 'ethical judgments' about you as well and there is a massive proportion of them who also think you and your family is morally wrong. If you haven't faced discrimination yet for your choices you must live a very sheltered existence. And if you have, I find it strange how you can be so careless about dishing out hatred and judgement yourself. 

post #476 of 515


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chaoticzenmom View Post

Icecreamjoy, MDC does ask that you respond to posts in a respectful manor and some of your responses have been very disrespectful to the members on this thread.  However, this is a common thing that single women hear and so I would appreciate feedback from the members who were offended as to what they would like done to this thread (via pm or report button, not on the thread).  We could have it edited to keep it as a supportive thread or we could keep it up and talk about all of the "isms" involved in this type of thinking and make it productive.  Adaline's mom has started a spin-off thread in Talk amongst ourselves if you'd like to contribute there with your thoughts as well. 

 

However the rest of this conversation goes, it needs to stay respectful. 

Thank you

 

 

 

 

 

 



Please do delete my posts.  I do not share the values of the group found on this thread.  I am deeply offended by someone's choice to place ads in newspapers for sperm donors while she is working only 4 hours a day, receives public assistance, and already has a preschooler.  Why does no one hold her accountable?  Again, this board appears to support SMC under any circumstances and without question or regards to good judgment.  To me, that trivializes the whole movement and sets us back.  It's no place for me.

post #477 of 515

It's a complete red herring to talk about my "hatred," which does not exist.  No one addresses if they think there should be times when a person should not become a SMC, such as when they do not have the means to support a child.   If you read my posts, you would see that I am concerned with the impact this irresponsible behavior has on the rest of the SMC community, many of whom have taken great pains to plan for their children and to de-stigmatize the single-mother household.  Part of being a parent and being an adult is knowing one's limits.  We can't have everything we want just because we want it a lot.  To encourage someone like PP is irresponsible but seems to make some folks feel like they are radical.  Poverty isn't glamorous or politically efficacious. 

 

Again, I do not share the group's values and will look elsewhere for a SMC community.

post #478 of 515
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCreamJoy View Post

It's a complete red herring to talk about my "hatred," which does not exist.  No one addresses if they think there should be times when a person should not become a SMC, such as when they do not have the means to support a child.   If you read my posts, you would see that I am concerned with the impact this irresponsible behavior has on the rest of the SMC community, many of whom have taken great pains to plan for their children and to de-stigmatize the single-mother household.  Part of being a parent and being an adult is knowing one's limits.  We can't have everything we want just because we want it a lot.  To encourage someone like PP is irresponsible but seems to make some folks feel like they are radical.  Poverty isn't glamorous or politically efficacious. 

 

Again, I do not share the group's values and will look elsewhere for a SMC community.

 

I have to say that I somewhat agree. There is no point in attacking individuals on internet boards, but I do agree that people who do not have the means to support a child, whether they are single or partnered, should think very seriously before they plan to have a child anyway. One should hope that is a commonly accepted point of view. Actually, I am an SMC (and the starter of this thread!), and it was very, very stressful when I was unexpectedly laid off when my second child was born. 

 

In a situation like that, opting to become pregnant again is not a wise choice. I was never on public assistance, but it was very stressful - I lived off savings and borrowed from a relative until I was employed again, six months later. 
 

 

post #479 of 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCreamJoy View Post

It's a complete red herring to talk about my "hatred," which does not exist.  No one addresses if they think there should be times when a person should not become a SMC, such as when they do not have the means to support a child.   If you read my posts, you would see that I am concerned with the impact this irresponsible behavior has on the rest of the SMC community, many of whom have taken great pains to plan for their children and to de-stigmatize the single-mother household.  Part of being a parent and being an adult is knowing one's limits.  We can't have everything we want just because we want it a lot.  To encourage someone like PP is irresponsible but seems to make some folks feel like they are radical.  Poverty isn't glamorous or politically efficacious. 

 

Again, I do not share the group's values and will look elsewhere for a SMC community.



Icecreamjoy, my intention is not to run you off of the board, nor silence you.  This is a long-standing support thread.  I would like for you to consider that there are different types of social welfare...stigmatized and not stigmatized.  Do school grants and loans not count as social welfare? Subsidized college tuition?  How about child tax credits and tax deductions? Public school?  They do, but they're socially acceptable.  Other types are stigmatized, but they're also necessary.  When you look at the total population in the U.S. who is below the poverty line, you cannot say that human rights (and reproductive rights are one) should be denied to them.  Our society/economy is set up against a huge population of people who are stigmatized for needing certain kinds of support.  Nobody would ever tell me that because I need student loans, attend a state college and get child tax credits that I shouldn't have children. 

 

Look at your own safety net as I look at mine.  I'm a married, middle class parent, so by many people's standards, we have the right to have as many kids as we can afford (right now.) What happens when the job is gone?  We lived in another country for awhile and we recieved 1300 dollars a month, automatically just because we had children.  It wasn't stigmatized at all, but it was definitely social welfare. 

 

Any group that you find is going to have the same reaction to your comments.  Any group that accepted that kind of accusation would also most likely not accept your becoming a single parent intentionally.  Why not stick around and see if you can find some common ground.  This single parenting forum is filled with amazing women who are very resourceful, kind and strong. 

 

 

post #480 of 515
Quote:
Originally Posted by IceCreamJoy View Post

I think I hit a nerve with you.  Are you on public assistance?

 

 

Once you mentioned that you are not actually concerned, I began to see how purely self-centered your rant has been and for that alone it became unworthy of my time.You are really only here to talk about how her use of public assistance makes you feel, what that means to you, something else about you. You aren't concerned with her family's well-being (noted by how you say you aren't concerned but instead disgusted and by how you didn't and, I'm sure, wont be "encouraging PP to pursue her education or career and become self-sufficient before bringing another child into this world"). The kind of attitude you've shown, you guessed it, does nothing for me.

 

But you're welcome to think otherwise if you'd like.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Single Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Single Parenting › Single Mothers by Choice!