Welfare Moms - Should we be supporting moms so they can stay at home with their children? - Page 40

[Cynthia Mosher]

Originally Posted by serenbat 

OT- 

I can think of some real good that would come of it if we did deal more with this and the trend is going  the opposite, certainly it is not helping, I feel we are taking some non-judging and making dangerous mistakes-IMO 

 http://www.oprah.com/own-our-america-lisa-ling/our-america-lisa-ling.html beyond tragic - IMO and hard to watch!

serenbat, what exactly are you linking to? That URL takes me to the "Our America with Lisa Ling" landing page, not a topic specific page or a specific video. 

[Polliwog]

Originally Posted by serenbat 


those were your words and that is how it comes off -better as in because she is with me (not where she was)

I do too- that's why I said about removing children from their community to really nice, suburban well funded schools (that means to me... better life-not what they would have had and I find it offensive to read!)  and no one puts down poverty as the reason, that's not done. Adoptions are happening- that is real, not in numbers they once were but still occurring. 

I know what Katharine is saying. I've taught in both kinds of public school systems. Better funded districts typically have more resources to meet the needs of children with disabilities, have staff who are more likely to stay in a school and not leave after a year or two, and often have a better teacher/child ratio and smaller class size. It's a lot harder to diagnose, treat, and/or effectively teach a child with "hidden disabilities." Queenjane and I are friends. We know a lot about the backgrounds of each other's children. We also know quite a bit about the lasting effects of child abuse and neglect. Some of it is irreversable. In our children's cases, the system worked as it should. Money wouldn't have fixed anything. In fact, my daughter's mother would have had to have someone LIVING WITH HER 24/7 to keep DD safe and healthy. We're not talking about shoes and clothes. Or even food, water, or electricity.

I wish my children's birth parents could have parented them. At a conference, the keynote speaker (a family court judge and adoptive parent herself)referred to adoption as "the least worst option for a child." I love my kids to death, but I wish their birth families hadn't broken in the first place.

[serenbat]

Quote:

serenbat, what exactly are you linking to? That URL takes me to the "Our America with Lisa Ling" landing page, not a topic specific page or a specific video. 

it had been linking directly to the show - now it goes to all of them, since this has passed - it is called "Generation XXL-morbid Obesity" - it talks about one 4 year old who is 101lbs. My point being, no one (family, friends, doctors, neighbors, etc) gave judgment to this mother prior to now on how she was raising this child? - this link might work better - http://www.oprah.com/own-our-america-lisa-ling/Generation-XXL-4-Years-Old-101-Pounds-Video

Polliwog - the whole point is we have laws that to combat this (in place and fought for) - actually in my state with TANF you could not stay home and homeschool you child, (there was a  mentioned about child with autism and the need for the parent to stay home) 

we should be able to do this and not have a child moved to a different school, we also should not (IMO) move children from a community (my comments were general comment for the whole system, not just for one parent like on here)

Quote:

I think this message is being given to girls on a regular basis.

This isn't just for girls!

I also do not support support a biological urge as a justification for welfare - not all young women hurry to have a baby, most young men want lots of sex, is it good for the child (children) to also not have a structure unit for care? That is a big part of the message, not only do they cry and poop, you need to provide other things for them. 

[mamaofthree]

i keep wanting to know EXACTLY WHAT sort of things should we be telling people that we don't already tell them? and how is increased shame going to stop people from doing what they are doing? it does feel very degrading to have to ask for help, some people won't ask even though they could have a better life if they had a bit of help. does anyone truly want to go back to the days of taking children from their teen mothers just because we don't like that 15 years are occasionally having a child? or how about just not having a safety net at all, no food stamps, no welfare of any kind. forget SS, let the old die hungry and alone, no health care for those blasted lazy poor,no food for children. just stop all aid at all and HOPE that all those people who say they would help if all those bagillions in tax dollars that went to feed and house the poor, was actually still in their pocket, that they would, you know ACTUALLY HELP PEOPLE?!

>:(

[serenbat]

Quote:

 that we don't already tell them?

where is this grand message you are talking about?

we are not getting a message out there

child development / preparation classes simply are not happening all over - my state doesn't mandate them and very few schools even run the program, we don't even mandate sex ed!

some feel we are promoting having babies (TV programs, making teen mom celebrities) not the opposite

we are not sending a message to mom's with children (already on assistance) -it is part of the goal of TANF, along with marriage- but implication is up to the states- I can tell you where I live there is no message getting out

when was the last time you head any talk about birth spacing from the government for all citizens?

this nation does not talk or promote family planning yet in any real way, some are hoping that changes with the ACA, at least for contraceptions occurs,  but so far we (as a nation) have not done much at all with FP/RH here at home yet spent the money overseas 

 where do you see that it's happening? 

[mamaofthree]

what exactly do YOU see as a way to do this and then HOW do you see it happening and WHAT do you see as the outcome? how do you tell people... you can only have X number of kids X number of years apart? how do you do that? and to what end? some people prefer to have 3 or more kids really close together, other prefer 3 or more kids years a part, some only want one, some none, some 10? do we need sex ed? YES!  family planning? possibly. home ec classes? i don't know. probably would be a good idea. 

you want the government nosing around in this area, spending your hard earned money to tell people how to have kids, when to have them, how to space them... but in the end, stuff happens. all the planning in the world won't always keep someone from being poor/sick/homeless. does it help, yes. but it isn't a 100%. 

this thread is making me nutty. i think the lovely people here who have been so brave to share their personal stories have gotten the shaft very often. 

i think i am done. 

[serenbat]

Quote:

what exactly do YOU see as a way to do this and then HOW do you see it happening and WHAT do you see as the outcome? how do you tell people... you can only have X number of kids X number of years apart? how do you do that? and to what end? some people prefer to have 3 or more kids really close together, other prefer 3 or more kids years a part, some only want one, some none, some 10? do we need sex ed? YES!  family planning? possibly. home ec classes? i don't know. probably would be a good idea. 

you want the government nosing around in this area, spending your hard earned money to tell people how to have kids, when to have them, how to space them... but in the end, stuff happens. all the planning in the world won't always keep someone from being poor/sick/homeless. does it help, yes. but it isn't a 100%. 

this thread is making me nutty. i think the lovely people here who have been so brave to share their personal stories have gotten the shaft very often. 

i think i am done. 

knowledge is powerful, I never understand this type of fear

why have it be so wrong to be told simple facts, take that and apply them-it would be helpful to so many who do not have the family recourses to understand and guide them

a bit of history on the prosperous societies and how they were able to feed their children is always helpful too

I see it as nothing but sheer good

[littlest birds]

So the solution that will lower the use of welfare is to provide facts?  So first provide information, then are the people still free to choose or do you have new rules for welfare? 

I think there are already a lot of active educational efforts of this kind that aim to help women create better futures for themselves.  These include educational programs and job skills as well as family planning help.  Implementing more is expensive, so I am not sure how much more we should pursue when funding is scarce.

The key to helping people help themselves is anything that helps them believe they have real power to get beyond mere survival. The people who get stuck receiving assistance for long periods either have major problems or simply have no pathways to success that appear walkable.  Those who believe in a better future will generally take that path, but those who feel crushed by their failures will often balk.  Those who are broken have a hard time seeing hope. 

Most of the moms that posted here are not stuck in such a cycle of hopelessness.  Most people who post on Mothering.com are actively building a good life for their children, which is why they are interested in learning about nurturing natural parenting methods.  That doesn't match up much with "generational" welfare recipients.  While you may think fraud is common, or you may think even that bad character or laziness is common, I doubt it is common here.  However, there are many members who do receive some kind of assistance. 

To go way way back to the original post topic, if I were to meet a woman who is a SAHM and also receives some kind of assistance I would have no reason in the world to think she has been an abuser of the system, that she has or will be in the system for many years, or that she is making a bad decision that takes advantage of others.  While there may be people who "ought to" bring more personal responsibility into their lives so they need less help, I have no reason to think that anyone who is a SAHM is that kind of a person.

[stacyann21]

You can't be on welfare and stay at home. TANF requires parents to work or attend school or job classes for at least 30 hours/week to obtain benefits. If you're talking about Calfresh (food stamps), then yes I think anyone eligible should be provided with benefits. With the amount of money we spend on military in this country, there is no justification for children going hungry. i also agree there should definitely be a better parental leave system. But like others have pointed out, many people can't even find a living wage job so I don't see that happening in our lifetime.

[kathymuggle]

Originally Posted by littlest birds 

So the solution that will lower the use of welfare is to provide facts?  

It might help - or not.

I don't think much harm comes from discussing how to prevent poverty in the first place.    I don't think all poverty can be prevented, but some might be. Isn't discussing poverty prevention worth a shot?

Welfare and food banks and the like offer help to people in poverty.  That is great - but they do not seem to do much to prevent it.  It would be nice to be able to talk about poverty prevention without resorting to (and I know you did not say this)  "…so you want to shame and take babies away from teen moms?"  

[littlest birds]

Originally Posted by kathymuggle 

It might help - or not.

I don't think much harm comes from discussing how to prevent poverty in the first place.    I don't think all poverty can be prevented, but some might be. Isn't discussing poverty prevention worth a shot?

Welfare and food banks and the like offer help to people in poverty.  That is great - but they do not seem to do much to prevent it.  It would be nice to be able to talk about poverty prevention without resorting to (and I know you did not say this)  "…so you want to shame and take babies away from teen moms?"  

Yes. I think poverty reduction and prevention are excellent subjects. I'm not sure who is helped and when, though. It's not helpful for people who are already there in a low income situation. Those folks need strategies and hope and power, and unfortunately most low wage jobs help people feel powerless and hopeless.

Who are the folks who engage with such a discussion? Are the ones who are interested the ones who need it? 

Life coaching, maybe... But not by obligation!

Originally Posted by stacyann21 

You can't be on welfare and stay at home. TANF requires parents to work or attend school or job classes for at least 30 hours/week to obtain benefits. If you're talking about Calfresh (food stamps), then yes I think anyone eligible should be provided with benefits. With the amount of money we spend on military in this country, there is no justification for children going hungry. i also agree there should definitely be a better parental leave system. But like others have pointed out, many people can't even find a living wage job so I don't see that happening in our lifetime.

Most of the debate lately here has been about receiving anything at all as a SAHM, generally with a partner working at a lower salary and qualifying for food stamps and/or medical assistance while the mother is at home with babies/preschool children.   

I agree there are already many rules.  It may be that at the beginning the thread was intended to be about hypothetical family leave but it did descend into mythical "welfare queen" territory. 

[serenbat]

Quote:

You can't be on welfare and stay at home. TANF requires parents to work or attend school or job classes for at least 30 hours/week to obtain benefits.

you can stay home and be on TANF (at least you can in my state)- if the child is under 6 and you have no child care, or under a year, as well as if you are unable to work (mentally or physically), lack of transportation also can exempt you