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

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 05:29 AM - Thread Starter
Administrator
 
Mothering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 121
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

welfare_warriors.jpgBack in 2001 Mothering published the article Welfare Warriors: Honoring the Value of Motherwork about mothers who made the decision to stay at home with their children and live on welfare and other government assistance. Ten years later the financial situation for many parents is no better and perhaps even worse.

 

Surely we can all agree that having a parent at home during infancy, toddlerhood, and the early years of childhood is much better for the child. Yet we also know that staying at home is an extremely difficult if not impossible option for many families and particularly single moms. Should we support moms through welfare or some sort of government subsidy to ensure that all mothers - or even fathers - who wish to stay home with their children are able to do so without discrimination or financial worry?

 

 


The Mothering user name is maintained by Mothering staff.  Any posts/threads created by the Mothering user name may be featured or shared on Facebook, Twitter or other social media. If you have questions regarding the Mothering user name, please contact administrator@mothering.com.

Mothering is offline  
#2 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 06:05 AM
 
Tonia Starr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 49
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

This is a tough one for me. I ou have to attempt to answer it unbiased. Here was my situation. Backin 2006 my husband left me for another woman. I had three young boys, no car, no job andanother baby on the way. Throughour marriage t had been agreed I would be a SAHM. I was ill equipped for this unexpected turn of events. I felt very strongly about continuing to stay home with my boys. (they were 6,4,and 2) and I was home schooling as well. It took a year to get child support so i was flat broke. There also was NO government assistance where I lived besides food stamps and Medicaid. (both of which I recieved and was VERY grateful for) I started within a couple of weeks to povide home day care. I cared for two children full time. Plus occassional after school careor a few older kids. At night when my kids slept I wrote articles for a website. I had to think creativly and work aroundd the clock to make ends meet. I was back to full time child care providing 5 days after my son was born.

My opinion is, if a woman desires to be home with her child, welfare shuld bean option for the first year of the childs life. BUT during that year programs shouldbe made available for the mother to receive job training, GED prep, college prep, etc.....whatever is her idividual need so she can stand on her own two feet and provde for her children.

In 2006 my ex husband looked in my face and told me I would never be able to make it on my own when I told him I planned to continue to stay home with them. His words to me were "You will flat on your facewithin a month. Then I will take these kids from you." That lit a fire of determination within me as mother. Five years later I still have100 percent sole custody of them. This is my pride and accomplishment. But in looking back, I really wish more oppurtunities had been made available to me to make this journey a litle easier.

Tonia Starr is offline  
#3 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 06:06 AM
 
crunchy_mommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 6,501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I would love a program like Canada's where parents have 1 year of paid maternity leave. I think something like that would be wonderful.

I also think jobs should be required to pay a livable wage to workers so that it IS possible to survive on only one income. And accordingly, that families should alter their lifestyles to make one income feasible (if they choose to live on one income). Housing needs to be affordable, and financial education needs to be a core part of school curricula so graduating students (who later become parents) can in fact survive in the real world.

Jobs that mesh well with motherhood (work-at-home positions, jobs that allow you to bring your child(ren) to work) need to be made more available and less stigmatized.

I don't believe welfare should be used in these kind of situations though... IMO 'welfare' should serve as a temporary stop-gap and involve efforts to assist in job training & acquisition, help with managing finances, etc., not as a lifestyle choice.
mt_gooseberry and Deepfeet like this.

Co-sleeping is really wonderful when your child actually SLEEPS!! familybed1.gif
crunchy_mommy is offline  
#4 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 09:30 AM
 
SuburbanHippie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: finally out in the country
Posts: 1,853
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I've written several papers on this very topic.  It's near and dear to my heart.  love.gif

 

The US is one of 4 countries without paid parental leave.  It's disturbing.  We're supposedly so "progressive," but we fall so far behind in this aspect.  It tells our women that motherhood isn't worth anything when it is absolutely one of the most remarkable things we will do in life.  We are raising the future of our country!

 

I would love to see the US with a paid parental leave similar to Sweden's.  It's simply amazing.  Fathers are more active in their child's lives because they have the ability to spend time with them when they are young.  Mothers are able to close the wage gap and are not living dependent on their spouses. Imagine the US when women are finally worth as much as men.  It would be a remarkable place to live and raise our children.


Mom to REPlaySkateboard04HL.gif(12), bikenew.gif(7), energy.gif(5),  guitar.gif(4), baby.gif (born 7/8/11), dog2.gif, and chicken3.gif

 


 

SuburbanHippie is offline  
#5 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 09:57 AM
 
ollyoxenfree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,933
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)

 

It's really too bad that this is cast as "welfare", with all the negatives that dredges up. I get that using provocative language to inflame a polarized debate is more fun than using more rational wording to inspire a thoughtful discussion about publicly supported parental leave. It's too bad because there is a lot to talk about - how to fund it, how to organize and administer it, how long parents can access it, etc. 

 

I thought that there were only 2 OECD countries that did not offer a publicly funded parental leave program - the U.S.A. and Australia - until last year when Australia announced it was implementing a maternal leave program. It's pretty paltry compared to other countries, but it's a start. It leaves the U.S.A. out in the hinterland on this subject. 

 

A decent, well-funded parental leave program, accessible by either parent, is essential to a nation that wants to nurture a civilized society. Almost every other nation in the developed world understands that. 

 

ollyoxenfree is offline  
#6 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 10:10 AM
 
umsami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Capital City
Posts: 10,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I think "welfare" is such a loaded term in the U.S.  It has such negative connotations.  I do think that we should offer paid parental leave with a job return guarantee, etc.  I also thin a stipend as is done in France or other countries for mothers of young children makes sense.  But I don't expect any of these things to happen in my lifetime.  We don't have a culture of caring for the vulnerable and truly caring about children.  We see that not only in situations like WIC and maternity leave--but in how we treat children in schools and day care.  Motherhood and parenting are not valued.  Spending time with your child, nurturing that child, is not valued.  The GOP wants to reduce WIC and child insurance programs.  If they have issues with providing supplemental food to pregnant and nursing Moms and young kids--then I don't have much hope for any improvement.  WIC money isn't like food stamps--the food is chosen for its healthfulness--low fat/fat free milk, whole grain bread, fresh fruits and veggies, low-sugar cereals, etc.  It's not like WIC Mamas are buying Coca-cola on the government's dime to feed their infants.

sunfairy79 likes this.

Mom to DS(8), DS(6), DD(4), and DS(1).  "Kids do as well as they can."

umsami is offline  
#7 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 10:12 AM
 
princesstutu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: the bay area, baby!
Posts: 1,771
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Yes, we should give mothers enough money to be able to afford staying home with their babies through age 3 years, which correlates to the social messaging we receive that says the first 3 years are the most important. 

 

 


Yes, yes.  I'm fabulous. loveeyes.gif  Moving on...

princesstutu is offline  
#8 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 10:22 AM
 
greencarnation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: VA
Posts: 628
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Considering that many jobs do not pay a living wage, and could not even cover childcare, I think that someone (not necessarily the mother) staying home with a child until school age ought to be a right.  There should also be help for job-reentry and education to help parents get better jobs, when they do return to work.

 

I don't see how staying home to nurture, breastfeed, educate, and generally raise your child is somehow 'lazy', but making $7.25 at McDonalds, while your kid is eating formula and stuck in gov subsidized childcare is 'right'.


Wifey (23) and Hubby (23) since 07/08.  Enjoying DS baby.gif born 8/6/11!
 
  bfinfant.giffamilybed1.gif nocirc.gif femalesling.GIF fuzmalesling.gif cd.gif !!!
 

greencarnation is offline  
#9 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 11:16 AM
 
mamazee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: US midwest
Posts: 7,500
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I have a family member who is an economist who says that the purpose of the economy is to create jobs and opportunities for people to earn money to support themselves, and that it's the job of the government to create an environment where that happens. IMO either the government can create an environment where people can afford to feed their families and pay rent, or the government can feed people's families and pay rent. Right now, many many people don't have a lot of options. SAHM or welfare? Is it really that often a clear choice? How many people faced with that choice have the earning potential to find safe and reliable daycare plus bring home enough money to make a difference anyway?
mamazee is offline  
#10 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 11:39 AM
 
Petronella's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Metro Vancouver
Posts: 283
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

May I ask what is the purpose of this thread?  It's been started by some person or entity called just "Mothering," as an administrator.  Is this one of those threads that's being posted on Facebook or Twitter or whatever, to drive more traffic to MDC?

elfinmama likes this.
Petronella is offline  
#11 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 11:50 AM
 
umsami's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Capital City
Posts: 10,401
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I really like the author's term, "motherwork."  thumb.gif

 

I also thought this was very powerful...

 

"The experience of being regarded as a social pariah led me to become an activist. I was appalled that our society punished mothers and children for the sins of the fathers. When fathers do not support their children, it is the mothers who are labeled irresponsible and dependent! Because we care for dependent minors, we are called dependent. Because our "missing male role models" take most of the community with them, our families are labeled "broken," and our kids are called delinquent or even illegitimate. When we work for no pay, we are called lazy."

 

However... I think a lot has happened to encourage that fathers, even absent fathers, support their kids since the article was written.  Seems to be States

are much more active in going after deadbeat Dads, garnishing wages, etc.


Mom to DS(8), DS(6), DD(4), and DS(1).  "Kids do as well as they can."

umsami is offline  
#12 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 12:12 PM
 
Adaline'sMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 4,792
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


The United States Government spends over $22,000 a year per inmate that we hold in incarceration. We spend 44.1 BILLION dollars paying for the War on Drugs enforcement, and over 200,000,000 rebuilding roads each year.

I hope no one begrudges me my measly six grand a year in food stamps so that I can SAH and be with my baby.

Holly and David partners.gif

Adaline love.gif (3/20/10), and Charlie brokenheart.gif (1/26/12- 4/10/12) and our identical  rainbow1284.gif  twins Callie and Wendy (01/04/13)

SIDS happens. 

Adaline'sMama is offline  
#13 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 12:18 PM
 
captain optimism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Good Ship Lollipop
Posts: 7,462
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)

Currently, recipients of Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) must work. Single mothers must work at least 30 hours a week to receive benefits--20 hours if they have children under six. If you go to the TANF website, you'll see that one of the reasons for the program was to enable families to stay together, but the work requirements are still there.

 

Furthermore, the current policy with TANF is to get people into jobs first. States are limited in the number of TANF recipients who are allowed to seek education instead of working at whatever job they can get, and recipients who are allowed to seek education aren't supposed to do it for more than 12 months. See this fact sheet from the National Council of Churches: http://www.ncccusa.org/publicwitness/training.html

 

There is no "welfare as a lifestyle choice," because the 1996 welfare reform under Clinton limited the number of months any family can receive TANF. In the current job crisis, some families with parents who don't have good job skills have used up their TANF eligibility--this article describes people using food stamp dollars for other things, like children's shoes:

http://colorlines.com/archives/2010/02/selling_food_stamps_for_kids_shoes_1.html

 

I do not see a huge danger of families going on welfare in order to subsidize moms staying at home. I think families use TANF because when you have children, you can't be proud and couch surf when you're in trouble. I think welfare reform was a huge mistake, and we're going to be seeing a lot of suffering in the current economic climate. No, I don't think we should be subsidizing moms staying at home to care for their children. We should be subsidizing their education and training to be self-supporting and providing high-quality childcare that they can trust while they are in school. We should stop limiting the number of months a family can receive subsidies, so that we won't have people who are this poor in the richest country in the world. 

Phoenix~Mama likes this.

Divorced mom of one awesome boy born 2-3-2003.
captain optimism is online now  
#14 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 12:57 PM
 
teraze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Virginia
Posts: 134
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I'm a SAHM at present, and am blessed to have a husband who earns a somewhat reasonable salary and really lucky housing circumstances (we live in a paid-for home rent-free).  BUT.  I have worked my butt off and have paid lots of taxes and I can say this - with those tax dollars, I'd much rather a mom receive assistance for staying home and raising her baby versus requiring that same mom to jump through hopes to earn a measly salary while her baby is in some random daycare (that probably receives tax dollars too).


Blessed mom (11.10) and wife (5.01-met/12.07-married).  HI!  nocirc.gif  namaste.gif  

teraze is offline  
#15 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 01:45 PM
 
zinemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: from the fire roads to the interstate
Posts: 6,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petronella View Post

May I ask what is the purpose of this thread?  It's been started by some person or entity called just "Mothering," as an administrator.  Is this one of those threads that's being posted on Facebook or Twitter or whatever, to drive more traffic to MDC?


I assume that is the purpose of every thread started by "Mothering."
peainthepod and lalemma like this.
zinemama is offline  
#16 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 02:06 PM
 
newsolarmomma2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 151
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adaline'sMama View Post


The United States Government spends over $22,000 a year per inmate that we hold in incarceration. We spend 44.1 BILLION dollars paying for the War on Drugs enforcement, and over 200,000,000 rebuilding roads each year.

I hope no one begrudges me my measly six grand a year in food stamps so that I can SAH and be with my baby.

THIS. EXACTLY.

For a nation so hell bent on "family values" ( read: patriarchal, christain ones only) we are extremely family unfriendly. No paid maternity leave, forget about leave for the dad, next to nothing as far as a social net goes, no universal healthcare, and on and on. We CAN afford to end poverty, strengthen education and preserve families, we CHOOSE not too.

I have NO PROBLEM AT ALL with welfare, or assistance of any kind to families, not that it even exists anymore. People get all up in arms over how illegals get healthcare (CHIP only, in TX), how mamas have more babies to make more welfare (ridiculous and racist), and how all these people "work the system". COME ON, what nonsense.

The system is broken, you have to learn to work it just to make it to e bottom rung of poverty! And most people dont even know how to do that, its a full time job you know. seriously, do these people that complain even have a clue how little you get in assistance? While the US govt is bailing out banks, paying for a drug war, not to mention the war in the middle east, the citizens are suffering. Imagine what could be done with even part of that money?

I don't know why Americans are so afraid to ask these things of their government. Independence is nice, but we are all in this together. what good is being rich if the city crumbles around you, KWIM? after all, it is OUR government, and we DO pay taxes. I wouldn't mind paying more (and I paid over 40k in taxes JUST LAST YEAR) if it meant an end to poverty, and end to sending single moms off to minimum wage jobs while their kids went to govt paid daycare. Why not cut out the middle man and just give the Mom that money, and keep families intact?

There is a strong current of "I don't want anyone to get anything they didn't bust their ass for, if you are in a bad situation it's because you are a lazy POS, Because I got MINE Jack" in this country, and it's both sick and sad.It does nothing to advance our society, our build community. I encounter this attitude all the time- people think teachers shouldn't get pensions, that minimum wage shouldn't exist, that food stamps are for leeches, that they have no obligation to anyone else. It needs to change. We are the wealthiest nation on earth, we CAN afford it, we CAN do better.

Sorry for the rant, this is near and dear to me.
newsolarmomma2 is offline  
#17 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 02:22 PM
 
Mommel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: down south
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I plan to do this. I am 38 years old and six months pregnant... and single (the pregnancy was planned, the single part not-so-much). My mother is moving in to help with childcare while I'm in class, but I am midway through my Economics degree after a 14 year career in finance flat-lined following a layoff two years ago. I will live on a combination of school loans, federal grants, and whatever assistance the US government sees fit to dole out to me (WIC, Medicare, TANF) and because I'm more than halfway finished with my degree, I stand to qualify for quite a bit, including housing assistance (that is, if the waiting list for Section 8 housing wasn't closed and already 3 years long). In any case, this will likely last for at least the first year of my child's life, if not the first two, after which I hope to gain better employment than I had before I was laid off.

 

Is this a "stop-gap" measure? Welfare? Cheating the system? (Oh, you mean the one I paid into for 14 years that left me flat on my face in one swift motion?) I have no idea. All I know is that it's the very best option I have as a single mother to do what I think is right for my child. I get the education I need, the benefits I need, the income and support I need to make a better life for my child than the one I had, and I get to do it in a way that is consistent with my values and the values I want to pass along to my kid.

 

I don't care what anyone else calls it... I call it survival.

 

soapbox.gif


Moo.

Mommel is offline  
#18 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 02:31 PM
 
Mommel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: down south
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by Mommel View Post

I stand to qualify for quite a bit


Oh... and by "quite a bit", I mean less than six grand a year in assistance... I guess it didn't occur to me that my "quite a bit" is far less than it used to be when I was making $65,000/year.

 


Moo.

Mommel is offline  
#19 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 02:49 PM
 
nextcommercial's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I'm divided on this.  I know many mothers who have no interest in parenting, but they also have no intention of working.  So, they use the system.  I think we as a country give too much money to too many people and many of them are taking advantage.  

 

However, there are so many families who DO deserve it.  There are many moms who would happily work, if they could make enough money to support their family AND pay childcare, but our system doesn't make it easy for those who would work.   

 

I guess I just wish there were a better way to check on those who don't deserve help from the government, but are taking it anyway. 

nextcommercial is offline  
#20 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 02:55 PM
 
mamaofthree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

i have no problem what so ever in a mama being home with her kids even if she needs to use assistance to do it. there is such a stigma, and such hate for people who use assistance, it is heart breaking. so much talk of "family values" but no real action here in the USA. god forbid we actually help families. i guess there is no real valuing of families, no valuing of mothering and fathering, no valuing of children or the elderly. what matters most is how much crap you have and how much money you make. you mean nothing otherwise.

we cut and cut the help that struggling families need and pass it along to banks and CEO's. there is always a big long list of stuff you have to do to get assistance as a family, but a bank run into the ground... the CEO's get bonuses from our money. so while i struggled to make ends meet (4 jobs between dh and I) and we stilled needed WIC and state run healthcare the CEO is a hero and i am a loser lazy jerk. GRRRR. 

 

 


mama to 6 amazing children joy.gif married to my main man for 21 years love.gif and finally home FULL time dishes.gifhang.gifknit.gif

mamaofthree is offline  
#21 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 02:55 PM
 
Interrobang's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 10
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

My jaw dropped when I found out (not so long ago) that the US doesn't have paid parental leave, and unpaid only lasts 6 weeks. That's completely barbaric!

 

The way I look at it, having the government subsidize SAH parenthood is an investment: I'm quite sure it'd save a few hundred thousand dollars a year per person in the long run, when you account for the potential people who'd be kept out of jail if they had an involved parent around even part-time instead of raising themselves!

 

I do think there needs to be some kind of check on it, to keep people from just completely abusing it, but what that is, I can't say. I'm not familiar with the system in Canada or the US, so I don't know what is already in place.

 

In any case, it's most certainly a better use of money than space exploration, scouting around the solar system looking for our next planet to destroy, or to go chasing down minor drug offenses.

Interrobang is offline  
#22 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 02:58 PM
 
mamaofthree's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 4,346
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by nextcommercial View Post

I'm divided on this.  I know many mothers who have no interest in parenting, but they also have no intention of working.  So, they use the system.  I think we as a country give too much money to too many people and many of them are taking advantage.  

 

However, there are so many families who DO deserve it.  There are many moms who would happily work, if they could make enough money to support their family AND pay childcare, but our system doesn't make it easy for those who would work.   

 

I guess I just wish there were a better way to check on those who don't deserve help from the government, but are taking it anyway. 


i think the problem with this is how do you know for sure they aren't parenting well? just because they aren't doing it your way? and who gets to say which way is best? who is going to be the watchdog on this? and there are some moms who actually want to stay home with their kids and should be able to. does that make them lazy? bad? do you only deserve assistance if you work outside the home? and then what is the point? 

 


mama to 6 amazing children joy.gif married to my main man for 21 years love.gif and finally home FULL time dishes.gifhang.gifknit.gif

mamaofthree is offline  
#23 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 03:16 PM
 
kristandthekids's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 652
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
.

“What is evil? Killing is evil, lying is evil, slandering is evil, abuse is evil, gossip is evil: envy is evil, hatred is evil, to cling to false doctrine is evil; all these things are evil. And what is the root of evil? Desire is the root of evil, illusion is the root of evil.”
- Buddha
kristandthekids is offline  
#24 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 03:23 PM
 
CourtneyM-L's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Flagstaff, AZ
Posts: 2
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

I looked at this post on facebook twice before deciding to add my 2 cents. I am a single mom to twins living on welfare. Wait - not living - barely surviving. I live in housing that is subsidized as part of a domestic violence program. My rent is still $20 more than the cash assistance I receive from the state. I have to do a lot of juggling to get the electric and gas utility bills paid... I also get food stamps each month but my twins are gluten and lactose intolerant so I really have to stretch to make the money cover the groceries. I also end up begging for diapers and I am considering potty training at 16 months since I can't afford the cost. We also have health insurance through the state but it is like drive thru Dr visits for me. The twins get more attention due to their issues (second set of ear tubes and allergies) - thank God. I was let go from my job last November when the twins got sick and needed the first surgery for ear tubes. I have looked for work since then but I lost  daycare assistance - so any job would have to pay well over $300 a week to cover daycare expenses. Even when I had help with daycare costs, it still cost $90 out of pocket and I was working part-time. I do not receive child support yet as my divorce has turned into a custody battle. I was able to prove DV against me but not against the children so he is asking for 50/50 custody.

 

I have to agree with another person who stated that there is no working the system anymore. I am getting lots of support and resources from the community and the government and we are still struggling. I worry every day about how I am going to pay the rent, keep the electricity on and buy diapers. If I earn more than $150 in a month, I could lose benefits from the state but that is not enough to cover expenses. The system is very broken and living in Arizona where the budgets are getting cut is not helping. If I didn't get help from the state (and a great church family) we would be on the street or in a shelter.

 

I have an associate's degree in education but I can't find a job that offers more than $7.50 an hour part-time. That isn't even enough to cover the cost of daycare for twins. Before anyone jumps on this post - I was married and the twins were a big surprise ! I had just gone off the pill and started a new job when I found out I was pregnant. After the twins were born, my marriage fell apart and the DV happened. We spent 9 weeks in a shelter before moving into subsidized housing. I have to attend classes, do volunteer hours and do case management as part of my requirements for living here. We do not have cable tv or any extras. We don't eat out or go to the movies. We don't have a car and we either walk or ride the bus to get around. I am only online because the internet connection for our staff is unsecured for the residents to tap into.

 

Welfare sucks and I would much rather be working part-time or at a job where I could have my children with me - but it isn't possible. I love being home with my twins but I never get a break. Life is hard and being a welfare mom is not sitting on the couch eating chocolate watching Oprah reruns.

 

Thanks for reading. ~ Courtney   http://cocoandtwins.blogspot.com/

CourtneyM-L is offline  
#25 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 03:34 PM
 
Mommel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: down south
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

This is the problem with the conservative agenda on welfare... there is this perception that prevails among conservative propaganda (yeah, I said it) that there is a large and significant subset of women who use the system with no intention of reform (i.e. back to work, becoming educated, etc)... as if it is a significant enough portion of welfare recipients to make a fiscal impact on the US budget. Show me the study that proves it. Check this out: http://www.anitra.net/homelessness/columns/anitra/eightmyths.html

 

 

Yes, in ANY system there will be fraudulent abusers of that system... but in the case of welfare recipients, that fraud is negligible. Who the HELL would spend as much time as it takes to navigate the welfare system to eek out a measly living from it fraudulently (in any country, but especially in the US), if it weren't absolutely necessary?? Do you have ANY idea what it's like to live on $6,000 a year?! Just budgeting that income is a full time job... there are no prepared meals in that budget... everything is made from scratch to save money (and I don't mean from a box, I mean from SCRATCH), every expedition outside the house is just that... an expedition... and how much time does it take to navigate public transportation to run the errands that it would take someone with a reliable vehicle half an hour to run? (I'll tell you how long: two hours, at least!), not to mention the disdainful and condescending BS that welfare recipients have to deal with from the welfare office to the grocery store clerk.

 

I could go on, but I won't. The fact is that the majority of fraud committed against the welfare system is done so by people that actually profit from it while also working, thereby getting more than they "deserve".

 

Sorry, I don't mean this personally at you, per se... but it REALLY IRKS me that this perception continues to pervade in our culture as it's perpetuated by the politicians that want more money in the pockets of their corporate investment bankers on the backs of hard-working families who are just trying to survive.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nextcommercial View Post

I'm divided on this.  I know many mothers who have no interest in parenting, but they also have no intention of working.  So, they use the system.  I think we as a country give too much money to too many people and many of them are taking advantage.  

 

However, there are so many families who DO deserve it.  There are many moms who would happily work, if they could make enough money to support their family AND pay childcare, but our system doesn't make it easy for those who would work.   

 

I guess I just wish there were a better way to check on those who don't deserve help from the government, but are taking it anyway. 



 

glorysmom and Phoenix~Mama like this.

Moo.

Mommel is offline  
#26 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 03:54 PM
 
avalonbirth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

Yes.

avalonbirth is offline  
#27 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 03:58 PM
 
nextcommercial's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 4,589
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by mamaofthree View Post




i think the problem with this is how do you know for sure they aren't parenting well? just because they aren't doing it your way? and who gets to say which way is best? who is going to be the watchdog on this? and there are some moms who actually want to stay home with their kids and should be able to. does that make them lazy? bad? do you only deserve assistance if you work outside the home? and then what is the point? 

 

In some cases, it's obvious.  The kids aren't fed, the parents aren't home, there are drugs in the house... 

 

I have no idea who would be watch dog.... or how, I know it could never happen, but I WISH it could.

 

I have a friend who is being supported by a rich fiance.  She lives in a million dollar home, has the best of everything, but she won't get married because she'd have to give up her welfare.  She gets food stamps, free college, and a check each month.. all delivered to a house she doesn't even live in.  She gets paid under the table for part time work, and hasn't paid taxes in several years.  She's in school, but makes it no secret that she has no intention of working after she graduates, but she has to graduate or pay back her student loans.  She proudly says "my full time job is to find a rich husband".

 

Another woman we know (not a friend) has a Cadillac  Escalade, buys the most expensive clothes, because her boyfriends  sell meth out of her home, while her five kids play in the living room.  When one boyfriend gets arrested, she just gets a new boyfriend.   She collects welfare, and food stamps, but sells the food stamps.  I'm pretty sure she's never paid taxes. 

 

On the other hand, another woman works two jobs just to stay above water.  Her youngest child is 14, her oldest is 18. In order to qualify, she'd have to quit one or both jobs, instead of HELPing her, they want to take control away from her... she just needs help, not a complete free ride.

 

 

nextcommercial is offline  
#28 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 04:07 PM
 
Mommel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: down south
Posts: 759
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by nextcommercial View Post



In some cases, it's obvious.  The kids aren't fed, the parents aren't home, there are drugs in the house... 

 

I have no idea who would be watch dog.... or how, I know it could never happen, but I WISH it could.

 

I have a friend who is being supported by a rich fiance.  She lives in a million dollar home, has the best of everything, but she won't get married because she'd have to give up her welfare.  She gets food stamps, free college, and a check each month.. all delivered to a house she doesn't even live in.  She gets paid under the table for part time work, and hasn't paid taxes in several years.  She's in school, but makes it no secret that she has no intention of working after she graduates, but she has to graduate or pay back her student loans.  She proudly says "my full time job is to find a rich husband".

 

Another woman we know (not a friend) has a Cadillac  Escalade, buys the most expensive clothes, because her boyfriends  sell meth out of her home, while her five kids play in the living room.  When one boyfriend gets arrested, she just gets a new boyfriend.   She collects welfare, and food stamps, but sells the food stamps.  I'm pretty sure she's never paid taxes. 

 

On the other hand, another woman works two jobs just to stay above water.  Her youngest child is 14, her oldest is 18. In order to qualify, she'd have to quit one or both jobs, instead of HELPing her, they want to take control away from her... she just needs help, not a complete free ride.

 

 


Well, I'll give you the meth mom... I honestly wish that welfare recipients were drug tested... there has been talk of that in the past, but unfortunately the drug trade brings more to the US economy than fixing that problem is worth (otherwise there would have been something done about it by now).

 

As for your gold-digger friend.... ever think that maybe there's another reason that she's not getting married that she's too embarrassed to admit? Sounds like her problem is a lot bigger than stealing welfare, and has a lot to do with her emotional survival. Knowing that if he tosses her to the curb, she won't have to reapply to welfare. Even so, that sucks and I'm sorry that I harshly judged your perceptions earlier. Obviously your experience has impacted your opinion in a way I hadn't thought of before. :)

 


Moo.

Mommel is offline  
#29 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 04:37 PM
 
desertrose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 43
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)

wow, some great points here.

 

Yes, we as mothers need to be supported so that we can be as fabulous mothers as we can be. It is confusing to me that the only help we have available to us is done so that we cannot actually raise our kids ourselves - but have somebody else do it.  It really begins to look like every move we make under our government is to stimulate the economy, and that anything and everything that is true and good about us and about life (motherhood, family, tribe, nature) does not matter.

 

Children belong with their mothers and/or fathers. If it is someone's preference to put their child in daycare, or someone else, so be it. A mother should have the right to breast feed, in person, for as many years as it takes. Our society needs to support mothers - society needs to work around mothers, not the other way around. Someday I hope a mother and/or father's actual presence and touch will be worth as much as food and shelter.

 

I believe it is our god-given right to raise our babies ourselves. Our society, our government should encourage this, should support this. This is OUR country. Not their country. And our government should be an extension of our own beliefs, needs, and desires.

 

I have known a bad mother. I don't use that term lightly. She lost the right to raise her children.  But what we need is community. We need to help each other, and when you have a bad mother on your hands, the mother needs to be rehabilitated or community needs to intervene so that the children are safe. I know that some people abuse the system. She was one of them. And then there's people like me that should be making more use of the system than I do. I need to be with my children. I have to be. But I certainly feel the pressure that I am not *supposed* to be (with them). I am suppose to let them go, so that I can get a job, collect all the assistance. But I can't do it.

 

I believe we need a whole system change.  And like someone else said - stay at home jobs, or jobs where we can take the kids with us, if need be. Better wages so that all wages can afford a decent living. And so that families can have at least one parent there at all times. But Ideally I'd like to see children having ample time with both parents, while also being contributing members of society. And single mothers that don't have their needs met, yes they should be helped so that they can be at home with their babies, if they desire it so, and I'd even like to see mamas have the right to homeschool as well. But also given the opportunity to provide work to society, and in a way that works AROUND what they need to do as mothers, and doesn't interfere with it.  And in these situations, as any, it should be made sure that single mamas are taking care of their babies good and right, that there is no abuse or neglect going on, that funds go where they are supposed to go, etc.

 

 

glorysmom likes this.
desertrose is offline  
#30 of 792 Old 05-25-2011, 05:33 PM
 
waiting2bemommy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: buried under laundry
Posts: 1,961
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)


Quote:
Originally Posted by nextcommercial View Post

I'm divided on this.  I know many mothers who have no interest in parenting, but they also have no intention of working.  So, they use the system.  I think we as a country give too much money to too many people and many of them are taking advantage.  

 

However, there are so many families who DO deserve it.  There are many moms who would happily work, if they could make enough money to support their family AND pay childcare, but our system doesn't make it easy for those who would work.   

 

I guess I just wish there were a better way to check on those who don't deserve help from the government, but are taking it anyway. 



Yes to all this. However, in defense of those mothers who don't want to work or parent, as hard as it is to watch, most of them are symptoms of this very same broken system. I know how many times I have wanted to throw my hands up in frustration, trying to balance rent, bills, keeping a car running in order to get to work, paying for childcare ordoing insane schedule juggling in order for both parents to bring in income (which still isn't enough to make ends meet) and say "forget it." I have been fortunate enough to see beyond poverty, so I have a vision for my family that I keep in my mind. For someone who is the 2nd or 3rd generation of abject poverty, survival on a welfare payment is enough because it's all they can imagine. They are conditioned to accept their standard of living, and to normalize it in order to cope. To them, "other people" work and make it. A frighteningly large population of children are being raised on substandard food, in substandard housing, by parents who can't meet their emotional needs, receiving a substandard education, and then the rest of the world wonders why "those people" think that the only ways to make money involve selling their body or drugs.

 

There is an excellent book on the issue of welfare reform, called "Flat Broke with Children."

 

In my ideal world, I would love to see families receive a stipend that was substantial enough to cover either the basic living expenses for the first 18 months of the child's life, or if the mother chose to work out of the home, to pay for high quality childcare. Although I prefer to stay home and enjoy it very much, I would not be so adamant about NOT going back to work full time if I didn't have to pay practically my whole paycheck just for my kids to be warehoused all day. But the choices can be so limiting. I have friends with degrees and they say it's not much better.

 

The bottom line is that this country pays lip service to family values, but in the end it values the dollar over the child. The way I see it, that debt will be paid.....we can either pay it on the front end, while kids are young and we have a chance to shape their future, or we can pay it later when we build more and bigger prisons. But you can't run from it.


Very blessed mama to one bouncin' boy bouncy.gif (12/07) one angel3.gif who didn't get to stay (6/09), one potty learning, mess making divaenergy.gif(4/10), and one cheerful milk monster. aabfwoman.gif (12/11) Happy partner to the love of my lifedp_malesling.GIF.  

waiting2bemommy is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off