Justice

lovehadley

I'm not saying this in a mean spirited way. Seriously.

I really *don't* care. But it does make me exhale a sigh of relief that wrongs are righted.

DH dropped SS off at BM's on his way to work yesterday morning. When he got there, BM was sitting on her front porch and she came straight out to DH's car in the drive.

And asked him if he had reported her to the state for welfare fraud!!!!

NO. Then she asked if I had done it.

DH said he just rolled his eyes and told her neither of us has either the TIME or the DESIRE to get involved in drama. Specifically, her drama.

Then---and, see, I've never understood where, on one hand BM is always threatening DH with court but then, on the other, spilling her dirty secrets to him---she told him that she had been reported to the state for collecting benefits fraudulently. Somehow the state discovered that she is MARRIED to her two little girls' father. (She's always gotten benefits by saying that she was single and living w/her parents.)

Anyway-she told DH she is losing over $600/month in food stamps and medical insurance for her and the two little girls.

I don't at all want her children to suffer but this woman does NOT need welfare. Money is tight for them because she doesn't work and they keep having kids! And then she tries to stretch welfare dollars into an income. If you kwim,

DH said he didn't really give her a chance to say anything else, he just said that he was sure she and her DH would make ends meet. And then he got the heck outta there.

I am just so relieved to hear that it's finally happened. After YEARS, seriously YEARS, of her milking the system. I don't wish ill on her and, honestly, I don't like it when SHE is in a bad mood b/c that's when she often lashes out at DH.

But still!

SaveComment151Like
Comments (151)
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justnotmartha

oh I'm mean spirited, and I say karma is a real b!tch!! :)
I hate that her three kids will be the ones to feel the brunt for the consequences of her actions, but I love the fact her actions caught up with her.

Score one for the tax payers!!

1 Like Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

I agree with justnotmartha!!! I'm mean spirited as well... sometimes... and this time.... Woohoooo!!! Obviously based on my thread right now... I'm in a mood. LOL!!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Amber3902

What goes around, comes around.

I wonder if they'll make her pay back any money for benefits she has collected? I've heard of that happening before.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

Yeah, I wondered if she might have to pay back some benefits, too.

Who knows. Blood from a turnip, ya know? ;-)

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Amber3902

"Blood from a turnip" - yep.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
ashley1979

Just goes to prove the old cliche about giving someone enough rope to hang themselves. She did this all on her own. She's racking up a pretty good criminal record here, huh?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

Maybe BM will tell them that she "forgot" that she got married! LOL!

You know what I don't understand? Summer is almost here, and again they will have community centers serving free breakfasts and lunches to kids in low-income neighborhoods. Yet again they'll say that this is because, for many of the kids, the free school breakfasts and lunches were the only food that they get to eat all day. Well, I've got no problem with my tax money going to feed hungry kids, so that's fine with me. Where my problem lies is the fact that a great deal of these children live with an adult who is getting food stamps. So if the kids are not getting the food (as seems to be indicated by their only food coming from the school), where is the assistance going? Because I've got a serious problem when my tax money goes to feed hungry kids via food stamps, parent spends the money somehow on something other than food, and my tax money goes again to feed hungry kids. How's about we just cut out the middleman if that's the case, and proceed directly to feeding hungry kids and skip the "enabling food stamp fraud" part of it? (I'm not talking about people who run short at the end of the month or are having temporary financial issues, but the day after day after day "someone else will take care of the kids" ones.)

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Yay!!!!!! I agree with you Mattie. All too often the kid is getting free meals and the mom is getting pedicures.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sweeby

Glad to see the system finally working --
The government safety nets are not so large that they can afford the abuse; and it's situations like that which endanger the meager supports that exist.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

I've worked with someone once whose friend was receiving food stamps. She would sell the food stamps to friends for cash.... in which she would buy her drugs. A lot of them sell them for 50 cents on the dollar. It happens A LOT!!! That's one reason I'm all for drug testing for welfare.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mom_of_4

well the catch is that a lot of the time (assuming they are not selling the foodstamps to buy drugs or what not) the amount recieved is no where near enough to cover food for the month and when you cut out kids eating at school your food bill triples without the amount recieved going up. Also, just because you qualify for free or reduced lunch does not mean you qualify for foodstamps... the lunch programs during the summer really help those families the most. And while I am for the whole drug testing welfare recipients, I have a huge problem with making them pay for it. Only because having been in that situation before if someone would have told me I needed to cough up that money in order to get help I would not have been able to get help... I needed the help because I was broke as it was.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

It is a shame they lied to get the money. I don't understand why they are having children and why isn't her husband works and why doesn't she? But i would not bash her for not working and having kids, you don't work either. I think you are just lucky your DH makes enough or you have other family to help, isn't your father paying for your DD's education? But it is unacceptable that they are lying to the state.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
sweeby

"But i would not bash her for not working and having kids, you don't work either.

There's a big difference between being able to afford to be a SAHM because the family has other options and being an unemployed mom who chooses to collect welfare rather than work to support herself and her children.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

"well the catch is that a lot of the time (assuming they are not selling the foodstamps to buy drugs or what not) the amount recieved is no where near enough to cover food for the month and when you cut out kids eating at school your food bill triples without the amount recieved going up."

I don't know if it's different in different states or not. In our state, for three people the max in food stamps is $400/month. DH, SS and I probably spend no more than that now! It seems so many people buy prepared foods now and I think that's why maybe some people's costs are so high? (White sauce mix? Really?!)

Of course, with teenagers $400 might be just enough for one of them. ;-)

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

IIRC the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) and the National School Lunch Program (NSLP)is above and beyond food stamps...and is for all children no matter legal citizen status. It's the fed programs to help meet some standard in the kids diets and to assure basically that kids are eating. It also gives them the ability to have lunch foods readily available already prepared.

Helps children get nutritious meals throughout that many would not be getting. Meals have to fit the guidelines and recommended requirements...I think lunch is to contain 1/3 of daily intake value guidelines.

In a very simplified nutshell, food stamps provide 'food' for a household, the others provide a chance for nutritional meals for the children.

As to the thread, good. Glad to hear this BM got caught milking the system. I have no problem assisting the truly needy, my problem lies with the cheaters. If BM did not qualify for the assistance and/or the amounts and types she was receiving without 'cheating' and lying to obtain it she is taking amounts away from the families who do need it (depends on which systems accessed) and sucking off our tax dollars. Deserves to be caught.

Weird her first thought would be Love/DH turned her in. Lady could have milked one 'cow' too many and it merely finally got red flagged in the process calling attention to be monitored. It may not have been a private citizen that 'ratted' BM out at all.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

I think the difference, PO1, is that Love only had ONE KID. She's not in a marriage in which her husband can't support the family, all the while not working and having more children.

The issue is not BM's not working. The issue is BM needing to work due to her financial situation and instead having more kids while relying on taxpayers to make up the slack.

Who pays for Love's DD's education is beside the point.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

Not to bring sensitive subject but love wants to have more kids, yet she does not work. She did mention that they had financial issues and dad had to help. Who pays for education matters in regards to not everybody is that lucky, not everybody has someone else who is capable to provide financially.

Of course BM is absolutely wrong for lying to the system, beyond wrong, criminal. I agree with that. I judge her for that, it is unacceptable. But I would not judge her for not working if I myself did not work, had no children at home during the day and was supported by a husband and a father. Not everyone is that lucky. But of course her lying is criminal.

On the other hand if BM did not qualify legally then she must not be that poor, otherwise she would receive assistance without lying.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mom_of_4

I spend at least 200 a week and way more during the summer for our family of six. In order to receive the max you would have to not be working at all. Most dont receive anywhere near the max. (I can't remember the max here) I mean don't get me wrong when we have had our moments of being strapped I can work it out on 50 bucks for the week but in order to acheive well balanced meals with lots of fuits and veggies it is really really pricey.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

As a grandparent, PO1, I pay for what, when and if I want per my grandkids. If I choose to pay for something it does not automatically mean my children could not 'afford' it or that the thought had even occurred to them... grandparents pretty much do as they please (at least in my family LOL).

Love's father also enjoys paying for trips/vacations for his extended family. So do I. Sue us, LOL!

The difference would be if a adult child whined, begged and demanded/expected their parents to pay for things for their family abd/or grandchildren. If I had a SAH deatbeat kid who thought I'd float their way, refused to work, refused to educate themselves and or tried to cheat for state assistance...my kids would not be getting one dime from me. It's not unknown of me to help my kids out whether they 'need' it or not...I make more money than they, I have more assests than they and I can and will spend my money any damn way I want to.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
pseudo_mom

PO1 ... can you be alittle more condescending ... I don't think LH or the rest of us got your point ...

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

"I spend at least 200 a week and way more during the summer for our family of six."

I agree food is incredibly expensive. Come think of it to qualify for assistance one really have to have NOTHING. I once asked for state insurance for DD for just few months until i obtain insurance and it was brief moment when i had low income and ex had bankruptcy, it was bad. i was told I make too much and don't qualify. I ended up getting yet another part time job and buying private insurance but then luckily both ex and I got on our feet.

Her lying is wrong on all accounts, but her not working is nothing to do with anything. Plenty of women don't work.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

"her not working is nothing to do with anything. Plenty of women don't work."

Actually, it has MUCH to do with everything. In our state, if you are on welfare, the first parent is required to work 40 hrs/wk; the second parent is required to work 20 hrs/wk while the kids are under 5. That goes up to 30 or 35 hrs/week once all kids are school age. (The theory being that if your kid is in school, you can feasibly work 7/hrs a day. Give or take.)

Since BM's younger 2 (the ones she collects med. insurance and cash benefits for) are 3 and 1, that means according to the state, she should either be working or going to school (they allow that, too) 20 hrs/wk.

And I just don't see how my dad paying for DD's education is relative. That's apples to oranges. He is doing that--something generous and EXTRA--for DD. Not paying our mortgage or buying us groceries!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

That can be debatable too, PO1. No business of mine if a woman wants to stay home and not work. It becomes my concern when this woman wants to stay home, raise babies and keeps popping them out but also then has to come knocking at my tax dollar to support her brood baby after baby.

Crap happens. We all know that. Some lady might suddenly find herself with three very young children and all alone to fend for herself. I don't berudge helping families in a tight situation. No problem assisting while the made up lady gets on her feet and figures out her future. None.

But don't think many tax payers will think that it's A-OK to pop out more and more kids just so they can stay home. Don't think many tax payers will think that it's just dandy to pop out babies and choose to do nothing but beat at our tax paying door to support her and a growing herd. You just said yourself, when you short time needed a bit of help you asked...you made too much money (even if whatever you made seemed like insufficient peanuts to actually run a home and raise a child). Guidelines are set, you did not qualify. But you certainly had enough sense not to then run back to the welfare office and lie/cheat to obtain the assistance. You got off your buns, put in a few more hours a week with a second job. Good for you. Good there was a second job out there for you.

You do realize, right, that most jobs won't hire one without a HS graduation? And that some woman don't have GEDs either? Instead of asking for assistance to help educate and prepare themselves to become self sufficient some ladies would actually rather just lie/cheat and/or keep popping out additional children. Kinda sad really. Some woman who have children really can't ever better themselves for various reasons (whether mental or physical) and tax payers may end up supporting their offspring for years...but even that is totally different than the able bodied lady who just wants to live life as a SAH and let other people support her and her family. And even lies to get the goods to enable her to make a choice she can't afford.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
JensNatPat

My DH's ex-wife quit her job (she said it was stressful) and started collecting unemployment. So she lived only off of unemployment and child support for 13 months. My SD never ate lunch (picky eater) because she didn't like the "free" lunch they served at school. Meanwhile, her Mom was posting new pics of her salon hair color du jor on Facebook and asking us if we could take SD to her activities because she had a pedicure appointment. Then had the you know what to try and take us to court for more child support since she "lost" her job and couldn't afford to pay her heat bill. (we went for temp. custody until she got her heat turned back on and her response was to ask for more CS) Once she realized we would win she went to Grandma for the money.

The judge basically laughed at her. She voluntarily quit her job and has the ability to work. So go get a job!!

Justice served. She got a job when unemployment ran out and she had to.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Po1 how in the world is lying to the system to get assistance and a grandparent paying for education even in the same bracket/hemisphere/category/planet ..???

grandparent is not taxpayers and if that grandparent said 'no I can't afford to pay for my grandchild's education' then I bet some alternatives would come in to play... But taxpayers paying for a lying cheater without the option to deny assistance to said cheater liar... Not even the same ...
Grandparents money=his decision how to spend it
Taxpayer money = there are rules and requirements To receive it

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Jens you should google unemployment benefits. You will find that you are disqualified if you quit your job. You have to be unemployed by no fault of your own.

Unemployment is not welfare. Tell all of these people who worked the majority of their lives to end up being laid off for 'restructuring' or having their position 'eliminated' that they are on 'welfare' and they need to get up and go get a job!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

I've had financial problems and been lucky that my parents were able to help.

My DD's grandfather and grandmother have helped to educate her, and me.

I have been a career woman who out-earned my husband but didn't care because he was following a dream. I have been a pampered SAHM. I have been a single mother. I am now a working BM and SM.

Although I would like more children I have not had them because I didn't feel the time/money/atmosphere/etc were right.

If I did not feel I could provide for my child in all aspects and have another child and provide for them too, I would not have a second. So far that has not happened.

There is a difference between people who do not work and rely on the government (ie, the people) to provide for them and continue to have children and those who fall on hard times and need help to provide for the children already here.

I have no doubt Love would get a job before going on the government dole. Perhaps she is fortunate that her father will help her. That matters not. What matters is living beyond one's means and EXPECTING me and you to pay for it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

I agree Silver -- Po1 has pointed out in several posts that I lived with my parents after my divorce, pointing out that I was never really on my own. Which I was in fact on my own in the beginning but could not survive because I didn't make enough to provide and pay child care. My parents wanted to help, they thought it would be better for dd and I if we were with them and they could help me not have to pay 'rent' to someone while trying to find my footing but I didn't go on welfare... Because I was already receiving 'shelter' help from my parents ... I felt someone out there might need it more than I did.
I've had a lot of people tell me I should quit my job an stay home while my kids are young so that I am not just working to pay child care. Now I'm making more and bringing in more than what child care costs.. So we wouldn't be saving any money for me to be at home -- we now would lose money and our health insurance...
I think love's dad paying for his grandchild to get a good education is a ridiculous argument and frankly no one's business. Someone cheating the system is absolutely our business as it's our money they are stealing.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Well said Myfam.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

"Jens you should google unemployment benefits. You will find that you are disqualified if you quit your job. You have to be unemployed by no fault of your own. "

Actually that's not necessarily true. In our state, you can get unemployment if you quit, but only if it's for particular reasons (sudden lack of transportation, medical issues, child care issues, job is not what was promised, or moving to follow a spouse) but, with the exception of the last, it's very difficult to do. Where it starts to get sticky is the difference between a "quit" and a "termination".

BM and her job parted ways in what most people would view as a "quit" - she stopped going to work. But, in the world of unemployment, it counted as a "termination" because apparently the company had no written, standard procedures for termination due to no-shows or excessive absences. A company can be as harsh or as lenient as they want to be with attendance policies - but they have to be consistent, and their policy has to be known to employees. (I know people who've gotten the other end of that particular stick.)

That said, I agree with all else that you said. In the vast majority of cases unemployment is not due to any fault of the recipient and it is not welfare.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
JensNatPat

Thanks Mattie, and yes MyFam, in NJ you can get unemployement if you quit under certain circumstances. She almost had a lawsuit against the company for a "hostile" work environment. So that might have been what qualified her for unemployment.

I never mentioned welfare and I do know the importance of unemployment for thoes who truly need it. My husband was laid off 3 weeks ago. But he's not trying to get his child support lowered while going out and spending $$ on himself frivoulously. Although several people have told us to ask for an adjustment we're not going to do that. It's not SD's fault he lost his job. We can go without somethings so she can have the same standard of life.

I would never tell someone legitimally on unemployment to go out and get a job. I would however tell someone who quit, and then spent all her money on hair color to get up and get a job when she can't pay her heat bill....

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

This might be long.... I've been reading and not able to reply....

First of all... my ss bm is also on unemployment. I think it's serious bs!! She had a perfectly good job here in our state then moved in with new man in new state and quit that job.... She then worked for approximately 6 weeks at a TEMP service, got layed off and now is collecting. I don't believe she's even bothering to look for employment... which is a requirement. It pisses me off! She's taking nice trips, getting new smart phones and just having a grand ole summer while the rest of us pay her dumb butt. I know unemployment isn't welfare... but it's still a rip off with some people.

Welfare.... this includes health insurance, food stamps, TANF, etc.... Members of my family whom I really do love upset me to no end!!! They just got married and the girl has a son. They have no health insurance at this moment. They both work but neither job offers insurance. In our state we have a health insurance plan that you have to pay a little for... I'm ok with that. BUT... they have plans to apply for the free stuff... medicaid. Again.. they both work. She has the ability to work a better job but wants to serve in a restaurant. Is that because you don't have to show tips? Maybe? That's BS!!! They clothe the child in clothes I gave them from my 8 year old. He's 4. My 8 year old just grew out of them therefore they're HUGE on him. They roll the pants up way high and have huge cuffs. Then they unroll and he walks all over them. They refuse to pay for haircuts... so the kid has a hideous bowl cut that her mom gives him... it's not good. They are both going to college online. So, they get huge checks back from the loans. She also was a single mom so her tax checks were giant. That'll change at least a little since they are now married. They have TONS of money in the bank. Back at Christmas time the kids shoes were so small on his feet his toes were crinkled up... I bought him shoes for his gift. She refuses to eat left overs so they eat out ALL the time. Now.... the big part. Their honeymoon was in Rio de Jenaro, Brazil!!!!!!!!!!! AND... they are planning to go to China next year and Egypt the year after. Yet... they want to apply for medicaid. AND their kid looks like an orphan. THIS is another reason I hate welfare!!!! I can't live like they do and I work my butt off. I also make sure my kids look presentable because they are direct reflections of my parenting. This just irks me to no end.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

It's not the programs themselves that you 'hate', it's the users and abusers of the systems. Unemployment (which is not welfare as stated) is meant to carry one over till they regain a job. Being 'jobs' have been hard to compete for in the last several years, regaining one instantly may not be possible. Accepting one too soon that is far below the previous position can really damage too. But seriously, who takes vacation after vacation instead of trying to get back on their feet? Who never bothers to seek a job until days before an expiration of benefits? That is likely the part you dislike.

'Welfare' and it's many programs can get iffy. Lots of jobs out there right now are nothing more than min. wage jobs, offer no benefits (or cost far more than wage can afford) and take still leave people working them earning little enough to actually qualify for state/federal programs. One can in some places work 32 hours a week (about the cut off for lots of lower paying businesses to offer out) and qualify. It happens often for single mothers. Some of these ladies can work their buns off at a not so pleasant job all week, certainly can't call them lazy...yet they make little and qualify for assistance.

Sure they can get another part time job to supplement, but than they lose their benefits the assistance provides and now make not enough to purchase their own items like insurance. Kid you not, make a few bucks over the guidelines and suddenly the programs think a lady can now 'afford' her own health insurance...yet a few bucks ago she was getting it free via the government.

I don't know what the answer is, but hating the truly hard working yet basically working poor is not the answer. Hating the programs have to exist is not the answer. The fraud, liars/cheaters and abusers give some necessary programs bad names and reps. I've seen women and men in their elder years suddenly shopping the low end grocery stores and paying for food stamps for what is probably the first time ever in their life. People in their seventies and eighties going back to work at big box stores...they've lost it all, their whole life they worked and saved for.

I don't hate these people anymore than I can hate the younger single moms out there...but I have no answers as to have it all gets fixed.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Two separate situations: BM 'quit' her job and is now living off unemployment and won't go get a job.. She gets her nails/hair done, BD not adjusting CS so SD can continue to live in her normal standard of living.

Sounds like: BM is getting unemployment when she should just go get a job... She's living off the system... Can't pay her bills because she's getting her hair done...

Truth be known: BM was in a hostile work environment so she qualified for unemployment...

My point/earlier post: you can't just quit your job and receive unemployment... At no fault of your own, you are unemployed and qualify for benefits ex:(Mattie I'll use yours) at no fault of my own, I lost my transportation, child care, employer made it impossible for me to continue working in a hostile environment. my post said just that... You can't just quit for no reason.. Sounds like BM had a reason and qualified.

My mom takes my sister and I for girls day once a month and she pays for us to have pedicures. Dd has started going. Dd tells BD that I get pedicures once a month. Bd complains that I don't spend my money wisely and if I ask him to reimburse for medical (which he is obligated to do) he says, stop getting your toes done and you wouldn't need to be reimbursed. I won't ever tell BD that my mom pays on her own free will for my sister and I to get pedicures with her because it's none of his business but he thinks I spend my money on things I shouldn't and I laugh reminding myself that he is an idiot and has no clue what he is talkin about. Last month he told me to get rid of my iPhone and I also laugh to myself because I don't pay a dime for my cell phone, my employer pays for it ... But if he wants to get himself all worked up over what I have, I'm not going to tell him he doesn't know what he is talking about. Your BM I'm sure is different, my parents would pay my heat before getting my toes done... But that's just another perspective to look at.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

JMT- I seem to always agree with you. You said it right.. All of it.

My take on it is we don't know the whole story in everyone's situation. One can take a fancy honeymoon because someone else paid for it. We received lots of money when we married and we didn't want to pay bills with it. We should have saved it (looking back) but we really needed a get away for Dh and I. We weren't just 'newlyweds' we already had a baby and I had my daughter.. We hit the ground running as a family before even saying I do so vacation get away is how we went.
But there were some people in my family that talked about us ( if they can afford that why don't they own their own home? Why do they rent? They are irresponsible with their money) well those people didn't know that we didn't pay a dime... And I never corrected them because it's none of their business what I do and how I got my money.

I don't like the liars and cheaters of the system either but apparently the person who approved their benefits being welfare or unemployment know a LOT more about their situation than we ever will. Do we ever really know how much a person makes? Have you ever known someone who has said I make $20k when they only really make $19500? I do!!
How do we ever really know what is really going on? We aren't in their bank account... We don't know. We just see on the outside.

Jens-- if your dh's ex can't pay her bills and is needing so much extra from you and Dh, don't give it to her. The only way to stop your frustration is to just not allow her to even share with you or DH what is going on. Sounds like in your situation, maybe his child should be with you full time until mom can get back on her feet or figure out what she needs to do to get on her feet.

Unemployment is just that... A way to help a person stay a float until they land a new job. Obama can't get unemployment down, and he is the leader of the free world... If he can't neither can we.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

My ss bm HAD a job that she quit to go to new man. There's no reason she should EVER be on unemployment. She choose to go to this new state and she choose the first job offered to her which was a TEMP job. I don't understand how you can qualify for unemployment after having quit a job then taken a TEMP job... that's exactly what that means. It's temporary. It shouldn't make you qualify for unemployment when it's over. To me, this seems like a scam. BUT.. she only gets 20 weeks, I actually called the state to make sure she was getting it the right way. Then I told them that their state is absurdly rediculous in that it's far too easy to get benefits and the guy agreed with me.

I have very little sympathy for people on welfare. Like I said about my family members... they are living much better then I am right now. Also, I had my first son when I was 16. All I EVER received was WIC, I was forced into the medicaid office and they were so rude to me I told them where they could shove their benefits. I made do. By the time I was a senior in high school I was working so much and making such good money that I no longer even qualified for WIC. Now seriously, if I didn't qualify for the easiest qualifying benefit as a high school student... how hard is it to make enough money? I also work in the medical industry. I see people in here all the time with their coach purses, nails done, hair done, kids have all kinds of games..... I only wish I could live as well as some of them do. I understand the people who need it for a stepping stone... but the ones who use it and abuse it just make me so mad. I also am totally ok with the elderly who are sick... or just out of money. My mother-in-law has NO money, zip, zero, nada..... some days she won't eat. I'm sure she easily qualifies but she won't apply. She's also extremely disabled. Those people are who the system is for.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

myfampg..... direct quote from my nephew.... "My priority in life is traveling, I don't care what I have to do to get a GREAT vacation, I will do it. I don't care about anything else." He works under my dh, my dh was there when he booked the reservations. He himself paid for the honeymoon. He also showed my dh his phone showing his account balance. They lived with me for 3 months, I still get a lot of their mail. I know they get checks from student loans and pell grants and high tax refunds. That's how they are paying. I know without a doubt my brother-in-law wouldn't ever ever ever pay for him to go on that honeymoon. The man is the cheapest on the planet. HAHA! And her parents paid completely for the wedding... not the honeymoon. The were engaged in Europe. For that trip they paid for the airfare but not the accomodations. He has a friend that helped with that. Still... airefare to Europe for two is beyond my means. And I'm not asking for free healthcare.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

"I don't understand how you can qualify for unemployment after having quit a job then taken a TEMP job... that's exactly what that means. It's temporary. It shouldn't make you qualify for unemployment when it's over. To me, this seems like a scam. "

There's a couple of reasons why that should work, actually. First is because people working for temp agencies pay into unemployment; I know people who've worked as "temps" for years. So many companies don't want to hire permanent employees and pay benefits, etc. so they'll have "temps" - temps who work for the same company for years upon years. (I don't mean through the same temp agency, I mean for the same client.) There's no reason that if that job gets eliminated they should not receive unemployment; they've been paying into it too.

This being the case, there's no way to know what this particular woman was told by the agency. This happened to a co-worker's daughter - she was working 35 hours/week or so for a grocery store, wanted full-time with benefits and found a job that was "temp to hire" after 90 days. The agency swore up and down that at the end of 90 days she'd become a permanent employee of Company X and get benefits. So she quit her job and started work; went in the first day to find 20 other people who were also temps, also new, also had been told that they'd be hired after 90 days, and started to get suspicious. They were all laid off at the end of 89 days. So that is how she qualified for unemployment; the wages made at her last job plus the fact that she was let go from the "temp" (but supposed to be permanent) new job.

I know that companies do this because I used to work at a company that would do exactly that. They'd bring in a bunch of temps at the end of the quarter, promise these poor people up and down that if they worked hard they'd get hired. Not one single time were any of them hired. All that it was was that the company I worked for wanted short-term temps (couple of weeks) to work their behinds off, for minimum wage, and they worked night shift. It was a horrible thing; anyone who told them what was really going to happen got fired. (I live in an at-will state so companies can do this.)

But yes, it can be used as a scam as well. I believe that the temp agencies are well aware of this, though. They seem to really try to get people placed back out again, and if they turn down another temp position they get reported to unemployment by the agency. That's what happened to co-worker's daughter. I felt badly for her; I understood why she refused to work for agency again (she was furious that she'd quit her job on a false promise and said she'd never again deal with an agency she couldn't trust. Poor girl - her mom tried to tell her. I think her feelings were entirely understandable but the fact remained that she'd turned down an offer of work, for however long it would have been, so they cut her off.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

I second you Mattie. I work for a company who is 'similiar'. They don't set out to lay off at 89 days but they do keep them as long as they can because they don't have to pay benefits, vacation, holidays... One girl has been here three years and just became permenant about 6 months ago.

They only hire from temp agencies now because they can let them go easier if they don't work out.

Mom of 3- you have legitimate reasons to be annoyed by your nephew. You are privelage to information that you shouldn't because your nephew is dumb. Not all people are this way but I will agree with you that your nephew is a scammer and is possibly cheating the system by the information you gave.

I googled my state to get an idea of the requirements:
A family of four must be under the poverty line which in all states except Alaska and Hawaii is $29767.50. To receive welfare checks. That is simple if one parent works and the other stays home. Or a single parent with three kids. I wouldn't qualify if I was a single mom ...

But for Medicaid it was something like $45k for a family of four. With all of the healthcare changes, I cannot find an income list like I have before... It states, if you feel you need help with insurance, contact a case worker. The requirements are not much if you have children. The state is now having to provide health care because many employers are not offering it, it's too expensive or a person can not obtain it privately for one reason or another. Eek I think it's just going to get worse and it's going to frustrate people even more....

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mom_of_4

well the incredibly low requirement for welfare and medicaid is part of the reason that people continue to not work and just stay on it. They are faced with the decision of going to work which more than likely means putting kids in daycare (which we know is ridiculously expensive) and losing the benefits which also means paying for healthcare and then all of a sudden they are working more just to be in the same place they were before. There needs to be a serious revamp. The current system is not conducive to really helping people improve their situation but rather stay in the exact same position for years on end.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

Hmmmm, they are a family of 3, I know he makes 22880 and then she's a server. So.. she's not showing what she really makes cause they never fully show their tips. So she could easily be making way more then the benefits allow but it won't show. Obviously they're living better then I am and I do make way more then him and my dh makes more then double what he makes. It's not right. Especially when most of my paycheck goes to pay for my health insurance.

My ss bm being on unemployment after only working six weeks in her current state and having quit the previous job is NOT right to get unemployment. I really believe she is a scam. My ss came home and I asked if mom had a job yet... he said "no, but she's still getting paid by the state".... wow!! Way to encourage good work ethic mom!!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

myfam, there is nothing wrong with living with parents or romantic partners (otherwise marrying would be wrong LOL). I just simply stated that first live with one husband, then with parents, and then with second husband, then logically speaking you never lived on your own. I never said it is wrong, it is absolutely not, it is just how your life played out.

"but I didn't go on welfare". Yes you got help from parents, but many don't have parents or they don't help.

Fraud is very wrong but finding job nowadays is hard. Day care is expensive and unemployment is high. i don't know where you guys live but where i am at it is very tough to find a job. So with three kids and two are very young and day care expenses and no family to help and no good education and maybe low abilities, no wonder people struggle. And maybe when they planned kids, they expected or had higher salary. Things change. It is tough out there. People just have to understand that not everyone got it easy.

Abusing the system is wrong though

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

It's not uncommon for people to never live alone. I've lived on my own but never by myself.

I think instead of calling out the situations of others it would be less antagonizing to comment on that which you know rather than cobbling pieces of stories together and presenting the mash.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

"So with three kids and two are very young and day care expenses and no family to help and no good education and maybe low abilities, no wonder people struggle. And maybe when they planned kids, they expected or had higher salary."

If you're referring to BM and her DH, I assure you that is not the case. And they actually have four children because BM's DH has a 12 yr old DD.

The state would have paid for daycare for the two younger ones for BM to go back to school! The night she punched me, which was BEFORE she got pregnant with her 3rd child, she sobbed and cried and said she needed to get her life together and was considering doing an LPN program. I tried to be kind and supportive and encouraged her to do so.

I'm not at all saying there aren't deserving people whose circumstances have unexpectedly changed and NEED the help. But BM is NOT one of them. She's been on some form of welfare pretty much for the last seven years. In seven years, she couldn't get on her feet? Gimme a break.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

So... sperm donor has 5 kids.... 4 of which receive medicaid and have received TANF... which is why I can't get his tax refunds. The state has to get paid back first. This is one of those situations that the moms SUCK... they knew he had all these other kids and they still continued to go ahead and have a kid with him. Then they go and get welfare. Really? I think there should be stipulations, if you are an idiot and put yourself delibrately (sp) into a bad situation then you don't get it. I mean really... the mom who had the fifth child, should she really be allowed to get benefits because she has a kid by someone she knew had 4 others and wasn't providing for them? NO!!

Then there's his brother. He's been with the same woman for at least 8 years. They have 5 children as well. Also all on medicaid, food stamps, housing, etc. They just keep popping them out. The woman doesn't work, never has. BUT... dad gets to claim all the kids on his taxes as a single dad. HUGE tax returns. Really? They don't even pay any of that in. It all just makes me sick. I can go to work 40 hours a week, get about $1800 back in taxes.... with 4 children, and barely have enough to get by. It's BS!!

Not only should these recipients have to provide a drug test but they should have to take birth control as well. Obviously sperm donor was doing drugs... so is mom number 4... she's getting benefits. The other mom of 5 is popping out babies she can't afford... hello!!! Birth control!!!

Also... men and women alike who cannot afford to have babies like sperm donor but keep having them should have manditory sterilization. I'll pay for that out of my taxes. That one time fee is a heck of a lot cheaper then a kid for the next 18 years.... that'll probably turn into longer because they have grown up this way and will probably turn out the same.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

Of course it is not uncommon to always live with someone else, but it is also not uncommon for people to live alone and be on their own. I think people who never were on their own do not understand how others survive.

It is a huge difference between live with others or in someone else's houses and live actually by yourself (even with minor kids who don't financially contribute). It is just very very different.

Plenty of people live with their children and no spouse or just completely alone or never been married and are single parents or never had kids. Not every woman always has someone else to share life expense with. We aren't in 1800s anymore.

My DD23 lives completely alone on her own(had a partner for 3 years but now lives alone). I lived alone on my own for almost 20 years (or with a minor child). People have all kind of lives out there. Compare to many people my life is easy too. Everything is relative. Just have some perspective, not everyone has parents or men to move in with.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

Love, what does her DH do? Is he working? I wonder what his role in all this?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

BM called DH last night, and in the middle of unrelated ranting mentioned that her unemployment is about to run out. We've been wondering when that would be; she's not worked since 2009 and has no intention of looking for a job. She's told both DH and SS this little tidbit of info. So she told DH that when her unemployment ran out she was going to "have to go down and get on assistance".

Oh, how I'd enjoy being a fly on the wall when she finds out that she's not going to get any cash assistance. I don't know how it is in other states but here, if you don't have minor children who live with you - you don't get any cash. Food stamps, medical benefits, on the waiting list for Section 8 housing maybe - but not cash. Ooops. Might fall into that category of "Things to look up before your unemployment runs out..."

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

Parent, her DH works. He is in some kind of home improvement sales. I think it's fairly decent money, all things considered--he only has a highschool diploma--- but like most sales jobs, it's all commission and it can be an up and down business.

I think he does okay but certainly not great, and never enough for them to get ahead. At this point, with four kids, I don't see them ever being able to get ahead. A few years ago, before they had the two younger ones, if BM had gone back to school herself, gotten some sort of nursing degree like she'd talked about, maybe things could have been better. Now, it's doubtful.

I don't know how *okay* her DH's income will wind up being now without them being able to rely on assistance to make up the difference: health insurance for BM and the two girls, food stamps, cash, etc.

He certainly makes too much to qualify for assistance but not enough to support a family of six.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
incognitomom

I know a family of 3 that gets $700 a month in food stamps here!

BM in our case has been collecting welfare benefits for my stepkids for years. We reported her twice and as far as I know the state has not done anything about it! I am so glad that your state caught up with your ss's bm. It makes me sick when people commit welfare fraud!!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Po1 I did live on my own. When my ex and I separated, he kept the house because he could afford to. I had never worked so I had to get my first 'real' job which I am currently still in just a higher paying position. I moved into an apartment with dd. We lived there for about 7-8 months. Exdh was not having his wages garnished so I often went without child support and became only able to pay rent and childcare nothing more so I moved into my parents house. It's not welfare. No one can complain that their tax dollars were providing for me and dd. No I did not pay rent for that short time but I was paying my parents money for the legal fees they were helping me with so they were getting something. Just not $1000 in rent. It was more like $300 a month which I couldn't even rent a one bedroom for in the ghetto. So I guess you may consider it housing assistance but the people weren't paying it, my folks were. Which is their business. As is the grandparents paying out of their pockets for education.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

If my husband left me today -- I could live on my own at this point. Just because I lived with my parents until marrying DH doesn't mean I dont understand what its like to be on my own. My sister has been a single mom for years and struggles day in and day out to provide for her son. Has never received benefits from any welfare but my parents buy clothes and help on occasion because they can and want to. I don't look down on my sister for my parents occasional help. I pat her on the back for not asking the tax payers to do it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

LOL PO1. I think everyone knows it's not the 1800's. I don't know about anyone else here but I was raised with feminism.

A woman does not need a man to provide for her. But a woman should take precautions to not have more children than she can support either.

People make choices. In the OP, the BM made the choice to continue having children even though she does not have the resources. Because of this choice, she is relying on my tax dollars to supplement her income.

I have no problem contributing to the welfare program. It is there for those who need it. I feel very strongly about helping those who are less able to have food, shelter, and opportunity to learn new skills so that they are not in the poverty cycle longer than necessary. It benefits everyone to have people contributing.

It's one thing to need help from parents. It's one thing to need help from government. It's another thing to ABUSE those who are helping by not making an attempt to help yourself.

BTW, I'd actually work LESS if I weren't married and I'd have a very similar lifestyle. Being married does not mean a person is living on easy street.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

abusing the system is wrong but many people get all kind of help from the government. people on this forum have their kids getting free lunches at school, it is paid by a taxpayer, nobody says they should pack lunches, get a second job or cut some other expenses. they qualify for free lunch, so kids get it even if it means that I, PO1, pay for their kids free lunches with my taxes.

I think it is unfair comparing asking parents or government for help, not everyone has parents who are capable or willing to help. i think it is all the same, you need help, you ask.

Myfam, the reason your sister gets no welfare is because liek you said your parents help. You guys are failing to understand that not everyone has parents to bail them out.

You don't look down at your sister because she gets help from her parents yet you look down on people who get help from the government just because they don't have such helping parents. It is just inherently wrong logic.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Oh no you misunderstand. I do not look down on anyone for getting help from the government. That is between them and the case worker who approves their application. My point in bringing in my story was that you were throwing at love that the grandfather was paying for her child's education which is the same as receiving welfare. I was pointing out that I didn't agree with your logic that because family wants to contribute to help is completely different than someone abusing the welfare system. It's not beneath me to go ask for help if I need it. I have never qualified for it. When I was at my lowest and had sold all of my belongings and had given up my lifestyle and buying name brand shampoo and other products, I researched where I could get assistance. I came across a program for child care assistance. If I wasn't paying so much in child care, I would have been fine to stay on my own but child care is what it is... It's a must for many people and I don't know if you've noticed but the cost goes up every year, not down. I applied for assistance and also applied for a 'scholarship' program. I was put on a waiting list and still to this day, 5 years later I have never been contacted. I'm still on the waiting list 5 years later.
My position on people complaining about ex wives that are on welfare is that they do not know the entire situation. And assuming that one is abusing the system because they only see what is on the outside and what they want to see. I hear this from lots of people in my circle, BM sits on her A all day and I am paying her benefits. She keels having kids and can't afford them. I am paying this I am paying that. It annoys me. One person cannot know the entire details of another persons situation just because they think they can 'see' what is going on. BM gets pedicures, well so do I but it's a gift. BM has a coach purse, well so do I but it was a gift. BM has a new car, well so do I but you have no idea how much I bargained for it OR that it's not new.. Etc. Complaining about someone being on welfare and bringing up all the material things they have is wrong. However in the case of the nephew with all of the kids, I agree her complaint is valid and cause for concern. I believe she should contact via the internet the state and report possible fraud. Have it investigated and then she will know.
The reason I pat my sis on the back is not because I don't believe in welfare, I believe that as you also stated, by not accepting relief when there are other options for her is allowing someone who does not have the help that we are so fortunate to have to receive the benefits she may qualify for. If my sister was receiving benefits and living the way she does, I would be angry at her for abusing the system. She has it difficult but she could make some changes and maybe it would free up a few dollars. Legitimate help is one thing and abuse of benefits is another. I believe we are on the same page but you aren't understanding my point. Or I'm not understanding you.

So I'll stop here.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

I agree it is better to use other options, but often there are no other options. I don't think there is anything wrong with a grandparent helping with education or whatever else, no it is not the same as accepting welfare, but it is still accepting help because it is there. I just don't think that ablebodied people, who do not work, should be judging others who do not work but do not have well-off husbands or parents.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

Myfampg, I don't think there is anything wrong with your parents having helped you out with your housing when you needed the help. And it is NOT the same thing--not even remotely in the same category---as what BM did in lying to get benefits.

Parent, I would venture to guess that if myfampg had, while living with her parents as a single mother to one child, had not one but TWO more children, her parents would NOT have been pleased and may not have been so generous in their help. You can't help people who refuse to help themselves.

\

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

"I just don't think that ablebodied people, who do not work, should be judging others who do not work but do not have well-off husbands or parents."

RUDE.

You are completely missing the point. Accepting A GIFT from my father for DD's education is just that---a generous thing HE is gifting to DD. His granddaughter.

If he didn't or suddenly decided to stop paying? She'd go to a public school, I wouldn't have to go on welfare!

I dom't understand how you can even compare the two. It boggles my mind.

You are missing the point entirely.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

There is a HUGE diffrence between not working because you are able to not work and not working because you choose not to work and accept welfare. There is also a HUGE diffrence between having child after child while you can afford it and when you can't afford it and taking welfare. If certain people didn't continue to have child after child they could then work because daycare wouldn't be as expensive. HUGE diffrence.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Exactly mom of 3. Thank you!!!!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

" There is also a HUGE diffrence between having child after child while you can afford it and when you can't afford it and taking welfare."

Exactly.

That has been my issue with BM. Okay, so she had SS and she was young-ish but not THAT young. 25. Anyway, DH was always the one who worked; BM quit her job soon after she got pregnant with SS. (She had been working in a daycare and she does have some college credits, maybe 30 credits or so.)

Anyway, after SS was born she didn't go back to work or school; then she and DH split up when SS was about one year old. Then BM moved in with her boyfriend---who worked----and she lived with him for about 3.5 years. Never really worked during that time nor did she go to school.

She got food stamps and state health insurance all during this time period. Occasionally, she'd start some job (I think to satisfy the welfare working or looking for work requirement) and then quit in a matter of weeks, sometimes even days. She did a few different, random things.

I DO understand that, without a degree or skill set, it's difficult to find work. BUT the point I've tried to make is BM made no effort to better her situation. She was drinking REALLY heavily during this time period----out at bars pretty much every other night when SS was with DH.

You all know that story.

Anyway, then when she and THAT boyfriend broke up, she moved in with her parents for about a month. They set down some ground rules---get a job, pay rent, no going out drinking---and BM was mad. So she moved in with her "guy friend" who is now her DH.

Got pregnant VERY quickly, like within the first few months. Ergo, DD who is now 3.5 years old.

She was still drinking really heavily all while being pregnant. Anyway, baby was born and then it was shortly thereafter that BM punched me, she stopped drinking, etc.

So it seemed like perhaps her life might turn around.

But then she got pregnant again and now has her third child, the DD who is 1 yr old.

That's a looong time to be on assistance and a loooong time to have not at least TRIED to make the situation better. I understand *things happen* but this is not a woman who has done anything to make her own life and the lives of her kids better. And, instead, she only compounds her problems.

Because it's totally true: daycare for TWO little ones is a heck of a lot more expensive than daycare for ONE little one.

And so on and so on.

But these are things that most *reasonable people* consider.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mom_of_4

okay, now... things happen and daycare for even one kid is ridiculous and there some on this board that never reasonably considered their first child and the consequences but justify it with I was young and that is okay... but why is it suddenly okay to judge others for their mistakes. Granted defrauding the system is and always will be wrong... but being on welfare is not wrong!! And, as I pointed out earlier the system is broken and isnt conducive to actually helping people get off welfare but rather encourages the continuation of welfare. Sometimes you calculate the bills and the income and realize your children were better off when you were on welfare and who are we to say oh come on you shouldnt do whats best for your children.

and while I dont necessarily agree with PO1 a lot of the time I see the point she is trying to make which is that taking help from family is a private form of welfare (not to mean it in an insulting way)... it is accepting help which is no better or worse than those who accept help from the state... as po1 was trying to say... many dont have the option of family helping out either because they have none or their family simply cant help them out. Dont get me wrong I am all for family assitance and doing for your own but there seems to be a lot of looking down on those that have multiple children while on welfare... a lot of judgement on their decisions... and really if we were perfect in our decisions we wouldnt be asking for assitance in our lives on a forum.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

"it is accepting help which is no better or worse than those who accept help from the state..."

What about defrauding and lying to the state to get said help?

"there seems to be a lot of looking down on those that have multiple children while on welfare"

I don't think people who are already on state medical insurance, food stamps and other means of assistance should be adding to families they cannot already provide for. Call it a judgement, whatever, but that's just common sense. If you are already struggling to provide for the children you have---and, clearly, if one is on welfare, then one is, by definition, *struggling*---you shouldn't have more until your financial circumstances change.

I have said repeatedly I do NOT have a problem with people in need of assistance getting it; I do have a problem with people taking advantage of the system and using it as a permanent crutch----rather than what it should be, which is temporary help.

Single mom going to school and working gets welfare? I'm all for it.

Mom---or dad---suddenly left alone, either via death or divorce, to provide for children. No job, no skills. I'm all for someone like that getting assistance.

A family who has unexpectedly fallen on hard times? Again, all for it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

I'm agreeing with love. If I'm passing judgement on someone so be it. If you can't afford the kids you have you shouldn't be having more. I've had people call to schedule fertility consults with obgyns.... guess what their insurance was... that's right... medicaid. That's just wrong!! Think of Octomom.... same thing. She was on assistance yet kept having babies implanted in her. WRONG WRONG WRONG! Period!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

mom of 4, exactly that's what I am trying to say. Sure it is better accepting help from family than going on welfare, yet not everyone has a family.

As about why is she having children? We had discussion about pregnancies on this forum and almost everyone here said she got pregnant accidentally and more so many were drunk or under the influence, nobody thought there was nothing wrong with it! Remember that thread? So I do not know how and why this woman became pregnant with her children.

Nobody on this forum seem to assign any responsibility to men. Where are me in all this? Sure she is not getting herself pregnant.

I think it started with the fact that she lied to the system and everyone agrees it is entirely wrong. Yet somehow this thread escalated to a discussion how wrong it is for women with small children to stay home and not work and why isn't she on her feet. I understand how people judge others who sit on welfare rather than work, I do work and my taxes pay for those who don't.

Love, I understand BM is a mess, she is useless, yet your whole post how she does not work is hypocritical. You do not work either. And you don't have kids at home, there are at school for at least 7 hours a day. I think you are more lucky than her because your DH is a nice man who makes more than her DH and you have nice dad who is willing to help. And you are obviously a nice person while she is not, yet you are being hypocritical.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

"Yet somehow this thread escalated to a discussion how wrong it is for women with small children to stay home and not work and why isn't she on her feet."

WHO said that? Not me. No one said that that I'm aware of!

But collecting state welfare dollars and not working, looking for employment, or being in school is actually in violation of the assistance program. There are rules and guidelines to receive assistance.

"think you are more lucky than her because your DH is a nice man who makes more than her DH and you have nice dad who is willing to help"

first of all--I have a degree in Early Childhood Education. I could support myself if I had to. If my DH walked out tomorrow, I would be *okay.*

As far as me having a "nice dad who is willing to help," WHAT does that have to do with WELFARE????

He's not buying my groceries, Parent. He's not paying our mortgage. He's not buying clothes for my DD. I said it before, if he stopped paying for her private school, she would go to a public school! HIS help doesn't make the difference between welfare or no welfare for us.

Your logic doesn't make sense.

Paying for DD's education is a gift, an extra, something generous and kind he does, it's not *helping to support our family.*

Am I luckier than BM? Of course. And it IS true that if I were in a terrible situation, I WOULD probably have family help, and would not NEED to go on welfare. BUT--BUT---BUT I haven't made the bad choices that BM (and her DH, you're right, he is accountable, too) have made.

Making a *mistake* is one thing, but when you keep making the same mistake year after year after year, and not doing anything to better your life...it becomes sheer stupidity. Nothing else.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

Love, I have no doubt that you could support yourself and a kid, but you don't. Your DH not only support you, his kid but also your kid. It is OK to accept help from dad. But personally if I didn't work and my dad paid for DD's schooling, I would feel guilty. I'd go to work to contribute. My dad also helped me in life but i worked. You don't, and BM doesn't either.

I think it is unfair for you to judge BM for not supporting herself. One thing is judging her for lying and abusing the system, but you are judging her for not working. OK, I agree your dad does not pay your bills, your DH does. Her DH does not do such a good job. I don't know why he is not supporting his family the way your DH does, I don't know. She is crazy, but I still disagree with your position on this. It is your business to work or not, but I think you are being unfair to her for not having it easy.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

There is no magical welfare fairy who comes and dispenses money to people. It is our tax dollars that pay for this. This is a decision that we, as a society, have come to a compromise on (some people would like more assistance, like maybe some to help young ladies who have managed to keep their legs together and are thus not eligible for free housing, tuition and food?) Some would like no assistance at all. But this is what we, in the United States, have agreed upon - the same way that we come to agreements on school funding, military expenditures, libraries, roads, Social Security and everything else.

Love is married. Any debts she incurs her husband is responsible for, and vice versa. They are a family unit. Their family unit pays taxes; their family unit pays for welfare, along with me, along with you, along with everyone else reading (in the US). The fact that Love's father wants to pay for school tuition is irrelevant. The fact that Love does not work is irrelevant. The only thing that is relevant is that Love's family helps to fund welfare, and as such, she has every right to judge how their money is spent, just the same way that I have every right to complain that my tax dollars fund sports stadiums and not libraries.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Please just agree to disagree. As love said, she is in violation of the rules and stipulations for welfare by not trying to find a job or do something to get of of welfare. To sit on it for years and years and do nothing -- absolutely someone needs to judge her.
This isn't a fight over who is a better person, love or Bm. This isn't over who makes more money or has a providing husband, etc. This is about a family who has been in the program for years and years and years and FINALLY it caught up to her. Sitting at home and not attempting to look for a job or seek education is cheating the system. Period.

The whole thing about having more babies, I commented and maybe I am being judgemental but I am seeing it that way because I too am in that predicament. I cannot afford another child. I know I can't. I am honest with myself, this is the worst time to add to our family. We don't even have a dog. But I do something about it. Yes PO1 I remember the thread well lol. My children were not planned. The two I planned ended in miscarriage. I'm so blessed to have these children but when I was pregnant with DS 4 years ago I said 'DH we cannot have anymore until we are in a better place' and we to this day have not had one scare - I protect myself as the owner of this uterus and these ovaries-- it's my job. I will not be having any more babies until I can stay home and care for my children without the need for childcare AND I will not have to go on welfare to do it.

There have been many times that people have suggested I stay home to stop paying child care. There is so much more to having a 'job' than not paying child care. 1. I have benefits 2. I have independence for myself 3. I'm proud of what I do 4. I enjoy contributing to our family 5. I have adult conversation daily
No offense Love, I wish 100% I could be at home with my kids, pick up from school, no daycare, go on field trips.. But for our family, not having two incomes would probably break us.

I also want to contribute this thought.
When I was married to exDH, I did stay home and he worked. We were not in debt, we didn't have many expenses, we lived pretty low key at first and we only had one child. Dh kept all the finances. I was given an 'allowance' to buy groceries for the household or to buy clothes but I never had my own money to do whatever. Dh would work odd parttimes and his 'cash' was his and he did with it how he wanted. I never saw the problem with it until one day DD needed something and he had no way of getting it until he came home. I realized, he is controlling me. In a marriage, this is my belief, regardless of who takes the role as the worker and who takes the role as the homemaker, the pot is community. I bet if we aske Love's DH he would say he wants Love at home. He wants her to be there for their children. He wants to provide for his family. The money he contributes to the household is 'theirs'. Love contribution is raising her children. Her husband's is providing financially. This is tomatoes tomAtos here. My husband and I are the same. It's one big pot. Yes I work but someone has to provide to the kids day in and day out. For us it's daycare, for Love it's Love. It's not welfare and she isn't 'living off her husband'

Dd's SM is a stay at home mom. Her child is in school 7 hours a day. I've often wondered, what does she do all day? I wonder what it's like not to have kids at home all day..........
In the beginning I was a *tad* bit jealous. I don't know their finances. I don't know how they make it. I don't know if they receive assistance or not. I'm sure they don't as they would not qualify. But I will say, if I found out they were on welfare and she was sitting on her bum and not looking for a job, I would judge her. She judges me because I work. I'm ok with her judgement as I am comfortable with my decision to work.
Its not about anyone staying home, it's not about who works and who doesn't or who makes more money. It's about this BM not doing anything but continuing to live off our hard earned and paid TAX $'s. For years and years and years.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

there is nothing wrong with not working and raising children. i just don't think that it is fair to judge others if you yourself don't work, that's it. my opinion.

and we do have people on this forum who say that schools provide free lunches for their children (don't recall who but there were plenty). i pay for those lunches with my taxes, no one tells them to go to work or keep their legs together as mattie so "nicely" suggests. same rules don't apply to members of this forum.

"I bet if we ask Love's DH he would say he wants Love at home. He wants her to be there for their children." That could be, many men like women at home but kids are not home, they are at school all day. Maybe BM's DH wants her in the kitchen too, barefoot and pregnant. What do we know.

I do have issues with BM lying to the system though. Of course it is different asking for welfare or staying home and husbands work. But I don't understand comments why isn't she on her feet or making anything of herself and why isn't she working. That's hypocrisy.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

" But I don't understand comments why isn't she on her feet or making anything of herself and why isn't she working"

I'm not making anything of myself. Wow.

There are people on this forum who know me and know me well---you know who you are---and those are some of the people who understand and appreciate the intricacies of my life. Like the fact that I WRITE and write well. I'm on an interesting and purposeful life journey and certainly "making something of myself."

One of the rudest things anyone's ever said to me. Just wow.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

Okay, I just re-read that, Parent, and maybe your comment was directed about what I'm saying in regards to BM. I'm sorry if I misunderstood.

I'm going to stop commenting on this thread because we're just going round and round in circles here.

We have an unresolvable disagreement on this subject and that's that.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

If Love was on gov't assistance welfare/food stamps/Medicaid and sitting at home doing whatever she does, while her 1 child and stepchildren are at school and no longer in need of full time daycare, I would tell her to get off her bum and get a job and get her family off of gov't assistance.
But she's not.
She is financially able to be at home writing, researching, cooking, cleaning, reading, picking her nose AND not be on GOVERNMENT WELFARE... It is not the same as a parent who does all of those same things and receives her pay/benefits from government funded programs. Love is very lucky to be in this situation. I bet they sacrifice a lot of additional luxuries for it too. (I'm assuming sorry) I don't know anyone that marries, starts a family and is financially able to live on one income so one parent can be with the children would say NO I'm not lucky I'm just better than you. Love knows she is lucky. And I don't hate her for it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

Love,

I think it's sweet justice when their lies & deceit catch up with them. It's too bad the children have to suffer, but what can ya do? It's not mean to feel satisfied that the right thing prevailed over the wrong thing.

As for what PO1 said: Lying to the state isn't just "lying", it's a crime. It is no different than stealing from your boss or shoplifting from a store. If it isn't bad enough to lie to the government to fleece the taxpayers that give for the truly needy families, it is worse to sit around having more babies when you have no intention of being a positive role model, working to supporting them, or put the children's needs first.

First of all, if you are already on welfare... that can happen to anyone. People lose jobs & fall on hard times, that's what welfare is for... or even being on welfare because you were raised in that & it's all you know, but to continue having more children.. KNOWING you are not supporting the ones you have... KNOWING you are struggling to feed & clothe the ones you already have... that is not putting your existing children first. AND pretty much goes for people that leave a first family behind (not supporting them) and go on to make another family. It's just WRONG and NOT in the children's best interests... not the existing children.. not the new ones.

To compare someone milking the system to someone that has a family member willing to financial contribute is so far from even apples & oranges. It really is such an unintelligent thing to say... and a bit mean spirited. As for being critical of someone that "cant' get on her feet" because she spends all her time on her back... well, it may not be anyone's business for the most part, but when they are committing welfare fraud while they do it... that makes it EVERYONE'S business... at least everyone that pays taxes!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
pseudo_mom

"Maybe BM's DH wants her in the kitchen too, barefoot and pregnant. What do we know."

then someone should tell him to work more to support his kids instead of cheating the system to have the all american dream of having a "SAHM" ... because technically she's a welfare wife.

PO1 your bliss is showing.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

I am not saying you are not making anything of yourself, I commented on your words that BM is not making anything of herself. She does not make anything of herself professionally but she is as the mother, and that's something.

I do agree that DH has to take more responsibility for supporting his family. And yes lying to the system is a crime. And definitely my taxes go into paying for welfare. And it is a bad idea to not work and expect welfare.

I don't disagree with that, what i disagreed with is hypocrisy. MY taxes pay for welfare and maybe I can complain. People, who do not work, do not pay taxes hence their nonexistant taxes do not pay for anyone's welfare.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

--She does not make anything of herself professionally but she is as the mother, and that's something. "--

Stepback a minute here, PO1. The BM that this thread pertains to is not exactly 'Mom of the Year', so I think you might want to include that thought in all the generalizations of SAHM vs WM. This is the BM who drinks, gets violent when she's drunk, attacked and assulted another person while drunk. Now add in lies to obtain assistance, emails and calls filthy things about Love and Little Love, calls and guilts her own son daily multi times, will not do anything to id and help her own child in school and his issues in learning blah blah blah.

Not exactly 'making something of herself as a mother'. What kind of role model is she? How does the fact this particular BM stays home, pops out babies she can not afford, lies to obtain benefits, obviously has plenty of money to get drunk, displays total dysfuction in mothering blah blah , 'making something of herself as a mother'? You will recall Love telling us that even when all this BM had was the one child (SS) this BM zipped out night after night to sit in bars, drink and whatever else...she was not much into 'mothering' BEFORE she popped out more.

Whether this BM has a chemical imbalance (Love says if I remember right the only time she acts half normal is when she is pg), mental issues or is just not 'mother' material, I have no clue. But I can say that if this BM would take the medical assistance to her herself diagnosed, treated/theraphy and perhaps even stablized herself via a medication routine, I would have no problem with my tax dollar assisting in that. Why? Because she would then be actually using the system as it was meant, getting needed help and getting one on stable footing so one can perform as a functional adult with children under her care.

I gotta say here, I've read above a couple times the idea that if a person is approved by a caseworker that it must be actually needed and qualify. Uh, nope. That would be a nonunderstanding of the system databases available to verify and actually check into the information feed the caseworker. Part of this is why there is abuse and people cheating/lying, there is little way to actually follow through with a total complete review and cross check systems and true infomation.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

PO1~ are you just trying to find a way to fault LH? I'm sure LH and her DH file a JOINT tax return. That makes them BOTH taxpayers.

But I will agree that BM is making something of herself... she's a criminal. Making babies does not make one a mother. Merely raising the kids does not guarantee it's positive or productive and certainly doesn't mean she's "making something of herself" by being a MOM. Personally, I feel sorry for the children that are forced to live with & be raised by an alcoholic mother that has so much little self control that she's had problems following the law... such as driving drunk, assaulting LH, disobeying a restraining order, and now she's caught committing welfare fraud. That's what she's made of herself... a criminal record & if she continues, she'll likely end up in jail where she belongs. To compare her to someone that obeys the law and does what she's supposed to, is such an uneven comparison that it's insulting. People make choices. BM chose to be a criminal (repeatedly) instead of working or going to school. BM chooses to have more kids she can't afford. She is a horrible role model... just based on the stuff she's done that we KNOW about. How does that compare with someone that obtained an education, has one child to support & has made some better choices in her life? In fact, LH has gone into therapy to deal with issues in her life to better herself. BM has done nothing but dig herself a hole & jump in... now complains/whines to LH's DH that money is tight because she's losing the illegal benefits? How do you have sympathy for that? She should be saying that she's going to have to get a job... but as far as what was told, that wasn't said. Nope, it's "poor me, I am losing benefits".

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

"Love says if I remember right the only time she acts half normal is when she is pg"

Yep, I did say that.

Now, when she was pg with her second child---DD now 3.5 yrs old---she drank excessively the whole time. :-( It was awful to witnes. BUT she is, while pregnant, much more *normal* in terms of her rages and emotional outbursts and crazy antics towards SS and DH and me.

Throughout the last pregnancy---DD now 1yr old---she was pleasant and calm the entire time. DH and I crossed our fingers it would stay that way, but no....she went back to her normal, raging self about six months post partum.

I do think she suffers from untreated PPD after the births and it seems to get worse. That was one of the big reasons she and DH broke up when SS was not quite a year old. BM started going out drinking (and she drank before she had SS, too, but not while she was pregnant w/him) when SS was only a few weeks old.

DH was working car dealership hours (he had not gone out on his own at that point) and he'd walk in the door at 9 PM or whatever, BM would hand him SS and take off to a bar or club, coming at 2 or 3 AM, if at all.

DH said it became intolerable. She really was OUT of control.

It has only been in the last two yrs that she's gotten sober, and I guess that fact has somewhat improved her emotoional stability, but not much. She still rages and flips out and acts insane.

I really do think her drinking is/was a symptom of some kind of hormonal or chemical issue. I think she may be bipolar or have some other chemical imbalance.

She's been on antidepressants and I know she was on lexapro after the birth of her last child but I don't know if she still is, or what all that entails.

I have walked the gamut of feeling sorry for BM and her situation to being angry to being indifferent and then all over again.

I DO feel *sorry* for anyone with that much emotional pain----however, I just cannot drum up empathy for the fact that she (and her DH) continually take steps to make her life worse instead of better.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

"People, who do not work, do not pay taxes hence their nonexistant taxes do not pay for anyone's welfare. "

Well, that sucks. Here I was thinking that I had to pay taxes on capital gains, unemployment, and investment income. And now I find out that I didn't have to!

"She does not make anything of herself professionally but she is as the mother, and that's something. "

Well, leaving aside Love's BM maternal instincts or lack thereof - who really cares? Love's BM can be or not be a mother all she wants - but since when does breeding children require me to pay for the breeder for years?! So all of these "deadbeat dads" walking around fathering children left and right and not paying for any of them are actually "being a father, and that's something"?! Instead of going after them to get a job and support their offspring maybe we should be giving them welfare too!?

"i just don't think that it is fair to judge others if you yourself don't work, that's it. my opinion. "

Could be. Some might be of the opinion that it not fair to judge stepmothers if you yourself are not one - but it seems that certain posters have no problem doing that.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
kkny

I think the point is that when SM doesnt work outside the home, she shouldnt bring that into convo re mom.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

exactly, that was my point kkny. "I think the point is that when SM doesnt work outside the home, she shouldnt bring that into convo re mom." exactly! that was my point.

mattie I am pretty sure lovehadley does not collect unemployment, she hasn't been working for awhile and unemployment runs out, it is possible she makes investments and has to pay taxes but I am confused if one does not work where does one find money to invest?

imamommy nothing personal about lovehadley, she is a great mother and a sweet person, i do see issue with her not working yet criticizing others who don't. Not issues with her as a person, just this particular issue.

as about BM suffering from mental illness, bipolar and depressed, I feel great sympathy and I wish she gets help. perhaps her constantly getting pregnant is manifestation of her illness. Unfortunately most mentally ill people deny their illness and refuse treatment. And no, mental illness is not a choice.

BM is a mess yet once again criticizing her not working is hypocritical especially if SM herself does not work. Saying that BM has to find a place for 1- and 3 year olds plus SS so she can work while SM has NO kids at home during the day yet does not work, is just beyond hypocritical. Sure BM is no good, but what is this to do with anything?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

"LH has gone into therapy to deal with issues in her life to better herself. BM has done nothing but dig herself a hole & jump in."

how do you know what BM does to deal with her issues? I assume it is private and not something BM would be sharing with SM or her ex. mental health is a private issue

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

BM shares ALL her personal and often gritty details with DH. For reasons I still cannot at all understand.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Hey maybe Love should offer to keep BMs children during the day so that BM can go get a job and then love can then pay taxes out of BMs childcare payment so that then BM can gain welfare that she paid Love for then Love paid taxes so BM is getting her money back ... Wow a thought.

I am being Ficiscious her Love.

It annoys me to know end how someone can say that becase one doesn't 'work' and is not 'paid' by an employer that they don't pay taxes... When one is married to someone whom does work and pays taxes and they file a joint return, yes, YES they are tax payers. My dad owns his own company and my mom is now 'retired', they PAY quarterly payments to the IRS and the check says 'Myfam's Dad AND Mom' so yes, she pays taxes. She also pays property taxes and school district taxes. It's joint. I think PO1 doesn't understand 'joint' because her Dh and her keep their things separate if I remember correctly. And PO1 is very proud (as she should be) of her independent single parent status for all of dd's life. If Love's husband stopped paying taxes tomorrow from his income, the IRS would go after HIS wife.. Jointly.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

We do file a joint tax return.

My DH is self employed.

I also wanted to add---good heavens, I don't know why I even bother---that it has only been in the last year and a half that I haven't worked outside the home.

I taught JK for a few years. Then I tutored privately ( roughly 20 hrs/week) for another academic year. And then I did work-from-home for a fundraising company.

And I fully intend to be a working mom again *at some point.* I really do hope that my writing will become a career.

It's just at this point in time, THIS arrangement is what works best for our family.

And myfampg, that made me laugh! Perhaps you have found the perfect solution!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

Maybe I'm just being slow this morning, but what the *ell does Love working or not have to do with BM lying/cheating to obtain assistance? Love did work, Love is educated, Love is not popping out babies left and right (though she would like to have another child which I assume she and her DH can and will be able to afford...and no, if Gpa gives gifts and treats it will not be because Love is using Gpa in place of welfare. Love had some money going into this marriage from her teaching. Does she have her own money (personal earned) now? I have no clue and do or not, what the *ell does that have to do with her forming an opinion on welfare cheats?

For all we know (and it is none of our business)Love has her own stash she inherited via a grandparent or aunt/uncle...crap, maybe she won the lottery. I happen to have investments and assests per inheritance money/gifts willed to me. Should we consider that 'welfare' too? I happen to set my own schedule and work as little or as much as I please because truth is I don't have to work for a living. I work because I want to. I work because I rather think I'd like even more money (*snark* just so I can hand out even more 'assistance' to my kids and grandkids).

I believe all Love was originally saying is that people who choose not to work should not than lie/cheat to obtain assistance from taxpayers who do work. Think about it. If this BM had not worked, fine, the trouble came when she did not work for whatever reason and then ran down and lied to government to get not only assistance but larger amounts of assistance based on a lie. Would it make any difference if Love had originally wrote 'damn, my DH is mad as a taxpayer that his son's mother has been lying to obtain welfare and he thinks instead of lying she should have used the system fairly and as intented and perhaps still recieved some assistance that if she used her benefits in a productive manner maybe she could even get a job and working would improve her situation'.

Oh wait...I think I saw the downed and out 'horse' wiggle one last whisker...maybe we should beat it some more!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

I think this horse is getting hungry and is craving some peanut butter. LOL.

I am not at all arguing that my situation--in ALL aspects---is much more fortunate than BM's. I understand that. I grew up with a lot of financial privilege (NOT so privileged in many other ways, however!) and was lucky to be able to get a good education and have opportunties BM's family could not provide for her.

I get that. I do consider myself lucky.

But everyone has different situations. I have a good friend whose family is wealthy beyond anyone's wildest imagination. She came into a multi-million dollar personal trust at the age of twenty one.

She's my age---30---and is married with two young children. She and her DH live in a 900K home, have a full time nanny, and a fulltime housekeeper.

My friend owns her own bridal shop and works. Not because she has to, because she wants to and enjoys it.

Has she had opportunities and privilege I haven't? Well, sure. I'd like to own four cars and live in a million dollar home and take weekend trips to South Beach or NYC on a whim.

But that doesn't mean it's within my means. That doesn't mean I should go lie on a home loan application and purchase a home my DH and I cannot afford. Is my friend more fortunate than I am? Heck yeah. But that's life. She has a different situation than I do.

EVERYONE is MORE fortunate than someone and everyone is LESS fortunate than someone else, too.

You do the best with what you have and you use what you're given to make the best of the future.

Like it or not, it is NOT within BM and her DH's means for her to not work. Or maybe her DH needs a second job. I don't know. All I know is he makes too much to qualify for welfare and his income isn't enough. So that leaves two options: BM needs a job or her DH needs a second one. There is not enough money coming into the family to support everyone.

And as far as the issue of her not working...for the hundreth time, the STATE requires it of people on welfare. If one is accepting state assistance of cash or food stamps, one is expected---and REQUIRED, but it's hard to enforce---to be actively looking for work, working or in school.

First parent----required to work 40 hrs/week.
Second parent---with kids under 5, required to work/or go to school 20 hrs/wk. Once kids are school age, second parent is required to work or go to school 35 hrs/wk.

The state wasn't just handing out $$$ to BM saying, "Here, take this and there, you don't have to work." The requirements are "This is temp. assistance while you a) seek employment, b) work until your circumstances change or c)go to school to make it possible to earn more money in the future." There ARE guidelines and not only did BM lie to receive the benefits, she didn't abide by the regulations to receive them in the first place.

If BM had been going to school or doing something to better her family's situation, I wouldn't think anything bad about her at all. I'd give kudos to her for doing her best to make a better life for herself and her family.

But having TWO more kids while you're ALREADY on assistance is NOT a smart or well planned move. And at what point do you hand someone the shovel and tell them they might as well start digging faster?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

I agree with every bit of that Love and JMT.

I think the reason it strikes a chord with me is because I'm constantly trying and trying to better myself and I am still looked down on and crtisized by BD and SM. I have had to learn to 'overcome' the way they make me feel about my life so I am proud to stand up and say 'I don't take welfare, I'm still trying to make it through the deep end of the pool, I see the light but it's still far in the distance' and then told that my parents allowing me and dd to live in their home for a short while, rent free while I get on my feet is the same as accepting gov't welfare. I see my parents 'help' as a gift. There are a lot of things they have 'given' me over the years that one might say, I got even more free hand outs. My mom's father was 'accidentally' killed in a hospital, I say accident because I do not feel they intended it to happen. They were found negligent and paid my mom and siblings A LOT of money. My mom handed it out to us kids and said 'go do whatever you want with it by remember grandpa when you do'. ExDh and I took DD to Hawaii. It was a 'gift' something she wanted to give us. As was the roof over our heads. I didn't ask for it, she offered it when she saw me struggling and became concerned. I would do it in a heartbeat for my children. Yes there are many people that do not have family to lean on or to offer help, which is where welfare comes in, and I am AOK with that but don't tell me I'm on welfare because my parents gave me a gift.
We are living way below our means right now to get our debt and lawyer fees paid off quickly. I've started the Dave Ramsey snowball plan and I'm so extremely excited to get this behind us in 1 year from next month and then we can move on to buy our very own home! BD makes comments to DD that we live in an 'apartment' and that aparments are not safe, clean, healthy environments for a young girl. And I get emails telling me how to save money and how I should be doing more for DD. Well she had food, shelter, clothes, education, way too many toys, lots and lots of love, no we don't go on vacations right now, no we do not go spend $140 at the waterpark, no we aren't going to costly exhibits or day trips but we have what we 'need' and in the end, we will get to have what we 'want'. It's none of his business but for whatever reason they keep on and on and on. They don't know that I work so much overtime each week, sometimes 10 hours! Just because that's like an extra pay check to me and that's one more debt (thank you exdh for all the debt you left me by the way) that is GONE. And then to hear of people cheating and lying the system when I am working my A$$ off and then to be compared to them... Ugh!

Love one day I plan to stay home, afte all of this is behind me. Maybe I will have another baby, maybe I will just be at home, waiting for 230 to come so I can go get my kids from school. Maybe I will volunteer and help out every day at the schools. But I promise I will not do it if I have to ask for help. If DH an I don't have enough to live the way we would like to live then, no I won't stay home yet but the day it happens I will scream from the roof tops, I'm debt free, I'm an All American SAHM and I do not need help from the government to feed my kids! AND like you are doing, if it's possible I would like to write a book. I would like to use all of my experiences and put it into writing. It might not sell and I may never profit from it but... If I can be at home and not have to 'bring' in an income to eat, then doing my writing and research IS working to me. It's not like you are on your A$$ all day not doing anything. You are doing something and it's something that is important to you and your DH supports you and you are not asking for food stamps to feed your kids while you follow your dream to write. Your BM is asking illegally for help while she follows her dream of having a house full of kids and doing whatever else she dreams to do.

Such different circumstances. Ugh!!!!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

I think some people just like to argue.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

"I think the reason it strikes a chord with me is because I'm constantly trying and trying to better myself and I am still looked down on and criticized by BD and SM."

Myfam, this story strikes a chord with you due to your experience.

And this story strikes a chord with me because I have education and work professional job, so does my mother, so did my grandmother, so did my great grandmother and so did my great great grandmother (that how far I can go all the way to 1800s). Some worked because they had to, some just because that's what we do. I don't care if others don't work. But if someone stays home and is fortunate enough to be supported financially, but then suggests other women must work, it does strike a chord with me. It seems arrogant to me, maybe it is not meant this way, but sure comes across.

Myfamg, I have debt too, i still owe on my student loan even though i am way pass student's age LOL I lived in a apartments most of my life. I can relate. I admire your working your as you said a$$ off, you are a good model for your children.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

"how do you know what BM does to deal with her issues? I assume it is private and not something BM would be sharing with SM or her ex. mental health is a private issue"

It's not very private when you get drunk & call people, or when you are so obsessed with someone that you have to have a restraining order placed on you... and yet, still have the compulsion to find reasons to push the boundaries by driving over, leaving things on the porch, calling, etc. Much of what the BM has done is NOT private. But, you're right, she may have deeper issues that she's dealing with in her own way... having more babies & lying to get taxpayers to pay for it so she can sit home, self medicate & work through her issues.

Sometimes it is better to have people just think you're a fool than to speak & remove all doubt.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

"I think the point is that when SM doesnt work outside the home, she shouldnt bring that into convo re mom."

Does it really make a difference that a SM is making the comment about a BM? Would it be okay if LH is the BM & she were talking about her ex's new wife (theoretically the SM)? If LH's DD's SM were living with LH's ex, having more kids & not working & committing welfare fraud... would that be okay then? I think the issue here is a woman that chooses to cheat the system & got caught... is now worried about how she is going to support & take care of the children she had, knowing full well she couldn't support them BEFORE she had them! She shouldn't have had them or she should get off her lazy butt & get a job to take care of them. BTW, if I am not mistaken... the BM's DH has other kids? So, doesn't that make her the SM to those kids? I don't think titles apply here... I, as a taxpayer & parent, am offended that people continue to have children & expect someone else (usually taxpayers) to pay for it.

Working in the welfare department, I saw many people have children on while on welfare & there is a difference between someone that has an unplanned pregnancy & wants to get an education & do something to better their life & not be on assistance... but I was working there when California passed welfare reform & notices were sent out with 10 months notice to all welfare recipients that if they had another child while they were aided, they would not get more money for additional children. It was amazing the number of women that reported becoming pregnant within the month... with due dates during the month prior to the new law taking effect. And then there were the ones that found the loophole... if they went off assistance for two months during the pregnancy, it was a "break in aid" and then they could go back on aid so when the baby was born, they could get the extra money for the baby. I saw too much of that & it made me feel sad for those children... who mostly existed to increase a check so the parents didn't have to work.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mom_of_4

okay, just to clarify my opinions have nothing to do with LH....but this conversation has progressed to a point that sickens me. Women need to keep their legs closed... please...oh come on... so much judgement... it is unreal! around 12% of the population lives below the poverty line... so none of these people should ever even consider having children?? not to mention the around 134 countries that have a larger percent of their population that lives below the poverty line up to over 50%... so none of these people should ever even consider having a child... well that is just ridiculous! Who is to say what these children may accomplish? Who is to say what these parents may end up accomplishing? And really all this my tax dollars nonsense... where else would you rather your tax dollars to go than to support a child.. I would much rather support a child than to pay for yet another useless study on what we might consider doing in the future for some lame project... or to pay million dollar pensions to corrupt politicians.

The key is to not condemn these women or families but seriously look at what we have created... a system and society that doesnt help one support themselves and doesnt give options for hard work for a DECENT wage but rather work at min wage (which by the way is not enough to survive on) at mcdonalds... while we ship out any sort of job that the basic worker might have had available to them once upon a time....

Want to talk about what we as a society have decided... we have decided to put those who do not seek our best interest into office and have backed ourselves into a corner... govt controls far more than they ever should have and in the process the poor are getting poorer and there is no end in sight...

but yes, lets make sure those moms on welfar keep their legs closed!

sorry this is just my own little rant here... this is driving me crazy.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

"Some worked because they had to, some just because that's what we do. I don't care if others don't work. But if someone stays home and is fortunate enough to be supported financially, but then suggests other women must work, it does strike a chord with me."

Seriously? That's why it strikes a chord with you? I work. I've worked since I was 14... even earlier, I babysat. I've always worked or gone to school or both.... except periods of time when my kids were small but always full time since my youngest was 4. She's 21 now. I work because I enjoy being productive, I enjoy the financial benefits, & I enjoy the work I do. I know many people that don't work at all... they are financially secure & don't need to work. Some married financially well off men & some made good investments when they were younger & some inherited it. At times, I may be envious that they have time (& money) to get their hair & nails done whenever they like. I'd love to blow off work now & then... lounge by the pool/lake/river/ocean & work on a tan too. But, I've never begrudged anyone that does what works for them... as long as it doesn't affect ME! When someone expects me to get up & go to work everyday to pay for them to sleep in, lay around watching tv or hanging out at the pool all day... then heck yeah it irks me!

There's very little difference between what my SD's BM does & LH's BM is doing... they want to make children that they expect someone else to pay for so they don't have to work or do anything. I was told that my SD's BM is collecting welfare & she is living with her BF (baby daddy) who owns a business and supports them... but he complains to his exW that they are struggling because BM won't get a job. BM won't get a job because she doesn't want to support SD. I work 7- 10 hour days a week and pay for much of what SD needs or wants. BM pays for nothing, even though she does have an income & could pay her CS from her temporary spousal support she still collects after 14 years. If she is collecting welfare, I will enjoy the minute she gets caught! I will SAVOR it! If people would do the basic right thing, then who would care how many kids they have? I certainly wouldn't. If BM paid her support & didn't expect me & DH to pay for everything... it wouldn't matter if she had more kids & stayed home not working. But, when a BM isn't doing the right thing... the basic right thing, not necessarily what I personally think is right... things like obeying laws & supporting the children you create as you should, then I could see defending them against criticism for choosing to be a SAHM & not working. Personally, I think a BM should put her children first... not burden them with adult problems & make them into her loyal slave at their expense. But, they are the mom & if they want to do that to their child, put their child through what I personally consider traumatic events... I must also recognize that others may not consider that traumatic & my personal opinion is just that & not important. However, breaking laws is not MY opinion or personal feelings... it's the boundaries that we are supposed to live by & criticizing someone for crossing the boundaries is part of why most people don't break laws... they don't want to be criticized, ridiculed, humiliated, or labeled a criminal. The only grey area is on having more children when you are already on welfare. On the one hand, it's my personal opinion that it's unfair to the children if you have more kids than you can take care of (physically) or support (financially). Having more kids than you can deal with is unfair to ALL the kids you have. And at the same time, while it's not "against the law" to have more kids while on welfare... the law (at least here in CA) says that children are entitled to be supported by BOTH parents. So, if you have no intention of ever working or supporting your child, then the child is being deprived of their right to be supported by BOTH parents. If you are not working or supporting children you already have... it really SHOULD be a crime to have another child until you are willing to support the ones you already have.

Maybe I should write some legislation... hmmmm

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

"where else would you rather your tax dollars to go than to support a child.."

Education. Maybe if people weren't milking the welfare system, the schools would have enough money to finally stop complaining about their everlasting & ongoing "budget" crisis & "budget" cuts. Maybe kids in school could have art & music & PE. (and after school sports)

It's hard to not get passionate about an issue like welfare fraud & abuse of tax dollars when you've worked there long enough to see more waste & abuse of the system that is meant to do good but really does more harm than good. When you see generational cases... parents pimping their children... families where several teen daughters having babies & letting their mother raise the kids so she can get the welfare check... parents with 50/50 custody coming in to fight over which one of them gets to be on welfare with the kids...

that is what drove me crazy... so now I own my own business in the private sector. Now what drives me crazy is that I pay my employees more than twice what I earned 20 years ago, but today it's barely over minimum wage... almost the same as what McDonald's pays. Every time the minimum wage goes up, the cost of everything else also goes up so it doesn't really give people working for minimum wage a leg up. 20 years ago, fuel was $ .99 a gallon. Today it is nearly $4 a gallon. In order to keep up, minimum wage would need to be at $20 per hour. Minimum wage workers are not any better off, in fact with every increase in minimum wage, they become worse off. Of course, that's just my opinion.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Oh they don't have to keep their legs closed or go get a job... But they should get off welfare while 'not' doing those things. And thats just my opinion.

I'd like to see my tax dollars going to education. I'd like to see education reform. I'd like to see my kids getting updated text books. I'd like to see the teachers compensated for what they are actually doing. I'd like to see my tax dollars going to higher educated teachers rather than just the bare minimum. Of course, we just lucky to find a school where 90% of the teachers hold a masters degree or higher but I'd like to see that across the board. I'd like to see my tax dollars going to fund the classrooms rather than the teachers paying out of their own salaries to provide for their classrooms. I'd like to see my tax dollars going towards educating parents on how to be parents and how to be involved in their children's education.
Instead my tax dollars go to LH's BM and others like her and her DH that do nothing to get themselves out of the situation they are in.
I DO feel sorry for these kids and that's why there is welfare because without it, they would go without and they do need to eat and have shelter, clothing, transportation etc. I would love to see more private companies or individuals stepping up and giving their wealth to help out where it's needed HERE in this country instead of other countries. Those people say 'let the government handle it' I'm going to Africa to save the water supply. What about OUR water supply? Different topic but no I dont want what we currently have in this country, it is corrupt and it's getting scarier every day. What about the people that legitimately need the assistance because they lost their jobs or fell on hard times but can't get help because they have a mortgage and can't sell their house quick enough to get relief? All the cheaters of the system are getting the hand outs because they keep popping out kids to up their monthly benefits. I have heard people say 'if I had two more kids I would qualify'. I cannot even begin to understand why someone would want to live that way... On welfare for years and years. Maybe I'm nuts but I need a plan.. I can't live like that not knowing if that check will come. I would have three jobs before putting myself in that situation. And before you say there are no jobs... I do understand that but I see now hiring and help wanted signs all the time. Are they fancy jobs? No but it's a job. Why can't LHs BM go work a night job while DH is working? That solves the 'I can't afford childcare' problem. I know many people that do this.
If I know I can't afford to feed a baby then it's my job to make sure I don't have one. If that means I never have a baby again then so be it. I'm not bringing a child in to this world to suffer and struggle through my mess.. Because chances are if the parents are modeling this behavior the kids will learn it and become the next generation that we are complaining about.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

and can I add that living under poverty level is not the same as collecting welfare benefits. Many working people live under poverty level & do not take government assistance. Folk's in other countries live in poverty because they don't dole out government aid like the United States does. As far as I'm concerned, they can have the family size they choose. But, they should also not complain when they must go without because they have so little. (& I still don't think it's fair to the kids or the right thing to do because doing that increases the risk that they will need aid at some point in their children's life over people that work & plan their families based on what they have to offer)

and it is NOT the same as a family with many kids that were financially stable and could afford the kids when they have them but then they fall on hard times and go on assistance... that is certainly a different scenario than a family that is on welfare already having more kids or having kids to qualify for aid.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

--"And really all this my tax dollars nonsense... where else would you rather your tax dollars to go than to support a child.."--

Well since we're now pulling out our political 'talking points' and being that you asked...

No one is denying a woman having a child, what we are suggesting is woman should use some self control and limit their children to the amount that they can reasonally afford. Sure, accidents happen, and 'opps' another sneaks in, but seriously you seem to be recommending populating a household with numerous children one can ill afford in the hopes of popping one out that will 'save the world'. In the meantime everyone will assist you in accomplishing your goal without concern and/or objection. I should just pay more and more taxes so 'you' can continue to be irresponsible in the persuit of your selfish desires?

I have no problem helping those in need, I do have a problem with liars/cheats. I do have a problem with the attitude that we should just keep populating without any thought into the long term. While we're busy adding and adding numbers to the 'child' population we are also cutting back on funding and programs to help these children actually 'accomplish' aka succeed in life. The education programs are being cut back, the senior adult medications/heating programs are being cut back. Heck, we're even ceasing programs meant to get teens off the streets and into a productive future. We're cutting back on mental health programs, substance abuse programs and on and on.

So while you're belief seems to be 'have as many as you please' afterall that's not the 'real' problem anyway, and my tax dollars should not be of any concern to me due to the fact a liar/cheat is using it to support a 'child', what would I rather see my tax dollars go towards anyway...liars and cheats were never meant to be an acceptable part of anything our tax dollars help pay for.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

Wow Imamommy!! I can see that you are very passionate about this, I completely agree 100% with you!

Women should NOT be able to just pop out baby after baby and receive more and more welfare. It's just not right. Whoever said that about not going after dead beat dads to make them pay... cause women don't have to pay was dead on! We can't possibly go after them to make them responsible when in fact some of these women are sitting on their butt eating bon bons doing nothing themselves to support their child. I could give a $%*& less how much daycare costs right now... you made them, support them. In my state their was an article in the newspaper the other day about mentally challenged people having to be on a wait list for 10-20 years to get certain government assistance. Yet scum like this pops out a kid and boom they have it. That's NOT freaking right!

People who believe and stand up for this kind of thing only do either a) to argue or b) because it hits close to home.

The welfare system is in place for the handicapped and for people to use as a stepping stone, not to live off of for years on end. Our country is falling to pieces and our elderly may not even be able to be taken care of yet we have people worried about receiving benefits because they want to stay home. BS!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

"where else would you rather your tax dollars to go than to support a child..."

Oh, I've got no problem with my tax dollars helping to support children, and never said I did. I do have a problem with my tax dollars going to support their parents, if they are perfectly capable of working.

I agree completely that most jobs that require more than a high school education are long gone, and college/university/technical school is horribly expensive. I agree that it can be very tough to get by or to even get started in life. What I have a problem with is the subsidizing the parents, not the children.

Let's have hypothetical twin sisters, both 19 years old, both fresh out of high school, both (for some reason) out on their own. Sister A is very responsible, a planner who thinks ahead. She works at two different fast food places, twenty hours a week at each, (so they don't have to pay her benefits), and makes minimum wage. She's struggling to pay her share of the rent so that she can live in a crappy apartment with a couple of other friends, and go to community college at night to get an associate's degree so that she can better herself. She's going to be eligible for almost NO assistance from anyone. In my state, at least, she'd make too much money to qualify for any food stamps, for subsidized housing, for subsidized health insurance - she'd make too much money to be eligible for the Earned Income Credit on her taxes! The limit for single with no dependents is $13,460. Sister A can afford neither a car nor a phone, so she takes buses everywhere and relies on the kindness of others to make phone calls. Sister A has dreams and goals; she plans to wait to have children until she can financially support them. I wish this imaginary young lady the best of luck because she's going to be looking forward to about, oh, five years of working full-time, going to school part-time at night, hoping that she has no health problems during that time, because she's got no insurance and certainly can't afford it, that she doesn't lose one of her jobs, that nothing goes wrong in the almost five years that it's going to take her to make it through, at which time she'll have massive amounts of student loans to pay back (you didn't think she was actually able to pay for her classes out of her 13K per year, did you?)

And then there's Sister B. She's not a bad person but tends to not think things through very well. She quit using birth control with her boyfriend because she loved him so much and wanted to spend the rest of her life with him and thought having a baby would make him stick around - plus, babies are so cute! So Sister B has a child - BF is long gone to parts unknown, of course. Unlike Sister A, who is living in sub-code student housing, Sister B is living in a government-subsidized townhouse, complete with AC and governmental safety inspections. Sister B is receiving food stamps, WIC money, heating costs assistance; not just does the baby have health insurance but so does Sister B, because she is the parent of a child on subsidized health!!! Where I live, Sister B would have received, from local government, a car - so that she could get to doctor's appointments, job training, etc. (I think this last one was cut out recently but it used to exist here.) Sister B has a subsidized cell phone. Sister B decides to go to community college as well - but she goes during the day. It is fully funded. Her child is in daycare during this time; that too is fully funded. Sister B gets a clothing allowance so she can have "school clothes".

Sister B has the best of intentions, but she's never learned to be responsible for anything - after all, life seems to be working out pretty well for her so far so she must be doing something right! There's a really cute guy in one of her classes, and she starts dating him, but she's afraid he's seeing other women. BF seems to be really fond of her child so maybe if Sister B has a child with him he'll stick around.....

This is what our welfare system, as it is, has created or condoned. Adults who are responsible are penalized to pay for the housing, schooling, food, and medical care for adults who were not responsible, who did not plan ahead, who did not wait to have kids until they could afford them. (And others, who fell on hard times through no fault of their own.) I understand the theories behind it - how will they ever get off welfare with no education? How could the child have food and shelter, but not the parent, short of removing kids and putting them into orphanages? But the fact remains that as things are now, not just the children, but their parents as well, can end up much better off because they did have children that they are unable to support.

I'm sure everyone has figured out by now but I was more of a Sister A - and while I would ration my mac and cheese to make it last the week, and decide if I should pay the overdue rent or the overdue electric bill, I'd see all of the Sister B's, running around complaining that the things that were handed to them weren't good enough. That their free car was too old (although legal and running). That they couldn't use their food stamps for toilet paper and had to actually use some of their (gasp!) cash assistance, the money that they'd been hoping to use for a night out with their friends, because "I deserve a night out". That when they took their children to the ER because they had a cold, they actually had to wait.

Twenty years later I see the exact same women. So many of them threw away the opportunities we gave them - and why not? Nothing in this process taught them that hard work has any benefits at all. Now they're complaining that my job is better than theirs. Now my house is better than theirs. My husband is better than theirs. It's just not fair! There's still no sense of personal responsibility, no grasp of cause and effect - still so much walking around with a hand out.

I'm tired of it. You can spend your whole life leading horses to water, etc. I am not saying that we should let kids starve in the street. I am saying that we need to stop rewarding those who are unwilling - not those who are incapable, but those who choose to not even try to take care of themselves and their responsibilities.

None of the above is meant to apply to people who had something happen that couldn't have been reasonably foreseen or planned for, like medical problems, job loss and horrible economy, death, etc. But in those cases I'd still like to see some assistance available for everybody, not just people with kids.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

BINGO Mattie!!! You hit the nail on the head!! I would just like to point out... I could have been a sister B... but chose to be a sister A. I worked worked worked, didn't even realize that all these benefits were available for single moms. I just chose to do the right thing. That's why my sympathy doesn't exist.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

Maybe getting cash assistance is excessive or wrong but asking for health insurance is not. Most of the civilized world provides either universal health care or some other type of care that is guaranteed for everyone, it is a basic human right. This is nothing to do with working/not working and how many kids one has. There is nothing morally wrong with asking and receiving health care. In fact it is morally wrong that people do not have health insurance and either cannot see a doctor or have to go into debt or bankruptcy.

I had a situation once when I did not have health care for DD and asked the state, I was denied due to high income (LOL it was nowhere high) but I did ask. By the logic of some people on this forum I had to keep my legs closed and not have DD just in case I might need to ask for help. That's a pretty evil thing to say. This is just stupid!

Imaommy, you have 3 children from 3 different men, all of them you had at young age and raised them without fathers, do not tell me you never asked for government help such as health care or free lunches at school or anything. And I would expect you to ask for help even if your work many hours! I would not see anything wrong with that. Where are all those "keep your legs closed" advocates.

Yes I do take an issue with statements about legs being crossed. These children are human beings and they are already here. And how many people on this forum had their kids on free lunches or any other assistance? Plenty. Should they keep their legs closed. Heck one of BM's kids is Love's SS. And if she is such a horrible drunk and evil person where is the responsibility of men who get her pregnant, she opened her legs for them, not some supernatural creature.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

"None of the above is meant to apply to people who had something happen that couldn't have been reasonably foreseen or planned for, like medical problems, job loss and horrible economy, death, etc. But in those cases I'd still like to see some assistance available for everybody, not just people with kids."

you can't possibly equate supporting single childless adults and supporting children, even if these children were born because someone stupidly opened their legs.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

PO1, they have continuously said that they understand when hard times come upon someone after their child is born. This does not give someone the right to continue to have child after child when they know darn well they can't support it.

I don't think it's right that some people get free healthcare yet they carry coach purses, have fancy nails, drive cadilacs, take fancy trips... while I sit here all day 40 hours a week working my tail off to provide the healthcare for my family. It should NOT be given to anyone but the disabled or maybe for a SHORT time while someone gets on their feet.

I feel like you are judging ima for having her children the way she did. I also have my three children by three diffrent men. The first one at 16... NO GOVT ASSISTANCE!!!!! The 2nd by the sperm donor who left us for the other chic he got pregnant.... STILL NOT GOVT ASSISTANCE... I transferred to full time for the insurance.... Third child was with my current husband... Guess what... I was layed off when I was three months pregnant. I got pregnant while I had insurance... then got layed off and lost it... STILL NOT GOVT ASSISTANCE!!!! My husband picked it up at his job. It cost us more be we got by. It's about the choices one makes. Do you want to be a loser or don't you. Some of us chose not to. And it pisses me off that people get away with living better then I do just because I make more then they do.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

Nope, mom of 3, you missed the point. I do not judge Imamommy for having children at all as i do not judge myself or myfam or you or anyone on this forum who has children and possibly struggled/struggle or accept/asked for help. I brought example of myself asking for help albeit not getting it. many women on this forum had assistance in one form or the other including free lunches for kids (that is paid by tax payers too). You missed the point.

My point is that some people here claim that women have to keep their legs closed, which I think is a very evil statement. And it is offensive to women on this forum who have children, no matter how many.

Mom of 3, I commend you for managing without government assistance, but it wouldn't be morally wrong if government provided health care for your children while you were out of job. I ended up in huge debt because i had to buy private insurance but it did not cover much.

Still I bet you all of us would rather have our children (regardless of what help we received or not) then kept our leg closed.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

This thread is amazing. All the personal attacks.

Is it really thought that if a person has not experienced something they should not comment on it?

I have to work to maintain our current lifestyle. If we changed things around I wouldn't. But I'd be cleaning our home (protecting our investment) and doing other things to contribute to the household. Not working outside the home does not mean one should not have a say in how our country's finances are spent. There is no sliding bar that says if you make X amount you are entitled to X more of an opinion.

If you are over 18 and have no felony convictions you can vote. Regardless of income, regardless of work history, regardless of ignorance.

I get angry when I see people take advantage of the system.

I can see why this frustrates you Love. Especially since you counseled BM for so long about how to get her life together and make something solid for herself.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

I did not miss the point. I 100% agree that ALL WOMEN who have assistance should NOT be popping out more babies that they cannot afford to support. That means they need to keep their legs crossed... or use birth control or whatever to prevent pregnancy. There are some who will continue to use our system and have baby after baby that they know darn well they cannot support without the government. This is WRONG!!!!!! Dead wrong. Especially when there are mentally challenged people who are on wait lists 10-20 years long for help.

If a dead beat dad goes to jail for not supporting their child then the mom who has that child should also go to jail instead of sitting on her a$$ collecting benefits. These women are the reason I cannot get my sperm donor's tax refunds sent to me. His refunds are being sent to the state because these women wouldn't work either. They opened their legs to a man with 3, 4 or 5 kids knowing he didn't provide for the ones he already had... so they went on welfare. Health benefits included because when a man in my state has a baby and that baby is on medicaid... the father has to pay the birthing expenses back to the state. So.... dead beat sperm donor's tax refunds are now going to the state for a number of years because he's a dead beat who had kids with dead beat women who sit and do nothing more then make babies. This is where women should have kept their legs crossed. It is literally my tax dollars and literally taking money from my baby to feed those babies that really should have been more carefully chosen. I don't care if this statment makes me evil or not. It's how I feel and it's WRONG!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

PO1, I was the one who made the "very evil" statement that you paraphrased as "My point is that some people here claim that women have to keep their legs closed, which I think is a very evil statement".

Please look back at my original post which was "This is a decision that we, as a society, have come to a compromise on (some people would like more assistance, like maybe some to help young ladies who have managed to keep their legs together and are thus not eligible for free housing, tuition and food?)"

"Most of the civilized world provides either universal health care or some other type of care that is guaranteed for everyone, it is a basic human right. "

Agreed. But (in my state) it does not exist for healthy adults without children. Period. End of story. So, PO1, please explain to me exactly why the parents of kids on Medicaid/state funded support should have health care at the expense of childless taxpayers? Maybe those people would like to save the tax money that they are paying to provide health insurance for other healthy adults and use their money to buy health insurance for themselves?

Actually, while you're at it, please explain this to me. If DH were to lose his job and apply for welfare for SS, he'd not get it. We're married, and they'd take my income into consideration; we'd not be eligible. That's fine, that's understood; I chose to marry someone with kids. BUT. If something horrible happened and DH and I both lost our jobs, went on welfare, had to go on state health insurance - DH would be eligible, but I would not. Since SS is not biologically my child I would NOT count as a parent for state health insurance purposes. Please explain to me how that should work - my income counts to disqualify us all - but if we all went under suddenly only biology counts?!

I have said repeatedly that I have an issue with parents getting all of these benefits. So again, I'll throw it back on you. Please enlighten me as to exactly why biological parents deserve assistance (medical, educational, etc.) but people who do not have children do not. Not the children - why do the parents deserve assistance that others cannot get?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

mattie, I think it is morally wrong that our government does not provide health care for people, especially children. I am all for universal health care. I'd agree to pay higher taxes so everyone can have health care. it is human rights not some excessive benefit. We clearly differ in our political views, I am somewhat left of center. I'd rather get paid less but everyone has basic necessities such as health care. I don't think it is unfair that someone gets health care and I didn't at some point, I believe everyone should have it.

I see your point, but our views differ and your comment about spreading our legs is still nasty. I was denied health care for DD because I made too much, yes i dared to ask and the reason i asked is because I did not manage to keep my legs closed and had DD. Well my bad mattie so sorry.

"Not the children - why do the parents deserve assistance that others cannot get?" mattie it is difficult to take care of children, it is harder to go to work, get day care, get education. Life is rewarding but it is more difficult when you have someone else to take care off. If you have no kids you can get any job without worries, when you have kids you can't work late, can't work nights, need day care etc etc Of course people with children have different needs.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

"Life is rewarding but it is more difficult when you have someone else to take care off. If you have no kids you can get any job without worries, when you have kids you can't work late, can't work nights, need day care etc etc Of course people with children have different needs. "

Of course people with kids can work late and work at night, or go to school. They do it all the time. My mom did, my husband did, they do it the same way that people without kids do - because they have to. And since we were not discussing subsidized day care while parents worked, but rather assistance for the parents, it still doesn't answer the question of why education should be free for parents but not childless people. (Why don't we have free medical care and education for foster parents?!)

My comment about legs was meant to be crass and rude (but it was not meant to be directed at you or anyone else on this board). It seems that society sort of assumes that when a woman has a baby, she becomes suddenly infused with some saint-like aura of holiness because now she is a "mother" - and now she will be more responsible, more mature, more loving than she was before. She will do anything for her child; work her fingers to the bone or throw herself in front of a train to save him. If that's the case then logic dictates that the only reason she wouldn't work would be because she couldn't - since she will always do what's best for her child then the only reason she would not do that is if there were some overwhelming obstacle (lack of child care, lack of job training, etc.)

Of course there are many women who do become more responsible after having a child. There are many women who were already responsible, before they had a child. And there are some who are not, will not, and will never be responsible, who will always put themselves before anyone else, including their kids, who will always try to take the easy way out.

There are no magical supernatural powers that a woman suddenly acquires because of a basic biological act. If that were the case then we should be providing assistance for surrogate mothers or egg donors. The women who are the most loving, caring parents are always the most likely to find or make a way - with or without governmental assistance.

PO1, you are a case in point. I'd bet money that you got the situation with your DD's health insurance resolved; that you kept looking until you found low-income insurance, that you swallowed your pride and went to family and/or friends to ask for money for your daughter, or, failing all that, that you tried your best to keep her healthy but had a list of charities that would handle free or subsidized health care by the phone. I don't believe for one second that you just threw your hands up and said "Oh well, DD doesn't qualify. That stinks." and quit trying. But you did what you did for DD not because she was conceived in any special way, not because DD is really the absolutely perfect wonderful most special human being in the history of the world (to anyone but you and your ex) - you did it because of who you are. You could have gotten oodles of government assistance, you could have had nothing and been a refugee - you still would have done everything that you possibly could for your DD.

And that's the thing. When a woman doesn't start trying to improve her life or her child's life after the first, second or third child, I don't think it's going to happen after the fourth. We can throw all the money in the world at that woman; job training, whatever, and it's not going to matter. Giving birth to a child does not make a person more loving, caring, and deserving of assistance, not having given birth does not mean that they are less so.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Good points Mattie

PO1 could have been denied assistance and then she quit her job to qualify but she didnt. She kept pushing forward and figured it out.

I don't take offense to the leg comment. I love my kids but I should have kept my legs closed. Someone said in an earlier reply that my parents might not have been so willing to help me if I had two or three kids and wasn't doing Anything to better my situation and that was correct. That was actually one of the rules of living with my parents. Yes I had a 'free' roof over my head but I had a LOT of rules and expectations. I had a curfew. I was 25 and that really ticked me off but I do understand my
Mom's concern. If she was keeping dd for me, I needed to be home by 1. If I was going to be out when she didn't have dd I needed to let her know where I was going or who I was with so she could contact me in an emergency. My dad said, 'don't go out and get yourself in trouble because we won't be able to help you out'. Be responsible. My parents didn't 'allow' me to spend the night over at now DH's house.. They felt that was not being a good role model to my young daughter. I respected them, although I fussed some. But I followed the rules of their home. Why is my 'family' offered help considered welfare but yet I had rules, responsibilities and expectations that NOONE on welfare has. What it taught me was to remain responsible. I could have spiraled out of control and I could have become lazy and let my parents do everything for dd but they wouldn't allow it. I had to be the parent 100% of the time. But welfare rarely teaches a lesson since people are able to sit back and feed of of it illegally for years. No way would my parents have allowed me to milk them and not carry my weight. So in my opinion, the lite bit of help from my parents taught me what I needed to get my footing and take off on my own. Yes... I have been reminded that I moved in with now DH so I wasn't technically on my own.. But honestly, I don't care what one thinks. My parents have not supported me financially since the day I moved out. They have never paid my bills nor did they give me 'cash' for whatever I wanted.

And since having my son, I have made sure NOT to get myself in that situation again. I might not be keeping my legs closed but I'm being responsible. I wouldn't go on welfare if I had another baby but I'd probably either file bankruptcy or just ruin my credit all together... But even with 3 more kids, I would not qualify... I know I cannot afford more kids so I don't put myself in that situation. Maybe our tax dollars should go to educating women and men on the importance of safe sex... Or we can start with teenagers. I'd pay for that.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

This thread is not about me, I have graduate degree and have a professional career plus was single most of my life and relied on myself and my DD was a planned child born in marriage. WTF And my whole family are hard working and educated people. It is not the case for everybody, not everyone is capable, not everyone was raised this way, not everyone's birth control worked (just ask members of this forum). Many women were raised to depend on men, unfortunately men fail them.

No myfampg and mattie, i am glad I did not keep my legs closed WTF by the way with this statement, what a disgusting freaking thing to say. I do wish I had more children, didn't happen, now I can't and am too old and my SO is way pass child-rearing age. But heck I wish I had more children.

"My comment about legs was meant to be crass and rude (but it was not meant to be directed at you or anyone else on this board)." Heck you forget that women on this forum do have children that were born from accidents, failed birth control, lack of self-control, men screwed them over, assaults, men promised sun and moon but did not deliver, did receive and still receiving some form of state assistance, trying to get more kids and can't. And children we so stupidly produced are existing human beings, some adults, some still young.

PS myfam, you don't have to defend yourself, you are a married woman and have children, I hope you don't seriously wish you didn't have them. What an awful thing that woudl be.

This thread is so freaking judgmental and unkind, it is gross. I am out of here.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Unfortunately the onus is on women to control the births. It is everyone's responsibility to take care of them once they are here, but traditionally mothers got the brunt of the job.

I agree. Women need to learn to keep their legs closed. Men need to learn that they have to be responsible for what happens between their legs too. And not just financially.

Once the children are here, it is up to us as a society to ensure they have their basic needs covered or everyone will suffer the consequences of neglected children turning into angry, neglectful adults.

If a person cannot afford more children and continues to produce more without regard for the consequences, they are irresponsible. Ultimately the child suffers most.

It doesn't matter if you are married or your child was planned. What matters is DID YOU TAKE CARE OF THE CHILD AFTER IT WAS CREATED? And, if you did not, did you continue to bring more innocent beings into the world who were not going to be cared for and then expect others to support you?

I don't care how highly educated a person is, or how much money, planned pregnancies, or marital status. Plenty of poor, ignorant, unmarried people have kids planned and unplanned and they do just fine.

What I care about is people who just don't give a dam* and keep popping them out without regard for consequences.

It is not a RIGHT to have as many children as we want. It is a privilege. Some are selfish and have kids even though they can't take care of them. Some are ignorant and do it without realizing the consequences. Some do it for religious reasons.

I would have more, but I consider quality of life for my DD and for my SD and for the unborn children. I could afford it. I don't choose to do so, and so I have taken precautions to prevent it from happening.

Sometimes I do wish I had not had my daughter. Sometimes I wish I didn't have a SD either. Not all the time, not most of the time, but I'd be a liar if I didn't admit the thought has occurred to me.

PO1, you started the judgmental and unkind remarks by bringing Love's daughter's tuition into the mix, saying that her SAHM status is the same as BM's, commenting that Myfam getting assistance from mom and dad is the same as CONTINUING to have children when a person is not able to support the ones they have.

That's where the "keep legs closed" came into play. If a person can't support the ones they have, they shouldn't have any more. Period. And if they do, and if they are LYING to get assistance (saying they aren't married when they are, etc) then they are STEALING from people like you, who really did need the help and applied legally and were denied.

I know. My mother was on welfare for a while when I was a kid after she divorced my dad. Her parents refused to help her. It was there when we needed it. I'm all for welfare.

Cheating the system doesn't work, and perpetuating the problem by having MORE kids is asinine.

But don't act like you're all innocent and standing by while the mud is flinging. Your hands aren't clean either.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

"Imaommy, you have 3 children from 3 different men, all of them you had at young age and raised them without fathers, do not tell me you never asked for government help such as health care or free lunches at school or anything. And I would expect you to ask for help even if your work many hours!"

I guess you could say that started my young adult life as sister B in Mattie's story (for the most part) my choices when I was young were not the best. That has already been established. I had my 3rd child at 21... my youngest child is now 21 & still learning how to make decisions about her life. Thank goodness she has learned from my mistakes or maybe she just lived a different life than I did. But, it didn't take long for me to realize that I was creating a huge problem in my life... that it was going to be a huge struggle to support my kids & I did NOT want to live on government assistance in poverty... waiting for a check & taking handouts. I did not want my kids to grow up, learning that is what is done. I did not grow up that way.. my parents worked & I had always worked. I've always worked, even pregnant. I never had the thought that I could have another child & let the government or taxpayers pay for it. That isn't to say I have needed help at times... I have. And I believe that is what they system is supposed to do... help people from time to time, not as a lifestyle. I also believe people are responsible for helping themselves first. I think a 20 year old making a baby with fantasy ideas about life & her future is NOT the same as a 30 or 40 year old doing the same. I foolishly had three children (that I truly wanted) but had them the wrong way at a too early age. My SD's BM had her first child at 25, had SD at 28, & this new baby at 38. She had the second two after she had already allowed her mom to become primary caregiver to the first one. She had the third one while grandma was raising the first one & we are raising the second one. And I'm not sure if BM is or isn't receiving assistance... but she clearly doesn't work & doesn't pay her support for her daughter & complained about hers & her BF's strained finances BEFORE she had this new baby. I simply think there is something wrong with that. Without excusing mistakes/decisions I made in my past... because they were wrong... but people can learn from their mistakes & change their path in life. But when you see people choosing a lifestyle that expects others to work & pay for while they do nothing... that is what is wrong. If you are wealthy, if you have savings, if you don't mind living in poverty (without government assistance) or any expectation that someone else should take care of you or your children... then by all means, have all the kids you want!

If government programs weren't so LIBERAL, it wouldn't be so easy for the sister B's of the world to stay in that category & learn to live (and even enjoy) that lifestyle. Even with the problems & issues I was dealing with as a young adult, I knew that lifestyle was NOT something I wanted for me or my kids. Later, when I worked in that field, I saw way too many families that learned how to work the system, cheat the system, and abuse the system. The worse part was how they model that behavior to the next generation. While there may be a few that step away from it and actually do something with their lives, the majority of people who grow up & live that life, become accustom to it and it's what is comfortable for them.

BTW, I'm very proud of where I am in my life today... when I think of where I was headed & where I could be. It actually made me chuckle when PO1 said "I'm out of here" because it's become so judgmental and unkind. I do believe it was her unkind and judgmental comments that got the ball rolling on these issues. lmao!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

Iammommy, I brought you and other mothers on this forum (including myself) as an example of how life plays out and showing that comments about us keeping legs closed or getting assistance are just unnecessary and rude because they do relate to people here. Plus some people do not know circumstances of everyone in here so why making such comments?

No, I made no judgments, I disapprove of judgments made about women who have more than one child, ask for help and do not to work due to young children at home. I dissaprove of hypocrisy as well. Nothing wrong with whatever people have or get tuition paid or whatever, but please do not pass judgments on others who aren't as lucky or tell them to do what you yourself aren't doing.

Many on this forum got lucky to live very comfortable lives and a lot of support and felt it is OK to pass unkind judgments on those who aren't as lucky. I have an issue with this.

But of course everyone can say whatever they want here, it doesn't mean though that I have to be OK with it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

"Sometimes I do wish I had not had my daughter."

This made me feel sick, I wish i didn't read it. That's where we differ. OMG Now I just have to be out, why did I even read it. Stupid curiosity OMG

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mom_of_4

I am not advocating that people just continue to have in children in the off chance that one may save the world. I am saying it is incredibly unkind and judgemental to look down on those who may have multiple children on welfare. (and I can not even express how much I dislike the whole keeping their legs closed nonsense)I was told the same thing by bible belt holier than thou in town for the baptist convention jerks when I was pregnant with my one and only child because I was unmarried. No matter who it is directed to or why it is unnecessary and disgusting!
And I clarified that abusing and defrauding the system was wrong. Also, as I stated before the system is broken. It creates a cyclical effect of being on welfare for life rather than as a life raft. And yes, part of supporting a child is the education system (which I am very passionate about) Even still I have heard many people complain "why should their tax dollars go to educating other peoples children when I dont have children". I have worked with these woman... I have worked with these children. To lump those who do misuse the system into one large group of those woman with all those children that are on welfare is an insult to every single one that works 24 hours a day to better their childs life.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

LOL. I'm sorry you feel sick.

Here's the thing PO1. I'm sure you will fling this back at me sometime soon. Along with whatever else you deem unacceptable.

I'm being honest. I think it's ok to think "I wish I'd never gotten married" or "I wish I'd have been older when I had my kids" or even "wow, I probably never should have had kids".

What matters is how a person conducts their life once they've made irreversible choices like that. I love my daughter and I wouldn't give her back for anything. My life is centered around her. But "I wish I didn't have any kids" has, for sure, crossed my mind.

Why does that make you sick?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

We are not passing 'judgement' on anyone on this forum that legally applied and legally obtained and legally used government assistance. If someone pipes in and says ' I defrauded the system, I lied to get help so I could sit around all day and have babies' then I would judge them for it.

That's my opinion.

Period.

Obtain it legally and you can pop out all the kids you want. Obtain it illegally and I'm going to say 'you might want to stop now and make sure this doesn't happen again'.

Dr Phil had a lady on the episode was 'maggets mold and rotten milk'
Her mom had 1 child, 2 were given up for adoption and the other 3 were suffering in filth and literally, maggets, mold and rotten milk... She had 5 children, she was 30 years old, she had no job, she was very well put together, nice looking young lady, fixed up hair, nails, make up.. On the outside you would NEVER know what was going on with her. She was receiving benefits and selling her food stamps for drugs. Dr Phil was disgusted over her continuing to have more children when she could not afford the ones she had nor could she take care of them. watch the show on Dr Phil.com. Wow. My point exactly!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

If you're up for it, google toddler drinks bleach from sippy cup. Same MOM that I was speaking of. These are the kinds of people PO1 that we are saying should stop what they are doing and take care of their kids instead of expecting everyone else to do it.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

PO1, yes, you made judgments. Starting on post #1. And you continue to make judgments.

"Plus some people do not know circumstances of everyone in here so why making such comments?"

You'd do well to heed your own advice.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

--"I disapprove of judgments made about women who have more than one child, ask for help and do not to work due to young children at home"--

Well then PO1, you take disaprroval with the entire state of Missouri (where this thread's BM lives) as her state requires 20 hours of work or 20 hours of schooling a week. Maybe you can write their legislators and tell them you disapprove of their judgemental laws/requirements. Not only is this BM not following through with the state's requirements she is also lying about her situation to obtain benefits she actually does not qualify for (Dh who she pretends she is not married to makes too much money if she told the truth).

Look at it the same way you were denied benefits when it was just you and your daughter. You asked, you made too much and that was that. You got a second job and figured it out on your own... as hard as it must have been you were on your own and the government did not care about your situation, you simply made too much, end of story. But that's not what this BM did...she lied/cheated so she could qualify and get the benefits. Now if you think the state of Missouri (and myself) are unduly passing judgement on this BM...tough, guess you could try protesting their rules/laws outside infront of the state capitol building. Neither that state (nor I) feel their requirements and guidelines are too far out to ask for in return for the assistance. I believe most states if not all also provide assistance to the 'working' mother to be able to work and pays for the daycare. So staying home because one has young children ( AND lying & ignoring requirements) really does not any longer give mothers an out of the requirements.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

OMG people!!! This is ridiculous... how can anyone excuse having kids and not be able to afford them on purpose? Lets see..... I want about six horses, I'd also like some mini horses... BUT, I can't afford to feed them or house them or the vet bills. Can the government please help me out with that? Cause you know... those animals are here anyway and someone needs to take care of them, why not the taxpayers? Does that make any sense? We don't just give people animals to care for at the expense of the taxpayers why the hell should women be able to continue to SPREAD THEIR LEGS and pop out babies just because they want them and want the benefits the government gives them for having them. It's COMMON SENSE!!! Obviously there are a couple people here who don't have any of that.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mom_of_4

and you are just getting more and more insulting...

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

If the shoe fits .......

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

OK, I have a question. Why are these benefits (educational, medical, etc.) not available to the parents of adoptive or foster children? These are kids who are already here, who are already in existence, who desperately need homes and loving families. In my state, there are now some special benefits available for "hard to place" (physically, mentally, or emotionally challenged, or just older and no longer so "cute") foster children who are eligible for adoption. I know that the state will basically cover the adoption fees and now they will cover health insurance for the child, even after adoption. I think continued family counseling may also be offered, even after adoption is finalized.

I think this is great; it breaks my heart to see these kids who are 15, 16, 17 years old and despite everything, are still hoping against hope that someone will adopt them, that they'll find a family to love them.

I am sure that even more "hard to place" kids would be adopted if the parents were offered educational assistance, medical care, etc. just like parents on welfare. So why don't we do that?

I've got to think that it's because they don't want people to adopt or foster kids mainly for the benefits to themselves. I think they're willing to help tilt the balance; if the family can already support themselves but wouldn't easily financially be able to take in another child, especially one needing medical care and/or counseling, they'll help make up that difference. But not anything "extra" to the adoptive family or parents.

So why is that? Is it because they are acknowledging that some people might take advantage of benefits to themselves and adopt kids for the wrong reasons? Is it that they expect people to plan ahead before they have (adopt) more kids? Are bio-parents more deserving than foster or adoptive parents? Who's to say that there are not some people out there who would be super adoptive parents if only they had a better education - but they're not going to get it at the taxpayers' expense! They'd have to first get themselves financially stable and then apply to be foster/adoptive parents.

If I adopted eight kids and promptly put them all into subsidized day care while I got free education would anyone have a problem with that? And why or why not?

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Really good questions Mattie. And I agree, it's because they don't want people to take advantage of the system using children as their ticket.

Too bad it doesn't work like that BEFORE the children are born.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ashley

It really is common sense. You should not have children you cannot afford and it shouldn't be up to taxpayers to foot the bill when you make bad decisions. I know somebody who chose to not finish high school and subsequently chose to have 5 children with 3 different fathers that she could not afford to raise. She chooses not to use WIC because she doesn't want to take her kids to the Doctor to be evaluated on a regular basis and she doesn't want to feed her kids the mandatory food that WIC allows for. Instead she uses the system by claiming disabilities for her and her children that are non-existent and using some quack-doctor to sign the papers for her. She gets almost $30,000 per year from the taxpayers while doing nothing and not even being a good parent. Her children are unruly and undisciplined. They are fed McDonald's almost every day. They are overweight and not even potty trained at the age of 4+. We are picking up the tab for her CHOICES. She is not unfortunate, she is not unlucky, she is lazy and makes poor decisions, but she does not suffer for her decisions. TAXPAYERS do.

I love how every time somebody who is 'left of center' does not have a good, logical argument for their policies, they turn to calling other people who make logical arguments hateful. I don't feel the need to be Politically Correct when I have lived my life making good decisions and paying into the same system that these parasites take advantage of. I can tell you a better place for my money to go than to these parasites. It can go back in MY pocket, to take care of MY child. And the same with every other taxpayer out there. Let them keep their money. They are the ones who earned it!!!

And this nonsense that healthcare is a basic human right. There is no hospital in this country that would turn away a dieing person, but since when are you entitled to a portion of somebody else's life to pay for anything? That's what it is, ya know. I spend my time at work, and when the money I work for is taken at the point of a gun to pay for somebody else's child, healthcare, whatever, that is a portion of my life that is taken away from me. What really gets me is that for the most part, these people who are sucking off of the system drive nicer cars than I do. They have cell phones and cable and computers and flat screen TVs. If they are so worried about their healthcare, they can allocate the money that they are spending toward these things toward their healthcare. What's even more ridiculous is that since Obamacare passed, the cost of healthcare has risen and people who used to be covered are no longer able to afford coverage. There are more people NOW who don't have coverage than before this whole thing passed. How's that for ironic?

Furthermore, I find it disgusting that a head of household making minimum wage has more disposable income in this country than a family making $60,000 per year.

Here is a link that might be useful: Entitlement America

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

I can't believe people still carry on, it is getting funnier by day, now we are getting links to right-wing blogs, what's next? quotes from Glenn Beck? I needed good laugh, thank you

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Are you mocking Raek? PO1, seriously, take a look in the mirror...

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ashley

What's really funny is that somebody who was supposedly "out of here" 18 posts ago is still sticking around to comment on how "funny" my post is. I don't find it funny at all. I find it disgusting that there are so many people in this country who feel entitled to the money that other people earn.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

it is not against the law to comment on something LOL I didn't comment on issue at hand (what was the issue?) i commented on posting links to the Internet forums as it is some factual or accurate info to go by. "link that might be useful" you don't think it is funny, I thought it was just hilarious.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ashley

Oh, so you are saying just because it came from a "right-wing blogger" that somehow means it is inaccurate? Would it make you feel better if I linked to the actual article? Here ya go.

Here is a link that might be useful: Article from Northside Sun

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

Although desegregation of schools in Cleveland is extremely important issue (I live in a very segregated area myself not Cleveland though). Segregation is disgusting, am not sure though why are you posting link about that. I think you are confused.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

I agree with you Raek. I read the first article but the second I think the link is misdirected.

PO1, you seem to have an attitude about the internet and how factual the information found on it is. This is not some fly-by-night new fangled do-hickey. It's a pretty valid source of information and research if one does due diligence.

It is crazy that I work very hard for my education and my job, and there are welfare recipients with more disposable income than I have. Truly the middle class is squeezed from both ends.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
Ashley

I did link incorrectly. Sorry about that. I've searched for the original article and found an answer basically stating that Wyatt Emmerich (the author of the original article sited) wrote a guest commentary for the Cleveland Current at that time. He is president of Emmerich Newspapers Inc. The article did appear in the Cleveland Current, as well as with the Northside Sun, one of his [news]papers. It is not a hoax. It is not online the Cleveland Current website, and is only available in print version.

The information went on to state that Almost all welfare programs have Web sites where you can call up "benefits calculators." Just plug-in your income and family size and, presto, your benefits are automatically calculated.

The chart is quite revealing. A single parent family of three making $14,500 a year (minimum wage) has MORE disposable income than a family making $60,000 a year.

And if that wasn�t enough, there�s more:

If the family provider works only one week a month at minimum wage, he or she makes 92 percent as much as a full-time provider grossing $60,000 a year.

All that to say, if you don't believe it, do the research yourself.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Back to the OP... I'm sorry for the kids. But I can see breathing a sigh of relief at her having gotten caught. I've had enough circumstances where someone is milking the system and I don't want to turn them in but am relieved when they are caught.

I'm happy welfare is there for people in need. But for those who keep having kids when they can't support them and then relying on me to cover their expenses... GET A JOB! Or stop having dependents you can't care for without assistance.

And it doesn't matter to me where you get the assistance (grandparents, parents, family, husband/wife working, etc) as long as you're not holding your hand out to me and expecting me to work while you stay home...

If all of us did that, imagine where we'd be.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
momof3_stepof1

Is it just a coincidence that every time I click on this thread at the very bottom is a link for a medicaid application? It states it's for my state... so maybe it is... but I don't like it!

PO1 likes to argue about everything. Obviously she's never had to use welfare, I don't understand why it is that she is continuously siding with these people. I totally understand the use of welfare for the disabled or the elderly... or for a stepping stone. But NOT to live off of as a way of life. It's just wrong!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

I get "lowest priced fake grass" on mine ;) Maybe it's regional Momof3.

I don't think PO1 is siding with the welfare recipients who receive it illegally, she just wants to portray OP and Myfam as entitled.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

No, of course they are not entitled. Myfampg works hard, how is she entitled, she had parents helping her at some point so she did not need welfare but she worked and works now. And OP has a family that luckily can provide financial support so she does not have to work. That's about it. Hard to believe I have to repeat the same thing again, I thought I was pretty clear about 50 posts ago. And mom of 3, you misunderstood, receiving welfare illegally is nasty and criminal. You probably confusing me with someone else.

But staying at home with young kids while husband works is not illegal. And asking for welfare if help is needed and family is not available, is neither nasty nor illegal.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Nope. You're pretty clear, but I don't think you're coming across like you want to. Instead of being happy for OP that the BM got caught defrauding the system, you drug her into it and called her judgmental and insinuated she's living off her dad, you brought Myfam into it and insinuated she'd never been 'on her own' so therefore she was judgmental, and you've continued on that vein ever since.

"But I would not judge her for not working if I myself did not work, had no children at home during the day and was supported by a husband and a father. Not everyone is that lucky."

" I think you are just lucky your DH makes enough or you have other family to help, isn't your father paying for your DD's education?"

"Everything is relative. Just have some perspective, not everyone has parents or men to move in with."

" I don't care if others don't work. But if someone stays home and is fortunate enough to be supported financially, but then suggests other women must work, it does strike a chord with me. It seems arrogant to me, maybe it is not meant this way, but sure comes across."

"Many on this forum got lucky to live very comfortable lives and a lot of support and felt it is OK to pass unkind judgments on those who aren't as lucky."

ETC, ETC...

IE: If you get help from family when you need it, you are entitled and judgmental toward those who have to ask for help from the govn't.

PLUS... It appears that your opinion is that if a mother even thinks for a moment that she wished she hadn't had kids... even if she'd never had an abortion and didn't consider having one when she got pregnant (even though she's pro-choice), it's sickening.

Try looking at it from the perspective of others for once.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
justmetoo

-- You probably confusing me with someone else. --

LOL. Nope only one PO1. One JMT. One Silver. One Blah Blah Blah.

Ok ladies, only like seven more postings and this thread finally takes the horse off to the processing plant. One, two, three...going going gone.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Holy moly. I hope we at least get some good jello from this horse.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

"But staying at home with young kids while husband works is not illegal. And asking for welfare if help is needed and family is not available, is neither nasty nor illegal."

For the fifteenth thousandth time----in my state, if one has children under five and is receiving welfare benefits, one is REQUIRED----REQUIRED!!!----to be either WORKING 20 hrs/week or in SCHOOL 20 hrs/week.

BM:

--has young children under five
--is on welfare

and is not in school, working part time OR looking for employment.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
mattie_gt

Mom of 3, I get an ad for group health insurance through AARP! LOL! I'm not old enough for AARP!

"And asking for welfare if help is needed and family is not available, is neither nasty nor illegal."

To sum up, if a woman chooses to have relations, shall we say, in a deliberate attempt to have more children and thus continue to live like a leech off of taxpayers, that's not nasty. But to say that she should not continue to do so is nasty - and evil.

I'm going to go make myself a peanut butter sandwich now. I've heard peanut butter is very healthy for us elderly folk!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
parent_of_one

"It appears that your opinion is that if a mother even thinks for a moment that she wished she hadn't had kids... it's sickening."
Yes it felt sickening for me. I am not saying everyone has to feel sick.

They are required to work or go to school yet BM doesn't, so sounds like not everyone is required but in any case she lied that she is not married and now she doesn't get welfare. So it is over and now everyone can rejoice and be happy that BM is not getting welfare.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
lovehadley

"They are required to work or go to school yet BM doesn't, so sounds like not everyone is required"

No, the problem, Parent, is that the SYSTEM is flawed and there are just not enough social workers to ensure that the requirements are being met. Their caseloads are far too large to keep tabs on everyone. BM has told DH many times that she is supposed to send in a monthly "timecard" updating the status of her "job search." She has to meet with her social worker periodically to renew/maintain her benefits.

This stuff (cash assistance/etc) isn't just handed out no-strings-attached but the safeguards in place are not enough to make sure everyone is abiding by the guidelines. It's far too easy to glide under the radar undetected.

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
myfampg

Mattie said *relations*. Tee hee

I hada pb&j sandwich -- I also smoked two cigarettes which I haven't done in years AND I dropped the diet and went full on Pepsi 20oz -- oh! I forgot, my own pint of chocolate chip cookie dough Blue Bell and my Dh brought me and Ds a sucker for Ds pooping on the potty ... And Ds ate his before dinner -- I wished SM evil all evening, fiercely cleaned Dd's room and now... I'm watching trash soap operas and catching up on the forum... I seriously could do this all day Everyday -- Dh and I could have *relations*, have a baby and I'm thinking of ditching my job, THEN I would have more disposable income than anyone else here!! Now THAT would be a perfect day!!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
imamommy

Quite frankly, this thread isn't about whether it's okay to stay home when you have young children and get welfare. If it was, then BM would not be upset that her welfare ended. She would not be complaining that now she won't have any money. It was income received fraudulently & not only does she not deserve to get it... she belongs in JAIL.

PO1 wants to make a case for parents of young kids that need help but the reality is that in OP, the BM did not qualify for any assistance, she lied & committed fraud. She got caught. and LH is not wrong for anything she said. The REALITY is that the BM needs to get a job. If she can't survive on her husband's income, then the husband needs another job or BM needs to work... not be making more babies they can't afford. If they want to live in poverty & have all the babies they can... who cares? But, not only is she having more babies while expecting the taxpayers to pay for it... she didn't even qualify to begin with.

END OF STORY!

Save    
Thank you for reporting this comment. Undo
silversword

Well!! I never!

Sometimes I wish I'd never gotten married too ;) (in case you're wondering, I mean the first AND the second time!)

Oh well. Enjoy your Bluebell Myfam. I'm eating black beans, rice, pico de gallo, kale and tortillas for dinner.

And then I just might have some almond butter smeared on dates. It's really good...

Save    
Browse Gardening and Landscaping Stories on Houzz See all Stories
Home Tech Be a TV Star With Your Video Phone Calls
Tiny screens don't do your video calls justice. For higher-quality video conversations, you've got to turn on the TV
Full Story
Great Designers Design Icons: Le Corbusier, Pioneer of Modern Architecture
'Prolific' and 'influential' don't do him justice. Learn about the legendary architect and MoMA's new Le Corbusier exhibition here
Full Story
How to Photograph Your House How to Compose Your Shot for Stunning Home Photography
A photo pro shares secrets like camera height, lighting and lens type for creating images that do your home justice
Full Story