SHOP PRODUCTS
Houzz Logo Print
lovehadley

Justice

lovehadley
12 years ago

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!

Comments (151)

  • momof3_stepof1
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • Related Discussions

    Pictures Don't Do it Justice?

    Q

    Comments (9)
    Yes, I do have a fondness for the wide yelow centers and the green margins. This one seems to turn creamy white late in the summer though, which gives it a unique look. I'm not too good with the whites. They don't seem to like me much. OUtside weeding, somebody said....well, I went out and did that a bit, mixed up some potting soil with the bark in it, and then potted up all but six of the new arrivals before it got too dark. I considered taking an outdoor shower, but the neighbor on that side is home, so maybe next time. When I'm this dirty, I hate to bring all that dirt into the bathroom. With our kitchen remodel, the shower will go on the OThER side of the house, big enough for bird cages and me. You haven't lived until you've showered with a parrot...such joy they have, such an absolute wet room MESS they make, whooping and hollering and flapping wings, climbing up and down the shower curtain, wiping eyes and beak on the towels, I highly recommend it for the sheer childlike feeling it gives. And does anyone else have fond memories of playing under the twirling lawn sprinklers as a child? No reason to stop doing it just because you grew up. And hmmmm, let me see if I can find one which is prettier than its picture. Well, Sentimental Journey I suppose. I was after Journey's End when I got it, just mistook the names a wee bit. However, it is prettier than this picture shows. I got Journey's End in my recent moment of madness. Now I'm reformed. I swore off ordering for the......rest of the summer????? :)
    ...See More

    Justice for Breezy

    Q

    Comments (2)
    Breezy is doing better. She is trusting people again and has bonded with some of her care givers. She has gone through surgery and may need more surgery. Dogs are loving and just want to be loved. She is receiving wonderful care and is very lucky. I heard the man who did this is out on bail. I hope he gets what he deserves
    ...See More

    Did You Watch Cold Justice?I

    Q

    Comments (6)
    I liked it, but, I am a huge fan of Kelly. She ran for DA here and lost, we ended up with a horrible DA in that outcome. She was a fantastic prosecutor.
    ...See More

    Trial is over, DH doctor gets 45 years. Is it really Justice?

    Q

    Comments (43)
    Thanks Robo. I appreciate it. There wasn’t a lot of information released to the public because apparently there was a gag order on it. Recently however, documentary on Oxygen was able to share a lot more information. As it turned out, Mary, the head nurse had discovered that many patients were receiving an fairly dangerous immune builder who didn’t need it. She canceled their treatments and made Fata aware. But it really alarmed her so she told another physician working there, Dr. Mungulay. He said Fata wouldn’t let other doctors near his patients, but while he was on vacation, Mungulay ended up treating one of his patients at the hospital anyway. She was newly diagnosed with Multiple Myeloma and had just broken her leg. However, when he looked at the chart there was no pathology report and her bloodwork was in normal range. She didn’t have cancer. He took that to the clinic manager, who then did some digging and found even more inconsistencies. He went to an Attorney for whistle blowers, who then called the Justice Dept. Fata was arrested within 5 days of that call. And the reason they charged him with Medicare fraud instead of murder and charges directed at the pain he’d caused, the Justice dept said they knew they could prove the fraud case faster. It helps now to have a clearer understanding of what happened. Thanks Neetsie, this happened several years ago, there’s just been some documentaries about it on tv so my old threads have been revived
    ...See More
  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    "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.

  • momof3_stepof1
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • momof3_stepof1
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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!

  • mattie_gt
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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?

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • mattie_gt
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    "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.

  • myfampg
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • imamommy
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    "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!

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • mom_of_4
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    "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

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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?

  • myfampg
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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!

  • myfampg
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • justmetoo
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    --"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.

  • momof3_stepof1
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • mom_of_4
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

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

  • momof3_stepof1
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    If the shoe fits .......

  • mattie_gt
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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?

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • Ashley
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

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

  • Ashley
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • Ashley
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • Ashley
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • momof3_stepof1
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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!

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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.

  • justmetoo
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    -- 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.

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

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

  • lovehadley
    Original Author
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    "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.

  • mattie_gt
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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!

  • parent_of_one
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    "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.

  • lovehadley
    Original Author
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    "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.

  • myfampg
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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!!

  • imamommy
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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!

  • silversword
    12 years ago
    last modified: 9 years ago

    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...

Sponsored
Longhouse Architects
Average rating: 5 out of 5 stars4 Reviews
Loudoun County's Prominent Architecture Firm Creating Cohesive Designs