Posted on 11/28/2004 9:53:36 AM PST by sinkspur
Simple, isn't it? Prevention. No problem to solve.
It's not like a person can't easily get contraceptives. This isn't 1960.
I see this all the time in my work and it is very upsetting. You want to just say, "if you'd straigten up and do things the way God intended instead of spreading your legs for every Tom, Dick and Harry that comes along, you wouldn't be in this mess." It breaks my heart to see these little kids, many of whom will never even know who their father is, being "raised" by mothers and their ever changing live-ins. The kids are screwed up; it's almost a given. And yet, it is practically the unpardonable sin to suggest to these people that just maybe there is a difference between right and wrong and that what they are doing to these kids is wrong.
It's true that payments from one source diminsh the amount she gets from another.
I remember when this girl got pg last year. There was lots of support, but it was coming from the wrong people.
These are bandaids on the problem.
The goal, imo, should be to prevent these pregnancies from occuring in the first place. No pregnancy, no problem. Birth control works when used. Abstinence is another choice, but abstinence depends upon strength of character. The ones conceiving are't usually the strong ones.
The second tier should be psychological deterrence in the form of state imposed child support payments for Poppa.
That should take some of the wind out of his sails. As long as we as a society continue to enable fathers to shirk their responsibilities, we are going to have these problems.
This is simply common sense.
That's where you're wrong. Perhaps intelligent women more likely would, but some of these people are dumb as a mud fence. And going after child support is all well and good, but you'd be amazed at how many young, able-bodied men males have never worked a day in their lives.
"I am going to say it again, wearily: WHERE are the mothers of these girls when the girls are young? If these girls had had stay-at-home, married moms, in that child's presence from birth to 18 excepting school hours, this would never have happened.
But noooooooooo! Women with kids have to go to WORK! Shuffling papers is SO MUCH MORE IMPORTANT than caring for your daughter to make sure she becomes a decent adult! And of course no one made any commitment to have one parent stay home with any child that might occur, BEFORE they had sex!
Thank you, feminism. You sure have improved the lot for women. Now we can be available to men from twelve to haggard, and then sit back and watch our daughters get their empty spaces filled in turn."
Amen.
"...and way has the state not forced his responsibility upon him?"
The state will not step in yet b/c she is not getting State welfare benefits. The babies each get a Federal SS disability check. As soon as they cut off her SSD she will probably apply for State welfare benefits (i.e. Medicare, AFDC). When she signs up for those benefits she will have to name the father and authorize the State of Texas (Office of the Attorney General) to go after Jimmy for child support, medical support and perhaps retro-active support.
If she doesn't cooperate, they could cut off her benefits. It's just a matter of time. However, as a side note, Jimmy is a deadbeat with other children that he is probably not supporting. Eventually he will face jail time for his failure to obey the court order. And the tax payers will then be paying to support the kids AND Jimmy.
I don't know what the program is like where she is, but here, being on welfare is no bargain. All the benefit is in the food stamps and medical, much of which is available apart from any cash benefit, at least for the children. What we have here is the TEA program. It is temporary and the cash benefit won't even pay the electric bill if the person is living in subsidized housing. Without family help, it is very difficult for single, poorly educated parents to improve their situation here. Unskilled jobs are scarce. Jobs that pay more than minimim wage are virtually nonexistent. There is no public transportation, and very little is actually close to town. In this area, a single mom would be much better off working, even part-time, than to be on "welfare."
Don't agree. Most DO learn, this one almost learned but failed to renew the bcs on time. Another very costly lesson.
I wonder when we as a society are going to learn OUR very costly lesson and demand accountability from BOTH parties?
We seem to hve a gaping blind spot when it comes to the fathers of these children.
Here, once the state is involved at any level, child support is sought from the father(s). It isn't up to the mothers. I believe that is the case in several other states as well.
Why is this piece of flotsam, this lousy schmuck, NOT required to pay child support? This is represensible.
Somebody needs to fight for this since the idiot girl is not bright/strong/interested/compelled/responsible enough to do it for her own kids.
I fear the life they are going to live!
One wonders what would happen if someone filed a lawsuit against the father ON BEHALF OF THE TAXPAYERS to get him to pay his fair share?
$500 and change per kid equals $2000 per month . . . and I'm sure some more will be added to the till when numero cinco joins the brood. But for the sake of my suggestion let's just say two grand a month. That's $24,000 per year X 18 years = $432,000.
Okay, okay, maybe she won't be paid for 18 years for each child . . . but is anyone here ready to bet she won't? But what I will bet on is this . . . you can take it to the bank that she'll get "cost of living" increases on her "investment."
Sounds to me like us taxpayers are being unfairly hosed for nearly a half-million dollars. And she admits she's not going to force the father to help take care of them? Sounds to me like us taxpayers have good grounds for a lawsuit to help her change her mind.
I work with a lot of these women and their children. They don't learn, or won't. Oh, maybe having 4 at one time would be a wake up call to some of them, but most just keep having babies by different fathers and let other people be responsible for them. Now keep in mind, that I am working with the ones who become a problem. In my experience, the ones that learn don't end up on my caseload. It is very rare, however, for all the children of these women to all have the same father. Sometimes they pay support and sometimes they don't. Sometimes these women get fixed. Often though, they raise kids that just repeat the cycle. And the children in these "families" are becoming sexually active at ages that would shock you.
Actually, she's and example of what's wrong with some American women and he's and example of what's wrong with some of the American men.
I especially like the part where he made her pay for the motel room -- a real classy guy. /sarcasm. Our society enables irresponsible men to be freeloaders and foolish women to be dependent on welfare. You know the children will have a minimal existence, be malnourished and likely feeble-minded as a result. They will be lucky to graduate from elementary school and will wind up involved in crime and drugs. The welfare/prison system will support them for the rest of their short and brutal lives. This is far from the Murphy Brown fantasy that the feminists tell us is the normal experience for unwed mothers.
That's the reason I excerpted it.
The state will not step in yet b/c she is not getting State welfare benefits.
I understand. The article also memtioned that "she won't ask him" -she says because she wants him to voluntarily be involved with his kids - but also probably because she knows it would cut into the SSD- and also because somewhere deep inside, she also knows he'll run.
It's my opinion the atate should be far more aggressive in pursuing these deadbeat serial inseminators like Jimmah.
You guys are way too nice, imo. I understand that your hands are somewhat tied by the regulations of different agencies, BUT I also feel like the public at large needs a lot of education about the whole process. Especially the serial inseminators of the future.
If the public demanded more accountability, then we would have more accountability.
From BOTH parties.
ps This is the third time I've tried to post this. Hope it gets there ;)
"I doubt if she will be able to put her life back together because, let's face it, she's too damn stupid. Some people are just too dumb to ever make it."
Yep. The dumbest people always breed like rabbits. Granny is pretty stupid too, IMO.
Here, once the state is involved at any level, child support is sought from the father(s). It isn't up to the mothers. I believe that is the case in several other states as well.
IMO, this is how it should be, only more aggressive. AND more publicized.
As do I, but my work is waaaay after the fact. Waaaaay after. I see the personal and interfamily damage and how it all gets passed on to defenseless children.
I'm convinced that prevention is key.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.