How many children should a woman or man be able to have before they should have to get "fixed". My step childrens mother just had a miscarriage with her 5th child and she just lost custody of her other 4 (two to us ages 15 and 14, and two to her other ex husband ages 4 and 3 due to neglect and being an unfit mother). None of which she pays child support for nor does she visit them but once every couple of months when her conscious is getting the better of her.
My son's father is the same way, 3 children none of which he takes care of (one with me and two with his ex-wife).
Why do we continue to do this and/or allow this behavior to happen?
Why does the government give $350 dollars worth of food stamps to the mother when she doesn't have custody of the kids and never sees them, but refuses to help us because we make too much money?
How can we stop this madness?
Thanks for letting me rant!!!
2006-11-01 10:14:38 · 25 answers · asked by Heather S 4 in Family & Relationships ➔ Marriage & Divorce
OK, so sterilization might be extreme, I like the person who said the gov't shouldn't pay after two. But then again, I don't understand why the government couldn't pay for having tubes tied or vasectomy if the person wanted it. Instead they'd rather pay thousands of dollars per year per child in welfare? Sounds funny to me. Kind of like the insurance companies not wanting to pay for a routine heart check up but would rather pay for a triple by-pass surgery. don't get it.
2006-11-01 10:36:35 · update #1
She cannot be reported for fraud with food stamps, the laws here stipulate if the child is in the home for more than a few hours a month then she gets full food stamps benefits for that child. Granted, she will go months without seeing the children, but that's too hard for them to regulate.
2006-11-01 10:56:32 · update #2
Not sure whether having a child is a right, like free speech -- or not. But I do know we are very inconsistant about it. If we, as a society, think that people have a right to have children, then don't we also have a right to make sure those children are well cared for, educated, etc? And if don't have any obligation to provide good care for these children, then shouldn't we take some action to avoid thier being created in the first place? As it is, we have the worst of both worlds.
2006-11-01 10:38:13 · answer #1 · answered by kill_yr_television 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
if this woman is collecting $350.00 for children she does not have custody of, then she needs to be reported. that is called welfare fraud and she can do time and pay back all that money.as far as fixing people to stop them from having children, never going to happen. ten years ago a senator was trying to introduce a bill that will pay women on public assistance not to have children. that caused quite a stir in the country, some were for it ,others were against. the people that were against it cried foul. they were taking a woman's right to bear as many children as she wanted. so the thought died. to some point i agree women who have over five consecutive births, without acknowledging that they have other kids in foster care or a ward of the state should have some type of birth control issued to them or be "fixed. but like everything else they will fall through the cracks. they will slip away or find another state, before the state can decide what action to take. so until then we have to sit and think would that open another debate on how to handle the women.
****that sucks that she can still collect food stamps. is there anyway that you can look again to see what you can do? where do you live? look at law books and see if you can find some type of loophole. let me know. ***
2006-11-01 10:54:19 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry, that really stinks! Unfortunately requiring an unfit person to get "fixed" would be taking away rights that the government just wouldn't take away. If they had such a law whose to say that they wouldn't start deciding that two kids are enough and anyone with more than that would have to get fixed whether they can take care of their kids or not. In the dream world in which I choose to live unfit parents would not be able to make babies so they can collect welfare and they'd some how learn to keep their legs together. Until then you just keep on ranting, I am right there with you!
2006-11-01 10:21:59 · answer #3 · answered by princesschubbybutt 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I agree there are too many children brought into this world by unworthy parents.
Yes there should be a limit they say the mother has rights that's why she cant be "fixed" what about the rights of the poor neglected children.
Neglect to a child is a crime and the punishment should be just as any other crime they should be in the position to do it again. Let alone 4 times
2006-11-01 10:33:11 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I know of a woman who is a prostitute in the downtown Reno Nevada area who has 13 children by different fathers and is now expecting another...she is 47 years old....not only should she be "fixed", but taken off the streets and institutionalized! Social programs here in Nevada take second and third place to condo development, more and more construction projects, mostly to benefit the casino industry. These people are pushed to the wayside...the taxpayer foots the bill.
2006-11-01 10:22:27 · answer #5 · answered by vaar69 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It disconcerting that this folly isn't the artwork of one rogue individual yet a determination authorized by capacity of a panel of "specialists". It illuminates the way that establishments which incorporate councils can develop into so insular that their team lose touch with actuality. If this actual determination is a hardship then evaluate what craziness is being enacted by capacity of the staff of alternative departments in Rotherham council and others around the country. maximum persons ought to handle council planners and regulators at some juncture and my impression is they are each and each bit as deluded using fact the Rotherham new child protection branch.
2016-10-21 02:50:34 · answer #6 · answered by lorentz 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What you are asking for here is a basic violation of civil and human rights. To take something away based on someone elses critereia of what is right and wrong just doesnt fly in the face of justice. The Government has placed restrictions on welfare and foodstamp benefits. But while we are on the subject do you think maybe ignrant people should be sterilised too?
2006-11-01 10:58:03 · answer #7 · answered by snoop_dougie_doug04 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Unfortunately, we cannot stop it, but I agree with you that women who have child after child and then collect welfare for each one, ought to be STERILIZED immediately! What the government ought to do, is put a stipulation on the amount of kids for which one can collect welfare, say two. And after number two kid, these baby factories would be on their own!
2006-11-01 10:16:44 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
This is a free country, that is why they don't have to get "fixed." I don't agree with them recieving food stamps for children they are not caring for though. That is just wrong. Us taxpayer are paying for these people to take advantage like this.
2006-11-01 10:18:39 · answer #9 · answered by Billys girl 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Are we talking about Kevin Federline here? But without the governement giving him $350, Britney Spears gives him $350,000.
2006-11-01 10:17:30 · answer #10 · answered by burtonpark7 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋