Some women have more children than they can financially afford, and thus turn to the state for benefits. Do you think this is fair? What is your opinion on the matter?
2006-11-10 17:13:45 · 17 answers · asked by gracious94 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
People of society can help those who are in situations where the person has ended up with more children than they can afford (for whatever reason). Churches and private organizations have been doing this for years in an effort to help the children grow to become responsible members of society.
It is unfair that one can turn to the government and the government forces its citizens to help support people who have ended up in these situations. It's a matter of choices of how to help and where you can do the most good. Government seems to want your money without consideration of time or talent. Where as private organizations ask for money but are more than willing to also accept your time and talents to help out.
We short change ourselves in this area all the time. I really wish people would see the benefits of real charity and not in thinking that throwing money at it through taxes is going to be good enough. It just isn't good enough.
2006-11-10 17:41:44 · answer #1 · answered by Tony C 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well there needs to be a dual approach. The girls need support whilst at the same time being made to offer childcare facilities for their benefits. Thus we clear up the problem of what to do with our kids whilst we work and we give the girls a sense of purpose and a sense of a job well done and the girls think to themselves that as they have to work then they may as well get a rewarding carrear and so thus the problem is even less.
Now no government department could ever take responsibility for such a project so we just use a quango. Heck the government already has a mass of the semiautonomous things around.
2006-11-10 17:19:13 · answer #2 · answered by smile 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
How do you figure that a mother is not paying anything towards the upbringing of a child for the next 20 years? Do you honestly think the child support the father pays covers ALL the expenses associated with raising a child? If you do, you are living in fantasy land. In most cases (unless we're talking about the likes of Tiger Woods, i.e. insanely rich people), child support doesn't ever cover half of what it costs to keep a child alive, educated and entertained.
2016-05-22 04:38:11 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
They should be LOANED the difference, just like a student loan or a patient going into nursing home on medicaid. Current system does not work as if GIFTS the money to these women. They have to be supported, and no child should go to bed hungry. But supported by a loan and a loan like a student loan where government is serious about recovering the money. Both parents would be liable for this loan.
2006-11-10 17:27:32 · answer #4 · answered by frankie59 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In the entire world...Women...only can give birth to human babies. They give love to their families. In some Unfortunate incidents, they are over powered for sex. Women is still being used as a production machine.
For this kind of problem, women & men should be educated, about birth control operations, and the governments should offer benefits and impose strict rules.
If a lady give birth more than two, an enquiry should be done why she has more than two. who is responsible? the society should Send "GET WELL SOON" greeting cards to that particular person, make him/ her embrassed. and let all the world know about it.
2006-11-10 17:31:10 · answer #5 · answered by SureshkumarYVS from hyderabad 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That it takes more than just the woman to produce a child so whoever the father is supposed be paying child support should also be included in the scenario. This could help keep them off welfare.
My opinion is, pro-lifers (and I'm not saying you are) should not deny welfare to anybody for having a child since they do not want the child aborted.
2006-11-10 17:19:00 · answer #6 · answered by nobluffzone 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think they should help these families. And this is my reason: the Canadian and American populations are in SERIOUS decline. Sociologically speaking, we are in crisis. We aren't replenishing ourselves. This isn't China where we can't afford more children, we can't afford NOT to have more children.
The men and women who are ACTUALLY having kids should be helped. It's not the children's fault their parents don't know when enough is enough. Why should they have to suffer?
If we can afford fancy cars, we can help feed the needy.
2006-11-10 17:17:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Support all efforts to educate. Education and hope is important to stoping it.
For those in that situation, it's important not to judge. We should do everything we can to support efforts that will offer those children the same future of those from wealthier families.
2006-11-10 17:19:29 · answer #8 · answered by Justin 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
You should read Jonathan Swift's, "A Modest Proposal." It was written about this very subject almost three hundred years ago. Here is a link, if you want to read it. It is not long and worth at least a glance.
http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html
2006-11-10 17:46:26 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
After having the 3rd child on welfare the mother and father should be fixed. and only allowed to stay on for a fixed number of years then they have to get a job and become a contributing member of society.
2006-11-10 17:23:36 · answer #10 · answered by lilmouser2002 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋