You mean, unlike the way the children of super rich people become problematic, and the normal income families children become problematic? Problematic children are across the board, but not every child from every background is problematic, it's a small percent.
What happened, you had a bad experience with one child who's parent/s are on welfare?
2007-04-17 12:56:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Hosebeast-ess to be 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
You would have to explain what you mean by making their children to be problematic. Do you think welfare kids are bad? And why would that be? I've seen far more snotty little rich brats running around town smoking and swearing, driving mommy and daddy's SUV through the streets like idiots. If anything, poor kids seem to get in more trouble because they don't always have their parents around to get them out of trouble in school, and in the court systems.
The biggest problem I see with kids is a lack of a parents ability to parent, which affects ALL tax brackets. You might want to focus more on the parenting and less on the money.
2007-04-17 12:57:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
That is quite a generalized statement. People that do receive "welfare" (Social Assistance) are often people that are in a bad predicament (such as have lost a job, etc)... BUT many people (helped along by generalizations like this on TV, etc) believe that being on "welfare" means you're a bum.. cheating the system.. lazy.. and all that stuff.
It means NONE of that. Yes, there are people that receive help that don't deserve it, but there are also many, many people out there who are able to survive because of the 'welfare system' and then get their life back on track and do great things...
What you have done is take a segment of people that have done wrong or had problematic kids, etc.. and generalized that because they were on welfare, that everyone on welfare is like that. That's like saying that since there are bad people that are out there on the Internet, that because we're on it, we're all bad too.. etc etc..
2007-04-17 13:13:34
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
That statement is to generic to hold up. Many raise their kids to be good people, to work hard and to be active citizens in their community. But I do agree that it seems that the majority of our kids involved in gangs and such are from families that receive welfare. Why? Because many of these kids +are being born to parents who are just kids themselves. How do you raise kids to be hard workers and know values and morals that keep them out of trouble when the parents aren't yet able to do these things. We don't dare not provide welfare to these families because if we did they would starve and be homeless. It would be a worse disaster. But maybe we need to go back to idea that putting babies up for adoption is not good because it is for the young parents and the child. It would be wanted and loved and the parents who raise it would be adults and know how to teach these things. We also need to relize that having a parent at home who is willing and capeabel to teach values and morals it better for the kids then daycare where they are just watched but not taught the things a stay at home mom does. Yes there are some very good moms who work and there are some very good teenage parents. But we are talking about a stastical situation not the exceptions.
2007-04-17 13:01:24
·
answer #4
·
answered by idaho gal 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I am not at all sure what you mean by this.
I am a welfare recipient and my child is not a problem to our society. We are in a bad situation for the time being and need some assistance, but it does not change who I or my son is and does not in any way make us less then anyone else.
2007-04-17 12:53:40
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
The worst one.... are the non-welfare recipients with problematic kids!
2007-04-17 12:54:11
·
answer #6
·
answered by Venom! 3
·
1⤊
1⤋
obese babies are frequently the made of lazy parenting, working too many hours, won't be in a position to be arsed to cook dinner and whilst they do cook dinner they provide the youngsters what they choose for to save having a argument. my youngsters consume healthful and that they see us as mothers and fathers going to the gymnasium and that they comprehend on the a while of 6 & 9 what's sturdy or undesirable and that they comprehend the constructive outcomes of exercising, even even though it relatively is a skinny line between being properly knowledgeable and bordering on the sting of an eating sickness for the reason which you have had all the concepts and a distorted photograph of what's proper and slender rammed down your throats from an early age. i'm all in favour of unfastened college dinners it would save me a fortune. i might desire to think of that each and each physique mothers and fathers have not got the two the money, time or have had an coaching in well-being like I even have and does no longer comprehend sturdy nutrients if it hit them contained in the face and that i blame the coaching equipment. for the reason that they stopped coaching domicile economics in faculties this concern seems to have escelated, youngsters now dont even comprehend what a carrot feels like ! we choose for extra life skills taught in college quite than pye and fractions we choose for domicile ecomonics, nutrients and childcare. and that i might choose for to function that those moaning with regard to the oftentimes occurring of faculty nutrients, have any of you tried them ? at my youngsters college mothers and fathers and grandparents are invited to connect the youngsters for a school dinner and that i will enable you comprehend they're sturdy high quality with many many healthful possibilities, chips in basic terms as quickly as a week. right here in staffordshire we've the suitable college nutrients contained in the rustic through fact jamie oliver grow to be going to return right here till he stumbled on that the oftentimes occurring grow to be already extreme, dont take your babies observe for it whilst they say college nutrients are shite, they weren't in my day and that they are no longer now.
2016-10-03 03:45:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
were changing into a other kind of life now, and parents cant under stand the new way of life.there for it leaves a problem
2007-04-17 12:58:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by vintagemale1951 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Erm......not everybody on welfare has "trouble" kids!
It has nothing to do with money, but everything to do with how parents raise their kids.
2007-04-17 12:54:24
·
answer #9
·
answered by Emma 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
because they are poor and under-educated.
under-educated people tend to rely on violence....
and poor people have a great deal less to loose if they take action.
Put those two together and you have a group of potentially violent people who have nothing to loose if they take action.
If you want to stop wellfare, you must stop alienating an entire sector of our society. But that will not happen anytime soo.
2007-04-17 12:55:53
·
answer #10
·
answered by Julian X 5
·
1⤊
3⤋