Why don't we enforce a rule that if people are on public assitance, they can't have any additional children?

Question

People are free to do whatever they want, but if these people are on public assitance and are being supported by tax payers, wouldn't it be logical to say, "you can't support yourself and we don't want you to have anymore children until you are off public assistance?"

Answer 1

Sweetpea had the perfect answer above, just put them on a salary cap, and they can quit popping out brats for bucks. Just like in my new home, France.

Answer 2

In some states they have a limit set for increased assistance if the mother of a certain amount of children with no husband or more than one father is apparent. In North Carolina they do. I believe the limit is 4 children per single parent. If the mother/father does not have a job or does not try to improve her/his situation with education to get a better job or attempts to keep employment consecutively, then there is no additional assistance other than medical and food stamp increase. The must also prove that they are attempting to get child support from the father or mother of each child. There is a support system in place for these types of people to help them with their current situation and to assist in education and mental support. If both parents are married or living in the same household and neither are working and one or both are on some type of unemployment or dissablility compensation then there are inquisitions to that effect and will be reviewed on a 6 month basis to quarterly basis to see if the situation in the household has improved or that they are making a valid attempt to better their own life by working and bringing additional money into the household. If the financial situation is not improving and they have more than 4 children they will make periodic checks on the home to make sure the new child is not lacking in anything. If the situation is dire then they will recommend that child services come to the home and talk to the parents about temporary foster care till the situation improves such as not enough food or no heat in the home during the winter months, unclean conditions, clothing deficiency, sickness ect. Some states do not even monitor their welfare recipiants and will just approve or disapprove depending on the amount of paper work it may take. It is sad but if the system is over taxed with too many people of assistance and they are currently recieving assistance they will just wave them through and let it go.
It is frustrating but as I have said many times - it is a state to state issue and you need to write to your officials about reforming the criteria used in those areas to control fraud and over use. Good luck if you do try to petition for your state to make the changes. I will back 100%. Great question though and your concern is warranted.

Answer 3

I'm going to star your question. I have been working myself for 20plus years, my only child/son is now 14, when I relocated 13years ago from Philadelphia to where I live now,(divorce) it was taking a while for me to find a full time, year round job. I was not employed for about 6 weeks. I was actually denied public assistance because I would not surrender my child support to the state (I only would have gotten a whole $5 more). The woman in front of me with 4 children and one on the way, had just gotten an increase in assistance AND food stamps. Fortunately I got a great job a few days later. I will never like or understand the system.

Answer 4

In theory you're right, but lets say. Your husband dies and you are left with a lot of medical bills and you were staying at home to raise your children. Now lets say the mortgage is too high and you can't sell fast enough and lose everything. And, let's say the last thing your husband did was get you pregnant..Does the State force you to get an abortion? There is your answer. What we do for one has to be for all, understand now? You do have a great idea, but it requires others to be morally responsible, and NOT everyone who has to get Welfare or state help is some loser looking for a free ride. There are a lot of tragic cases and people who need real help to get back on their feet. No one grows up and says, Let's get on welfare"..except morally bankrupt types and parasites, unfortunately we will always have those to weed out sadly. Most states have a two year limit now, thankfully, for those of us supprting those who can't support themselves. We don't know their story or why they're on state aid, we need more compassion maybe, BUT others need more morality, and to be responsible too right :-)

Answer 5

I AM A MOTHER OF A 16 MONTH OLD LITTLE BOY. I HAPPEN TO GET PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, IN THE FORM OF MEDICAL COVERAGE. MY HUSBAND AND I BOTH WORKED FULL TIME JOBS UNTIL MY SON WAS BORN. AT WHICH TIME I CHOSE TO STAY AT HOME AND RAISE MY SON. MY HUSBAND WORKS FULL TIME, AND SOMETIMES OVERTIME, AND WE CAN PAY ALL OF OUR BILLS. HOWEVER, I HAVE A CHRONIC MEDICAL CONDITION, AND I SEE SPECIALISTS ON A REGULAR BASIS. I COULD NOT POSSIBLY AFFORD OUR MEDICAL BILLS. AND WITHOUT THE ASSISTANCE, I MAY NOT LIVE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. ALSO, NOT EVERYONE THAT COLLECTS THESE TYPES OF BENEFITS ARE HAVING CHILDREN ON PURPOSE. TAKE ME FOR INSTANCE, WITH MY CONDITION, I HAD BEEN TOLD THAT I WOULD MOST LIKELY NEVER HAVE CHILDREN. MY SON WAS A BIG SURPRISE, A VERY WELCOME ONE, AS WE WANTED CHILDREN. AND I WAS GETTING MEDICAL HELP THEN TOO, EVEN WITH WORKING I STILL COULD NOT AFFORD THE MEDICAL BILLS. TAXPAYERS ARE THE ONES WHO MAKE THESE PROGRAMS POSSIBLE, AND THO I DONT PAY TAXES AT THE MOMENT MY HUSBAND DOES, AS WELL AS MANY OTHER MEMBERS OF MY FAMILY THAT DO NOT GET THESE BENEFITS. MY HUSBAND AND I PLAN TO TRY AND HAVE ANOTHER CHILD WHEN OUR SON TURNS 3. I DON'T FEEL THAT THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD BE ABLE TO TELL ME THAT BECAUSE I COLLECT BENEFITS FROM A DES OFFICE, I CANNOT LIVE THE AMERICAN DREAM, AND HAVE CHILDREN AND RAISE MY FAMILY. BECAUSE THIS IS AMERICA, WE DON'T LIVE IN A THIRD WORLD COUNTRY. HOWEVER, AS A PERSON THAT HAS VISITED THESE OFFICES, SURELY I HAVE TO BE HONEST AND TELL YOU THAT IT REALLY ANGERS ME THAT SOME OF THESE PEOPLE MAKE COLLECTING BENEFITS, AND CHARITY THEIR JOB. THERE ARE HONEST HARD WORKING AMERICANS THAT JUST NEED A LITTLE BIT OF HELP, AND THERE ARE THOSE THAT TAKE ADVANTAGE. IF THESE CASEWORKERS COULD DETERMINE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO, THEN MAYBE THAT TYPE OF RESTRICTION COULD APPLY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT IT WOULD BE FAIR TO SET A GENERALIZED RULE OF THAT MAGNITUDE WITHOUT KNOWING THE FAMILIES PERONALLY. THEY COULD ALSO SAY THAT IF A FAMILY LIKE ONE OF THESE HAS A PREGNANCY OCCUR DURING THE TIME THEY GET THESE BENEFITS, THE BENEFITS WOULD BE STOPPED DUE TO THE VIOLATION.

Answer 6

Ideas like this are what chip away at civil liberties in America. Imagine here that you have someone getting $400 dollars a month of public assistance and they get pregnant. Are you going to make them get an abortion? I don't think so. And reducing benefits would be stupid, because here this woman has an extra mouth to feed but little money to do it with. We need to stop focusing on what would be 'moral' and 'ideal'. Sure, it would be great if everyone worked hard 100% of their time and pulled their weight. But it doesn't always happen, and taking away benefits from kids punishes the innocent party.

Answer 7

People that cannot pay for the upbringing of their children have no business having children and asking the rest of society to pay for them. Why should I suffer and save to pay my childrens medical expenses, food, schooling, college and everything else and then pay taxes for someone else. My American dream is to be filthy rich but taxpayers won't give me any money so that is life. People think they are "entitled" to benefits and that is disgusting. Pay your own way and leave me alone except in dire emergencies and that should be temporary help not for the next 15 or 20 years. The adults in prison today are likely the children yesterday of bum parents.

Answer 8

We don't have that rule b/c we live in a free country. Regardless of whether or not we agree that people on public assistance should not have more kids, they can do as they please. If we were to enforce that rule, we'd be no better off than China where little girls are being abandoned at alarming rates. And we'd end up paying for them anyway.

Answer 9

Uh, no.

That's OK for Red China, not for the US.

Now, what you could do that would have a similar effect is to have public assistance give you a fixed benefit, regardless of how many children you have...

Answer 10

my nutrition regulations are if it could stain a carpet then it remains contained in the kitchen, and no nutrition in there rooms.. And thats because of the fact I dont want to ought to constanly examine for dishes and so on upstairs contained in the rooms.. yet while they want to munch on there snacks mutually as sitting contained in the front room I dont have a situation with that.. I have been given a sprint hand-held vac that sucks up each little thing. I dont incredibly have any incredibly strict regulations. My young ones are 8 and 3 so incredibly its in simple terms greater of a time table( like hygiene, situations to comb tooth and bath time and so on).. education is significant for my 8 twelve months previous so of course she has to get her homework carried out yet Im extremely fortunate along with her, she likes to examine and study so thats on no account a controversy.. i assume the extreme subjects will come while there older and coping with curfews and such..