government freeloading sister in law

[Anonymous]

Of course not. Many become homeless when the safety net is taken away. Or they double or triple up with family members or go back to their abusive partners, etc. Not a pretty picture. Federal law mandates a 5 year lifetime limit on TANF -- in addition to a number of strict work requirements. I used to represent women who were kicked off of the rolls at administrative hearings -- the system doesn't mess around -- no one is allowed to freeload b/c caseworkers are closely monitoring you just waiting for you to mess up so you can be kicked off the rolls (and it isn't easy to get back on -- even if they kicked you off in error).

[Anonymous]

That is good to know. I'm glad to hear if you can't get it together after 5 years, you can fend for yourself like the rest of us. If I were the ruler, they would have a lifetime benefit of 1yr.

[Anonymous]

I am the poster with the sister in law who has been getting hand outs since she was 19. No she hasn't been getting welfare/food stamps for 15 years straight but she goes on and off the system. Different kids by different men, different husbands, different addresses, different names. This is not in the area, she is out of state but she is definitely has been getting assistance for the kids for at least the last 8-9 years straight and none are disabled. Previous husband held a job and they were doing a little better for about 3 years but still getting assistance through her/his parents and churches.

I used to believe in being compassionate and helping her out. You know it get tiring after a while. I've seen this behavior for over 15 years now. Don't you think at this point she should help herself? Heat got turned off in early December because it hadn't been paid in 4 months. Cried to her parents who said maybe you should go to a shelter. She found a church to pay it. I know it sounds harsh but it is highly infuriating when someone is so irresponsible. Everyone in the family is finally getting tired of the drama and the handouts.

I said she had a part-time job. Check comes in, a responsible person would pay rent, pay gas/water, etc. not buy video game system, gym membership????, using food stamps to buy pork tenderloins, filet mignon.

The family has given her all the compassion in the world, good advice, paid counseling and schooling and she just doesn't care. I've barely scratched the surface on the craziness that is her world. You wouldn't believe some of the stunts she has pulled over the years but somehow someone is always there to bail her out.

Face it there are people who play the system. Unfortunately I know it's not just my SIL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of course not. Many become homeless when the safety net is taken away. Or they double or triple up with family members or go back to their abusive partners, etc. Not a pretty picture. Federal law mandates a 5 year lifetime limit on TANF -- in addition to a number of strict work requirements. I used to represent women who were kicked off of the rolls at administrative hearings -- the system doesn't mess around -- no one is allowed to freeload b/c caseworkers are closely monitoring you just waiting for you to mess up so you can be kicked off the rolls (and it isn't easy to get back on -- even if they kicked you off in error).

Are some of these people mentally ill or have small children they cannot afford to put in daycare and that is why they become homeless or move in with family or abusers?

[Anonymous]

"Are some of these people mentally ill or have small children they cannot afford to put in daycare and that is why they become homeless or move in with family or abusers?"

Oy vey. People become homeless for many reasons. The primary reason -- and the bottom line -- is extreme poverty. To the person who commented about folks being able to get their act together in 5 years (or even 1): that simply isn't realistic. Generally speaking, the folks receiving public assistance aren't as equipped to fend for themselves as the average DCUM poster. We're talking about people who are not well educated (to wit: it is very possible to graduate from the DC or Baltimore school systems functionally illiterate); who did not grow up in stable homes; who live in abject poverty; who have either witnessed or born the brunt of violence, etc. While it would be difficult for me to pick myself up by the bootstraps and get my act together if I ever FILL IN THE BLANK (lost my job, lost my spouse, suffered a serious illness or developed a chronic illness, lost my house, etc.), I could probably do it in relatively short order b/c of my advanced education, long-term work history, and the safety net provided by my friends and family. People living in poverty aren't so fortunate -- they literally have nothing. How quickly could you pull it all together and support yourself and kids if you are starting with NOTHING??? FWIW, TANF benefits don't even begin to cover the most essential living costs. And childcare isn't a given -- it's something you have to fight for -- and hope that vouchers are available -- and that someone will accept your voucher -- and that their hours will coincide with your crummy minimum wage job that may entail overnight shifts. Trust me, I'm a big believer in personal responsibility -- so much so that my friends and colleagues tease me that I'm becoming a conservative (I'm not). But having focused on poverty law and advocacy since the late 1990s, I realize that we aren't dealing with a level playing field -- and the folks struggling to survive are dealing with a plight that we can't even begin to imagine.

And to the poster about her sister receiving benefits forever: there is no way that SHE is receiving TANF for longer than 5 years. Period. This is governed by federal law which trumps state law. Her kids are probably eligible for health coverage and the family may be eligible for foodstamps and housing assistance (which is hard to come by) -- and the bottom line is that it is SAD. It's sad that children are growing up in such an environment. And FWIW, families can't get by on foodstamps -- the reality is that someone is going hungry in that family. And that is SAD. If my sister was struggling and her kids were growing up in a less than ideal situation I would do whatever I could to HELP THEM -- not JUDGE them -- HELP THEM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't get it
A young delighted mother who believes she will get by
What is so wrong with that.
You do not have children. Let the pregnant mommies dream and do a little shopping. She will need what she buys. Babies go thru a lot of clothes

So now getting pregnant is a free pass for everyone to approve of your behavior, no matter how reckless?

And now being disgusted with this is proof that you don't have children?

When did that happen, and why didn't I get the memo?

What is "so wrong" with that is that (a) this clearly irresponsible woman is going to be a parent and primary role model to another human being; and (b) she is using funds designed for necessities in order to buy frivolous things. When she earns money, she can shop like that. Right now she needs to learn how to save money for food.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Are some of these people mentally ill or have small children they cannot afford to put in daycare and that is why they become homeless or move in with family or abusers?"

Oy vey. People become homeless for many reasons. The primary reason -- and the bottom line -- is extreme poverty. To the person who commented about folks being able to get their act together in 5 years (or even 1): that simply isn't realistic. Generally speaking, the folks receiving public assistance aren't as equipped to fend for themselves as the average DCUM poster. We're talking about people who are not well educated (to wit: it is very possible to graduate from the DC or Baltimore school systems functionally illiterate); who did not grow up in stable homes; who live in abject poverty; who have either witnessed or born the brunt of violence, etc. While it would be difficult for me to pick myself up by the bootstraps and get my act together if I ever FILL IN THE BLANK (lost my job, lost my spouse, suffered a serious illness or developed a chronic illness, lost my house, etc.), I could probably do it in relatively short order b/c of my advanced education, long-term work history, and the safety net provided by my friends and family. People living in poverty aren't so fortunate -- they literally have nothing. How quickly could you pull it all together and support yourself and kids if you are starting with NOTHING??? FWIW, TANF benefits don't even begin to cover the most essential living costs. And childcare isn't a given -- it's something you have to fight for -- and hope that vouchers are available -- and that someone will accept your voucher -- and that their hours will coincide with your crummy minimum wage job that may entail overnight shifts. Trust me, I'm a big believer in personal responsibility -- so much so that my friends and colleagues tease me that I'm becoming a conservative (I'm not). But having focused on poverty law and advocacy since the late 1990s, I realize that we aren't dealing with a level playing field -- and the folks struggling to survive are dealing with a plight that we can't even begin to imagine.

And to the poster about her sister receiving benefits forever: there is no way that SHE is receiving TANF for longer than 5 years. Period. This is governed by federal law which trumps state law. Her kids are probably eligible for health coverage and the family may be eligible for foodstamps and housing assistance (which is hard to come by) -- and the bottom line is that it is SAD. It's sad that children are growing up in such an environment. And FWIW, families can't get by on foodstamps -- the reality is that someone is going hungry in that family. And that is SAD. If my sister was struggling and her kids were growing up in a less than ideal situation I would do whatever I could to HELP THEM -- not JUDGE them -- HELP THEM.

You're absolutely right. Unfortunately, you're not going to convince any of the people on this forum who are quite sure they're above everyone else...especially the poor among us. One component of the problem is that most humans, at some point, lose their capability for true empathy. Sure, they can empathize with the hard working dad who loses his job, but they can't empathize with someone who is drowning in the system.

and yes, other posters, I think people game the system. But you have to face up to the unpleasant reality that is out there for many of them. They cannot get ahead so some stop trying (if they were ever motivated to try in the first place).

The transition from AFDC to TANF was a revolting thing to see. Poster above, I was interning for a Senator during the time of this transition and then worked at AARP's public policy department right after the transition. The transition put a tremendous strain on grandparents raising grandchildren. They, too, lost assistance -- even at 70 years old they were given a few years (I thought I remembered it being 2) and then told to go to work, the "free ride" is over. And there was a huge flaw in the welfare to work program -- no universal childcare. So who takes care of the kids when mom is forced back into work?

For those of you who think the moms deserve to suffer...well.....I don't agree but let's say "okay" on that. Don't you think there should be some safety net to protect the children? So that they won't, in 15 years, simply emulate the lifestyle they've grown up with? No?

If you can't agree to that, then somewhere along the line you've lost your humanity.

PP, I guess I can understand why you tried to change some minds -- I vowed not to try to do the same and there I went. We're shouting into the wind, though...

[Anonymous]

PP (13:41, 13:58 and 14:30), thanks for the information. I think sometimes it's hard to really know what others go through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And to the poster about her sister receiving benefits forever: there is no way that SHE is receiving TANF for longer than 5 years. Period. This is governed by federal law which trumps state law. Her kids are probably eligible for health coverage and the family may be eligible for foodstamps and housing assistance (which is hard to come by) -- and the bottom line is that it is SAD. It's sad that children are growing up in such an environment. And FWIW, families can't get by on foodstamps -- the reality is that someone is going hungry in that family. And that is SAD. If my sister was struggling and her kids were growing up in a less than ideal situation I would do whatever I could to HELP THEM -- not JUDGE them -- HELP THEM.

Apparently you have got it backwards, the state CAN trump the feds as long as they are willing to pay for it or the feds allow them:

From the US Dept. of Health and Human Services:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/opa/fact_sheets/tanf_factsheet.html

"Five-Year Time Limit:

Families with an adult who has received federally funded assistance for a total of five years (or less at state option) are not eligible for cash aid under the TANF program.
States may extend assistance beyond 60 months to not more than 20 percent of their caseload. They may also elect to provide assistance to families beyond 60 months using state-only funds or Social Services Block Grants. "

[Anonymous]

OP - I'm a little confused by the post.

First, does your SIL qualify for all the "free" perks? There are certain thresholds - even something as alimony from the baby's father can "reduce" the number of free things.

Does your SIL know that WIC allowances only allow for certain products and only of a certain amount. I hope she knows that she won't be eating filet mignons for dinner - more like generic macaroni and cheese with a slice of bread lathered in generic peanut butter.

I think your SIL needs a reality check and that there are certainly strings attached to all the "free" things from the government.

[Anonymous]

Families with an adult who has received federally funded assistance for a total of five years (or less at state option) are not eligible for cash aid under the TANF program.
States may extend assistance beyond 60 months to not more than 20 percent of their caseload. They may also elect to provide assistance to families beyond 60 months using state-only funds or Social Services Block Grants. "

Yes, in theory. The REALITY is that states are strapped for cash and eager to kick folks off the rolls. Trust me, no one is riding the welfare gravy train anymore. There aren't any welfare queens bilking the system. The money simply isn't there. If you don't believe me, go stand out in front of your local DSS and talk to folks. I did this for two years in some of the worst neighborhoods in Baltimore City (legal outreach to recipients in need of an attorney) -- it's heartbreaking. Please don't judge others -- you simply have no clue what life is like for these folks. Be grateful for everything you have.

[Anonymous]

Totally see why OP is pissed. And SIL is naive as to how much help she thinks she is going to get from the government.

As to other folks condemning the meager support the government gives, be aware that before SIL went to the gov for handouts, she had a family that enabled her. How is the government going to teach her what her family wouldn't?

Probably not unlike those people who are taking our federal bailout money after they developed faulty mortgage investment vehicles out of pure greed. Their bailout is hurting taxpayers much more than SIL's.

[Anonymous]

"As to other folks condemning the meager support the government gives, be aware that before SIL went to the gov for handouts, she had a family that enabled her. How is the government going to teach her what her family wouldn't?"

Good point. Where did the SIL learn this behavior?

[Anonymous]

So true. Some people who are raised in an environment where expectations are low have a hard time doing more than is minimally required.

[Anonymous]

There's a "government freeloader" gene on the husband's side of the family. It will be passed on to the OP's kids.