Should birth control be mandatory if you are on welfare?
 

I saw a story today on the news about a woman who is on welfare and has 12 kids. She is pregnant with number 13 and says she will be getting pregnant again with number 14 as soon as she can. Her reason is that she has a dream of having twins and says she will keep having kids until she gets pregnant with twins or triplets.

Clearly this is someone who has some mental problems. I was talking about this with some friends today and we all agreed that part of getting welfare should be that you are required to be on birth control. You have to get the implant or the shot. No doctors proof that you are on birth control, no check.

Sound fair?

is she Catholic ?

People already called Obama and the Democrats communist and talk about how evil "big government" is so of course something like forced birth control would just put those criticisms to rest. And even if the neo-con Obama haters would be for something like that, who is paying for this birth control? Certainly not the people so poor they are on welfare. So it's everyone else. And then the neo-con Obama haters would complain about that.

Hell I hate to see people who are on food stamps that smoke. How can you be too poor to feed yourself but have enough money for cigarettes? I also can't stand seeing people on food stamps that buy soda, chips, snack cakes etc etc., and expensive cuts of meat. They need to restrict what you can buy with food stamps.

I am sure.. someone should explain her that having twins is like winning the jackpot.

I have a lot of friends who have babies here just to get a free house. Then after they have one, they have more to get bigger houses. Somebody should stop it

I'm not sure. She isn't married. They didn't talk to her much, it was kind of a short piece. She just said her dream was to have twins or triplets so she would continue to have kids until she realized her dream. When they asked her about being on welfare she said she thought it was fair and she was earning it because being a mom was her job.

some have kids to get bigger houses - some pedal porn

I agree with a lot of that. I have a friend who is a cop so he sees all the lowlifes in his town and he says almost without fail when he goes into a house where he knows they are on welfare and/or food stamps they always smoke, always have beer cans and booze bottles around so you know they drink and they have digital cable.

Another friend of mine used to work in a grocery store for years and there was one family that would come in and buy a bunch of food on food stamps and then load it into their 45K brand new suburban.

The point is if she was then it's against her religion to use birth control. The fact that she may be committing any number of other "sins" doesn't matter. The government can't force you to go against your religion becuse the Constitution says if you believe in baby Jesus you have the right to worship him in as silly and rediculous manner as you wish. Well unless your Mormon then they can force you to stop having more than one wife and marrying 14 year old girls.

But I don't think that it says the taxpayers have to pay for your decided form or worship. she is still free to have as many kids as she wants, as long as she can pay for them herself. By forcing the tax payers to pay for her kids they are forcing everyone else to participate in her religion.

im not sure what circumstance would convince me to agree with govt forced birth control...

there should be some kind of control when it comes to people like this

I can understand that position and in most cases am against the government telling people how to live their lives, but I guess with this one I feel like it is more of a business deal. You are simply saying, if you want our money, you have to follow our rules. You are free to not take the money and do as you please, but if you want us to support you, we call the shots.

So you're saying that if poor people want to eat, they have to promise not to reproduce.

What you are suggesting is a sort of reverse eugenics done under the guise of responsible social policy. No way anything like this will ever be allowed, nor should it.

People who are are poor and need social assistance most likely have a history of making bad decisions. We have to accept that people receiving public aid may use it inappropriately and the fact that they do doesn't mean the system doesn't provide a real benefit.

I would rather live in a country with a wasteful and bloated welfare system than in a country where the government forces a certain segment of the population to not procreate.

Giving up a basic human right in order to save a few tax dollars is a lousy deal.

dunno about forced, but offer an incentive to NOT have oodles of kids. afaik, the more kids you shit out the bigger your checks/aid gets.

I'd gladly pay for their birth control if it meant there were less "walking paychecks" in this country

how many children could a single mom on welfare have, before the govt intervenes and forces birth control on her...?

I have always looked at it like this: sometimes in life shit happens. Sometimes a girl gets pregnant and the guy takes off and she is left caring for the kid on her own and sometimes she needs help. It happens every day all over the world. I feel like a person like that should be given the help they need and even given a chance to better themselves. For example, I think it would better serve society to give that person welfare for 3-4 years, pay for babysitting and food stamps and help this woman get through some sore of college so she can get a good job, support herself and her kid and break the cycle than it would be to just give her a check each month until the kid is 18 years old. Often kids that are from welfare families end up in the system themselves. By investing in them early we can break that cycle. And I think there are a good number of people that would love that chance.

Still, there are, as you say, people who have a history of making bad choices. Maybe making them accountable for their actions and making them act in a responsible manner will help to change that. If you say to someone, "we will help you support your kid and help you get an education and get a job, but in return you can't have any more kids while this is happening." I don't see the big deal. You aren't telling them they can't have ever have more kids. You aren't sterilizing them, you are just telling them right now you can't care for the kid(s) you have, the responsible thing to do is not bring another kid into this world and we are going to make sure that while we are supporting you that you do the responsible thing.

If it were up to me. . .one. Of course it would depend. There are going to be women who have more than one kid when they enter into the system. A good example is a woman I used to work with. She had three kids and was a stay at home mom. Then her husband cheated on her, they divorced and he became a deadbeat dad and refused to work or pay child support. So she went on welfare for about a year and a half. She ended up getting a decent job and eventually got a really good job. But she had more than one kid when she got into the system.

But in my mind if you have one kid and go on welfare, clearly (for whatever reason) you need help caring for that kid so the responsible thing to do is to not have another kid.

Thats why socialism for ants, but not for humans :winkwink:

so what happens if you pop out twins ? you're shit out of luck.
I'm sure there are more than a few that abuse the system but this doesn't mean you have to get it ruined for everyone else.
If you think this is indeed a problem the best preventive method would be better education.

As I said in that same post there will be situations where a woman already has more than one kid when she goes on welfare. In my view if you have one kid when you go on welfare, that is enough. If you already have more than one kid when you go on welfare that is enough.

I understand there could still be abuse. There is nothing from stopping a woman from going on welfare then getting a job for a little while and going off it, getting pregnant and going back on it. No system is perfect, but this would stop many of the people for whom welfare is a career.

But I do agree with the education part. We should be teaching kids about birth control from about 8th grade on. The problem is there are many parts of this country where all they teach is abstinence which means they end up with a lot of pregnant teenagers.

what kind of human right is breeding like dogs and producing kind of tribal family?

while even one child is a big responsibility, how the fuck You will take care of them all with a balanced way?

not just people on welfair, everyone should forced to stop giving birth after 2 children at least.

i can't sacrifice my own rights and freedom due to some stupid freak wants to produce like a factory :mad:

Imho this is a non issue. There are so many sectors where taxpayers money are wasted that having less little fuckers around won't change a thing.

I'm very tempted to pull a Sleazy on you and tag you as an idiot.
You are very narrow minded if you think those "stupid freaks" are in any way affecting your rights or freedoms.
You have the right to shut the fuck up.

welfare needs to be radically changed. instead of being a temporary solution, too many have made it a way of life. you should only be allowed to be on welfare for 6 months after unemployment runs out. after that, you're on your own. that would stop morons like this women from giving birth to a small army.

One thing is for sure there are a ton of ways that tax payer money is wasted. Actual welfare checks only make up a small amount of it, but the other stuff that goes along with it like housing assistance, education, health care and things like that do add up pretty quickly.

:2 cents:

Its clear that it needs some restructuring but I think we could come up with better solutions than the topic at hand.

Absolutely. It gives you one more incentive to get yourself off of it. My first job was at a grocery store. I would say that 3 out of every 4 people who paid in food stamps or WIC used their cash for cigs, beer, star magazine, etc....and then did my personal favorite.....took their stuff out to their brand new car. Oh...and did I mention their gold jewelry?

:2 cents:

Not everyone on welfare is out having babies or trying to get knocked up, they didn't always make bad choices - shit does happen, they don't all have big ticket items because not everyone once had lots of money or acts like they have money.

Some people..... actually need it.

should I be forced to support your family?

You'll need those kids to grow up and enter the porn industry...

ice ice baby

while Les Population means more resources, more food, more water per person, better education,

more population means possible high crime rate, mass poverty, high amount of uneducated people etc.

should i say more?

Last year with My chinese mate and i were talking about China and India comparison, he said even today there is no more limitation to giving birth in China, No one will be wanting to have more then 1-2 kids, because they learned economical way of thinking.

he also said and we both agreed that in sooner then later India's population may grow more then China's population.

actually even population increase in last decade shows that it is not impossible.

***

so i advise You to think twice before You post something next time, that will save You from sounding like a retard :321GFY:321GFY:321GFY

what irritates me is when you read the "Garey is 19 and going to Iraq next month" stories, first thing they usually ALWAYS say, "Gary and Kelly have been trying for months to get pregnant which she now is" then dad gets shipped off to Iraq.

That is terrible parenting from the start. Baby enters world with no father around just liuke welfare moms, they are the same in my eyes. Mommy sits home watching Lifetime collecting check while daddy is playing with guns in Baghdad.

birth control and random drug testing.

ha what a bunch of white trash responses. classic.

I don't know about forced, it would be nice to see it offered for free though. What's the price of providing birth control vs the cost of supporting these children via welfare? Makes sense to me, but will probably never happen as long as we have issues like conservatives who want to teach abstinence as the only form of birth control in schools.

Religious dogma aside it's socially irresponsible to not recognize that the majority of people are going to have sex for reasons other than procreation. As long as there are people in government who feel passionately that providing condoms or even teaching safe sex in schools is promoting sin and moral corruption we will suffer.

in czech republic they sterilized gypsy women after their child birth without their knowledge - huge scandal.