Comments on: Receive Assistance, Fail Drug Test And Lose Your Kids?

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 20:28:00 +0000

REGARDING:
“But instead of taking from them, you could help them with their addictions. Seeking counseling, helping them to find jobs. Education is an option because some might need a high school diploma. Taking children is not the answer.”

Sometimes taking the children IS the answer. They’re not saying it would always be the answer, but the question should be asked if they have proof the parents are picking drugs over the good of their own children.

Further, if they refuse to finance drug abusers, they aren’t taking away from them, they’re refusing to take away from taxpayers who earn a living, working those jobs which aren’t supposed to be out there. Or perhaps they have more money to help those who actually do need help and won’t blow it on dope.

Still further, if the only way they can get funding from the public is to dry out and abandon drugs, this program might actually help them. That would also help them get jobs from those people who don’t dare hire people who walk around high for work on heavy equipment or to work in potentially dangerous situations.

Finally, yes, education is helpful. Nobody arbitrarily stopped them from earning a high school diploma. They chose to drop out of school or behaved so badly in school that they were ejected for the safety of the other children. Even then, GED is still a way of getting a diploma. If they’re convinced they don’t need an education to earn money because “the government” will give them money, they have been hurt much worse than being denied money for their next fix.

David for real good

By: Citizen of Florida

Citizen of Florida — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 13:36:46 +0000

I mean these people on my comment. Law is arbitrary!

By: Citizen of Florida

Citizen of Florida — Sat, 02 Jul 2011 13:34:57 +0000

Law is so arbitrary! This is one of the worst ideals ever. You only make things worst. How are you helping this people. Some people take care of their children. I agree that some people are abusing the system, and their are some people that really have a drug problem. But instead of taking from them, you could help them with their addictions. Seeking counseling, helping them to find jobs. Education is an option because some might need a high school diploma. Taking children is not the answer. Not only you hurting them, you are hurting the children. First all the world need “Jesus”. We need prayer. Prayer changes things. If you want to do something victorious, get the drug dealers off the street. That’s the only way thats gonna change. Then we wonder why people so much crime. Why?…their no jobs, they require so much experiences and quailifications, etc. We are living in perilious times. We need to wake up! Stop labeling people thats on assisstant!, and help them. Cause if it was that easy to find a job, they wouldn’t be on assisstant would they. In my conclusion, Stop through rocks, and hiding your hands. When you dig one ditch, you better dig two. The trap you set for someone, may be for you. God see all things. If their never been no rain in your life, just wait a while. It’s coming!.

By: Test for all drugs

Test for all drugs — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 21:46:33 +0000

I aggree with this whole-heartedly, but we need to be sure and test for all drugs including ALCOHOL and CIGARETTES which arguably are two of the most dangerous and addictive drugs that are readily available.

Certainly we wouldn’t want kids being neglected by druggy parents who are high on alcohol and nicotene would we?

I think not…

By: David Huie Green

David Huie Green — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 19:07:56 +0000

REGARDING:
“You may ask who is John Bowlby …..probably the most eminent man that ever lived in the field of Attachment and Bonding”

Nope, nobody asking, don’t care other than to wonder how eminent he could be if he wondered if Charles Darwin died of a psychosomatic disease.

More to the point, though, is to wonder why we would worry about someone who dealt with non-drug abandonment problems since a drug test won’t find them. The subject at hand deals with the fact that parents sometimes abandon their children’s welfare to buy recreational drugs for their own pleasures.

This has nothing to do with “Two parents working and “Drugged” on the benefits of all the best things in life” because they aren’t demanding money for themselves to spend on drugs. They may do a poor job as parents but no single law addresses every ill and folks don‘t agree on what constitutes perfect parenting.

Drugs which are needed for medical problems aren’t faulted by the testing. Even those reported are simply reported as possible (likely) evidence of child abuse.

David for holding accountable those who prefer children to drugs

By: jp

jp — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 18:51:48 +0000

Now we compare a cup of tea to hard drugs. There is no way tea stains compare
to drugs that change a persons perception and impare their reaction time to
cituations that need immediate attention. I follow the reasoning that some
parents are not as attentive to their children as they shoud be. Drugs just
complicate an already 24-7 job. If you dull your wits with drugs and alcohol,
you make an almost impossible responsibility a lot toughfer.

By: susan dobbins

susan dobbins — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 17:06:57 +0000

as i agee people do abuse food stamps are abused,however ive always wondered why they could not issue a ck like wic does with household items desperatly needed ,soap tissue shampoo etc to those with no income this would stop alot of sellin for money.the drug issue im against cause some may or may not abuse drugs,taking childing instead of just bennifits are wrong.there are to many children they know about not on assistance being abused that nothings being done.smoking pot like above does not make abuser.and i know from experiance they say theres help for people addicted there isnt .3 days maybe at most .whats next you smoke ciggerretts they take your kids .get to the real issue of child abuse .dont single these out .

By: David Wayne Grayson

David Wayne Grayson — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 03:16:15 +0000

Just because someone uses “Drugs” does not naturally make them a bad parent
The word “Drug” can be used in many varied formats
Two parents working and “Drugged” on the benefits of all the best things in life which they can buy with the money and the children coming home from school in the afternoon with no parent there can be just as much “Abuse” as parents that take Substances as their “Drug”
Read John Bowlby …Attachment and Loss…..The Trilogy and see what Attachment and Bonding is all about
You may ask who is John Bowlby …..probably the most eminent man that ever lived in the field of Attachment and Bonding
I have seen parents that sit and drink cups of tea with friends and ignore the children…..There are many ways “Drugs” can be explained

By: Just Thinking

Just Thinking — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 02:27:19 +0000

These people are going to be treated worst than the crackhead moms in drug court. Noone ever complains about giving them chance after chance. I read the TANF website and I was just thinking if all of these parents who test positive let the grandparents keep their children they can recieve more money per child than the parents so I am so sick of people always putting people down because they are on welfare. I am thinking let grandparents have temp custidy and really get paid alot more since they will get atleast 200-250 per child plus foodstamps. HHMM Mr Scott would love that. someone with 4 kids could prob get 800 a month if not more. Just thinking everyone wants change welfare people could change things in a big way if they wanted.

By: Debbie

Debbie — Thu, 30 Jun 2011 01:10:16 +0000

The children who have druggies as parents are already suffering. Maybe this will be a wake up call for some of these young parents who have not been putting their children ahead of getting high. These innocent children are not getting the food and care that they need when the parents are just interested in their own addictions. Children are being traded for drugs. How bad does it have to be for the taxpayers to stop paying for drug addicts?