Sparkling Adventures in Child Neglect: Vive La France

[Patsy]

Okay, someone in Australia --- NOW can they take her children away? She's abandoned them with a stranger and they are presumably in one place.

There were two cases of children starved to death sentenced just this month (a young teen and twin toddlers) so I really don't think that's a priority.

[August]

Where did the guy from La Hacienda go? Is he in France? Jimmy, Johnny, something like that?

[Annasopinion]

Yep I think it is too...

What to think now?!

At least she can find it in herself to troop off to Europe for a holiday, I'd hate to see her go another year without a holiday...

[Annasopinion]

I'm inclined to think she's still heading to somewhere/someone else. This is just a stop over on the way...

Unless she wants to keep her new baby spawn 'in the family' weirder things have happened.

[Annasopinion]

Actually, having been raised by a mother all too similar to Lauren who embraced fundamentalist Christianity because oddly she could abuse and cajole my father so that she looked like the long-suffering Godly wife, there IS an alternative to teen pregnancy,, tattoos and poor endings for those girls. Those girls have family, family that is stable and sane and has been involved in their lives. That connection CAN make the difference between self destruction as a child grows up, or reaching out to the safety net of that family to fall apart and be embraced, supported and reparented by those relatives.

My suspicion is that the older the girl at the point of Elijah's death, the more likely they will reach out to family instead of self-imploding like their mother. Aisha has strong bongs and relationships with her grandmother and grandfather. She will most likely reach out. Broini is the Golden Child for Lauren and it will be FAR harder for her to break away and thus will likely implode trying to mimic her mother. Calista and Delaney are difficult to tell their future, because it depends upon whether Lauren's family can continue to reach out and help them feel loved and bonded in the coming years, or whether those girls feel they have nothing outside of Lauren and thus feel they must stay within her world to implode.

I honestly think that before 16, Aisha will be done with parenting for Lauren and will run away. I believe she will likely reach out ot her gay grandfather first, who Lauren has deemed as alternative and "authentic" enough now to be acceptable for her family. From there, Aisha may reach out to her grandmother for a mother figure.

I say these because I look at the pattern of children raised by mothers such a Lauren and the influence outside family can have on the situation.

I'm going to agree to disagree with you on this one. IMO Lauren wasn't born a psychopath, she was created into one by her father and possibly, mother. This explains her bouts of serious and genuine depression, when her psycho mind pauses for breath. Her parents, including her lying insincere Missionary Father hauled his family to Africa to Save Souls for Jesus before deciding he was gay and promptly abandoned one lifestyle and all it's intensity, motivation, repercussion and authenticity for another. Not only that, but his new lifestyle makes a complete mockery and lie of his old one, it's a complete flip. Sound familiar?

I don't know what her mother is like, but I know what the Missionary dynamic looks like and I know how intense and involved you have to be to go to Africa to Save Souls so she is involved to a great extent in this lifestyle. For all we know, Lauren is mimicking her parents own relationship, the one she saw growing up. They may have been playing their own psycho game of piety which she repeated with David.

So who are these normal balanced people the children can turn to? Their grandfather? What will he teach them? He may be the very root of Lauren's behaviour. It's interesting that they're so much closer now, now that he is living 'authentically' whatever that means in Lauren's head. He seems to favour him over her mother which I think is interesting.

You think Aicha will be fine, I think she will be another Lauren, she has nowhere else to grow. She is like a sapling in a box, lauren is her only light. If she runs to her Grandfather, he is the same light source. What hope is there? Who does she have access to, to measure normality against, in her life? What is her measuring stick? And if things were as good with Lauren's parents as we assume, then why aren't her children with either of them? Err, why?! There's obviously more to her family dynamic story than anyone reading her blog knows about.

I think her parents are a whole big bag of psycho themselves and Lauren is just the product of that upbringing, I don't think those girls stand a chance.

Whatever her girls turn into, they deserve a loving and stable home environment NOW.

[meep]

At least she can find it in herself to troop off to Europe for a holiday, I'd hate to see her go another year without a holiday...

From what people are saying on here, more like we would hate to see her going another month without a holiday!

[meep]

What does Lauren do that she has the money to just take off to Bali and Europe within a six month period?

This whole thing is like a soap opera!

[ILoveJellybeans]

What does Lauren do that she has the money to just take off to Bali and Europe within a six month period?

This whole thing is like a soap opera!

Shes on welfare, but she spends it all on herself. She doesnt need to put money into paying the rent because she lives in a bus. Living in a bus also means she doesnt spend much on things people with houses have, like electricity, water and heating. She doesnt spend much on her children, they pretty much live in rags and look filthy, and rarely get anything new. She probably spends little on food for the kids as well, and has them pretty much scavenge.

She also mooches off others for free.

All the living costs of her lifestyle are pretty much the cost it takes to run the bus and use the internet.

[So Many Lies]

As per previous comments, resources are stretched to the limit. If the girls are being fed and housed (bussed? trucked? tented?) and are in no immediate danger then they are simply not going to be a priority. And if they are still with Alice then she is not a stranger. She may be a complete fruit loop herself, but they know her and have stayed at her home.

Unless Lauren just parked the bus and wandered off there is nothing that she has done wrong legally and the girls are relatively safe physically. Mentally? Well we all have our opinions on that, but it is not an immediate, urgent situation that would require seizing the girls.

There are sadly many, many cases of awful, shocking, physical and sexual abuse and neglect that have to be prioritized before Lauren's girls. Lauren's girls tick the boxes for basic essential care and no apparent immediate danger. They would be well down the list, which is a sad commentary on both their situation and all the children worse off than them.

For example, I know that girl children from particular cultural groups are in immediate danger of being subjected to female genital mutilation and are on a watch list in case their family tries to take them overseas for the procedure. Ditto, arranged marriages where a girl is taken overseas to be sold off in marriage to some horrible old man.

Agree with you 100%. Also I do not want to see the girls hauled off the foster care or something...even if the parenting is dubious I don't think the State should intervene. Lauren has an extended family anyway and they are reasonably sensible folks. Foster care is terrible, anyway they don't belong there. Lauren isn't pimping his kids out. She left them with a friend. And whatever your beliefs are on shoes/hygiene/diet/ upbringing they don't factor into australian child services. They mainly look at police reports and immediate physical violence. They also look at sex assaults. They are largely non interventionist on trivial matters and prefer to keep families intact. I'm not saying the girls well being is trivial but to the cps, these types of things aren't even a blip on the radar. They are subjective in any case.

I certainly don't want the child services baying for blood. I just want lauren to be sensible and make good choices. By the way there have been many recent deaths in foster care, some foster families are awesome but some are in it for the (paltry) income. it's definitely a last resort.

[meep]

Shes on welfare, but she spends it all on herself. She doesnt need to put money into paying the rent because she lives in a bus. Living in a bus also means she doesnt spend much on things people with houses have, like electricity, water and heating. She doesnt spend much on her children, they pretty much live in rags and look filthy, and rarely get anything new. She probably spends little on food for the kids as well, and has them pretty much scavenge.

She also mooches off others for free.

All the living costs of her lifestyle are pretty much the cost it takes to run the bus and use the internet.

WHAT?!?!?!

So let me get this straight...she uses the welfare money - which should mostly go toward her children - and spends it all so she can go on solo trips around the world? Wow. Just wow.

I knew she was a looney from the few blog posts I read but wow. She's really low.

[church_of_dog]

Shes on welfare, but she spends it all on herself. She doesnt need to put money into paying the rent because she lives in a bus. Living in a bus also means she doesnt spend much on things people with houses have, like electricity, water and heating. She doesnt spend much on her children, they pretty much live in rags and look filthy, and rarely get anything new. She probably spends little on food for the kids as well, and has them pretty much scavenge.

She also mooches off others for free.

All the living costs of her lifestyle are pretty much the cost it takes to run the bus and use the internet.

I can't disagree about any of the above, but as I read through the blog it was clear even back when they were living in their house that they were living a costly lifestyle -- the attitudes of privilege were apparent in her writing all along. Which only makes the talk about the earthy lifestyle seem less authentic, if you ask me.

I do remember her saying, in response to a commenter who challenged her that the children needed a formal education in order to get good jobs, that both she and David, neither with university degrees, had not only had good jobs in fields they enjoyed, but those jobs had been sufficiently remunerative that they could now afford not to work at all. So it sounds like she has some savings, perhaps on top of Australia's benefits programs available to her.

To take any kind of benefits while still holding savings that aren't for the girls' future but instead get used on luxury living, rubs me the wrong way indeed, even if she does qualify legally for them.

[So Many Lies]

Shes on welfare, but she spends it all on herself. She doesnt need to put money into paying the rent because she lives in a bus. Living in a bus also means she doesnt spend much on things people with houses have, like electricity, water and heating. She doesnt spend much on her children, they pretty much live in rags and look filthy, and rarely get anything new. She probably spends little on food for the kids as well, and has them pretty much scavenge.

She also mooches off others for free.

All the living costs of her lifestyle are pretty much the cost it takes to run the bus and use the internet.

I think her welfare income would be slightly less than 3k a month. There are also supplements for having an incarcerated partner, or there used to be. She might spend $150/week on fuel. That's the biggest expense I'm sure.

Then I guess food but yeah the mooching subsidises that.... Oh wait, I meant The New Economy.

[So Many Lies]

I can't disagree about any of the above, but as I read through the blog it was clear even back when they were living in their house that they were living a costly lifestyle -- the attitudes of privilege were apparent in her writing all along. Which only makes the talk about the earthy lifestyle seem less authentic, if you ask me.

I do remember her saying, in response to a commenter who challenged her that the children needed a formal education in order to get good jobs, that both she and David, neither with university degrees, had not only had good jobs in fields they enjoyed, but those jobs had been sufficiently remunerative that they could now afford not to work at all. So it sounds like she has some savings, perhaps on top of Australia's benefits programs available to her.

To take any kind of benefits while still holding savings that aren't for the girls' future but instead get used on luxury living, rubs me the wrong way indeed, even if she does qualify legally for them.

I think David encouraged frugal living at some point and I'm not sure but I think they paid off their house which would have meant they could live pretty well. Tradesmen in australia can earn large amounts. I do think lauren had a kind of snobby attitude but I don't know if that necessarily relates to being loaded per se.

But yes, it rubs me up the wrong way too. All this swanning around using other people's resources with a born to rule attitude does get my blood pressure rising. It is sort of inauthentic in that she eschews trappings like clothing for her kids but has bourgeoise tastes for trips to Paris.

[bubblekitty]

The mooching is straight out of the a missionary upbringing IMO. I now know third generation missionaries who spend their whole lives asking people to give them money so they can travel all over the world talking about Jesus. To be fair some missionaries I've known have actually gotten medical degrees and do useful things within missionary organizations but a lot of them it's just one big ridiculous mooch. Like the family I knew with 5 or 6 kids that have lived all over the world, begging in a different church every sunday for sponsorship, doing PLAYS. Little plays about Jesus. Getting people to pay their rent and bills and all their expenses because their plays about Jesus are so important. I've known MK's who can't hack regular jobs and just fall back into being missionaries in their own heads (ie, not part of an organization) and spend all their time waiting on the Lord to provide while they get about their very important work of talking about Jesus.

Getting other people to pay for your lifestyle which includes international travel is how Lauren grew up.

[So Many Lies]

The mooching is straight out of the a missionary upbringing IMO. I now know third generation missionaries who spend their whole lives asking people to give them money so they can travel all over the world talking about Jesus. To be fair some missionaries I've known have actually gotten medical degrees and do useful things within missionary organizations but a lot of them it's just one big ridiculous mooch. Like the family I knew with 5 or 6 kids that have lived all over the world, begging in a different church every sunday for sponsorship, doing PLAYS. Little plays about Jesus. Getting people to pay their rent and bills and all their expenses because their plays about Jesus are so important. I've known MK's who can't hack regular jobs and just fall back into being missionaries in their own heads (ie, not part of an organization) and spend all their time waiting on the Lord to provide while they get about their very important work of talking about Jesus.

Getting other people to pay for your lifestyle which includes international travel is how Lauren grew up.

Hmmm interesting! So she is working as a kind of missionary to initiate the unauthentic!

[Annasopinion]

Hmmm interesting! So she is working as a kind of missionary to initiate the unauthentic!

Totally! Her upbringing primed her to be the lying earth mama she is today - the current "theme" she has adopted to espouse is irrelevant, it all goes back to her getting something for doing nothing. She's a scheming, manipulative mooch who turns her nose at society...all the while relying on 'society' to live, exist and enjoy. I don't see the "NE" paying for her daughters dental visits, or their vegan food, or their opshop rags, or their ipads, or their internet or their petrol, or their rats, or their her jaunts to Europe for a break.

Interesting. I guess no one in lauren's family actually has a work ethic, they have a mooch ethic.

She is a typical missionary woman - with none of the mission and all of the entitlement to live of others. Use, use, use.

[Annasopinion]

Don't question her, she has DREADS...which cost more and take more upkeep than regular hair if you are caucasian..BUT NO MATTER! DREADS!

[Annasopinion]

I think David encouraged frugal living at some point and I'm not sure but I think they paid off their house which would have meant they could live pretty well. Tradesmen in australia can earn large amounts. I do think lauren had a kind of snobby attitude but I don't know if that necessarily relates to being loaded per se.

But yes, it rubs me up the wrong way too. All this swanning around using other people's resources with a born to rule attitude does get my blood pressure rising. It is sort of inauthentic in that she eschews trappings like clothing for her kids but has bourgeoise tastes for trips to Paris.

YAH! that's out tax payer funded money hard at work there!

[Annasopinion]

Lauren gets tax payer funded money, when she would otherwise have to go out to work again, because she homeschools. So she gets out of returning to the workforce thing that affects all other single mothers. But who checks to make sure the girls can at least count or spell their names? I mean, seriously, they have been on holiday all year and they'll no doubt spend the next 2 weeks on their ipads and playing with rats. It's neglect. What happens when they grow up and might want...gulp...an income? What will they do, count on their fingers?

Before reading Lauren's blog, all the homeschooled children I knew (6 of them, a small sample but still) were home schooled because they were bright and their parents didn't want their potential capped or fine tuned by our 'education system' which is more akin to a state babysitter. Those children are advanced for their age, super advanced with hobbies and interests and pursuits far above their 'years'.

Lauren's children....not so much. So WHAT is the advantage? You know, apart from mooching?

[August]

WHAT?!?!?!

So let me get this straight...she uses the welfare money - which should mostly go toward her children - and spends it all so she can go on solo trips around the world? Wow. Just wow.

I knew she was a looney from the few blog posts I read but wow. She's really low.

She buys very expensive toys for the girls. That drum thing, the slack line, an ipad each, with internet not wifi.

[meep]

She buys very expensive toys for the girls. That drum thing, the slack line, an ipad each, with internet not wifi.

Oh okay, that's so much better, she buys them ipads, but not food or clothes. A+

[bubblekitty]

One of her sister's is a doctor. So the family hasn't all inherited a mooch lifestyle.

I thought the extended parenting payment because of homeschooling didn't exist any longer? At any rate she receives parenting payment until her youngest is 8, if she was parnered with a low income she would receive it until the youngest was 6. Family tax benefit she receives (as do all families below a fairly high figure) automatically as a part of the tax system. If she got a job she would still be getting this, though reduced if she is earning enough.

[So Many Lies]

Lauren gets tax payer funded money, when she would otherwise have to go out to work again, because she homeschools. So she gets out of returning to the workforce thing that affects all other single mothers. But who checks to make sure the girls can at least count or spell their names? I mean, seriously, they have been on holiday all year and they'll no doubt spend the next 2 weeks on their ipads and playing with rats. It's neglect. What happens when they grow up and might want...gulp...an income? What will they do, count on their fingers?

Before reading Lauren's blog, all the homeschooled children I knew (6 of them, a small sample but still) were home schooled because they were bright and their parents didn't want their potential capped or fine tuned by our 'education system' which is more akin to a state babysitter. Those children are advanced for their age, super advanced with hobbies and interests and pursuits far above their 'years'.

Lauren's children....not so much. So WHAT is the advantage? You know, apart from mooching?

Well the usual goal is that as unschoolers they will develop as natural learnersband develop their individual interests. The world is their schoolroom etc. It can be well intentioned...

[Annasopinion]

Well the usual goal is that as unschoolers they will develop as natural learnersband develop their individual interests. The world is their schoolroom etc. It can be well intentioned...

The world is their classroom, the tax payer is their benefactor...

[bubblekitty]

The world is their classroom, the tax payer is their benefactor...

At this point she is saving the taxpayer money. It costs the government 12k a year to have a kid in a state school. If she put them in school she would be getting the exact same family tax benefit and parenting payments as she is now.