Sparkling Adventures in Child Neglect: Vive La France

[Annasopinion]

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.

At this point she isn't saving the taxpayer anything, she's simply freeloading the system, given that her children aren't actually getting an education, 12k or otherwise.

[bubblekitty]

If they were in school she would be on the exact same benefits. She may be freeloading off friends but she is not freeloading accepting family tax benefit.

[Blahblah]

If they were in school she would be on the exact same benefits. She may be freeloading off friends but she is not freeloading accepting family tax benefit.

She is freeloading off tax payers because if the kids were being educated (at school or PROPERLY by her) there is at least a chance that one or more of them will be a functional, contributing member of society in the future. Otherwise I can see all for girls growing up with no discernible skills, no ability to earn a living for themselves etc.

As it is, I can see my tax dollars funding the girls for the rest of their lives because of their useless mother's failure to educate them in any meaningful way at all.

[ohnomoe]

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.

Her kids loose though and if Lauren has indoctrinated them into the 'welfare cycle' by purposefully not modelling the value of work and education, chances are they are going to cost the government 4x in welfare payments as adults.

Of course it is overly simplistic and often insulting to talk about people in terms of their cost to the government/tax payer. Still, it really bugs me that parents and kids who are facing a life of welfare usually don't choose to be there but Lauren not only does but also appears to feel righteous about it.

I used to work with 'first in family' kids at a university to support them in finding their way at university. One of the big problems they face is not having the same knowledge and support base that middle class kids get from family and friends who have already been through the system. There are many parents living on welfare who are really struggling to instil a value in work/education in their kids so they can have a better life and doing so without a lot of experience in the workforce or education system to guide them. Meanwhile, Lauren has that capital and just chooses not to share it with her kids because presumably it is more "authentic" to cruise around living in a van with dreads. Blargh.

[Annasopinion]

If they were in school she would be on the exact same benefits. She may be freeloading off friends but she is not freeloading accepting family tax benefit.

She is making all her children incapable of contributing to society. Now, if you think 'stuff society' and everyone is entitled to tax money, then fair enough live how you want to, but if you care for the welfare and future of her children you'd see that this isn't about the yearly 12k, this is about 4 girls who will not be able to work, be employed or engage in further education. Maybe those things don't matter to you, but at least they'll want to be on the internet, doing something with all their unemployed time, so how will they do easy things like read contracts? understand basic laws?

They 12k you imply that they save society will end up costing society 120,000k because they are uneducated and unfit to contribute. To say nothing of the THERAPY and those associated costs each one will need.

[bubblekitty]

Sure not educating your children is wrong, it is terrible. But we don't tie in family tax benefit with how good a parent you are, nor should we.

Lauren is one year out from Elijah's death and losing her partner. Though she may always be loopy at some stage she may find a place and a person that leads her to settle down, and I see parenting burn out contributing to the kids ending up in school. The way she lives now she's not going to find it easy to repartner, she'd either hardly ever see them or they would have to live in a tiny van (or buy a bigger van). She might find some hippie school (plenty of those) and the family falls over themselves to pay the fees they are so glad to have the kids in a stable situation.

At this point I don't see the controlling and cray element as temporary but I do see her living circumstances as temporary, or in transition. I can't see her still, 5 years from now with much bigger kids, criss crossing back and forth australia. You can pretty do anything lifestyle wise when they are so young, once they are all solidly school age and early teens this is going to break down.

[pastaswife]

She still thinks she's ministering. She said on her blog before how she "shares" the story of Elijah to everyone she meets, I figure she sees that of some sort of ministry (she's practically Jesus with dreads, as we all know.)

[So Many Lies]

^ hey yeah. It is rather minister-y! Testimony and all.

[So Many Lies]

I also want to add re schooling, or lack thereof, we won't know how the girls turn out for at least twenty years. Maybe they will be awesome, maybe not. But I had a "good" formal education, tertiary and all but have I set the world on fire? HELL NO.

[ohnomoe]

I'm also wondering if friends or family have paid for this trip. Perhaps David's family helped organise and pay for it to give Lauren a break, maybe hoping that she'll come home more focused on the girls and their future? It seems reasonable except that I can't understand why they wouldn't insist on minding the girls while Lauren is gone.

[bubblekitty]

Maybe she has to go there to discuss stuff/sign stuff with David's brother. I knew he lived overseas at some point, maybe he lives in France now. Maybe the family has paid for it and there's some legal stuff to do. She did say she was dreading September at one point.

[Annasopinion]

She still thinks she's ministering. She said on her blog before how she "shares" the story of Elijah to everyone she meets, I figure she sees that of some sort of ministry (she's practically Jesus with dreads, as we all know.)

She Ministering and I'm Witnessing. My Witness testimony is that she is a fuckingselfishpsycho, AMEN!

[Annasopinion]

Maybe she has to go there to discuss stuff/sign stuff with David's brother. I knew he lived overseas at some point, maybe he lives in France now. Maybe the family has paid for it and there's some legal stuff to do. She did say she was dreading September at one point.

Sure, or maybe she just wants a holiday and doesn't see anything wrong in going overseas whilst her (lets be frank here) unsupervised children are left behind now motherless AND fatherless. This ISN'T a normal family situation where ordinarily I wouldn't bat an eyelid if a mom of 4 went away for a mini break, this is an extraordinary decision from a woman who is all attachment parenting guru....you know, when it suits her.

[Annasopinion]

Maybe she has to go there to discuss stuff/sign stuff with David's brother. I knew he lived overseas at some point, maybe he lives in France now. Maybe the family has paid for it and there's some legal stuff to do. She did say she was dreading September at one point.

There are 4 children on the line here, so it would make sense, wouldn't it, that if this were the case, for the brother to fly to Australia :think: and not the other way around.

[Annasopinion]

I also want to add re schooling, or lack thereof, we won't know how the girls turn out for at least twenty years. Maybe they will be awesome, maybe not. But I had a "good" formal education, tertiary and all but have I set the world on fire? HELL NO.

No we won't know but I will hazard a "guess" and suggest that without any education the options available to them are TINY...not to mention any other battles which they may (or may not, miracles pending) have to work through in their adult life.

Having actually known children-adults of cults, I know that they do not transition into real life. Their lack of education often keeps them within their sect and when they do leave or try to leave they suffer a lot of pain and confusion and confrontation from a world that operates so differently from the way they were taught. It's like they're missing a layer of skin; everything affects them and you CAN'T MAKE UP FOR THAT. The men usually end up in unskilled labour and the women struggle through basic 'further education' or somehow all become SAHM.

It limits them, no one deserves to be raised in a country where, the country's taxes are paying for their keep, yet those children kept by society are unable to contribute to society through education or interaction in the future. Its not the NE keeping Lauren or her children, its OUR economy and those children, through Lauren's choices, are already second class citizens...how is this going to end well?

Ipads and computer games do not constitute an education.

[lilith]

If they were in school she would be on the exact same benefits. She may be freeloading off friends but she is not freeloading accepting family tax benefit.

She is scamming - she must be declaring the home she owns as their primary residence, otherwise centrelink would consider it an asset and it would effect her parenting payment. I very much doubt that she declared the donations that flowed in in the wake of Elijah's death to centrelink and the ATO either.

Also, Davis purposefully closed a very profitable business with the intention to live on benefits. Lauren chose to give up a lucrative career. These were not people without options.

I have nothing against single parents pensions and parenting payments - they fed my kids when I left my ex husband with three kids under four, and I am grateful that I live in a society that provides single parents with enough to live on until their children are of school age. But many many single and low income parents are desperately budgeting every fortnight to stretch that payment to cover food, shelter, bills and education, and to see a privileged couple choose to give up their income and their home and to live on a payment designed for parents with few options is galling.

[lilith]

I also don't believe that Lauren doesn't receive any rent for her home. Why would she pay substantial rates to allow someone to live in her home rent free? I am firmly of the opinion that she receives an undeclared cash payment as rent.

[bubblekitty]

I seriously doubt she receives no rent. She probably just doesn't call it rent, it's the New Economy. And yeah, most likely under the table.

[miffy]

So interesting that the new economy involves centerlink money & cheques from the ATO.

It baffles me the way 'hippies' who supposedly care about the environment fly to Europe. I've never heard of somebody like that getting on the train in HK instead of the second leg of the flight.

[ILoveJellybeans]

I think it is going to take a lot for Lauren's daughters to be able to function in society. Even more than it would take a fundie kid, as at least they are getting an education with the basic stuff in, like reading, writing and math. I doubt they will be employable, theyre basically feral kids who arent getting any schooling at all. Thats not to mention the years of therapy to get over what happened to Elijah that theyve had to keep bottled up all of the years, and teaching on things like how to look after their own health, and how to act in society.

[So Many Lies]

Well the thing about that is Centrelink will deem that she is recieving market value rent even if she isn't. If you have a home that you aren't living in it is automatically classified as an asset and they will assign value if you don't have a lease set up. So it won't matter if the rent is under the table, or you tell them til your blue in the face people are living in it rent-free, they will still deem income. The only way out is if she says she lives there. If so, that is fraud.

[lilith]

Well the thing about that is Centrelink will deem that she is recieving market value rent even if she isn't. If you have a home that you aren't living in it is automatically classified as an asset and they will assign value if you don't have a lease set up. So it won't matter if the rent is under the table, or you tell them til your blue in the face people are living in it rent-free, they will still deem income. The only way out is if she says she lives there. If so, that is fraud.

I would bet money that she lists her home as her residential address for Centrelink purposes.

That's one aspect if Lauren's situation that makes me furious. It's SO SO HARD paying private rental rates on a single parenting payment - the payments are set under the assumption that the receiver is in public or subsidised housing, which is just not the case for many recipients - public housing just isn't available for everyone who qualifies. To think of Lauren owning a lovely home outright and not claiming any income from it while still receiving the full payment makes me want to cry "But it's not FAIR" like a toddler.

[haras1972]

well next stop Iceland. The mystery continues...

[So Many Lies]

So interesting that the new economy involves centerlink money & cheques from the ATO.

It's funny that if there were a schematic diagram of this New Economy all the arrows are going only one way... and that the NE is inextricably tied to the Old Economy.

Iceland! Now come on. I'm getting jealous here!

[Trudestar]

well next stop Iceland. The mystery continues...

What the actual FUCK??!!

I've looked on fb, missed this snippet of info.

This woman pisses me off more and more every day. Yep, I'm jealous too.....