Duggars and Welfare

[MandyLaLa]

I know the Duggars don't get welfare, I just want to know when whether someone is on assistance not became the litmus test for being good parents? I hate how so many in this country assume and fervently believe being on assistance means your a horrible low life scumbag.

 

As a side note does anyone know any large ATI families that are on assistance?

[lilwriter85]

I know the Duggars don't get welfare, I just want to know when whether someone is on assistance not became the litmus test for being good parents? I hate how so many in this country assume and fervently believe being on assistance means your a horrible low life scumbag.

As a side note does anyone know any large ATI families that are on assistance?

I hate that assumption too. I know a few families who were on assistance during really rough times. I haven't heard or read about any ATI families who've been on assistance. There are a couple of fundie bloggers that I know of that were on assistance in the past, but I can't remember if they are ATI.

The Duggars and Bateses annoy me with their whole attitudes about being debt free and not being on government assistance. Both families aren't any better than people on welfare. The Duggars and Bateses have taken food and clothing donations in the past from people in their towns and the Duggars used to get assistance from the church they attended a long time ago.

[JesusFightClub]

It really pisses me off, that "Ooh, but they aren't on WELFARE" that pro Duggar people come out with. The Duggars had faaaaar more kids than they are inclined to raise properly, hold utterly mental beliefs, have dragged said kids round as a freakshow for years, used a miscarriage as a publicity stunt and are in all ways a bad example. But that's all OK because they aren't on welfare. Gah!

In my experience, Americans are far worse for this than Brits. Although there's a stigma here, it seems to be far greater in the US. People I've told online about being on the dole get quite angry and indignant - they ask if I am not ashamed of myself, demand to know details of my spending, etc. Generally people who react like that are American.

[Lillybee]

Quite a few FLDS families are collecting welfare.

[gilora]

ATI is expensive and most likely ATI folks wouldn't meet the income criteria for welfare.

Edited for typo.

[JenniferJuniper]

I can't imagine a family like the Bates isn't getting food stamps at a minimum.

And assuming TLC didn't pick up the bill, state Medicaid probably is paying for their latest baby's week long stay in the NICU. They prouldy have no private health insurance and I can only imagine what that bill will look like.

[jesssnerch]

No one ever mentions that if they keep having premature babies, odds are one is going to have something permanently wrong with it. That means it is eligible for Social Security Disability money. Which is taking money from the government. Not really different from welfare.

[FundiesInMyFamily]

As a side note does anyone know any large ATI families that are on assistance?

My stepsister and her tribe (9 kids) get food stamps, and each time she gets knocked up she gets on medicade so the state of Texas can pay for her pregnancy and birth. They are quiverfullers but I'm not sure who they affiliate with - ATI, Vision forum, ect.

Her asshole headship makes about $60,000 a year, so with 3-4 kids they'd have a decent living. Before he went to school and got a better job, they had 7 kids + them living in a 3 bedroom trailer out in the sticks.

[genericJname]

I don't get the moral distinction between public/ private forms of assistance. I guess their thought process is that getting help from church or individuals is more voluntary, while help from the evil government involves "stealing" money from other people. Either way, you are in a situation where your "hard work" alone is not enough to sustain your family and someone else in society is giving you a hand.

[FarmWife]

I know quite a few ATI families with Medicaid, but none that would take CHIP/Food Stamps.

[fencesitter]

I think the diiference between Welfare and private charities is - Welfare is funded by taxes that are required to be paid (i.e.: money taxpayers are forced to give) and private charities are funded by WILLING donators. (there are some exceptions and some charities receive state/national funds). And that's why some people take that stance... "If I am not paying for it, I don't care..."

[mrs]

I'm not a "big government liberal" but I really support food stamps and welfare. I really wish Emily and DNA would opted to receive aid. Its depressing thinking about it.

[Shoobydoo]

In my experience, Americans are far worse for this than Brits. Although there's a stigma here, it seems to be far greater in the US. People I've told online about being on the dole get quite angry and indignant - they ask if I am not ashamed of myself, demand to know details of my spending, etc. Generally people who react like that are American.

Are you serious?! I can't imagine being that rude, especially to a stranger.What they hell is wrong with them that they think they can judge someone like that? I'll kick em in the pants. :x I'm sorry you got that kind of treatment from anyone.

[3 is enough]

I can't imagine a family like the Bates isn't getting food stamps at a minimum.

Actually, on more than one occasion, Gil has proudly stated that his family does qualify for food stamps, but that they would not take government assistance.

However, depending on his son to pick up the slack, accepting gifts and donations from admirers, taking his kids to the ER for medical care, and using a free Christian clinic for pre-natal care (multiple times!) is just fine. And you know, bringing a plate of cookies to the staff at the clinic more than makes up for thousands of dollars of free care. :P

[freejoytoo]

I don't understand how not receiving welfare makes the Duggars good people or better than others. It is the lamest reason to defend them - never mind that the older children raise the younger ones, are aged eighteen and over and haven't moved out/gone to university/got a job, all live in one room and most definitely have emotional issues - they don't sponge of the state so surely they're free from criticism!

[valsa]

I think the diiference between Welfare and private charities is - Welfare is funded by taxes that are required to be paid (i.e.: money taxpayers are forced to give) and private charities are funded by WILLING donators. (there are some exceptions and some charities receive state/national funds). And that's why some people take that stance... "If I am not paying for it, I don't care..."

And yet, I don't see them only driving on private roads and only using hospitals funded solely by private payers.

It's almost as if it's okay to use things that tax money pays for, provided it's for the common good. And I can't think of anything that serves the common good of our society better than not letting children and people going through hard times starve.

[emmiedahl]

Social welfare aside, I think it is better for society to invest heavily in people and to make investments that will pay off. I read a study once that for every dollar spent on preschool programs, we save X amount in prisons later. I cannot believe we still bicker about whether we need more preschool funding. It's not just a socially conscious decision, but a financially conscious one. A lot of welfare programs are like that.

The Duggars *do* receive government funds, albeit not in the form of a check. They probably pay almost nothing in taxes and even receive some back. Their preemie was cared for in a hospital funded by taxpayers, the treatments were ones developed in state-funded research. They drive on roads, they enjoy police and fire protection and protection from criminals. Society IS investing in the Duggar children. I won't even go into all the resources they use, the environmental toll of supporting a family that cannot be bothered to wash a dish. But what will we get back? None of them will ever do anything important or prosocial, at least not if their parents have anything to do with it. They'll sell cars and manage investments and basically contribute nothing to anyone. They'll always be the takers. Their way of life is not sustainable by any measure.

[lilwriter85]

I don't understand how not receiving welfare makes the Duggars good people or better than others. It is the lamest reason to defend them - never mind that the older children raise the younger ones, are aged eighteen and over and haven't moved out/gone to university/got a job, all live in one room and most definitely have emotional issues - they don't sponge of the state so surely they're free from criticism!

I agree it is the lamest defense for the Duggars. I have seen Duggar defenders use that defense way too many times and some of the Duggar defenders either forgot about the charity the Duggars received in the past or they don't know about it. Getting charity from willing donors is different than receiving government help as others have mentioned in this thread. Several QF families are always in need of money because they can't truly afford their family sizes.

In some ways, the Duggars and Bateses are worse than people on welfare. Many people that have been on welfare have got off it and are now working full time jobs and supporting their families. The people that I know that have been on welfare were only on it for a 1-3 years. TThe Bateses are going to be getting charity in different forms for the next 18 years or more depending on if they have more kids after Jeb. Gil and Kelly looked like assholes on Primetime when they talked about Lawson lending them money and buying groceries for them.

[MckSassy]

Well welfare, that's terrible. Most would only accept a love offering.

[ladypuglover]

In my experience, Americans are far worse for this than Brits. Although there's a stigma here, it seems to be far greater in the US. People I've told online about being on the dole get quite angry and indignant - they ask if I am not ashamed of myself, demand to know details of my spending, etc. Generally people who react like that are American.

That happened to me too. I was on food stamps and wic back in the day when you had to tear the food stamps out of a little coupon book. I was standing in line getting both food and wic items and the guy behind me wanted to make small talk. He was so nice and even said how refreshing it was to see that I had only healthy foods for my little guys and wasn't buying junk food or soda. Well when it came time for me to pay and he saw that I was using food stamps he came unglued. He started screaming that I was using his tax dollars to buy my kids fresh fruit and veggies when I could buy canned goods. He was pissed that I was buying things to make homemade bread and cookies instead of generic cookies and how dare I buy my kids good meat when they could just eat canned pasta instead. I mean this guy was foaming at the mouth pissed. I was pregnant with #3 and burst out into tears. The manager of the store came over and yelled at him that I was a very good customer and never fed my kids crap and then made Mr. Angry Pants leave. After that the manager always checked me out and helped me out to my car so that kind of thing would never happen again.

It sucks when people make snap judgements and don't have a clue of what they are judging.

[freejoytoo]

I don't see what's so shameful about getting welfare in the first place. There is so much worse you can do in life than ask for some money from the government. The stereotype of getting it because you are too lazy to work is simply not true, end of. There is certainly stigma of it here in Britain (I have had disapproving looks when I mentioned that I was on benefits before finding work - and we're talking a six week period here as well) but it's like some kind of crime in the states and I don't understand why. People need help sometimes - would they rather see families starve and live in poor conditions? Actually, I don't think the question's rhetorical and it's sad.

[ladypuglover]

I used to go to the food stamp office with a scarf and dark glasses on and made my babies wear a hat and sunglasses too. I just felt so ashamed because even the food stamp people would make us feel like we had no right to be mooching off the system. Nevermind the fact that I was only on it for 2 years and needed it to escape an abusive ex husband. They just saw me as a moocher who refused to work even though I had a job.

[0KidsAndHappy]

I really feel that a lot of the fundie families who claim not to be getting any assistance are simply lying.

I know someone who rants about people on welfare. The rants are usually racist, of course. He isn't in the best shape, but there would be no reason why he can't hold a job ... beyond his laziness. He doesn't work, though. He receives disability because his back hurts. He does yard work, goes out and lives his life, and does things that people I know who are actually disabled cannot do. He doesn't consider himself to be getting any government assistance and is a hardcore Republican who thinks tax dollars shouldn't pay for lazy people who don't work.

It's like all those Tea Party people with the "Get your socialist hands off my Medicare" signs. :roll:

[emmiedahl]

I used to go to the food stamp office with a scarf and dark glasses on and made my babies wear a hat and sunglasses too. I just felt so ashamed because even the food stamp people would make us feel like we had no right to be mooching off the system. Nevermind the fact that I was only on it for 2 years and needed it to escape an abusive ex husband. They just saw me as a moocher who refused to work even though I had a job.

Word. The people at DSHS can be very rude, like you are asking them to donate out of their salary. I've had some really awesome workers also, though. People who moved the heavens to fix system snafus, for example.

I think the social service employees are probably mistreated by many people and also feel a bit helpless because they don't make the decisions. They are just the people who tell you what the computer says and stamp a paper, but I bet they get a lot of abuse.

[snickerz]

I used to lurk on some large family mommy boards (those are FULL of quiverful fundies of varying denominations) and they were all against welfare, but probably 90% of them were on WIC. But WIC was OK because it wasn't welfare. I never could figure out the double-think there.