Too poor to buy sanitary towels

steddyeddy

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Should the state pick up the medical tab for obese children? What about for lung cancer, diabetes type 2 or other diseases which are in part caused by behaviour.

infogiver

infogiver wrote: »

What kind of help though? Mostly they don't acknowledge that there is a problem with money management, other than the concept that the government doesn't give them enough money, as the TDs are all driving around in gold Mercedes and keep all the money for themselves. So, as others have said, for the most part any attempts to persuade them to change their approach to bills and other commitments fall on deaf ears.
I think that for the most chaotic families who have proved themselves to be totally unresponsive, that a voucher system leaving very little actual cash would very quickly focus minds.

Advice on budgeting, followed by checkups that the child is adequately cared for.

There will, however, be genuine cases. People who are recently unemployed, or disabled, for instance, who have financial contracts that they can't cancel immediately.

What do you suggest should be done in those circumstances?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Idbatterim

It's the problem with our appalling governance. Instead of throwing out a fiver increase in welfare for everyone in the audience. They start sending the money to the schools etc for proper meals and facilities etc instead of into the hands of the legions of wasters here? The nub of the problem is, many of these parents are irresponsible and **** with money. So stop giving them any further increases...

snowflaker

steddyeddy wrote: »

Should the state pick up the medical tab for obese children? What about for lung cancer, diabetes type 2 or other diseases which are in part caused by behaviour.

In the U.K., they do! They do here too by and large

snowflaker

infogiver wrote: »

But who is punishing anyone? Everyone agrees that the immediate crisis at hand should be dealt with promptly, but some of us feel that that crisis is indicative of serious neglect on behalf of the child's parents.

Some are saying there should be no intervention

jimmycrackcorm

Candie wrote: »

There are people who can't spare the money for even the cheapest own brand products in the Western world today. Sometimes it's because they can barely afford to put food on the table - and to some toothpaste is a luxury

I was a kid in the 70's. Toothpaste was a luxury - I didn't get.

up for anything

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

We have care facilities and foster homes for children that have been abused by their parents.

Out of the frying pan....

up for anything

infogiver wrote: »

I think this is a good temporary measure for people who can't manage to spend appropriately. Attending life skills classes should be mandatory

I was taught Irish for 13 years and can barely scrape together a sentence now and I doubt I'm in a minority. Education doesn't always work. Do you really think that parents who prize cigarettes, alcohol, Sky and gambling above their children's welfare are going to respond to life skill classes! Waste of money.

infogiver

up for anything wrote: »

I was taught Irish for 13 years and can barely scrape together a sentence now and I doubt I'm in a minority. Education doesn't always work. Do you really think that parents who prize cigarettes, alcohol, Sky and gambling above their children's welfare are going to respond to life skill classes! Waste of money.

If they were afraid that their kids would be taken into care it might focus the mind

steddyeddy

infogiver wrote: »

If they were afraid that their kids would be taken into care it might focus the mind

You're going into too much detail there.

steddyeddy

snowflaker wrote: »

In the U.K., they do! They do here too by and large

But these are illnesses that are brought about by one's own behaviour. I wonder would some of the anti-state guys on here lile to see an end of state funding for medical intervention. Would they prefer a education programme instead?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Idbatterim

This situation is about the uk. Who's welfare system is far less generous than ours. I think it's outrageous, as in it should be able to afford absolute basics. Why don't other family members help out if a family are struggling? Let them work cash in hand jobs if they are that stuck! I'm past the point of hearing endless excuses from the same wastes! Ironically the left leave them in this limbo to a large extent!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Unpossible

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That sounds a bit grim and extreme*. I do agree that there is financial mismanagement going on and lack of priorities. I wouldn't begrudge someone on welfare having TV, the odd bottle of beer every week, new clothes for the kids etc. Of course I don't want to see the other extreme where hundreds are pissed away every month on massive booze-up sessions, on sky subscriptions, in the bookies, multiple runners for going out (have I hit enough stereotypes yet?) etc.
People can't live like frugal hermits, we all need some little treats or comforts.

*Edit: I mean the no tv, pc, tablet, no alcohol/take away ever, second hand clothes all the time

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Lollipops23

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

The "norm" and mainstream has changed significantly since most of us were kids.

A tv and access to wifi is fairly basic these days, and I wouldn't begrudge anyone on welfare it.

But if you honestly can't afford the basic sanitary ware for (on average) £1-£2 a month....then you need to really look at what you can cut back on. Sky TV doesn't get prioritised over the safety and dignity of your teenage daughter.

Unpossible

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Oh yeah, I mean once you have the food heating etc there is nothing wrong with say a cinema trip or some treat.
Personally it's only now I realise how little we had growing up, we only had branded clothing if some cousin was passing it down, but back then no-body had smartphones etc so it was a little easier.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I'd agree that over-use of technology is not good for a child. Nor do I believe in the "keep up with the Jones" mentality.

Having said that, Internet research is now part and parcel of English, History, and Geography homework at my local school.
The child who has no internet at home is at an immediate disadvantage - and no, there is neither an internet cafe, nor a library within easy reach of the majority of these children, since I live in a rural area.

The other issue I hear commented on very often is the existence of a sky dish, with the accompanying assumption that that means there is also a sky subscription, which is frequently not the case. Freesat does still exist, after all.

Frankly, I think your idea of how those on welfare should live is very harsh, fails to take account of different living circumstances, (recently unemployed, already own a TV, rural vs urban living re: libraries and access to internet cafes, when required, etc.) - and definitely, no offence, out of touch with second level education in Ireland.

infogiver

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'd agree that over-use of technology is not good for a child. Nor do I believe in the "keep up with the Jones" mentality.

Having said that, Internet research is now part and parcel of English, History, and Geography homework at my local school.
The child who has no internet at home is at an immediate disadvantage - and no, there is neither an internet cafe, nor a library within easy reach of the majority of these children, since I live in a rural area.

The other issue I hear commented on very often is the existence of a sky dish, with the accompanying assumption that that means there is also a sky subscription, which is frequently not the case. Freesat does still exist, after all.

Frankly, I think your idea of how those on welfare should live is very harsh, fails to take account of different living circumstances, (recently unemployed, already own a TV, rural vs urban living re: libraries and access to internet cafes, when required, etc.) - and definitely, no offence, out of touch with second level education in Ireland.

So far you have batted away every argument that supports the suggestion that some low income welfare dependent families are reckless with the financial aid that the State provides them with.
I get it. You just don't believe that there's a problem, and if it's a problem then the parents aren't to blame and couldn't and shouldn't be burdened with any responsibility.
They're victims of society.
However you've not put forth any long term solution to the child appearing in school with no sanitary protection, or next week no coat, and the next week nits, and the next week no school books, no shoes, etc.
Can you tell us what you DO think could be done?

mariaalice

infogiver wrote: »

So far you have batted away every argument that supports the suggestion that some low income welfare dependent families are reckless with the financial aid that the State provides them with.
I get it. You just don't believe that there's a problem, and if it's a problem then the parents aren't to blame and couldn't and shouldn't be burdened with any responsibility.
They're victims of society.
However you've not put forth any long term solution to the child appearing in school with no sanitary protection, or next week no coat, and the next week nits, and the next week no school books, no shoes, etc.
Can you tell us what you DO think could be done?

Anyone with any sense knows there is a large degree of dysfunctional behaviour going on, however taking money away from someone had not been shown to cure dysfunctional behaviour.

infogiver

infogiver wrote: »

So far you have batted away every argument that supports the suggestion that some low income welfare dependent families are reckless with the financial aid that the State provides them with.
I get it. You just don't believe that there's a problem, and if it's a problem then the parents aren't to blame and couldn't and shouldn't be burdened with any responsibility.
They're victims of society.
However you've not put forth any long term solution to the child appearing in school with no sanitary protection, or next week no coat, and the next week nits, and the next week no school books, no shoes, etc.
Can you tell us what you DO think could be done?

Actually, I have been trying to make the point that not every parent who can't afford sanitary protection for their child is necessarily reckless.

In fact, I made a point of asking what should be done where someone newly unemployed, or disabled, who has financial contracts that they cannot immediately cancel.

I received no response.

The fact is - some parents are irresponsible, others are very much a victim of circumstance.

This theory that there are never extenuating circumstances is rife on this thread - yet common sense dictates that where a large group of people are involved, there will be exceptions to the norm.

I've suggested vouchers for sanitary protection for girls who need them, together with help with financial planning. Which, by the way, is in itself an admission that some people mismanage money.

What I have not seen is those who would not help these girls admit that there can actually be extenuating circumstances.

Why is that, I wonder?

DanielODonnell

The country is called the United Kingdom JupiterKid not Britain, by that logic I can call your country the free state as an unofficial name.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

DanielODonnell wrote: »

The country is called the United Kingdom JupiterKid not Britain, by that logic I can call your country the free state as an unofficial name.

In fairness many media outlets in the UK refer to it as Britain more often than the United Kingdom. It's Brexit not Ukexit for example. It's just an expression.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Dial Hard

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

Ah, now we're getting to the crux of it. Your experience is the only experience that counts.

Permabear wrote:

This post had been deleted.

I'm about to finish a distance degree in English Literature with DCU which absolutely could not have been done without internet access. You do realise that immersive reading and internet access aren't mutually exclusive properties, right?

Permabear

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

?? I have one child left in second level education. Both she, and her siblings before her, have often been given subjects to research online, for example, news items that they have to write a journalistic piece on, in addition to marketing projects that necessitate researching products, etc.
It's a very long time since English was only about Shakespeare and Poetry in this Country.

Research for History and Geography projects needs no explanation.

For that matter, I've even had some of my children looking for images for Junior Cert needlework, or crafts projects.

Having said that - my Computer remains firmly in the corner of my living room.
There is allowing internet access, and there's the foolishness of assuming young teenagers will automatically use that access wisely.:D

I would agree that children learn more effectively by taking notes by hand - however, a variety of sources to take those notes from is certainly beneficial.

Certainly, in my local school, internet access is assumed to be available to all by the teachers - which leaves parents struggling to afford it, but wanting the best for their children in an unenviable position, as opposed to keeping up with the Jones, tbh.