Too poor to buy sanitary towels

Widdershins · 21-03-2017 7:12pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

And some Dutch Mold and a new string vest, I suppose.

21-03-2017 7:14pm

infogiver wrote: »

The parents get children's allowance to buy things like sanitary protection for their daughters. That's what childrens Allowance is for.
So why would they also need to be given free sanitary protection items?
What other essentials that they have already been given money for should they also be given for free?
Where do you draw the line?
Also what do you mean by help with money management or do you just mean give them more money?

I mean exactly what I said. Help with money management. As opposed to going to extremes, and putting children in care...

SEPT 23 1989 · 21-03-2017 7:14pm

Have the poor got so lazy nowadays they can't even be bothered shoplifting for the essentials?

Bubbaclaus · 21-03-2017 7:32pm

snowflaker wrote: »

So it's ok for society to look away, no duty of care to its most vulnerable citizens

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

infogiver · 21-03-2017 8:02pm

snowflaker wrote: »

So it's ok for society to look away, no duty of care to its most vulnerable citizens

Who is looking away? Looking away actually is saying "Of course you couldn't be expected to pay for the tampax and paracetamol out of the children's allowance that was given to you for that very purpose. So here's more money and we'll just ignore your lack of parenting skills and the ensuing neglect until the next crisis erupts ".

infogiver · 21-03-2017 8:05pm

snowflaker wrote: »

Why should the child be punished?

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.

infogiver · 21-03-2017 8:14pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I mean exactly what I said. Help with money management. As opposed to going to extremes, and putting children in care...

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.

Permabear · 21-03-2017 8:28pm

This post has been deleted.

steddyeddy · 21-03-2017 8:36pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Some serious hate dude. Have you thought about examining its source?

steddyeddy · 21-03-2017 8:48pm

hungry hypno toad wrote: »

Check with the parents who are punishing them on that one. Because the state is certainly not punishing them.

An extreme case of child neglect is a result of the parents. In this case it's the job of the state to step in. By your reasoning the state shouldn't because it's the parent responsible. Those who believe that the state shouldn't because the parents are responsible are the ones that need the help.

Can anyone think of a recently discovered historical case where children were punished for the behaviour of their parents?

steddyeddy · 21-03-2017 8:51pm

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.

21-03-2017 9:14pm

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 · 21-03-2017 11:09pm

This post has been deleted.

Idbatterim · 22-03-2017 12:25am

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 · 22-03-2017 1:25am

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 · 22-03-2017 1:27am

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 · 22-03-2017 1:42am

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 · 22-03-2017 6:00am

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 · 22-03-2017 6:08am

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 · 22-03-2017 7:34am

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 · 22-03-2017 7:56am

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 · 22-03-2017 10:34am

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 · 22-03-2017 10:51am

This post has been deleted.

Idbatterim · 22-03-2017 12:19pm

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 · 22-03-2017 2:20pm

This post has been deleted.

Unpossible · 22-03-2017 3:52pm

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 · 22-03-2017 3:59pm

This post has been deleted.

Lollipops23 · 22-03-2017 4:33pm

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 · 22-03-2017 4:40pm

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 · 22-03-2017 5:20pm

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 22-03-2017 5:22pm

This post has been deleted.

22-03-2017 6:55pm

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 · 22-03-2017 8:09pm

[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?

22-03-2017 8:28pm

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.

22-03-2017 8:44pm

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 · 22-03-2017 9:02pm

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 · 22-03-2017 9:19pm

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 · 22-03-2017 9:58pm

This post has been deleted.

Dial Hard · 22-03-2017 10:11pm

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?

22-03-2017 10:19pm

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.

Permabear · 22-03-2017 10:30pm

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 22-03-2017 10:34pm

This post has been deleted.

FizzleSticks · 22-03-2017 10:42pm

This post has been deleted.

infogiver · 22-03-2017 10:59pm

mariaalice wrote: »

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.

But no one is saying that we need to take money away, well not me anyway.
What the state has to stop doing is throwing MORE money at the problem and then running away to hide while hoping that the problem goes away.
It's not working.
A member of the Travelling community, an unemployed father of 5 children was recently in front of a Court in Co. Mayo charged with, amongst other things, threatening a Garda.
Having many previous convictions, the Judge was seriously considering a custodial sentence.
Hoping to elicit some sympathy, the accused implored the judge not to send him down, because he had a holiday booked for the whole family in Disneyland in Florida.
When the judge reacted with dismay to this news, the man further tried to correct the statement by stating that it's "only for a week ".
This is not funny. This mans children think that you can sit at home, never earn a day's pay and still have, what is for most, a once in a lifetime holiday.
You can't think that this is good?

_Whimsical_ · 22-03-2017 10:59pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

I have to say I completely agree with you, I'd even go so far as to say I think children would be better without internet connectivity. Studies have shown that in adults use of the internet has meant we can process information faster but also much more superficially and that we have "outsourced" some memory to the internet, that is rather than make the effort of actively learning and committing to long term memory we give information a quick scan knowing it'll always be online if we need it.
A diet of constant information that's never fully reflected on or integrated through active learning is relatively useless.

Also information on it's own does not create the rounded people we want as our future citizens or the future professionals whose hands we'll place our lives in. You want people who are dynamic in their thinking, influenced by a broad spectrum of sources but also able to think deeply and weigh up a wide range of factors in any decision. A well-developed attention span, the ability to reflect and considered critical evaluation are essential life skills that have to be learned and practiced. The internet just does not promote them. I dread to think what a generation raised on it will be like. I absolutely think books, poetry, even good films would be much healthier for a child's developing mind.

22-03-2017 11:22pm

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

There is more to the English curriculum than the Leaving Cert.

Which is a good thing, imo.

Do you honestly think research skills are not valuable?

Your comment about libraries presupposes that all children have access to libraries. But we both know that is not the case.

As to telling the teacher you don't have Internet access?
I have absolutely no doubt that you would be told that was unfortunate - and the teacher would make a mental note that you had no interest in providing the tools necessary to maximise your child's potential.

Permabear · 22-03-2017 11:24pm

This post has been deleted.

Permabear · 22-03-2017 11:38pm

This post has been deleted.

23-03-2017 12:09am

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Permabear - I'm not questioning your commitment to your children's education.

I'm merely telling you that Internet is considered a necessity by the teachers - and their attitude would be exactly what I said were you to tell them you didn't have internet access. (The English teacher is a witch, tbh - but, that's beside the point.:D)

It matters not a jot whether you or I think Internet is a suitable medium - the fact is - the teachers set the homework - and that homework often requires Internet use.

Permabear · 23-03-2017 12:17am

This post has been deleted.

Too poor to buy sanitary towels

Comments