If a woman has to go on welfare in order to keep her baby, should she give the baby up for adoption instead?

PhilM

We have become so miserly as a society... We seem to forget our obligations to our fellow human beings, to lift them up, rather than tear them down. To lend them a hand, rather than smack them with it.

Those of us who have achieved a measure of success have done so because of the things society has offered us (paved roads, public schools, fire departments, police departments, and so on). And yet we prefer to believe that we somehow got where we are all on our own and thus that those who need help are somehow a drain on us, rather than our fellows.

Our government is willing to bail out banks who made lousy loans and preyed on others. But when an individual, a young girl in this case, makes a mistake, we think she should suffer for it.

How have our priorities gotten so screwed up?

(I do not think that you, Problem Child, are saying this. But the anti-welfare movement in our society is very disheartening to me. If a mother wants to keep her child, shouldn't we move heaven and earth to help her and the child?)

LaurieDB

Quite recently there was a question asked as to whether or not poor women should lose their children simply because they are poor. The answers were overwhelmingly, "No."
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AjJtc9Fi0A5HjRX_uz0tRlVq.Bd.;_ylv=3?qid=20080122171832AA8OUtY

Somehow, the minute one adds the word "welfare" to the equation, many people change their tune. Just how did they expect those poor women from the previous question to get by? When we make it sound "Orewellian," as in the previous question, it's not okay for the woman to lose her child.

Anyway, welfare is temporary, and it's set up to be that way. The vast majority of people on welfare do not abuse the system. The amount of money that goes into the welfare system is a drop in the bucket compared to the money that goes into other programs.

People who adopt normally get an adoption tax credit. When we call it a "tax credit" somehow people view it differently. Businesses get "incentives" and bail outs. There is all type of help the government gives in different forms. But, when it's "welfare" there are those who get up in arms.

Have we become a society where we believe that people should be penalized for not having much money? Do we think so little of family that we think families should be torn apart rather than helped in a time of crisis?

Along with welfare payments, recipients can have help to get job training and education to help them get to a place where they no longer need welfare. A family is too important to let a temporary money situation be the cause to break it up.

hispregnantwife!

welfare is for people who genuinly need help and it sounds like she needs it if she loved her baby this would not be an issue

Velken

Keep the baby. My husband is military and we live on just his check. I know alot of people in our situation that technically earn at the poverty line and easily qualify for food stamps, free school lunches, WIC, etc. Welfare is there to help people. As long as you have a plan and don't intend to abuse the system, do what you need to do. Welfare does legitimately help alot of people. I'd hate to hear a woman gave up her baby just because she needed welfare help.

**A*L**

Welfare is intended for exactly that type of purpose. It's people that are okay with living on it indefinitely that need to be straightened out. There is nothing wrong with using the system for a few years to get on your feet.

When I got pregnant with my first, my hubby still had about 18 mo of school (college) left. The job I was working at didn't offer insurance so I utilized the system. Today, he's got an awesome job, I'm a SAHM, baby #2 is on the way and both WIC & Human Services would laugh us right out of their offices.

We used the system but now we are putting back in the system. The way it was intended.

Johnna Riddell

Loving your child is more important than having to get help to support it. A Child is a human being with the need for a mommy and a stable environment... if the best way for you to currently raise your child in such an environment that is what WELFARE is for. for Help. Some peole DO abuse the system, but if you love your child and sincerely need help, welfare is a good option. I mean... it seems that simple to me.

elaeblue

No - it costs way more to have those children in the foster care system than it does to give her welfare.

tara_lawhon

everybody needs help atleast once in a lifetime... its nothing to be ashamed of to be on welfare.... if you need it... i think she should keep her baby.....

sn2bnurse

Ok, so here is where I stand on this issue, but for personal reasons. I had my first child at 18, and my second at 22. Were either one of them planned? NO Did I use protective measures? YES ..... BUT nothing is 100% (well unless you remain abstinant). I started out working as a manager at a department store, and I was supporting my first child and myself. I made pretty decent money, and still consistently struggled. We had nothing at all, and I was literally starving just so I could feed her mouth. When baby two came it was just impossible to survive, and I was not the type to sit on my *** and collect welfare. Soooo...what I did was, chose to collect welfare and then I bettered mylife by going to college. I will be an RN in May, and will never have to re-live that struggle.

So what I am trying to say is that life brings choices and struggles....Collecting welfare is not a horrible thing if you step up and change your life. No one should have to give up their own flesh and blood just because they are poor. There are so many resources out there for low income parents, that there is really no excuse to not change your life for the better for your child. Adoption is a personal option, and no one should be forced or encouraged to do it because they are poor. I hope I made some sence here.

Christop

nope, I met some wonderful people who were both the woman and the baby at one time of their lives. The key being it was a temporary thing. now when you have both parents not working with 5 children, then you can ask this question.

Morgaine

I think, that if she wants to parent, anything that will help keep her and her child together is a great thing. If she needs to go on welfare in order to provide for her child while she finishes school, I think that is more of an ideal situation, then other people who abuse the welfare system.

I do not think unplanned pregnancies are a factor of being responsible or irresponsible. I know of many "responsible adults" who have unplanned pregnancies.

Just because there are people out there willing to take ANY baby (well, any healthy, white newborn), does not mean that anyone should feel pressure to place a child for adoption. If at all possible a child should stay with his/her biological family. It is better for them that way.

teal_eyed_girl

The real question is what? First, if you get pregnant whether you keep the baby or not is not based on whether or not you need welfare. This is a decision based on whether or not the person having the baby feels that they can give this new human being that is coming the rest of their lifetime.
You don't put a child up for adoption based on whether you need welfare everyone needs help sometime whether it be from family, friends, or welfare life is a hard struggle and even those fortunate enough to not have to use welfare go threw more than some can imagine when it comes to raising a child.

whatever

I do not feel that a mom shouldplace her child soley because of finanaces or lack of finances. Since there are many ways our government (ie. welfare, WIC, food stamps) can help low income families then it is the families responsibility to access these funds for help. NO I do not think it is wrong to go on welfare when you need it. I DO think it is wrong to keep having babies so your welfare check grows.

BTW, where does the dad fit into this equation. Perhaps he should get off his behind and pick up another job to help support the baby.......it was not only her "fault".

giftfromgod

Are you trying to suggest that only rich people have the moral right to be parents? It takes two people to make a child not one.

Mandy

No. The costs to the state and federal government are likely more if the baby is in foster care and a preadoptive and adoptive home anyway. Court costs, subsidies, stipends, tax credits etc
If she's going on welfare so she can stay in school then I would say that's more responsible than not

asafegous

a woman works for herself. if she works the same job to support 2, shouldn't welfare be provided for the child? i say she has every right. there is no better solution for a child than its parents.

practicalwizard

no. i think it would be worse for the child and it would cost more.

tish

lol!

i am anxious to read the replies to this..

here's my opinion: the amount of money that we provide to young mothers to keep their babies so that they can finish school pales in comparison to the amount of money we've spent on governmental contractors during this farce of a war in iraq!

i see no problem with it at all.. poverty should NEVER mandate that a person has to give away his/her own flesh and blood. never.

especially when there is NO GUARANTEE that 1) an adoptive couple will be better, or 2) that they will always be together. and with the unemployment rate and divorce rate going the way it is, hell, the amom might find herself, single and waiting in the WIC line.

Barbie V

If she loves her baby then she should not be made to feel that adoption is the only way - no one knows what their future holds and if she does give baby up she may live to regret her action - she should take all the help she can - get her education and keep her baby - love is the most important thing she can give the baby

aml0017

NO!! Welfare is a temporary situation. Once she is out of school and can get a full time job, she has the opportunity to get off of welfare. Sure it was irresponsible of her to get pregnant when she was not fully prepared to raise a child. However, wouldn't it be even more irresponsible to foist the child on an already strained foster care system, or to give the child to someone else who may or may not be a good parent? There are a lot of people walking around today whose births were unplanned or "irresponsible", but our parents hung on and made it through.

Laurel J

Again, there's no "should"--it's her decision.

It's not immoral for a single woman to "use" the welfare system to keep a child. Welfare is FOR single mothers.

Doodlestuff

It is morally wrong to separate a baby from its mother. If that means being on welfare, so be it.

Think about it. Would you put this question to a mom who was married but poor? A widow? Or even a mom whose left her abusive husband? Why is it ok to take the baby of an unmarried woman then?

Nikki

First of all, welfare and adoption are not the same. Welfare is for parents who are in need of help. I only get upset when people abuse the system. If you honestly need to ask this about a choice between welfare and adoption, you should see a professional, not yahoo answers. Having a baby is a bigger commitment then some younger women realize. Best of luck to you.

Mirandamichelle

Welfare is designed to help people get on their feet. It is not morally wrong to take advantage of the system as long as you are not abusing it. Everyone knows that in the world we live in today, not all pregnancies are planned by married couples who can financially afford to raise a child. It sounds like this person has a good head on her shoulder and she plans to finish school in order to better her life and the life of the child. Raising a child alone is a huge undertaking that is hard for adults and married couples. I can't even imagine being a young single mom. However, I am a social worker and know that it can be done. Good luck!

Gaia Raain

This question makes me so sad! Being poor is absolutely NOT a reason to put a child up for adoption!!! There are people on welfare who are excellent parents. Money has nothing to do with parenting ability, period.

Even people who are financially stable can lose everything they have and end up destitute. Should THEY give up their kids, too? I think not.

Growing up adopted (for many) is a far worse fate than growing up poor.

laraby9

There is a difference between adoption and foster care.

That said, no, I don't think she should give up her baby. Welfare is there for people who really need it. I think it's great that we have that available for people who really need it. The whole point of welfare is to help you get on your feet when you're in a bad situation. So it sounds to me like she would fall into this category.

However, if she later on gets comfy on welfare and just stays on it indefinitely, and decides that it's better for the government to just give her checks instead of getting a job, then I would have a *****HUGE****** moral issue with what she was doing.

oscar and Lauren F

A mother's instinct is to always want her child, not matter what it takes. Nothing matters more than the child. If a young woman is willing to be a good mother, go to school, and raise her baby than God bless her. Money does not make a baby happy, love does. Welfare is a good resource, not an embarrasment. There are plenty of ways for the young mother to make it work. To whomever reads this and does not agree with what I said take a look at the people who DO take advantage of the system. Going on welfare to take care of a child is the best reason I can think of to seek the help that is there.

Mom of two

You use welfare if you need to use welfare. The adoption decision should not be based on welfare, it should be motivated out of love for the child and a desire to do what is best for both the birth parents and the child. Trust me, no one is thinking about the morality of welfare at 3am when you are up feeding a crying, hungry baby and have been doing so multiple times a night for several weeks already.

Freckle Face

No no no. That is why welfare is there to help people out in times of need. Money doesn't make you a better parent.

If a woman's only reason is that she currently doesn't have a good income, I would hope she would feel free to use welfare, go to school and college to get a better paying job.

But in the end it would be her personal choice. I can't pretend to know all the factors invovled in placing a child thru adoption. I would hope that all options are presented to her so she could make an informed decision that would best suit her life.

snowwillow20

Absolutely not.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: