Parents feeding kids

[TexasFreedom]

This is a rant, gotta vent or my head may explode.

What is it with the accepted 'norm' now that parents are no longer responsible for the most basic care of feeding their children?

It seems most schools are going to 'free lunches' for all children. No such thing as free. They don't want some kids to feel 'less' because they are on the free lunch program, so make everyone a loser is the only choice?

They say 'oh, but the kids come to school hungry and can't learn on an empty stomach'. Huh? Isn't that what CPS is for: if parents are abusing their kids (not feeding them), then CPS gets involved.

Maybe if there were a little accountability, mommy would forgo her nail salon appointment or daddy can delay his 28" rims. If they are illegals, great, let's deport them. It's a free country, the parents can do as they choose. But neglecting to feed, cloth, shelter, and protect their children are criminal offenses. And it will lead to even greater evils if we 'give them a pass' on this.

OK, I'm done... for now.

 

[user 6493]

CPA ,,,,,,,,,,, I don't think much of that agency,,,they do more harm than good

 

[Mountain trapper]

You mean parents are supposed to feed their kids? Who knew.....

 

[user 6493]

CHILD PROTECTIVE SERVICES ,,,,,,,,,HURPH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

here is the problem and why I don't have much of an opinion of them other than they suck,,,,,,,,,,

little Johnny your loving son is a bit on the violent side,he likes being a bully and torturing small animals ,,,oh you have caught him a dozen times at this,you can't beat the kids ass for it and teach him that there are consequences for his evil deeds,,,,no CPA will throw you under the jail for this,,,sending him to his room or taking his phone only makes him worse,,,,,,5 or 10 years down the road when he finally runs foul of the law and ends up in jail you are told you failed your child,,,,,,,,,,,,, yeah sure,,,,

now look at all the crap that kids do today and tell me just how good of a job this outfit is not doing

this is a pet peeve of mine and the sad thing is,,,we can not do one damned thing about it

 

[user 6493]

many of you are older and remember that if you crossed the line MOM OR DAD AND MOST LIKELY BOTH WOULD BUST YOUR BUTT FOR IT,,,,,,,,,,,,,those days are long gone ,just look at some of the little turds that are sitting in a jail cell somewhere for some violent crime that at the time they thought would be cool to pull off,,,,,,,,,,

 

[TexasFreedom]

GG,
I'm with you that CPS (or whatever your local version is called) has some real, massive problems. I don't want CPS to take the kids, but I would use them as a leverage to 'encourage' parents to BE parents. To feed their kids, to give them reasonable shelter/clothes/etc. I have no problem with a kid wearing hand-me-downs. I have a problem with the parent when they won't give their kid 3 meals and a roof. I don't care if the parent has to deliver pizzas on a bicycle.

Parents are as much in need of 'time out' as kids. Take away the parents facebook/phone/whatever until they go out & earn what it takes to give fundamental care for the children. GG, as you said the kids are wild and the parents don't/can't/won't discipline them. I suspect that's because the parents are/were spoiled brats as well. The parents need to go hungry for a while as well, give them some motivation to make something of their lives.

I've used this example before. Look at the 3 primary races in the US to see the path we are on. The newest is the Hispanic community. They are having their first generation of kids being raised without a father in the home, and those kids are growing into worthless adults. Next look at the white community. They're on their 2nd generation of kids growing up without a dad in the house. Often you see grandparents raising the kids because the parents are worthless/lost/out-of-the-picture. The previous generation are worthless 20 / 30 / 40 year olds. The new generation are so lost/confused/angry that they're joining Antifa & such. But if you think that is bad, just look at the black community. They're on their 3rd generation of fatherless children. Now they just kill 2/3rds of their babies before they're even born. And most babies that are born are there just to get more welfare, the parent(s) couldn't care less about if they live or die. The previous generation had massive incarceration rates, this generation just kill each other without regard for life.

Each of these communities are following the previous into a downward spiral. I honestly don't know what will be happening with the next generation of blacks, where do you go to be worse than child sacrifice? It's a complete loss of humanity. Will it be an entire generation of MS-13-like culture? Ugh, a thought just hit me. They could move into widespread islam: women and children are property, violence is rampant, and might-is-right. Scary and sad. This isn't a put-down against blacks: whites & Hispanics are only 1-2 generations behind following the exact same pattern.

 

[JackDW]

My pet peeve! I keep hearing on the Corrupt News how there are millions of kids in this country that are going to bed, hungry! HOW?? Where is that billions of dollars going that is given out to prevent this? It does not appear that money will resolve this. What will?

Based upon the past results, giving more money will not fix it. Time to start CUTTING the money and see what happens.

 

[Mountain trapper]

My pet peeve! I keep hearing on the Corrupt News how there are millions of kids in this country that are going to bed, hungry! HOW?? Where is that billions of dollars going that is given out to prevent this? It does not appear that money will resolve this. What will?

Based upon the past results, giving more money will not fix it. Time to start CUTTING the money and see what happens.

Kids are always hungry, just ask them. That's just part of growing up. Hell, I go to bed hungry too sometimes. In fact I'm hungry right now.
So the government's answer is to dump more money at the "problem" to fatten the kids up. That way they can dump billions more later in life on health related issues from the government's program of fattening the kids. What a scam.

 

[DrPrepper1]

Kids are always hungry, just ask them. That's just part of growing up. Hell, I go to bed hungry too sometimes. In fact I'm hungry right now.
So the government's answer is to dump more money at the "problem" to fatten the kids up. That way they can dump billions more later in life on health related issues from the government's program of fattening the kids. What a scam.

At my husband’s job they did a food drive for a local food pantry to feed hungry kids during the summer.
They asked for convenient foods for kids that might be too young to cook on a stove. They asked for instant oatmeal, crackers, pudding, Mac n cheese, fruit cocktail etc... I understand where these items might be convenient, but there isn’t a lot of nutrition in those types of foods.
At my grandsons school (5th grade) they have snack time after lunch. Snack time? For what?
It baffles me. Kids eat breakfast, lunch and have a snack all by 1 pm.
Then he comes home and feels that he is entitled to another snack, then dinner.
I think society is programming people to eat more junk food more often. Little Debbie and other snack food makers must be pushing this. The grocery store isles are filled with non nutritional snack foods.
I wonder how hungry some of these “hungry “ kids are.

 

[TexasFreedom]

My pet peeve! I keep hearing on the Corrupt News how there are millions of kids in this country that are going to bed, hungry! HOW?? Where is that billions of dollars going that is given out to prevent this? It does not appear that money will resolve this. What will?

Based upon the past results, giving more money will not fix it. Time to start CUTTING the money and see what happens.

Just for the record, this "JackDW" is not an alternative login I've created. I've said before I don't do that. But dad-gum, I like how this fellow thinks! It's like he's reading my mind (or my past posts...)

Seriously, though. This would be a great experiment. Take a 'typical' big school district. Cut all gov't funded meals. If a kid wants a meal, he (mom/dad) pays for it. No money? Pack lunch. It worked for me all the way through high school, I didn't have money for the school lunches. If the teacher notices that some kids don't eat, they send a note home to mom/dad & remind them that it is THEIR responsibility to feed their kid and if it continues then CPS will be notified. Run the program for a full year, preferably 2-3 years. Let's see how many parents step up when they HAVE to.

 

[Maverick]

In school when I gone we didn't have cafeterias, we had to eat breakfast at home and pack our launch, I didn't see a cafeteria till I was in high school (new school) in high school most saved the launch money for cigarettes out of the machine in the schools breezeway (how times have changed) In my time in school I never known a kid to go to school hungry (food deprived) I suppose there could have been but no one complained that I recall, something is diffidently wrong today if a child unwillingly leaves the house hungry!

 

[KateMTx]

Wait, parents are actually supposed to RAISE their children and TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for them? That is a ridiculous idea. We can't expect ordinary people to be able to do such things. That's what we have schools and government agencies for. . . right???
In all seriousness, I agree that it is parents' responsibility to feed, care for, raise, and educate their children. Exactly what resources they use or may be made available is another matter. "Free" lunches for children will ultimately be paid for by taxpayers the same way "free" schools are, and that's what everyone needs to understand. Personally, I don't really want my tax dollars spent on that, but neither is it the worst thing they are going towards. Also, for everyone who suggests CPS getting involved as the magic solution, I don't know exactly what you think CPS does or where children go when they are taken away from their parents.

 

[JackDW]

Sorry to disappoint anyone, But I do not know TexasFreedo! I just post my opinion. And I want to point out that what I post is my opinion only and I don't expect anyone to agree with me. I will also warn everyone, I have been known to be wrong before (just ask my wife ).

When I was in High School, I had Free Lunches. Starting in the 9th grade, I started working in the cafeteria and for payment, I received a free lunch. I consider this one of my best HS experiences. It taught me the benefits of hard work. I worked with other cafeteria staff and interfaced with a lot of other students. PLUS, starting in the 9th grade, my parents never had to pay for another school lunch for me. While I was never one of the "IN" guys, I feel I gained a lot of respect and "creed" just from my interaction in the cafeteria. I suspect it would be against some law for the schools to allow students to work in the cafeteria today in exchange of a lunch.

 

[Mountain trapper]

There's a big difference between being hungry and starving. Just look at how fat so many kids are now days. They aren't starving. They're being fed too well in fact. With mostly empty calories, sodas, candy, burritos and energy drinks. Like the little turds need more sugar.

 

[Kevin L]

Wait, parents are actually supposed to RAISE their children and TAKE RESPONSIBILITY for them? That is a ridiculous idea. We can't expect ordinary people to be able to do such things. That's what we have schools and government agencies for. . . right???
In all seriousness, I agree that it is parents' responsibility to feed, care for, raise, and educate their children. Exactly what resources they use or may be made available is another matter. "Free" lunches for children will ultimately be paid for by taxpayers the same way "free" schools are, and that's what everyone needs to understand. Personally, I don't really want my tax dollars spent on that, but neither is it the worst thing they are going towards. Also, for everyone who suggests CPS getting involved as the magic solution, I don't know exactly what you think CPS does or where children go when they are taken away from their parents.

They go into foster care, or--more likely--a string of foster homes.

I have been involved (in my field as a paramedic) in taking kids away from their parents.

As I've said in earlier posts on other threads, I believe that my experience as a paramedic have warped me in certian ways.

I have removed kids from abusive homes where the abuse was disguised as a manifestation of strict religious values.

I've often seen parents beat their children to a bloody pulp because a son confided to his father that he was gay, or other situations where sexual abuse by clergy was covered up by a complicit family because it was for "the good of the community", and so forth.

In my mind, traditional family values don't give people a license to abuse their children.

And so on.

We had contracts with the prison system, and a very, very, very common factor with the vast majority of violent criminals is how they were beaten as children.

I understand that discipline is neccesary, but CPS is there for the parents who can't tell the difference between disciplining a kid and beating a kid.

I better stop now while I'm ahead. I know I'll get backlash (no pun intended), but my opinions come from my experience.

I was emotionally (not physically) abused as a kid, as were my parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents. A reason that I never married and had kids is because I was terrified that they would feel 10% of what I feel toward my family, and I wouldn't be able to live with myself.

 

[KateMTx]

They go into foster care, or--more likely--a string of foster homes.

I have been involved (in my field as a paramedic) in taking kids away from their parents.

As I've said in earlier posts on other threads, I believe that my experience as a paramedic have warped me in certian ways.

I have removed kids from abusive homes where the abuse was disguised as a manifestation of strict religious values.

I've often seen parents beat their children to a bloody pulp because a son confided to his father that he was gay, or other situations where sexual abuse by clergy was covered up by a complicit family because it was for "the good of the community", and so forth.

In my mind, traditional family values don't give people a license to abuse their children.

And so on.

We had contracts with the prison system, and a very, very, very common factor with the vast majority of violent criminals is how they were beaten as children.

I understand that discipline is neccesary, but CPS is there for the parents who can't tell the difference between disciplining a kid and beating a kid.

I better stop now while I'm ahead. I know I'll get backlash (no pun intended), but my opinions come from my experience.

I was emotionally (not physically) abused as a kid, as were my parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents. A reason that I never married and had kids is because I was terrified that they would feel 10% of what I feel toward my family, and I wouldn't be able to live with myself.

I definitely understand why CPS exists and that it can be a lifesaver (literally) for children with horrible parents. In the cases that you mention CPS definitely needed to be involved to remove the children and those "parents" should be shown what it's like to be treated like that. But in other cases where the parents are not being willfully evil or neglectful, I think there are other solutions and resources that can help. The situations that were being discussed that I was referencing were parents who (apparently) may be financially unable to provide lunch for their children to take to school. I was just suggesting that in such a case it may be better to put families in touch resources such as food banks that can help provide food rather than immediately jump to "removing the children from the home."

 

[tmttactical]

Kevin L, if you spend our life wallowing in the sewer, you will develop a sh1ty view point. There is a difference in corporal punishment (spanking) and beatings. Those that can't figure it out, need to go to jail and the kids be removed.

 

[Kevin L]

I definitely understand why CPS exists and that it can be a lifesaver (literally) for children with horrible parents. In the cases that you mention CPS definitely needed to be involved to remove the children and those "parents" should be shown what it's like to be treated like that. But in other cases where the parents are not being willfully evil or neglectful, I think there are other solutions and resources that can help. The situations that were being discussed that I was referencing were parents who (apparently) may be financially unable to provide lunch for their children to take to school. I was just suggesting that in such a case it may be better to put families in touch resources such as food banks that can help provide food rather than immediately jump to "removing the children from the home."

I agree with you.

It's just that we then come full circle to points that I've made in other threads about government help in feeding the poor, as it's been my experience that church soup kitchens (I'm very spiritual, but non-religious.....and I often volunteer in soup kitchens, as I believe in doing my part now that I can't work as a medic anymore since I was injured) and food banks are inadequate for the task.

Other people in other parts of the country may feel differently, so I'm only speaking about my narrow perception of a complicated situation.

Here in South Florida, we have an immensely huge homeless population, as we get crazy people migrating here from other parts of the country, as it's always warm down here. We also have a horrific drug problem, as I worked in "ground zero" of the flakka epidemic, the opiate epidemic, the crack epidemic.....and now I'm hearing whispers about crystal methamphetamine becoming more common.

All of this--in my mind--contributes (either directly, or indirectly) to kids not getting regular meals.

As I've said many times before, I don't have an answer....just the vague, fuzzy, undefined belief that a country as wealthy as ours could be doing a lot better.

 

[Kevin L]

Kevin L, if you spend our life wallowing in the sewer, you will develop a sh1ty view point. There is a difference in corporal punishment (spanking) and beatings. Those that can't figure it out, need to go to jail and the kids be removed.

I agree with you for the mist part....but I have a s---ty viewpoint, LOL?

 

[Dani]

They go into foster care, or--more likely--a string of foster homes.

I have been involved (in my field as a paramedic) in taking kids away from their parents.

As I've said in earlier posts on other threads, I believe that my experience as a paramedic have warped me in certian ways.

I have removed kids from abusive homes where the abuse was disguised as a manifestation of strict religious values.

I've often seen parents beat their children to a bloody pulp because a son confided to his father that he was gay, or other situations where sexual abuse by clergy was covered up by a complicit family because it was for "the good of the community", and so forth.

In my mind, traditional family values don't give people a license to abuse their children.

And so on.

We had contracts with the prison system, and a very, very, very common factor with the vast majority of violent criminals is how they were beaten as children.

I understand that discipline is neccesary, but CPS is there for the parents who can't tell the difference between disciplining a kid and beating a kid.

I better stop now while I'm ahead. I know I'll get backlash (no pun intended), but my opinions come from my experience.

I was emotionally (not physically) abused as a kid, as were my parents, grandparents, and great-grandparents. A reason that I never married and had kids is because I was terrified that they would feel 10% of what I feel toward my family, and I wouldn't be able to live with myself.

Sorry but people who have true traditional family values would never abuse their kids. . . If they do, they never had any in the first place and their family value is only in their mind. . . .

 

[KateMTx]

I agree with you.

It's just that we then come full circle to points that I've made in other threads about government help in feeding the poor, as it's been my experience that church soup kitchens (I'm very spiritual, but non-religious.....and I often volunteer in soup kitchens, as I believe in doing my part now that I can't work as a medic anymore since I was injured) and food banks are inadequate for the task.

Other people in other parts of the country may feel differently, so I'm only speaking about my narrow perception of a complicated situation.

Here in South Florida, we have an immensely huge homeless population, as we get crazy people migrating here from other parts of the country, as it's always warm down here. We also have a horrific drug problem, as I worked in "ground zero" of the flakka epidemic, the opiate epidemic, the crack epidemic.....and now I'm hearing whispers about crystal methamphetamine becoming more common.

All of this--in my mind--contributes (either directly, or indirectly) to kids not getting regular meals.

As I've said many times before, I don't have an answer....just the vague, fuzzy, undefined belief that a country as wealthy as ours could be doing a lot better.

I definitely agree with you on some of those contributing factors. I also think that, strange as it may seem, the very fact that our country is so "wealthy" may contribute to the problems. Our wealth has contributed to entitlement and people have forgotten what it means to work. Our dependence on the system has taken away reliance on self and family. And heaven knows I don't have the answers either, but I will continue to do my part as well to serve those around me and give back to my community.

 

[Kevin L]

I definitely agree with you on some of those contributing factors. I also think that, strange as it may seem, the very fact that our country is so "wealthy" may contribute to the problems. Our wealth has contributed to entitlement and people have forgotten what it means to work. Our dependence on the system has taken away reliance on self and family. And heaven knows I don't have the answers either, but I will continue to do my part as well to serve those around me and give back to my community.

I have to admit that you've given me an intereresting argument.

Has our vast wealth made us spoiled and entitled, thus paradoxically contributing to homelessness and poverty by eroding certian basic values?

It's as good--if not better--than a lot of the other explainations that I've run across.

I can see your points very well.

I need to think about them and get back to you.

 

[TexasFreedom]

Great discussion all.

First, when I said CPS getting involved, I wasn't jumping immediately to child removal. But CPS has the power to get the parent's attention like nobody else. If teachers see kids that are malnourished, they would contact CPS. CPS would visit with the parents, verify the kid's condition, and help educate the parents of the child's nutritional needs and various programs that can help.They can even advise the parents on some budgeting strategies. If the parents then continue to not feed the kids, then they can escalate the situation. Can anyone say that is the wrong path? I get it, far too many parents don't even take responsibility for themselves let alone the kids. But just giving them everything

BTW, Jack, you did not get a 'free lunch'. You worked for it & earned it. It was part of your 'salary'. Nothing wrong with that at all, I wish all kids would do some work & learn some responsibility.

 

[Kevin L]

I have to admit that you've given me an intereresting argument.

Has our vast wealth made us spoiled and entitled, thus paradoxically contributing to homelessness and poverty by eroding certian basic values?

It's as good--if not better--than a lot of the other explainations that I've run across.

I can see your points very well.

I need to think about them and get back to you.

Another relevant issue occurred to me after I wrote this.

Let us suppose that two kids turn 16.

With one kid, the wealthy parents buy him a fancy corvette. Let us suppose that the other kid earned money by shoveling snow, mowing lawns, and a part-time job at the grocery store, and bought his car.

I promise you that in six months, the corvette will look like ka-ka, and the cheap piece of s---t car that the other kid bought with his own money will look much better.

So, we don't appreciate our wealth, and squander it like a spoiled child who doesn't appreciate the new car his parents gave him? Is this part of why we have so many people on welfare when there are jobs out there? Did KateMTX just give me the answers to questions that I've been asking myself for decades?

I'm not being sarcastic, I promise.

 

[JackDW]

I am mixed on the CPS people. In some areas and communities, these people are life savers and really try their best to look out for the welfare of the children and family. In other areas, it is a "power trip". The CPS staff are more concerned about making themselves look good and really don't care about what is best for the children. Seems that the larger the city, the more "corrupt" the CPS staff becomes.

 

[DrPrepper1]

Another relevant issue occurred to me after I wrote this.

Let us suppose that two kids turn 16.

With one kid, the wealthy parents buy him a fancy corvette. Let us suppose that the other kid earned money by shoveling snow, mowing lawns, and a part-time job at the grocery store, and bought his car.

I promise you that in six months, the corvette will look like ka-ka, and the cheap piece of s---t car that the other kid bought with his own money will look much better.

So, we don't appreciate our wealth, and squander it like a spoiled child who doesn't appreciate the new car his parents gave him? Is this part of why we have so many people on welfare when there are jobs out there? Did KateMTX just give me the answers to questions that I've been asking myself for decades?

I'm not being sarcastic, I promise.

I believe that what KateMTX said is what others on here (different threads) have been saying as well. People a while back were raised to work hard, save, and appreciate what they have. In today’s world, we have given so much to our children as (and society has given as well) that it has created a victim like mentality. It has taught people to expect things to be given to them right away instead of working for them. What has been given to them they don’t appreciate. They don’t appreciate it because they haven’t had to work for it.

 

[Kevin L]

I am mixed on the CPS people. In some areas and communities, these people are life savers and really try their best to look out for the welfare of the children and family. In other areas, it is a "power trip". The CPS staff are more concerned about making themselves look good and really don't care about what is best for the children. Seems that the larger the city, the more "corrupt" the CPS staff becomes.

Having worked with CPS on many occasions, I can maybe offer a little clarity about why this situation appears as it does.

Anytime resources are in short supply, people cut corners. That's just the way it is, and I've often done it myself as a medic when working on a mass casualty incident or in the aftermath of a hurricane.

I've gotten the impression that when budgets are allocated, it's often done by geographic area....not by need.....so Albany, New York gets a budget that's similar to New York City, as Albany will complain and get pissed off about being shortchanged in NYC gets more.

So, NYC ends up being underbudgeted.

Without adequate resources, they will then hire people who are substandard, corners get cut, workers are overwhelmed, and the administrators who run the show have to focus on high-profile situations to justify their existence in the endless scrabble for more money that every other department is competing for.

I could be wrong, but this is the impression that I got.