B
boppaid
Guest
Ohhhhhh!..duh! Thanks!let’s call him richard.![]()
Ohhhhhh!..duh! Thanks!let’s call him richard.![]()
I am not opposed to that. However, with single parents, I would say that if they are going to school, they need help financially, so that they can make ends meet without being gone from their children 60+ hours a week.{/quote]
And they get help.
Remember, I am not theorizing here. I’m talking about real people, who really went through my wife’s CNA instruction and really went on to become LPNs and RNs.
boppaid;2516562:
Of course.If they choose not to go to school, then I agree that they must be either working or actively looking for work to get any sort of welfare.
I know you’re not. I can’t say for sure, though, whether or not those children got enough of their mothers’ attention physically and emotionally.Remember, I am not theorizing here. I’m talking about real people, who really went through my wife’s CNA instruction and really went on to become LPNs and RNs.
If you can’t say it, why allege it?I know you’re not. I can’t say for sure, though, whether or not those children got enough of their mothers’ attention physically and emotionally.
The downside is clearly not enough quality time with a parent, and not having your parent actively involved in your school, activities, and life. BIG downside. Much better to have an involved and active parent than better clothes and “the good things of life”, in my opinion.If you can’t say it, why allege it?
I see kids with better clothes, more of the good things of life, and clearly happier because their mothers got an education. I see kids who have a better chance in life, better goals and values.
Where’s the downside?
Prove it!The downside is clearly not enough quality time with a parent,
Tell me the names of the children who are harmed by their parents going to nursing school.and not having your parent actively involved in your school, activities, and life. BIG downside. Much better to have an involved and active parent than better clothes and “the good things of life”, in my opinion.
Names? Specific harm?Additionally, I can “allege it” because there are only so many hours in a day, right?
Yet you want to thow up smokescreens and claim that these hard-working parents are somehow “hurting” or “neglecting” their children.I’m all for parents going back to school and getting an education. (I’m doing it myself…full time!) BUT, I’m also for the state helping them financially, until they get their degree and are on their feet. This way, they can get better educated, get the “good things of life”, yet not take away from their children in the process.
It seems to me like you’re attacking them – claiming they aren’t giving their chidren enough attention, not being interested in their school activities and so on.I wanted to edit this to add that I am not personally asking for help from the state. I am doing this without help, other than a few grants for tuition. However, I am not a single parent…I am advocating for them.
**Prove it!..Show me that these children don’t have enough time with their parents and are worse off because of it. **
To borrow one of your enlightened responses, "Do you want a study to show the sun comes up in the east? "
Are you truly saying that children don’t need quality time with their parents to be successful and well-adjusted? Are you truly saying that children aren’t better off when their parents are actively involved in their activities, their schooling, and their lives??
vern humphrey;2520071:
them – claiming they aren’t giving their chidren enough attention, not being interested in their school activities and so on.It seems to me like you’re attacking
I’m simply refuting what you said … that they are better off because they have nicer things. I’m saying those things are not as important as a parent’s time and attention. Do you disagree?
I want to add that I am again all for them bettering themselves. I just think that the state should help so that the children aren’t denied time with their parents. … time that is so essential to their well-being. I’m not attacking those mothers you know. I am feeling sorry for their children…sorry that the state cannot help them out more, financially, so that they could be actively involved in their children’s lives & activities.
To borrow one of your enlightened responses, "Do you want a study to show the sun comes up in the east? "vern humphrey;2520071 said:**Prove it!..Show me that these children don’t have enough time with their parents and are worse off because of it. **
No, I want you to show me that these children are siuffering because their hardworking parents are getting an education so they can better support them.
No, I’m saying that your allegation that these children are siuffering because their hardworking parents are getting an education so they can better support them is false.Are you truly saying that children don’t need quality time with their parents to be successful and well-adjusted? Are you truly saying that children aren’t better off when their parents are actively involved in their activities, their schooling, and their lives??
No, I’m saying they are better off in every way – not least because they have the example of hard-working patents who are bettering themselvesI’m simply refuting what you said … that they are better off because they have nicer things.
That’s irrelevant because these children are better off in every way – not least because they have the example of hard-working patents who are bettering themselves.I’m saying those things are not as important as a parent’s time and attention. Do you disagree?
Then why do you attack them and accuse them of neglecting their children?I want to add that I am again all for them bettering themselves.
And yet the children show no signs of their well-being suffering.I just think that the state should help so that the children aren’t denied time with their parents. … time that is so essential to their well-being.
Oh, yes you are attacking their mothers!I’m not attacking those mothers you know.
That’s a figleaf.I am feeling sorry for their children…
And that’s a false accusation – they **are **actively involved in their children’s lives.sorry that the state cannot help them out more, financially, so that they could be actively involved in their children’s lives & activities.
In fact, they are doing something that far too few parents do – setting an example! Inculcating a value system that emphasizes hard work, education and saving.
And you attack them for it!
Note, I “can’t say for sure though”. Um, where are the attackes and allegations? I think you are getting way too worked up over this and reading way too much into it.I know you’re not. I can’t say for sure, though, whether or not those children got enough of their mothers’ attention physically and emotionally.
Then why do you keep suggesting they are somehow neglecting their children?No, Vern, I am not attacking them.
Which is the whole point!!I don’t even know them.
Put your mind at rest – I can assure you from personal knowledge that they are doing a fine job bringing up their children.I am questioning whether there are enough hours in the day for them to work full time, go to school full time, and be actively involved in their childrens’ lives.
Then come out here and meet them. You owe them that before you accuse them of neglecting their children.Again, I am questioning it.
Let’s recap. You don’t know these women, you don’t know their children. But you feel they are somehow neglecting their children? And it’s the state’s fault?I also think that the state should help these women so that they have more time with their children because they ARE taking steps to better their lives. Bravo to them for trying to better themselves! Now, I think the state should help so that they aren’t so overworked (if they are).
Kind of like saying, "I can’t say for sure whether Jones is a child molester, but . . . "You know, I went back and reread the thread to see what “allegations” and “attacks” you are talking about. Here is what I said:
Note, I “can’t say for sure though”. Um, where are the attackes and allegations? I think you are getting way too worked up over this and reading way too much into it.
Kind of like saying, “Show me where I accused them of child molesting. I merely wondered . . .”Show me where I accused them of anything. I merely wondered, because (as I said ) there are only so many hours in a day.
Like everyone else’s week – starts on Sunday and runs through Saturday. They work, take a few classes, cook and keep house, help the kids with homework, go on a picnic or a fishing trip, go to church, and so on.So tell me, what does their typical week look like?
Most recently it was a snide “So tell me, what does their typical week look like?”If you can show me where I accused or attacked, please do and I will be big enough to apologize. I certainly never meant to, and if I came across that way I owe an apology. If you can’t find it, then I would appreciate an apology from you. Please don’t accuse me of something I didn’t do. I was questioning how one does something on so few hours a day and I stand by that. I have the utmost respect for people trying to better themselves. Again, if they cannot stay actively involved in their childrens’ lives (again, note the IF) then the state needs to help.
When do they have classes? What are their work hours? When do they go to sporting events? When do they volunteer at school? When do they sleep? Do they work days? Midnights? Also, I noticed you said “take a few classes”. Do they have a large homework load? Is this full time or part time school?Kind of like saying, “Show me where I accused them of child molesting. I merely wondered . . .”
Like everyone else’s week – starts on Sunday and runs through Saturday. They work, take a few classes, cook and keep house, help the kids with homework, go on a picnic or a fishing trip, go to church, and so on.
This is becoming difficult to debate. There was nothing snide about my question. Why are you trying to read so much into the simplist thing? I really wanted to know. I’m getting the feeling that you don’t want to debate.Most recently it was a snide “So tell me, what does their typical week look like?”
It’s going where you took it:This is becoming difficult to debate. There was nothing snide about my question. Why are you trying to read so much into the simplist thing? I really wanted to know. I’m getting the feeling that you don’t want to debate.
Post 105can’t say for sure, though, whether or not those children got enough of their mothers’ attention physically and emotionally.
I’m simply refuting what you said … that they are better off because they have nicer things. I’m saying those things are not as important as a parent’s time and attention.The downside is clearly not enough quality time with a parent, and not having your parent actively involved in your school, activities, and life. BIG downside. Much better to have an involved and active parent than better clothes and “the good things of life”, in my opinion. ]
Additionally, I can “allege it” because there are only so many hours in a day, right?