Jump to content
GreaseSpot Cafe

CoolWaters

Members
  • Posts

    2,566
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by CoolWaters

  1. I don't exactly disagree with you here, because untreated mental illness can be at the choice of the patient - the patient going against medical advice. Personality disorders would be lumped in with this. Whether it's medication, therapy, or other treatment, if someone is offered treatment and refuses it, you can't do anything about it. That's their right as a patient. But you can without hold aid to them if they refuse to do what it takes to be at a higher level of functioning. I think what is not measured in the doling out of aid is the functioning level of people.

    The real Gods of the health professionals aren't those in the mental health or behavioral health services, but the insurance companies.

    Thank you for this post!

  2. 2 lg cans refried beans 2.00

    4 loaves bread 2.00

    10lbs potatoes 1.99

    2lbs margarine 1.00

    3lbs onions 1.89

    1 dozen eggs 0.79

    5 1lb pkg frozen veggies 4.45

    1 jar low-fat mayo 0.99

    1lb decaf coffee 1.89

    1 lg jar creamer 1.89

    1lb sugar 0.89

    3lbs hamburger 5.67

    1 pkg frozen burritos 2.50

    6 boxes mac n cheese 2.00

    4 cans tuna 2.00

    2 heads lettuce 3.00

    1 bunch cilantro 0.50

    3 tomatoes 2.83

    2 1lb pkgs bologna 1.98

    Give or take $40.00/week depending on sales and what is left over from the week before.

  3. I mean, it costs a lot of money to get to be more than 100 lbs. overweight and to the point where one can't walk, much less keep themselves clean.

    I must take issue with this statement. I know from my own personal experience in life that to buy the food I need to keep healthy costs an average of $95/week. That's just for me. To buy the food that causes obesity and other problems costs an average $40/week. That's for both me and my husband.

  4. The able bodied we can make work

    Those who fraudulently obtain assistance we cut off

    but this category poses tremendous ethical, and moral conundrums

    How do we address those issues is my question.

    To me this is very much like the issue of 'assisted suicide'. If someone is at the point of suicide, can that someone make their own choice about having assistance in committing suicide? Isn't assisting suicide really murder? Suicide is something one does to one's self. Having help is not suicide. Is it?

    After you are an adult you have two choices ---to move forward with your life or not. You are in charge, unless there is a mental defect.
    As to the others -there are hundreds of people --many protected and enabled by family members- who choose to keep drinking, eating, drugging, not follow doctors orders, not take their medications, not make lifestyle changes-- knowing that their actions will be detrimental--

    It is a mental defect to continue damaging one's self. No matter the reason.

  5. NOW back to my earlier question

    What do we do with those who are chronic abusers of drugs etc and health problems who have reached the stage where, because of the abuse of their bodies on the physical front ,will probably never be able to hold a job and in some cases care for themselves but refuse to even attempt to stop their addictions ior bad lifestyle choices?

    To me there is a problem with the question here.

    If someone has made such terrible choices in their lives, there is a reason. Until that reason is addressed, the person will never make better choices.

    But if someone has deteriorated to the point of never being able to hold a job and/or care for themselves, and they continue in their bad choices with no desire to make better choices, therein lies the answer to your question.

    What person of sound mind and body would actively choose to be like this?

  6. Otherwise said woman will soon find herself back in the very spot she apparently is complaining about and have NO ONE to blame but herself

    She isn't complaining. She isn't blaming.

    If what I have posted here makes her look like she is complaining and blaming, then I have done her a great disservice.

    All I was trying to do was respond to Bowtwi's original post by explaining the life of one woman who was in nearly exactly the same situations Bowtwi had described.

    Again, if I have painted her as complaining and blaming, I have done her a great disservice.

    Trust me, she fully understands how she's screwed up her own life. Nobody needs tell her.

  7. And for the record I have tremendous sympathy for the downtrodden, the exhausted, and those persons who have come to the end of their tether for whatever reason. I would be hard pressed not to having been there myself. I got out, I got out with help from friends, Agencies, and God. I got out because I was willing to do the things necessary to change my life for myself.

    A person who is a diabetic

    and eats foods she knows are bad for her

    stays with a man who is exacerbating the problem

    only applies for available assistance at the insistence of others

    IS NOT I repeat IS NOT willing to help herself

    I believe this is exactly what is happening with this woman. She really doesn't want SSD. She doesn't want to leave her husband. She doesn't want anybody to do anything for her except to leave her alone.

    I felt sorry for her once upon a time.

    Now I know that she has most likely made an active choice to give up.

    That is her right. Her husband supports her with his income for which he works. She refuses any assistance from her church, food banks, and such. Nobody but her husband is bearing her burden. Other than her husband, nobody else has any right to say anything about her choices.

    I was just very specific.

    Do you need me to also make the phone calls?

    I think it's all a moot point now, Chas. Her experiences in the shelters were a few months ago. She has been living with her husband since then. As I said above, I think this is the way she wants things to go...surrounded by her family.

  8. Maybe you just do nothing. Maybe you just pray. Maybe you complain about it. Maybe there is nothing that can be done.

    Whatever the answer, it's a personal answer that is not solved by public anything.

    That's been proven over and over and over again.

  9. Shelters, liker any other institution, are subject to the law. ANY shelter which failed to exercise due diligence in dealing with a woman this ill would find themselves shut down, fined and facing not only civil but criminal charges both as an entity and the individuals involved.

    Please find the applicable laws for Kansas and Missouri and post that information here. It would help this woman tremendously and I would be glad to pass the information on to her.

    A shelter on finding themselves housing a woman with this level of illness would NOT be making her eat doughnuts, pasta, and walk the streets.
    Shelters are not obligated to provide for special dietary needs. Again, please post the pertinent laws and I will pass on the information.
    They would be on the phone to local area resources to find her more suitable housing, have her hospitalized in the interim to make sure her blood sugars etc were at acceptable levels and feeding her foods that were acceptable.

    She was sent to the shelter from the hospital...by hospital social workers and her case manager...who are the resources the shelter would turn to. Again, find the pertinent laws and I will pass on the information.

    Clearly CW, the wool has been pulled over your eyes--

    This part of this persons story is a fabrication.

    In your mind. Your knowledge is limited.
    THE only exception to it being a fabrication would be if this woman DELIBERATELY withheld the information that she is ill, Then that would be on HER shoulders.

    As I said, she was placed in the shelter by social workers and her case worker.

    Secondly, a person whose health is so bad that they are facing death CANNOT be denied help[/qutoe]I don't know what world you're living in, but in the real world, people facing imminent death can and are routinely denied assistance.
    IT may mean that guardianship is appointed to handle money so that the funds are appropriately used

    What funds? The woman has no money, no assistance, no income.

    It may mean that a guardianship of the person is declared that in life and death situations can override the persons wishes and have suitable care provided

    It may lead to a declaration of incompetency on one or several levels if it is clear that the person is either physically , or psychologically incapable or uunwillling to make sound health and life decisions

    This was part of what I was hoping for by turning her situation in to the authorities. The response? Bitter laughter and pointing to all the changes in the laws that keep people from being institutionalized for longer than the obligatory 72 hours.
    In short from the facts you have provided with one of two scenarios is in play

    A--this person if not outright fabricating the story is definitely slanting or leaving large holes in the truth

    B- the story is true for the most part except the severity of the illness is being severely exaggerated both in the telling to you and in the persons daily life as she continues to try and garner sympathy and milk the system

    Templelady, I go back to what I've said before: In your mind. Your knowledge is limited.

    Milk the system? Garner sympathy?

    She gets nothing from the system. How is she milking it? She is on her 4th application for SSD. She isn't even trying for herself. Her caseworker is pushing her.

    Sympathy? From whom? You? People here at GSC?

    :jump:

    If anything, if she were to read GSC, she would find that people would want to find fault, place blame, mock, ridicule, call her names, say she is lying and gossip in open forums about personal details of her life than be sympathetic to her.

  10. I have some questions - I'm confused.

    So you’re saying you turned these people in for what?

    Everything I could think of.

    And after you turned them in was there an investigation and they were declared ineligible for any assistance?
    Yes.
    Are you saying that or that there was no investigation, that they people just had to stop using their neighbor’s electricity so now have no electricity at all?

    There was (and may still be) an investigation (see above). How it turned out is a legal situation that is not something the public is privy to.

    You said you couldn’t believe that’s all that was done. What was the that which was done? I’m trying to follow along here.
    From where I stand in this situation, I could not believe that the woman was not helped.
    You’re saying you thought you would help cause an intervention for this woman and now today she’s facing kidney failure as a result of your phone call?

    If she had a home why did she have to spend evenings in a shelter and days not in the shelter?

    If she’s got that severe diabetes, why in the world would she eat donuts and coffee during the day and pasta heavy meals at night?

    Not as a result of my call, but as a result of actions taken or not taken to 'assist' her. I was quite detailed in my post, so maybe you will find your answers by reading it again.

    I’m really lost at the part about it exposure and lack of ability to keep herself clean during the day – why wouldn’t an adult be able to keep themselves clean during the day?
    Bow, think about this. She was out on the streets and unable to walk very far.
    And how would maybe sending her over the edge health-wise be the best thing for her?

    I put in an emoticon to indicate that being a tongue-in-cheek remark.

    So what part about this was good and how do you feel now about your plan and the way it ended up?
    None of it appears to have been good. I wish that instead of trusting that the system would step in, I would have been more helpful as a friend.
    If you had it to do over again would you turn them in?

    No.

    Since she had already brought herself back from near death with no help whatsoever, has she recovered yet from this latest assault – or is she still facing kidney failure?

    She has not recovered.

  11. I couldn't put it any better than FreeAtLast has done.

    Prayers from me.

    I know I've shared this with you before, but I am thinking it might help here. One of the times I was in the hospital with sepsis, I started hallucinating that I was talking to Jesus while He was on the cross. I asked him, "How did you endure the cross?" He responded, "Prayer."

  12. Can you just imagine what it would do if when people applied for public assistance they were first handed a skills checkoff list and second be informed that their benefits would be equivalent to hours worked at minimum wage?

    And what about day care and transportation? Uh...have a daycare center at the public assistance offices...then hire applicants/recipients to staff it. Those applicants/recipients with vehicles would be required to transport x number of applicants/recipients without vehicles.

    Gawd. Somebody wound me up...

    What about clothes? What about hygiene?

    Partner with thrift shops, churches, etc. Partner with the Y. Do something besides make excuses as to why these things can't be done.

  13. It is often a rob Peter to pay Paul thing. If they hired more workers to check out applicants/recipients, the money is still being spent. Probably more.

    The best and most effective programs are those that require a return. As has been brought up, WPA was a great program. It built this nation's highway system, many of the schools, bridges, public buildings etc.

    Is it slavery? NO NO NO NO NO NO!!!!! How does one get slavery out of people being paid to work????? And government benefits work out to be far more than minimum wage jobs with no benefits.

    What I don't get is the complaint that there aren't enough workers in the system. Every time I ever had to ask for public assistance, I volunteered to help them out. Duh! If for every worker that says there isn't enough help that worker were allowed to assign tasks to recipients, then there'd be enough help. Ya know?

    Can you imagine what would happen if those companies that hire illegal immigrants were required to instead hire public assistance recipients?

    I have always, always, always been an advocate of putting people to work who are able to work.

    Why?

    Self-esteem, resume building, networking, cost efficiency, etc.

    It just plain makes sense to me.

    Even if someone is able to work only an hour at a time, that's an hour of help. Ya know?

  14. This discussion may be helped along by some actual facts of the US Budget 2007.

    The alcoholic and/or druggie who refuses treatment and refuse to quit

    Are we obligated as a society to help this individual indefinitely??

    If the discussion is about 'government' money, the availability of assistance based solely upon an addiction has been slowly reduced to where, in many states, getting any state assistance is next to impossible...based solely upon an addiction...and getting SSI/SSD is no longer available...based solely upon an addiction. Government spending in this area is one thing we, the people, can do something about...because the politicians like smokescreen issues when other issues are too hot to handle, so if it's government spending
    in this area
    that's bugging someone, the next 2 years (until after the Presidential election) are favorable for presenting concerns...and an election year is the hottest iron to strike for any issue to be presented to politicians. Strike often and strike with as much citizen force behind the blow as possible.

    If the discussion is about private money...churches, organizations, businesses, etc....there are many ways to address concerns. Volunteer to sit on the boards of any agencies, organizations, etc. that one feels is enabling and not helping. If volunteering is not an option, then one can write letters to the board members, request time to speak at any open board meetings (or any other open meetings), contact local media with concerns, etc. If one is giving tithes and offerings to a church, most legitimate churches allow one the option to designate how one's support is used. That is true with many helping organizations and agencies, too. However, one must realize that private monies are just that...private...and not costing one a dime that one does not willingly give.

    What about the welfare mom who when we cut her off we cut off her children.

    Is not getting a job grounds for removal of the children?

    First, since Welfare Reform there is assistance available for only a total of 5 years.

    Second, remove the children to where? It is by far cheaper to pay Welfare benefits than it is to pay foster care. The average cost of foster care in Kansas 12 years ago was $80,000/year per child...not including medical costs. At that time the welfare benefit, not including medical assistance, for one parent with one child was a total of $365/mo. Each additional child up that by increments of about $60/mo per child to the ceiling of 5 children. A single mother with 5 or more children could get a maximum of $7,980.00 a year. That was less than 1/10 of the cost of foster care per year per child. In other words, removing 5 or more children from the home and into foster care cost at least $400,000.00 per year...as opposed to the $7,980.00 in welfare cash benefits.

    Just exactly how much to we owe citizens of this country who lie, cheat, and othewise milk the system?

    One of my particular soap boxes! Corporate Welfare is appalling this country! :D

    If you want to be outraged and do something that really matters, look into how many millions (billions!) of American taxpayer dollars are unaccounted for in Iraq.
    Amen.
    Unfortunately, the only way to catch those people is for people like us to turn them in since the government can't/won't spend the money and manpower to actually check on recipients to make sure they really do need the help and really are doing something to help themselves.

    With Welfare Reform, this is no longer the norm. People who are not working at a full time job with benefits are required to spend at least 4 hours per week day in classes, volunteering in the community and a whole host of other job preparation and job searching activities.

    In the late '80's and early '90's I was part of several pilot groups made up of welfare recipients and designed to test out programs with the ends of stopping generational welfare. Not one of us...generational or temporary recipients...argued that Welfare should be a lifestyle. In fact, many of the Welfare Reform points now in use came out of those pilot groups...in which we the recipients told the government what we thought would be actually help. The 5 year limit with actual and required help was the main point all of us said was needed...over and over again. In fact, many of us felt that 5 years was too long.

    Unless one has been on welfare, one cannot understand how welfare itself was the biggest contributing factor to generational entrapment.

    Not only is that dangerous, but my God, is that not stealing?

    I knew a family in exactly the situations described (actually, several, but I know first-hand the situation in this one family...not just rumors around the 'hood). They got turned in...by me.

    This family is now 'camping' in their home.

    I couldn't believe that's all that was done!

    It turned out that the husband (he works a full time job and is the only income in the household) had for many years refused to pay bills for 'luxuries' such as utilities, clothes, medicines and foods needed to meet medically required dietary needs. Because of the husband's income, the wife could not get any assistance whatsoever. Her health declined to the point of near death, but she had brought herself around...with no help whatsoever...to where she could walk without aid and had lost over 100 lbs. But that just angered the husband. When the wife ended up in the hospital twice in one month, she finally asked for help.

    Although she had applied for Social Security three times, she had not followed through with the required paperwork and was therefore denied. The most recent denial was 2 months ago. The last time she was in the hospital, she was assigned a case worker. Since then she has been moving more and more towards independence...which includes the $650/mo she may get from Social Security. (Social Security Disability benefits are based solely upon the person's earned income throughout their lifetime. SSI benefits are based upon the current income of the home. If she stays in her husband's home, she will not be eligible for SSI. Even if she lives alone, SSI would supplement SSD only up to $850/mo. She's going to be in the lap of luxury.)

    In the meantime, because she was not being physically abused and because of her health issues, she was not accepted at battered woman's shelters. She got desperate enough to stay in homeless shelters, but her health deteriorated quickly...to the point that she can no longer walk more than a few feet (because of damage done to knees, hips and feet while walking the streets during her time in homeless shelters...it is a requirement for adults without children to leave shelters between 7am and 5pm), she is still healing from diabetic sores that covered her body (her average blood sugar levels were 400-600+ during her time in homeless shelters due to absolute lack of access to any food besides donuts and coffee during the day and pasta heavy meals at night, stress (which always has raised her blood sugar levels at least 100 points), exposure and lack of ability to keep herself clean during the day), and she is now facing kidney failure.

    I knew the possibility that my turning in this family would send this woman over the edge health-wise...but she needed intervention. That was my thinking, anyways. At least now she's on the radar screen, so to speak. Maybe it was a good thing, maybe it was pointless. Only time will tell. I do know that if she wasn't 'truly' disabled before, she is now...by all accounts...including professionals...so maybe sending her over the edge health-wise was the best thing for her. <_<

    Rape

    What sexual abuse does to a child's mind hasn't changed in 40 years. What people think of those children as adults has, though.

    Any abuse, really.

    Rape

    This is a very charged topic for me...not only because of my 'history', but also because of having raised a daughter who 'consensually' had sex with a man 7 years her senior and became pregnant, having been there with so many girls and women after being raped, having friends who have been caught in many of the exampled situations.

    I will do my best to check my emotions at the door.

    When I was 14 I had sex once with a 15yo boy from school. This was the first time I had 'consensual' sex. It was in the woods behind an apartment complex where he and I had met at my youth pastor's place for bible study...then left after opening prayer. I felt nothing. Had no clue that anything had happened. Never felt any penetration or anything. But I got pregnant. When my mother asked me if I had any "sticky stuff" on my legs or panties, I had no idea what she was talking about...she had to explain to me about semen. I truly had no clue about the actual physical reality of sex.

    Was that rape? No. Was it consensual? I had no clue what I was consenting to, so how could it be consensual?

    Until then, I did not understand that what my dad had done to me from age 4 to age 9 would be in any way similar to what someone I 'liked' or 'loved' would do to me.

    Once I understood, I also understood all the other stuff...like being told that because I was so fat (ha! I can only wish that I weighed 140 lbs again!) the only boys that would have anything to do with me were the boys that knew fat girls were easy. What did easy mean to me before that time? I figured it meant that I'd kiss them and let them touch me. After that time, I understood...and for too many years felt that all I had to offer to a boy or a man was the use of my body.

    So when I began offering that at the age of 15, was I then 'consenting'?

    consent

    1. To give assent, as to the proposal of another; agree. See Synonyms at assent.

    2. Archaic To be of the same mind or opinion.

    assent:

    1. to agree or concur; subscribe to (often fol. by to): to assent to a statement.

    2. to give in; yield; concede: Assenting to his demands, I did as I was told.

    –noun

    3. agreement, as to a proposal; concurrence.

    4. acquiescence; compliance.

    Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law

    Main Entry: 1as·sent

    Pronunciation: &-'sent

    Function: intransitive verb

    : to agree to something esp. freely and with understanding : give one's assent

    Synonyms: These verbs denote acceptance of and often belief in another's views, proposals, or actions. Assent implies agreement, especially as a result of deliberation: They readily assented to our suggestion.

    Agree and accede are related in the sense that assent has been reached after discussion or persuasion, but accede implies that one person or group has yielded to the other: "It was not possible to agree to a proposal so extraordinary and unexpected" (William Robertson). "In an evil hour this proposal was acceded to" (Mary E. Herbert).

    Acquiesce suggests passive assent because of inability or unwillingness to oppose: I acquiesced in their decision despite my misgivings.

    Often laymen forget that consent does not immediately imply agreement, understanding, or willingness.

    (Edited to add "not" before "immediately" in my last sentence.)

  15. It is SOOOoooooo inconvenient to press 1 for english., I have to actually use one of my fingers. (sigh)

    ~HAP

    Fingers? Which ones?

    A)The 'international sign language' one?

    B)The nose pickin' one?

    C)The bu tt pickin' one?

    D)All of the above?

    Press 1 if your answer is A, 2 if your answer is B....

    :biglaugh: :biglaugh: :biglaugh: :biglaugh:

  16. Had this all typed up for the Open forum but realized it really belongs in this forum.

    Hope I remember this correctly...

    It was taught in piffle that the bible interprets itself in the verse, in the context and used before. It was also taught to understand the hard verse in light of the easy verse. Also taught in piffle was the whole add a word, delete a word stuff about Eve.

    IMO, this wasn't revelation like it hadn't been seen since the first century church, but simple reading comprehension...like it should be taught no later than the 3rd grade.

    All of this was done in twi to make people unable to see the forest for the trees. It is yet another perfectly good thing twi took and made bad.

    However, just because twi twisted it all up for its own nefarious intentions doesn't mean that the thing itself is bad.

    In fact, when I tutor students concerning reading comprehension, I borrow how things were explained in piffle to help students understand how to comprehend what they are reading.

    Often the problems students have with reading comprehension are there because the students read something and then put their thoughts into the meaning as if that were what was written.

    Take this sentence for example:

    I am happy to join with you today in what will go down in history as the greatest demonstration for freedom in the history of our nation.
    Unless one recognizes exactly what this sentence is taken from, this is a quite an ambiguous sentence.

    And this sentence:

    In a sense we have come to our nation's capital to cash a check.

    Again, unless one recognizes exactly what this sentence is taken from, this is quite an ambiguous sentence...and, dare I say, in this day and age it may even be a sentence to spark suspicion, hostility and explosive disagreements.

  17. CW,

    I just love how you knew my intentions of that post.

    And that you are so well versed in mine and my husband’s family of serving since WW2.

    And of course there has only been one war in your and my life time so how could it have been anything other than related to Iraq.

    As well we all Jesus Christ is completely confined to this war in Iraq only.

    Thanks for the enlightenment!

    Kathy

    Wasn't commenting on your intentions. Was commenting on the intentions of that particular piece of spam.

    Read my post again, please.

  18. Jesus Christ and the American Soldier.

    One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

    This email has been going around ever since the illegal war has been going on.

    It is SHAMEFUL to describe the sending of young men and women to their death in an illegal war that basically boils down to, 'shouldn't have ph ucked with my daddy and our money' as dying for my freedom.

    It is just plain emotional manipulation to make these young men and women be willing to die...and their mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, etc. be willing to send them to their deaths.

    Toss in Jesus to make the manipulation sink in deep and feel like God has put His stamp of approval on it all.

    VPW could only dream of running such a cult!

×
×
  • Create New...