When Jayden, a rambunctious preschooler, walked through the doors of Horizons for Homeless Children in Roxbury a year ago, he barely spoke a word, not much more than “mommy” and “daddy.” Now, his mother says, he’s almost too expressive.
“I forget I’m talking to a 3-year-old,” Kim Webster said.
Comments
Taxpayer funded daycare. Headstart doesn't work, read the most recent report. 180 billion dollars wasted babysitting children of poor people.
Another negative consequence of this lack of funding is that parents have their children tested for disabilities. If the kids are disabled they can get funding that way. A lot of wasted money and a sad state of affairs when parents need to go to these negative extremes. Plus they have to up with idiots-right Vlad?
Are you referencing parents who teach their kids to be unruly or mimic certain conditions so the parents get an additional government check for a so-called disability? For free medical care, these parents just bring their kids to the hospital emergency room for earaches, colds, etc.
That question is dangerously close to making the inferrence that the Poor, (People of Color), train their children to mimic learning and other disabilities. Also, free medical care for children...WTF is wrong with that. You embarass youself in a Public Forum.........Vlad.
"“We know there are people out there who would like to be able to get their children into child care, but they can’t because they can’t access the state subsidies.” That's because all these "State subdidies" actually don't come from the "STATE". They are extracted from the working people who can no longer care for their own children while being saddled with the cost of providing FREE subsidities to non citizens.
Where does the topic of non-citizens come from? Gosh, there are some dumbells on this page.
Easy way to shorten lists, those that are working or going to school shoot to the top...those that are just sitting home doing nothing go to the bottom. Also, shorten the day. Unless they are working full time (which would disqualify them for aid), they really don't need their kid in day care for 9 or 10 hours a day. If you split the time, you could accommodate double the kids. I pay for preschool for 2 hours 3 times a week in my town, because that is what they offer.
"And if parents don’t have access to child care, parents can’t work. “So,” she said, “it’s a never-ending cycle.” And if the parent (you realize this is not a 2 parent home) thought about what it takes to raise a child maybe they would have taken precautions to insure that they would not have children until they could provide for them. There is a moral breakdown of society when you have individuals that use Public assistance as a lifestyle.
It is NOT necessarily a single parent home, as you for some reason indicate (and thereby indicate your prejudice). Regardless of income, how many families these days have or can afford to have one of the parents staying at home? Not many, unless you are in the upper income echelon. And the poorer the family is, even with two incomes, the more they need daycare to be able to stay working, since they live paycheck to paycheck.
Why would people who can barely afford to keep themself above water bring children into this world? Then us the taxpayers flip the bill for subsidies to raise the children. All part of Patrick's tax bill....time to make people responsible for their actions.
And just what are you suggesting to "make people responsible for their actions" in having children? Take the children away? Turn the family away from daycare/school? What "punishment" would you impose? China has limited family size for decades, with extreme penalties for breaking that rule. Would you like the USA to emulate China? Or are you saying that, for their "stupidity", these families should be ostracized and have to live under the bridges, scrounging to keep from starving? How far are you willing to go to "teach responsibility" to people?
Its called slappping on a rubber before sex.
And refering to taking the children away, also not a bad idea. There are plenty of people looking to adopt...also a deterrent to a mother looking to increase welfare benefits by producing more infants. Its a win-win...give prospective parents a child they want, and cut down on spending to parents who can't and do not want to pay for more children. Thats how far I'm willing to "teach" responsibility. redglare2, what's your method? Just keep raising taxes to help out a percentage of people that do not want to work, keep pumping out kids, get free room and board, etc...
While I am somewhat dismayed by the meanness ("kick 'em when they're down") of some of the Globe's readers -- attacking people with children, who are living in poverty -- I cannot sympathize with their failure to place the blame where it properly belongs -- on the state government and the educational establishment.
If both truly acted as they claim -- recognizing that the minds (or brains) of children growing up in poverty in the first five years of their existence, supported by parents who work at Massachusetts minimum wages, and who have not the time to meet the demands of those first five years, suffer in growth -- and fail to act accordingly, there is an enormous social cost to be borne by every one of us.
But of course, the educational establishment that knows this to be the case, leaves it to so-called non-profits, and to small business to provide the adequate or inadequate care by relying on 'vouchers' which are now insufficient in number.
We should thank Akilah Johnson and the Globe for revealing that Deval Patrick and the Democratic Party are talking about welfare, and not about investment in Education. This is a prescription for keeping people in poverty. Not for building self-reliance where it begins. No wonder some readers are confused and angry.
Elie Yarden
Greater Boston Chapter
Green-Rainbow Party
Cambridge