Cut Welfare for kids with bad grades?

[Rageaholic]

http://www.opposingviews.com/i/socie...-school-grades

This is just cruel.

I know they're trying to stop welfare abuse, but surely there are better ways to go about this than to put the pressure on children. Heck, some children aren't even old enough to understand what this means. This just seems like a bad bad idea.

[Nekojin]

This is just cruel.

That about sums it up. There are myriad reasons why a child, or a school full of children, can be suffering educationally, and making things harder won't have the desired effect. This is a real-life version of, "The beatings will continue until morale improves." This will just drive the underperforming children/schools even further into the ditch.

Sen. Stacey Campfield needs to be removed from any position of authority - he's the very worst kind of person to be handling these sorts of matters. Sadly, Tennessee voters are just as "unenlightened" (*cough*) as he is, and are likely to rally behind him. Not the welfare recipients, of course, but they're a minority, so they don't really matter... right?

[Anthony K. S.]

I have two words for you :

Grade inflation.

When teachers know that a child's family is already struggling and could lose a lot of their resources if the child doesn't do well in school ... The teachers are going to be very reluctant to give the child bad grades.

The result will be students getting good grades that they haven't earned, which is a bad thing, any way you look at it.

That's just one of many reasons why Senator Campfield's plan is a stupid idea.

[Rageaholic]

^

Man I never even thought of that. As if teachers didn't have enough to worry about.

Campfield is a bloody idiot.

[Andara Bledin]

Oh, yeah, let's just go ahead and ignore the fact that money problems are one of the most common reasons for children to struggle in school in the first place...

^-.-^

[Tanasi]

First of all this has very little chance of passing. Stacy is a damnyankee NY carpetbagger come south. He's not the brightest bulb in the pack but he from being as stupid as the crop that represents the Memphis area.
His motivation is to get the parents and/or guardians involved in getting the kids to school and if need be helping them with homework or getting them help. In his district the vast majority of the kids that are failing are doing so because they're not at school. Why??? Because their parents/guardians are laid up in the bed sleeping and can't be bothered to not only make sure the kids are up and out but to even feed them a little something.
Now we'll hear the whinning that taking the money away won't solve the problem well them having the money doesn't appear to being solving the problem either. The money could be doubled and the problem would still exist.
I don't live in his district and I don't know if I would even vote or him but the "winners" the demos keep running against him are mostly "reformed" crack-heads so it comes down to either voting for a crack-head, a nut-ball or not voting at all. Given the BS the Memphis Maffia bunch does you gotta say "at least he's trying."

[Andara Bledin]

Oh, goodie, back to the myth of the welfare cheater being the majority of those on welfare.

Can we please put that horse to rest?

^-.-^

[fireheart17]

His motivation is to get the parents and/or guardians involved in getting the kids to school and if need be helping them with homework or getting them help. In his district the vast majority of the kids that are failing are doing so because they're not at school. Why??? Because their parents/guardians are laid up in the bed sleeping and can't be bothered to not only make sure the kids are up and out but to even feed them a little something.

We had a similar scenario down here with the Aboriginal communities in the SA/WA/NT region. I'm not 100% sure if it still exists, but I do believe that if the kids don't GO to school, their welfare payments get cut (or were going to get cut?). I think the other bribe for them was that if they didn't go to school, they weren't allowed to use the community pool (the communities themselves are around 100-300 people).
I do know that with Youth Allowance, you need to be attending school/uni/TAFE or in an apprenticeship and if your attendance drops, that gets cut. (you need to be enrolled in something like 3 topics a semester at uni in order to keep your payment, which is the highest "part-time" rate)

[Hyena Dandy]

Now we'll hear the whinning that taking the money away won't solve the problem well them having the money doesn't appear to being solving the problem either.

There aren't people dressed as lions traveling around the district giving every student hugs, either. Perhaps we should begin a lion-hugging program?

I mean, some may say it won't help, but NOT being hugged by lions isn't helping either!

[AmbrosiaWriter]

There aren't people dressed as lions traveling around the district giving every student hugs, either. Perhaps we should begin a lion-hugging program?

I mean, some may say it won't help, but NOT being hugged by lions isn't helping either!

Aren't logical fallacies fun?

Honestly this isn't going to help, it's going to make it way worse. Kids who are worrying about when they'll eat next, or if they're doing well enough to keep the money, are going to be doing worse because instead of focusing on their work, they're worrying. Not to mention depending on the reaction/temperament of the parent, the parent could be heaping even more stress onto them during the entire situation.

How about we make the parents go to school with the kids and base it on the parents grades huh?

No matter what we do, we shouldn't be tying aid money to a child's performance in school.

[MrsEclipse]

The money certainly isn't solving the problem, but in most cases it does seem to be helping.

[ngc_7331]

While I think it's a really really bad idea to tie benefits to any sort of child-related criteria, how about tying it to attendance rather than performance? Some kids just don't do well, some have learning disabilities that aren't diagnosed and therefore aren't being addressed, some have parents who just can't help them because they themselves are uneducated or just don't understand what their children are learning. Putting the fate of a family on a child's shoulders just seems cruel.

[evilfarmer]

While I think it's a really really bad idea to tie benefits to any sort of child-related criteria, how about tying it to attendance rather than performance?

Except here in Tennessee it already is tied to the students attendance. From the artical in the OP

"Currently, parents (or guardians) can lose 20 percent of their welfare benefits if a child does not attend school. Campfield's bill requires that the child make "satisfactory academic progress" or the family will get a 30 percent cut in benefits."

[ngc_7331]

Except here in Tennessee it already is tied to the students attendance. From the artical in the OP

"Currently, parents (or guardians) can lose 20 percent of their welfare benefits if a child does not attend school. Campfield's bill requires that the child make "satisfactory academic progress" or the family will get a 30 percent cut in benefits."

Oops, I missed that part.

30%? That seems like a lot especially to people who don't have much to begin with.

[s_stabeler]

Personally, I would make it something similar to the since-abolished EMA in the UK: there isn't a cut if you don't attend school, but you get extra money if the kid does attend school. not much, but it helped. ( I didn't get it, since my family wasn't eligible, but it apparently helped in some areas)