Thursday, December 30, 2010
Life Continues Past Infancy and Being Pro Baby Doesn't Count as Pro-Life
Friday, December 17, 2010
Deployment Time Again
The dreaded phone call came last night. After enduring a relatively short 9-month deployment to Afghanistan last time, our family is now prepping for the longer 13-month deployment of one of our own at the beginning of January. The little boy I rocked to sleep; the adventurous child who came to me crying with injuries including a seriously bleeding head wound/hospital visit; the teen I consoled when girls were more cruel than I knew they could be; the adolescent who never seemed old enough to drive, but I taught him manual shift anyway; the young man I proudly saw face responsibility as a husband and father by joining the Army to provide health insurance for his family.
Most parents will know immediately what I mean when I say that it would be easier to go oneself to the war front than send the child they raised. If I told the truth, there were few moments that he wasn't on my mind during the first deployment. My stomach constantly clenched; chronically talking myself down from worry. Every single report of American casualties means waiting to breathe until he manages to make contact, and reassure us that he is okay.
What breaks my heart the most is the impact on his 6-yr stepdaughter and 2 1/2 year old son. His stepdaughter has grown up with my brother as her father, and when he deploys, she acts out in school and her performance declines. Almost everyone knows that the first five years of life are crucial for child development, so his son missing his father's presence a second time during those critical years has an unknown and negative effect. It is a child's sacrifice seemingly largely unappreciated by the nation.
The casual nature of most Americans' everyday lives, oblivious to war and its consequences, often feels callous and unconcerned, even in the face of all those "Support the Troops" magnets. When people think about supporting the troops, I hope they remember their often forgotten family members.
Thursday, December 16, 2010
I'm Crying Too, John Boehner
Sunday, November 21, 2010
The Truth About Public Sector Pay
Tuesday, November 16, 2010
Jon Stewart is Wrong: Left and Right Are Everything in the Heartland
Friday, August 6, 2010
Unemployment Benefits are Pro-Family
Despite applying for jobs on a daily basis, no one was hiring in Iowa during the Farm Crisis. With no government money, a few dollars a week from a paper route, and a heavily used credit card, there was a lot of praying, but they still couldn't make the rent on our apartment. My grandfather's abandoned farmhouse was rent-free. There was a lot of open land, so we could plant several gardens for food. We were lucky to have this option available rather than living in the car.
It went well until winter when the lack of electricity and frozen water pipes made keeping ourselves clean a problem. The winter of 1981 was very cold, and the farmhouse was 32F inside when the authorities measured it. It was the teachers at school who reported that they suspected child neglect, because we came to school dirty and took food from other students' plates at lunch time.
The State of Iowa resolved my family's situation by dividing up the children between two foster care homes. They paid $1600 a month for our care, $800 to each foster family. These figures stood out to me, because the monthly payment my family had received under the federal welfare program was approximately $500. It would have cost less to keep our family together.
Listening to the debate about extending unemployment benefits brings it all back. The stigma of laziness and the belief that getting a fixed-term benefit is a disincentive to seeking a job. The assumption that there is something wrong with the personality of people who are out of work. The complete invisibility of the children affected by economic downturns. When Alan Grayson pointed out that children were being hurt by the failure to pass additional employment benefits, it was refreshing to finally hear them considered. May God have mercy on the hard hearts, indeed.
However, there is a wrinkle to my family's story. One that has allowed many a conservative to dismiss it as "outside the norm" and not applicable to average unemployed people. My father had a form of schizophrenia, diagnosed while he was enlisted in the Air Force in the late 1960s. My mother has bipolar disorder. "Aha," they say, "benefits for healthy, unemployed people should be treated differently than those for people with serious mental illness."
The generosity of American conservatives toward social programs for people with serious mental illness has never been manifest either. Services available for unemployed people with disabilities are slightly more numerous than they were in 1980, but not substantially more effective at overcoming employer bias against hiring this category of worker. If people think it is hard to get a decent job during a recession, add the spotty work history common with serious mental illness, and watch that resume disappear down a black hole. The solution to the high unemployment rate (estimated between 70-80%) for this group has been to push them onto Social Security Disability or Supplemental Security Insurance-SSI. Had either of my parents realized that they had a mental disorder in 1980, perhaps our family would have stayed together under one of these programs. However, it can take years to be deemed sufficiently disabled to receive these benefits.
No matter what form the social program takes, the fact remains that there was nothing there to keep our family together, and 20 years later, little has improved in the social safety net for families, regardless of who heads them. Social programs are pro-family and it would be worthwhile to articulate this point to Americans broadly as we debate the priorities our spending should take.
Friday, March 26, 2010
How Conservatism Harms Family Relationships
I am tempted to publicly call them out by name for the hypocrites they are by supporting anti-government and anti-health care stances while their relatives live on government programs. They have at least one family member who has been dependent on the government because of her disability for years now. ... and in the case of at least one other relative, their family now lives off the government since the accident, the tragic accident that should make them grateful people to those have fought to have such government disability programs available to them. They helped to prevent this from taking them down to indigence as they were content to see happen to their own family many years earlier. Or perhaps they need to recall that their great conservative paternal leader lived out his end of days on Social Security and Medicare... admitting to me that he ended up taking far more from the government than he ever paid in.
The saddest thing is that many people could be productive if we restructured our notions of how work has to happen. My mom has been one of the best senior companions Iowa has to offer since she joined a program they have which takes low-income people like my mother and has them work with seniors who would otherwise end up in nursing homes. They are flexible employers, because her mental illness requires flexibility in schedules. In this way, my mom is one of the most productive, money-saving members of society today, because nursing home care costs the government a ton of money that she is able to help save. Good thing we fed her thru the non-productive years. (tongue in cheek).