Do you think this is unethical?

[ha98ed14]

I have an acquaintance (friend of a friend) whose DH has a very seasonable work. Spring & Summer are okay; Fall tightens up; Winter they are really hurting. He makes so little that they can't save when times are good because they are living on it. She's been very open about their lifestyle. They have 4 DC with no plans to curb their fertility. (That is a completely separate issue!) But this is the question:

In order to keep her food stamp and medicaid benefits, she has to show proof of income. Because he is self employed, there are no pay stubs, so she presents bank statements showing the balances. When times are good, there is too much for her to qualify, so she moves money from cking to svings to print the cking statement, and then back to print the svings statement. The alternative would be to go on and off food stamps and medicaid every 6 months, but since it takes the gov't offices months to process the paperwork, it would be a huge, huge mess. (This is really true! Having worked connecting people with benefits, for people in such situations where they qualify one month and not the next, it *IS*a nightmare.)

So, not addressing the "having children you cannot afford" issue, do you think it is unethical for her to move money to print the statements when times are good in order to keep her benefits?

ETA: This is a decided lifestyle for them. He does not plan to see other employment or educational opportunities. She aspires to being a FT SAHM.

[amldaley]

Unethical? To me, yes. But I have a brother who is in the exact position of your friend. And I know that they do whatever they have to do to keep their family afloat. The system does not always work the way it should or is supposed to. And so they find ways to make it work for them.

That aside...it is illegal. It is fraud. They are falsifying financial documentation and I am sure when they signed up for food stamps, etc, they signed a form stating they would provide accurate documentation.

I think the ethics of it are based on the perception of what is more important...is it unethical to steal in order to feed your child?

[lovin2shop]

In short, Yes, absolutely.

[Melaine]

Yes. Unethical, illegal, wrong. Yes.

[TwoBees]

Yes. And they w ill be caught eventually, and it will be a bigger mess than the paperwork.

Perhaps she should consider part time emplyoment for herself? (not the point of your post, I know).

[egoldber]

Are they required to show savings as well as checking account statements? Are they are hiding income? In which case, yes it is fraud.

I can easily see the incentive to them to do this though given the instability of his income. And if it meant my children would be hungry if I didn't do it, then I am honestly not certain what I would do.

And they w ill be caught eventually, and it will be a bigger mess than the paperwork.

Exactly, and having a relative who was convicted of fraud for a similar issue, I can tell you it has had long term consequences for that family's financial health.

[TwoBees]

I think the ethics of it are based on the perception of what is more important...is it unethical to steal in order to feed your child?

I don't think this is the problem here. If both parents worked and they STILL can't afford to feed their children, then maybe there would be an ethical dilemma. But if one parent does not work by choice, then really, they can change their situation and this there is no need to "steal" to feed their kids.

ETA: OP, I notice youd idn't say if your acquaintance is already a FT SAHM, or just aspires to be one. Does she currently work?

[kijip]

Frankly I would just go on and off every 6 months. It is a hassle, but it is something they need only part of the year. And it is a hassle they should be able to do to get the services only when they need them. If they qualify in the winter and fall legit, they should be able to access the services. But if they don't qualify in the summer, they don't qualify.

I tend to think that they will get caught and that will have long term negative consequences.

[amldaley]

I don't think this is the problem here. If both parents worked and they STILL can't afford to feed their children, then maybe there would be an ethical dilemma. But if one parent does not work by choice, then really, they can change their situation and this there is no need to "steal" to feed their kids.

ETA: OP, I notice youd idn't say if your acquaintance is already a FT SAHM, or just aspires to be one. Does she currently work?

I am not saying I think it is ok. I am just making that point that personal ethics are based on personal perception and perspective.

Leaving aside that this family maybe is not making wise decisions based on continuing to have children they can not afford to support adequately, it is not usually as easy as "mom chooses not to work so it is their own problem."

1) With that many children, the cost of childcare would be astronomical and would negate any income the mother would bring in unless she opted to work nights somewhere.

2) People whose income is seasonal and limited are usually working at the max of their capabilities. Few people choose to live that life if there are capable of more. It is not as easy to tell them to go get a better job when they are already performing at their max.

3) There ARE people who abuse the welfare and social services systems because they are lazy, because they think they are entitled, because they think they are clever getting something for nothing, because they think they are clever beating the system. There are other people who genuinely need that assistance and depending on their situation, the paperwork, the red tape and the bureaucracy make it nearly impossible to get what they need. These people sometimes have to find ways around the rules in order to protect their families.

I don't think this issue can be so easily boiled down to "Ethical vs Unethical" as OP asks. I think that everything has to be taken in to consideration, including how many children they have, WHY DH's work is seasonal and low pay, what Mom's qualifications are to obtain a job that would pay enough to merit WOH and the costs of childcare.

My mother worked 3 jobs at one point when my father was unemployed. I do feel this is unethical, but I don't think any situation such as this is easy to analyze.

[vludmilla]

It's unethical. Rationalizing it in some appealing or sympathetic way does not change that it is unethical and probably illegal.