Skip to comments.Who Should Support The Disabled?
Posted on 12/31/2012 11:19:02 AM PST by OddLane
Some of the most terrifying words the parents of a newborn will ever hear are there is a problem with the baby. Sometimes the dreadful news comes later after a tragic childhood accident or disease. When such children grow to adulthood they are joined by an even larger number of those who lived perfectly healthy lives as children only to become disabled in some way as adults.
Adults with a disability of some kind are many times unable to work or unable to make enough money from working to support themselves or their families, especially during periods of economic downturn like the past few years. They usually have less education and fewer assets than the general population. The question, then, is, Who should support the disabled?
This is not a question that has a definite legal or moral answer. In the case of children, the answer, legally and morally, is obviously the parents. And the same is true in the case of adults who have been unable to care for themselves since childhood. In the case of most adults, though, the party ultimately responsible for their support is themselves. If someone is unable to provide for his own support, then the case might be made that it is his family who bears that responsibility. But that is a moral, not a legal, issue.
Outside of someone in ones immediate family, it cannot be said that any person is legally obligated to support another person. Whether someone is morally obligated to do so depends on his religion, spirituality, ethics, or moral philosophy.
(Excerpt) Read more at fff.org ...
I sincerely believe that in the case of the disabled, it is morally incumbent upon us to support them through government subsidies. Don't all Americans pay into disability, anyway?
The unemployment rate among the disabled, including those able to work with accomodations is over 75%. I worked for a major corporation. They had “advocacy” groups for GLBT, Minority, Muslim, Indian (not Native American), etc. I tried to get recognition for the disabled, was rebuffed on all sides. Further, there were employment quotas for minorities, but the disabled could not get through the door.
There are millions of the disabled that would love to work, but there are no jobs for the disabled. The only alternative is support by SSDI and the family.
“While libertarians - who don’t share their admiration for the Constitution” Yep, but they sure do admire money.
Benefits for the disabled are far less objectionable than those we currently pay to the people I see in grocery store lines and convenience stores.
If you see a Knight of Columbus selling Tootsie Rolls, buy some. The proceeds go to Disabled Youth. Mostly with MS.
3 - bring back freak shows. Before we got all PC many disabled got to travel the world and make a decent buck.
I disagree. Failing the family's ability to support them, it is the purpose of charities to do so. The fact Americans are forced via legal fiat to 'pay' into this system, is, IMHO, itself an IMMORAL act.
It would help, however if our charities weren't being regulated into extinction.
One must wonder how old you are to have narrowed it down to those two choices. I grew up in the '50s before the family had deteriorated due to "liberal" influences. Families took care of their own to the best of their ability and charities helped out when someone couldn't manage. There are more sane choices than the two you proffer and they don't just spring from a moral and Christian society - they also have the tendency to help expand such a society. Death or the Government is exactly what the Leftist Commies want the People to think of as the two alternatives.
Given many families are in economic trouble, I failed to consider the family as the caretaker. Of course if at all possible YES the family is the lead responsibility. Government support follows if there’s no family to support a disabled person and of course it depend on the degree of support which a disabled person needs.
I see from you info page that you say:George Washington is my hero. Im looking for a group in my area that meets on a regular basis to share ideas, concerns, and developing the solution for restoring the America that once was.
I hope you find such a group and that they can explain where your thinking is a bit misguided. I'm not trying to cut you down because it's obvious you put some thought into your posts and I don't want to turn you off FR or healthy debate. I have to assume you are relatively young (probably 40 tops) and that is why you tend to think of Government as a safety net vs. having families make the necessary sacrifices to take care of their own and to make use of available charities; especially ones own Church Family to help eke out a living when times are tough. Some of the most frugal and self-dependant folks I have had the privilege to call friends were those that lived through the Great Depression and they had it so much tougher than the families that "just can't make it without government handouts" have it today. They knew what "poor" meant - today the poor have cars, stereos, big screen TVs, computers, IPADs, etc. What you might consider "being poor" today was living in the lap of luxury to those who really had it hard - and they not only survived and persevered, but they became so much stronger for the hard times - they became prepared to survive things that would have today's folks committing suicide over because it's just so damned inconvenient...
Hope to see more of you on FR.
For those disabled since birth, yes of course the family is responsible but there are perhaps even MORE Americans who become disabled later in life and are unable to work and are damn well entitled to the money stolen from them throughout their working years via SS/Disability/Medicaid/etc.. Your darned tootin'!!!!
As you point out, we who have paid in, by force, for all these years are "entitled" to reap the "b enefits" of it. I'm saying that we are only as "entilted as the Commies say we are and we are no longer entitled when they decide it is too inconvenient. Once again, my whole point is that when the People are able and willing to fend for themselves, these government pogroms have no place except in very limited and rare cases. A self-reliant and self-dependant society can tell the government to suck sand.
Once again, I hope you find the group you are looking for and that it has enough folks with the ability to formulate some really good debates.
Suppose the parents have taken care of the disabled child since birth, but now they are old, disabled, or dead? Suppose they have not been able to create a trust big enough to support the child for the rest of his life, perhaps forty years more?
And please remember, having a disabled child is likely to limit one’s ability to earn money in the first place, and entail greater expenses for his care, making it harder to come up with this trust.
And some disabled people’s expenses will exceed any ability of their family (how extended, btw?) to provide for them.
Well, there is charity, and perhaps many of us would give more to charity if we were not taxed so much.
There is also considerable abuse of SS disabilit payments, another story.
And now the Communists add 0bamacare to the list, because Social Security has worked out so well.. F’ing IDIOTS. Fast track to bankrupting America (Cloward & Piven). We’re allowed to b!tch about getting OUR money which we’ve been forced to pay into it. It’s the ‘forced’ part that’s wrong.. 0bamacare is more of the same and will surely be bankrupt in short order as it’s ‘honey to the bear’ when it comes to the flood of illegals we’ll incur the minute it’s operational.
These people hire handicapped workers in their warehouse specifically. I’ve never had serious problems getting good service because of it, their prices are competitive, and the product is of good quality.
The more we can learn about and support companies that will do this for the community the better. That is support without committing other people’s money to what you believe is a good cause.