**MOD NOTE UPDATED**Limerick woman complains about living in 3 bed house with 4 kids

hairyprincess

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

One room for parents and baby. One room for epileptic ADHD kid. One room for other kids. When the fifth child comes it will be a squeeze but that's the life of a slut.

That is a disgraceful comment to make

token101

token101 wrote: »

She can be the secret call girl if she wants. As long as shes prepared to live with her actions and take sole reponsibility for them. We dont need more welfare children to replace working graduates/tradesmen or whatever. Thats a daft thing to say.

and thats equally daft and assumptive that her children will never amount to anything or contribute to society in any positive manner .

some amazing people have come from very humble beginings .

token101

The King of Moo wrote: »

dj jarvis wrote: »

here is one , you find the second , trust me its in black and white

That's hardly an "Oh poor lamb" reaction.

More along the lines of suggesting that her background might partly play a factor in her situation, which I don't think anyone would argue with.

If theres a strong feeling for thia type of situation start a charity. That way people can choose to contribute. It shouldnt be incumbent upon taxpayers to provide for this womens ludricous choices.

nagero

Maybe she should just sue boards.ie for the abuse dished out on this thread.

token101

Maximilian Flaky Nose wrote: »

token101 wrote: »

She can be the secret call girl if she wants. As long as shes prepared to live with her actions and take sole reponsibility for them. We dont need more welfare children to replace working graduates/tradesmen or whatever. Thats a daft thing to say.

and thats equally daft and assumptive that her children will never amount to anything or contribute to society in any positive manner .

some amazing people have come from very humble beginings .

I think you know damn well thats not what I meant. Taking 5000 emigrants out of an economy and replacing them with 5000 kids on welfare means youve lost taxpayers and got more mouths to feed. So your original assertion is ridiculous.

The King of Moo

token101 wrote: »

If theres a strong feeling for thia type of situation start a charity. That way people can choose to contribute. It shouldnt be incumbent upon taxpayers to provide for this womens ludricous choices.

But you see, there isn't such a strong feeling.

You're just creating an extreme position to argue against as, but no-one in this thread has suggested that her background absolves her of responsibility and that they want to provide charity to her.

I for one would never want to get involved in some sort of Hooverian/Big Society-esque voluntarist system of welfare.
It sounds like a libertarian's wet dream (largely because very few people would contribute).

I believe that if this woman has come from a disadvantaged background, then that makes it more difficult for her to break out of her lifestyle and get a job.

NOTE: I'm not saying that her background absolves her of all responsibility.

But of course I don't know her so I don't know her background, the father(s) of her children, whether she's looking for work etc. so I'm not going to make any assumptions about her.

Still, it's not as fun as "Herp derp, sew up her gee!"

micropig

oldyouth wrote: »

Everyone is drifting off topic. Is there a bank account where sympathisers can make a contribution?

Details PM'ed, please give generously:D



Her children should have wore their communion clothes for the photo..get a second wear out of them and value for money for the state:pac:

whatdoicare

The King of Moo wrote: »

I agree, and the level of hatred and number of presumptions in this thread is a perfect of example of that.



Which is exactly the reaction the newspapers want, and why they feature stories of cases like this completely disproportionate to the number of such actual cases in the real world.
They also deliberately pick and choose details to get you angry, in case some element of reality contradicts the narrative they want to construct.
Lastly, they'll feature a big picture of a crying baby to really get you going.

So, please tell me - what way would the story be different? She has four children and no money to pay for them - she made the choice to keep going and have another - how can you turn this into a story where she becomes a responsible person?

Sure, she may have have one accident - but five?

Noone is that uneducated. Social workers would have had the talk with her about contraception and offered to help arrange it for her.

If her living conditions were unacceptable she should not have gone on to have two more pregnancies.

I believe I have every right to have feelings of anger and resentment towards her - I want a family and can't afford one.

KeithAFC

It is a disgrace. She should be given a bigger house to look after her kids. This is a complete disgrace and she should take it to the courts to sort it out. Do not accept this brutal environment for your kids Serinna. I wish you all the best in the right to find justice and to sort this mess out.

It is conditions like these are lead to accidents and certain death and if it isn't dealt with, this is what will happen. Houses like this aren't safe for kids.

simply put i think the minute society fails to care for the weak vunerable old or sick and (yes i do believe this woman falls into at least one of these categories) its failing and failing badly .

The King of Moo

whatdoicare wrote: »

So, please tell me - what way would the story be different? She has four children and no money to pay for them - she made the choice to keep going and have another - how can you turn this into a story where she becomes a responsible person?

Sure, she may have have one accident - but five?

Noone is that uneducated. Social workers would have had the talk with her about contraception and offered to help arrange it for her.

If her living conditions were unacceptable she should not have gone on to have two more pregnancies.

I believe I have every right to have feelings of anger and resentment towards her - I want a family and can't afford one.

For a start, it could have mentioned if she's looking for work or not, told us about the father(s) of the children and her background, which would've provided a lot of context to her situation.

Most importantly, it could have told us how she's not representative of the majority of single mothers, and single mothers on welfare are not a huge expense for the taxpayer.

That wouldn't get people angry though.

mikemac1

Where's Willie O'Dea?

He sorts this out, not crying to the Limerick Leader

stoneill

The news paper article misleads the issue.
It doesn't matter if it is a two, three, four of five bedroom house, the issue is about the house being habitable. Minimum standard is required, especially for kids and that minimum standard has not been reached.

I personally do not agree with state handouts for career single mums, why are the dads not helping support their own kids. Anyway - that's beside the point.

The house is not habitable - it should be.

dj jarvis

ok after reading back some comments were on the harsh side ......
but , if you were in the position of working so hard you never see your kids , getting screwed by the state and retailers and not to mention my employer

then you read this tripe by some ( in my humble opinion , a feckin leech ) hand out merchant wanting a bigger house, i feel like i have the right to question her motive and does she actually deserve the help.

as far as i can make out shes getting plenty help as it is , so she should thank her lucky stars and keep her gob shut

as for all the kids and her choices , maybe if the father(s) don't hang around then she should learn how to spot a chancer - why should i pay for her lack of life skills?

so you see as one hardest hit at the moment ( kids , mortgage , self employed contractor , in the 30 / 45 demographic , chronic illness that i get no financial help with , ie no medical card , along with ALL the tax rises and pay cuts ) i feel i do have the right to make a forthright and stinging comment on this most stupid of demands by from the face of it she has a neck like a jockeys bollix

as i said before , she should learn to keep her mouth shut or she will attract the vitriol shes getting here

it really does boil down to the fact that some people really don't live in the real world - at one end of the magic money rainbow we have bankers and politicians and at the other we have life long SW trolls sponging off us all ,

well me being stuck in the middle i feel it time these ****ers are pointed out for what they are at EVERY opportunity

Thrill

whatdoicare wrote: »

Sure, she may have have one accident - but five?

Who said that they were unplanned/accidental pregnancies? She may want to have a large family.

LimGal

Maximilian Flaky Nose wrote: »

simply put i think the minute society fails to care for the weak vunerable old or sick and (yes i do believe this woman falls into at least one of these categories) its failing and failing badly .

B*llocks!

She has been looked after pretty well already if you ask me.

Maybe she should start looking out for herself a bit more by not having any more kids.

Mis-guided do-gooders like you drive me daft!

dj jarvis

Thrill wrote: »

Who said that they were unplanned/accidental pregnancies? She may want to have a large family.

grand , she can pay for that large family and house also , not you not me

if you cant afford them , STOP HAVING CHILDREN - how is that so hard to understand

can someone please tell me why we all should finance her lifestyle ?

whatdoicare

The King of Moo wrote: »

For a start, it could have mentioned if she's looking for work or not, told us about the father(s) of the children and her background, which would've provided a lot of context to her situation.

Most importantly, it could have told us how she's not representative of the majority of single mothers, and single mothers on welfare are not a huge expense for the taxpayer.

That wouldn't get people angry though.

You miss the real issue - no matter if she's looking for a job, her background or the situation, having five children is totally irresponsible.

I don't know anything about the numbers of single mothers out there - I have a cousin working in social care in Limerick and she says this situation of multiple births to gain benefits is common enough but she says her hands are tied - they know what they are entitled to and they are more than capable of applying and if needs be arguing their case in order to receive them. It is not uncommon for single mothers to recruit a local TD to speed up their case or get a desired result.

I know plenty of single moms who don't claim anything beyond childrens allowance and they all work very, very hard to support their children - all of them have only one child (this is the key to my story here) They are responsible people who made a genuine mistake.

This lady did not make a mistake four times only to continue and make a mistake a fifth time.

micropig

Thrill wrote: »

Who said that they were unplanned/accidental pregnancies? She may want to have a large family.

She can as many children as she wishes once she can provide. Once the state is paying, stop having children until such time you can provide for them again

Daisy M

Thrill wrote: »

Who said that they were unplanned/accidental pregnancies? She may want to have a large family.

There are lots of things many of us want but unless we intend to fund them ourselves it is not our entitlement to have them. Why should it be any different when it comes to children. This lady has a choice on wheather she will have more children or not, I as a tax payer do not have the choice on wheather I want to hand over a large amount of my wages in tax to contribute towards people who will spend their entire life living off the welfare system. With such a poor health and infrastructure services in our country I will openly admit that I believe it is disguisting that people who are fit for work can and do spend an entire lifetime living off the backs of others.

LimGal

LimGal wrote: »

B*llocks!

She has been looked after pretty well already if you ask me.

Maybe she should start looking out for herself a bit more by not having any more kids.

Mis-guided do-gooders like you drive me daft!

you think a house with no plaster and bad dangerous heating is looking after her pretty well? i disagree

also if you dont have any sympathy for her what about her kids ? are they not vunerable ?

Dubit10

Some of the comments on here are a flipping disgrace. Yes the woman has made mistakes (who has'nt) but the way some people pass judgement is shocking.

ejmaztec

Would she get more sympathy if a private landlord were involved?

Thrill

dj jarvis wrote: »

grand , she can pay for that large family and house also , not you not me

if you cant afford them , STOP HAVING CHILDREN - how is that so hard to understand

can someone please tell me why we all should finance her lifestyle ?

what makes you think she cant afford to raise her five kids?

This is about her getting a house with an extra room. She may be working (the story doesn't say whether she is or not), her husband/partner may be working. They may very well be able to afford to rent a bigger house. The problem seems to be their ability to get one.

JustAddWater

Dubit10 wrote: »

Some of the comments on here are a flipping disgrace. Yes the woman has made mistakes (who has'nt) but the way some people pass judgement is shocking.

Welcome to AH... You must be the new guy?!

LimGal

Maximilian Flaky Nose wrote: »

you think a house with no plaster and bad dangerous heating is looking after her pretty well? i disagree

also if you dont have any sympathy for her what about her kids ? are they not vunerable ?

She has a free house.

Maybe if she stopped popping out the kids she might be able to afford to fix whatever needs fixing and not be spending money on a new child.What do ya think eh??

Battered Mars Bar

Thrill wrote: »

what makes you think she cant afford to raise her five kids?

This is about her getting a house with an extra room. She may be working (the story doesn't say whether she is or not), her husband/partner may be working. They may very well be able to afford to rent a bigger house. The problem seems to be their ability to get one.

Bless

micropig

Maximilian Flaky Nose wrote: »

you think a house with no plaster and bad dangerous heating is looking after her pretty well? i disagree

also if you dont have any sympathy for her what about her kids ? are they not vunerable ?

If it's so bad, why bring more children it to that situation?

mikom

Thrill wrote: »

what makes you think she cant afford to raise her five kids?

There was no plaster - it was only last year we were able to plaster the front room.
http://www.limerickleader.ie/news/local/limerick-s-serinna-in-despair-over-home-for-kids-1-3764536

She sounds flush.

ejmaztec

Thrill wrote: »

what makes you think she cant afford to raise her five kids?

This is about her getting a house with an extra room. She may be working (the story doesn't say whether she is or not), her husband/partner may be working. They may very well be able to afford to rent a bigger house. The problem seems to be their ability to get one.

A lot of people seem to be assuming that she's living off benefits, even though I've seen no mention of this in the LL article.

Thrill

LimGal wrote: »

She has a free house.

Maybe if she stopped popping out the kids she might be able to afford to fix whatever needs fixing and not be spending money on a new child.What do ya think eh??

Free?

Where does it say she's staying in the house for free?

LimGal

Thrill wrote: »

Free?

Where does it say she's staying in the house for free?

Free in the sense that she is paying probably sweet FA for it!

Battered Mars Bar

LimGal wrote: »

Free in the sense that she is paying probably sweet FA for it!

I believe they contribute 15% of the rent. Council foots the rest.

The King of Moo

whatdoicare wrote: »

You miss the real issue - no matter if she's looking for a job, her background or the situation, having five children is totally irresponsible.

Is that a universal truth or only in certain conditions?

My mother (married then and now) had five children including myself, and despite never having a lot of money, we turned out ok.
Me especially.

I'm not concerned with how many children other people have anyway: it's their concern.

whatdoicare wrote: »

I don't know anything about the numbers of single mothers out there - I have a cousin working in social care in Limerick and she says this situation of multiple births to gain benefits is common enough but she says her hands are tied - they know what they are entitled to and they are more than capable of applying and if needs be arguing their case in order to receive them. It is not uncommon for single mothers to recruit a local TD to speed up their case or get a desired result.

I know plenty of single moms who don't claim anything beyond childrens allowance and they all work very, very hard to support their children - all of them have only one child (this is the key to my story here) They are responsible people who made a genuine mistake.

This lady did not make a mistake four times only to continue and make a mistake a fifth time.

Here's some facts and figures:

http://www.familydiversity.ie/students/Quick%20glance%20statistics%20on%20one%20parent%20families%20in%20Ireland%202002%20and%202003.pdf

They're a little out of date till the relevant Census report comes out in September, though going by the preliminary figures there won't be a big change.

Basically in 2002, roughly 24% of households were headed by a lone parent. 85% of lone parents were female, 15% male.
23.9% of all lone parent families in 2002 were headed by a single parent, 40%
by widowed persons and 32% by separated or divorced persons.

There were 78,030 lone parents claiming the One Parent Family Payment (including divorced people and spouses of prisoners, not including widow[er]s).
The vast majority of claimants (47,801) had one child. 846 had five.


So basically, single non-divorced, non-widowed mothers are a minority of lone parents, and single mothers with many kids are an even smaller minority.

whatdoicare

ejmaztec wrote: »

A lot of people seem to be assuming that she's living off benefits, even though I've seen no mention of this in the LL article.

The article mentions her begging city council and regeneration - this would indicate that she is living in a council house. She is begging for a bigger house and claims she doesn't want to be moved away from Moyross - this too would indicate that it is not a rental or owner buyer house but a property subsided.

If you do the maths - when she originally moved into the property she had maybe three children. Since then she has had a further two children indicating that she planned the last two to put pressure on the council to place her on the top of the list to rehouse her - she also booked a meeting with the mayor to add pressure to rehouse her.

A regular renting or mortgage paying person would not have the right to ask the council to move them elsewhere.

LimGal

Battered Mars Bar wrote: »

I believe they contribute 15% of the rent. Council foots the rest.

The important word in that sentence being earnings,which I would hazard a guess that she has sweet FA of otherwise she wouldnt be asking the council to fix stuff for her.

LimGal

whatdoicare wrote: »

The article mentions her begging city council and regeneration - this would indicate that she is living in a council house. She is begging for a bigger house and claims she doesn't want to be moved away from Moyross - this too would indicate that it is not a rental or owner buyer house but a property subsided.

If you do the maths - when she originally moved into the property she had maybe three children. Since then she has had a further two children indicating that she planned the last two to put pressure on the council to place her on the top of the list to rehouse her - she also booked a meeting with the mayor to add pressure to rehouse her.

A regular renting or mortgage paying person would not have the right to ask the council to move them elsewhere.

You would think that would have been pretty self-explanatory to people.

whatdoicare

The King of Moo wrote: »

Is that a universal truth or only in certain conditions?

My mother (married then and now) had five children including myself, and despite never having a lot of money, we turned out ok.
Me especially.

I'm not concerned with how many children other people have anyway: it's their concern.



Here's some facts and figures:

http://www.familydiversity.ie/students/Quick%20glance%20statistics%20on%20one%20parent%20families%20in%20Ireland%202002%20and%202003.pdf

They're a little out of date till the relevant Census report comes out in September, though going by the preliminary figures there won't be a big change.

Basically in 2002, roughly 24% of households were headed by a lone parent. 85% of lone parents were female, 15% male.
23.9% of all lone parent families in 2002 were headed by a single parent, 40%
by widowed persons and 32% by separated or divorced persons.

There were 78,030 lone parents claiming the One Parent Family Payment (including divorced people and spouses of prisoners, not including widow[er]s).
The vast majority of claimants (47,801) had one child. 846 had five.


So basically, single non-divorced, non-widowed mothers are a minority of lone parents, and single mothers with many kids are an even smaller minority.

Hold on here - so you are saying according to your own link that out of 78,030 lone parents - 30,229 parents have more than one child and a staggering 846 were allowed to carry on and have five?? That's insane!

Battered Mars Bar

LimGal wrote: »

The important word in that sentence being earnings,which I would hazard a guess that she has sweet FA of otherwise she wouldnt be asking the council to fix stuff for her.

I changed it because I'm a self loathing grammar Nazi. Her dole and child benefits all count as "earnings"

The stuff they ask for is ridiculous, some of them actually ring up the council to come out and change light bulbs for them and they do.

dj jarvis

Thrill wrote: »

what makes you think she cant afford to raise her five kids?

This is about her getting a house with an extra room. She may be working (the story doesn't say whether she is or not), her husband/partner may be working. They may very well be able to afford to rent a bigger house. The problem seems to be their ability to get one.

ok lets start with its a council house , most people in moyross are on the dole ( no problem with that - they could have been working before ) so its fairly safe to assume shes not working either , add to that if she was working i would imagine the child care costs for 5 kids are mighty , so she would have to be earning 35/40k plus ? if shes earning that why is she in state housing and asking for bigger state housing ,

if she has a " official " husband partner , do you not think its strange he was not mentioned or in the photo ? i think shes a " single " mother of 5

and in fairness if she could afford it , plenty of houses for rent with 4/5 rooms in the limerick area , she would have no problem finding one

so lets face it , she most likely lives off state hand outs in a state house and is looking for more

i think your argument is super flawed and you might be a slight bit naive of the going on in the super world of free state hand outs

funny, the busiest night every month in my local pubs and clubs is micky money day - all the unemployed out on the lash while the workers cant go becasue they are broke paying for the rest of the wasters

if some one actually deserves state help then give it to them , but long term spongers should be tackled with

The King of Moo

whatdoicare wrote: »

Hold on here - so you are saying according to your own link that out of 78,030 lone parents - 30,229 parents have more than one child and a staggering 846 were allowed to carry on and have five?? That's insane!

*not sure if genuinely outraged; jaded by thread full of outrage at isolated case costing the taxpayer little...*

You know people are allowed to have as many children as they want, right?

forfuxsake

Seriously, some of the stuff on here is truly amazing. Some people say Ireland was a horrible place in the Celtic tiger but the recession has created some monsters.

What do you want to see
Workhouses?
Labour camps?
Enforced sterilisation?
Enforced exile?
Compulsory terminations for pregnancies among the unemployed?

15% unemployment and rising. you could all be next.

When I read this thread I couldn't help but think of Maurice Ogden's hangman.

http://homepage.mac.com/steveklein/hangman.html

whatdoicare

The King of Moo wrote: »

*not sure if genuinely outraged; jaded by thread full of outrage at isolated case costing the taxpayer little...*

You know people are allowed to have as many children as they want, right?

Not if they can't pay for it!!! She can't afford them!!! How can you keep missing this point?

30txsbzmcu2k9w

Zero sympathy. Another case of too many kids not enough chromosomes.

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

micropig

forfuxsake wrote: »

Seriously, some of the stuff on here is truly amazing. Some people say Ireland was a horrible place in the Celtic tiger but the recession has created some monsters.

What do you want to see
Workhouses?
Labour camps?
Enforced sterilisation?
Enforced exile?
Compulsory terminations for pregnancies among the unemployed?

15% unemployment and rising. you could all be next.

Wouldn't we all have jobs in the workhouses and labour camps? = unemployment dropping

dj jarvis

forfuxsake wrote: »

Seriously, some of the stuff on here is truly amazing. Some people say Ireland was a horrible place in the Celtic tiger but the recession has created some monsters.

What do you want to see
Workhouses?
Labour camps?
Enforced sterilisation?
Enforced exile?
Compulsory terminations for pregnancies among the unemployed?

15% unemployment and rising. you could all be next.

When I read this thread I couldn't help but think of Maurice Ogden's hangman.

http://homepage.mac.com/steveklein/hangman.html

no , i want to see the people who have or do contribute to this country of ours get every help and opportunity to better themselves and their children's lives

and i want to see the one who NEVER HAVE getting it in the neck
we support them for what good reason again ??
still NO ONE has answered this question

why should any of us fund the spongers ?

and i do NOT mean genuine people who have fallen on hard times , god knows im only one wage away from it

LimGal

forfuxsake wrote: »

Seriously, some of the stuff on here is truly amazing. Some people say Ireland was a horrible place in the Celtic tiger but the recession has created some monsters.

What do you want to see
Workhouses?
Labour camps?
Enforced sterilisation?
Enforced exile?
Compulsory terminations for pregnancies among the unemployed?

15% unemployment and rising. you could all be next.

When I read this thread I couldn't help but think of Maurice Ogden's hangman.

http://homepage.mac.com/steveklein/hangman.html

Actually we wouldnt mind seeing a bit of ****ing cop-on is all.no need to be so dramatic.....workhouses:rolleyes:

mikom

Anyone know if she has started to take in washing to help pay her way out of her predicament and make a safer life for her children?

Eric Cartman

forfuxsake wrote: »

Seriously, some of the stuff on here is truly amazing. Some people say Ireland was a horrible place in the Celtic tiger but the recession has created some monsters.

What do you want to see
Workhouses?
Labour camps?
Enforced sterilisation?
Enforced exile?
Compulsory terminations for pregnancies among the unemployed?

15% unemployment and rising. you could all be next.

When I read this thread I couldn't help but think of Maurice Ogden's hangman.

http://homepage.mac.com/steveklein/hangman.html

Long term unemployed should be made do council jobs like sweeping roads, If you get pregnant on the dole you should have to take a sexual education class that focuses on contraception, offer out free contraception, dont offer people a chance to move to bigger houses.