I agree with you that many people missappropriate the support given to them, and do not attempt to help themselves. I don't believe it's a fair general statement though.

I have lived in a shelter. I have met many people who are incapable (through circumstance) of having their lives improve short of an outside help saving them.

I agree that having 6 children is a poor life move if you can't afford it, and it would seem to me that the consequences of such have been heavy on this woman. (Poverty, etc.)
Given the information that we have from the article, I cannot agree with a claim of negligence.

Your ideas in regard to medicaid and the food stamp system have merit.

It is important to not lose empathy (I'm not talking about alligator tears here) and respect for people in other circumstances, especially harder circumstances. It is important to not dehumanize people.

I save my disdain, contempt, and disregard for people who are deliberately evil. This woman does not qualify.

I hope these are better points for discussion ... I would really prefer to diffuse this thread.

Please ref below. Said better than I could on tilt.

It's too easy to take out frustrations at society's failings on one particular individual. We know hardly anything about this woman's life, other than the bare bones of a news report that barely scrapes the surface of what may well have been a very complex and difficult situation. We certainly don't know enough about her situation to demonise her.

Maybe the US should recognise that free markets aren't the universal panacea it likes to pretend they are (when dealing with the poor, of course - it's a different story when it comes to protecting farmers and the interests of big business), provide free easily accessible health care for all, and give the needy tokens that can only be exchanged for essentials?

Some chance.

I know I get pegged as this big liberal or whatever, but I was honestly interested as to what people would say about this and what they would focus on.

I don't see why it's an either-or question. Everybody is arguing one side and insisting the other side doesn't exist.

It's like liberals somehow don't realize that some people are stupid and bad parents. Well of course they are. My child and any future children I may have aren't in any danger of having this happen to them. If you're reading this, then neither are yours, I imagine. Mom messed up on so many levels here, it's really sad.

At the same time, it's like conservatives somehow don't realize that our medical system is completely and totally fvcked up. 80 bucks versus 250 grand, PLUS a live kid versus a dead kid. Any decent medical system saves $249,920 in costs and keeps the kid alive. European countries generally have more generous welfare systems than the US, and yet somehow this stuff doesn't happen there. What's the explanation? Our system sucks donkey balls.

The kid would be alive, but both his mother and his medical system failed him. Both are true. Why do we have to choose one or the other and get all angry about people who choose the other? What would Freud say about all the defensiveness and anger shown in the responses on this thread?