Welfare and state benefits have and always will be a controversial topic.
Some believe people should have to pass a drug test in order to receive benefits, which at first thought, makes complete sense, until you think about it.
There are people who clearly have drug problems in society; however, should a child be punished for this fact? Should a baby be punished? A teenager?
Drug testing seems like a good policy, until you really think about it - I was for it at first, until I thought about who it would affect the most. Welfare should not be used as a drug deterrent.
Another thought is to reduce or completely cut benefits if the recipient's child does not maintain a certain grade point average in school (or a satisfactory report in elementary)
This plan also has plenty of obvious holes - some kids in special education obviously have learning disabilities, as well as children who may have undiagnosed dyslexia, as well as other learning issues - if one child in the household has these issues, should his/her brothers or sisters be punished?
This is not an excuse for children; however, it is a fact in some situations - some kids are just lazy with their schoolwork, while some really do have issues that need to be dealt with another way.
With the various ways to monitor people receiving benefits, one policy that makes sense is to hold the parents responsible for their child's/children school attendance. I believe this policy puts more emphasis on responsibility (for both parents and children), more awareness of the child, as well as more of an opportunity for children to receive an education - children have more of an opportunity to learn in school as opposed to missing school.
Another policy that puts the emphasis on the parent would be to require that all recipients of any benefits be required to complete a specified amount of community service - clearly if a parent is working two/three jobs in order to feed his/her family, the community service should be adjusted.
Another positive of doing community service is the large possibility of an individual learning another skill or trade.
If an individual works as a cashier and does community service as an assistant/secretary in an office or state/county building, the experience gained may lead to a job within that office, state or county, or a job in that particular field - sometimes experience supersedes education.
Understandably there are people who cannot work or may have trouble leaving their home, which is easily accommodated by telecommuting to work - meaning these individuals can work form home, either by providing a phone service to a company/organization, or managing simple online duties.
The main thing is to get people back to work - careers in parks and recreations, sanitation management, road commission, as well as various other state/county jobs are easily learned on the job.
The community service would not only be state/county jobs, there are plenty of local businesses in every community that would benefit, as would all involved.
