Question:
Hi, who. Good to see you back. Source: http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/hlthcare/asstprog/mmap.htm I had a look at this site and read part of the law at another site. I must say, Minnesota’s coverage seems fairly comprehensive and reasonably generous. You all a bunch of socialists out there?
Just shy of it. The politician who came the closest and actually got elected governor was Floyd B. Olson, who once siad: ""I am frank to say that I am not a liberal. I enjoy working on a common basis with liberals for their platforms, etc., but I am not a liberal. I am what I want to be — I am a radical." Olson was elected as a candidatee of the populist Minnesota Farmer Labor Association, which survives tofay primarily in the name of the Democratic party in this state: the DFL or Democratic Farmer Labor party. I note, though, the usual exclusion of abortion, made morally hypocritical by the usual exceptions for rape and incest.
We’re also a moralistic lot, although I suspect this exclusion’s a federal restriction as well as a state restriction. I’ve never seen anyone even attempt to reconcile an anti-abortion position and support for a rape/incest exclusion. There is none, of course; it’s a purely visceral political position that wins votes. I couldn’t figure out whether a pregnant woman living with her parents would be considered a "household" unto herself, or whether her parents would need to qualify for her to receive aid.
The site doesn’t address it. My understanding is that it is now much harder to qualify a minor pregnant woman as a household than it was a few years ago. Also — Some examples of net income limits: Net of what? Taxes?
I don’t think it’s taxes. If it tracks other programs I’ve encountered, certain items are excluded from income. * On July 1, 2002, asset limits for families with children will increase to $15,000 for a household of one and $30,000 for a household of two. When is a "family with children" also a "household of one"?
Good question. When the one is pregnant? Remember, we’re dealing with statutes and rules here, not logic. If a woman does not apply for assistance while pregnant, can she qualify retroactively after she gives birth?
Another good question for which I have no answer. Finally, though I’m sure similar information is readily available for every state in the Union, I don’t see how that completely invalidates the argument that the threat of having to pay thousands of dollars in medical bills may be used to influence some mothers to relinquish, particularly where the arguments against her keeping her child have been primarily economic, and most especially where medical bills have already been paid by the PAPs who expect to adopt her child.
I don’t think it does completely invalidate that particular argument. In fact, it has nothing to do with it, unless one can qualify retroactively. As in many situations, disseminating the information is the best you can do with it. I posted this in an attempt to inform the discussion and to show how readily available the information is. My best advice to a woman threatened with medical bills is to tell the agency and paps to fuck off and to call a bankruptcy attorney [1] if the medical community comes after her for payments she can’t reasonably make. If it appears to most of us that a woman would have to be under the influence of low self-esteem, denial, depression, emotional dependence, stupidity, passivity, or panic to fall for such a ploy,* well, isn’t that exactly the type of woman who should be protected from sharp operators who see her child as a commodity to be sold or a prize to be won?
Yup. What do you suggest? Preventive strategies include requiring agencies to inform all the parties of their actual legal responsibilities up front; mandatory referral to the local Medicaid eligibility tech is another. Requiring that the p-bmom be supplied with independent legal counsel of her choice is yet another. Knowing her rights won’t be enough if she can’t stand up and spit in their eyes when the time comes, though. Unfortunately, our legal system is such that a claim of coercion based on such a threat faces a hard, if not impossible, road. And that assumes she can find a lawyer to take the case. J. whoever or as a drug, like caffeine? *It should be noted that only one of the listed conditions is necessarily permanent; and a great many stupid people are rearing children more or less successfully.
[1] Many bankruptcy attorneys in my area typically require advance payment of only the filing fee, a few hundred dollars at most. Reply to jmhjmdATaolDOTcom
Response:
I know of one naive woman who was told to either hand over the baby or hand over the money.. She handed over the baby.. Did not know her rights.. And whose fault is that?
Well I say the society.. ‘the collective’ if one were to look for a ‘fault’. Jackie
Response:
snip And some women may think it is all her fault.. after all she did not have medicaid and/or private insurance.. She does not think outside the box.. If she didn’t find out what else was available, then yes it IS her own fault. Kim, I am so glad you say it like it is.
Thanks. Not everyone likes it, though. I don’t know why. There’s somedays I find myself slipping back into it was ALL done to me mode, (not that some of it wasn’t),
Right. It’s important to be able to make the distinction. Used to be Jackie was able to do this. Then she had her reunion and the guilt kicked in, so she went back into "it was all done to me" mode in an effort to make herself feel better. Notice how well it’s working – ha. but all I have to do is read a powerful post like this, and I’m sooo back on track. Thanks for being you.
Uh oh – now the CBs’ll accuse you of sucking up again. Ghoulagirl. "Kim dictates how people think here. If she says it is so then they all believe it to be so. She lives in their heads, you see." – Di the Delusional Birthmother, 5/2/2002
Response:
If it appears to most of us that a woman would have to be under the influence of low self-esteem, denial, depression, emotional dependence, stupidity, passivity, or panic to fall for such a ploy,* well, isn’t that exactly the type of woman who should be protected from sharp operators who see her child as a commodity to be sold or a prize to be won?
Also.. she is expected (the new OA) to look for and choose the folks who will eventually adopt the child.. (I know she does not have to) But if she has fallen though the cracks and does not qualify for medicaid and does not have insurance.. IMO she needs to look for folks or an agency that will pay the medical costs.. Some here think the woman just wants rid of the babe and does not care about the child.. IMO some women are very concerned about the health of the baby.. before and after the birth.. If the child is expected to be relinquished the child needs all the health it can get.. Doctors visits pre-birth etc.. Soooo she seeks out the potential aparents thinking she will relinquish and if she changes her mind she is trapped.. IMO And some women may think it is all her fault.. after all she did not have medicaid and/or private insurance.. She does not think outside the box.. Jackie
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – My best advice to a woman threatened with medical bills is to tell the agency and paps to fuck off and to call a bankruptcy attorney [1] if the medical community comes after her for payments she can’t reasonably make. I know of one naive woman who was told to either hand over the baby or hand over the money.. She handed over the baby.. Did not know her rights..
And whose fault is that? Ghoulagirl. "Kim dictates how people think here. If she says it is so then they all believe it to be so. She lives in their heads, you see." – Di the Delusional Birthmother, 5/2/2002
Response:
Also.. she is expected (the new OA) to look for and choose the folks who will eventually adopt the child..
Wrong! She is NOT "expected" to do this. (I know she does not have to)
Well then why did you write the above?? But if she has fallen though the cracks and does not qualify for medicaid and does not have insurance.. IMO she needs to look for folks or an agency that will pay the medical costs..
Yes – never mind all of the other solutions that have been posted. It’s clear that if she can’t pay her bills, she MUST relinquish. snip Soooo she seeks out the potential aparents thinking she will relinquish and if she changes her mind she is trapped.. IMO
No she’s not. As others have explained, she can tell them all to fuck right off because she’s KEEPING her baby and there’s not a goddamn thing they can do about it. And some women may think it is all her fault.. after all she did not have medicaid and/or private insurance.. She does not think outside the box..
If she didn’t find out what else was available, then yes it IS her own fault. Ghoulagirl. "Kim dictates how people think here. If she says it is so then they all believe it to be so. She lives in their heads, you see." – Di the Delusional Birthmother, 5/2/2002
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Also.. she is expected (the new OA) to look for and choose the folks who will eventually adopt the child.. Wrong! She is NOT "expected" to do this. (I know she does not have to) Well then why did you write the above?? But if she has fallen though the cracks and does not qualify for medicaid and does not have insurance.. IMO she needs to look for folks or an agency that will pay the medical costs.. Yes – never mind all of the other solutions that have been posted. It’s clear that if she can’t pay her bills, she MUST relinquish. snip Soooo she seeks out the potential aparents thinking she will relinquish and if she changes her mind she is trapped.. IMO No she’s not. As others have explained, she can tell them all to fuck right off because she’s KEEPING her baby and there’s not a goddamn thing they can do about it. And some women may think it is all her fault.. after all she did not have medicaid and/or private insurance.. She does not think outside the box.. If she didn’t find out what else was available, then yes it IS her own fault.
Kim, I am so glad you say it like it is. There’s somedays I find myself slipping back into it was ALL done to me mode, (not that some of it wasn’t), but all I have to do is read a powerful post like this, and I’m sooo back on track. Thanks for being you. Ghoulagirl. "Kim dictates how people think here. If she says it is so then they all believe it to be so. She lives in their heads, you see." - Di the Delusional Birthmother, 5/2/2002
Kathy "To err is human; to forgive, divine."
Response:
It couldn’t hurt to expect an objective social worker to know where to find this information, though. Then again, it may not be reasonsable to expect to find an objective social worker in every position.
Or even a social worker of any description. Who counsels the birthmother in a "private" adoption? Heaven help anyone who hopes to get useful information out of the Marcy Chosen Childs of this world. A digression: [snip horrifying bureaucratic anecdote] I wonder if that attitude still prevails and ot what extent its counterpart exists in adoption agencies.
I can’t even begin to imagine what the woman thought she was accomplishing by preventing you from helping someone. What was the point? … which I suppose, really, is the point. I’d have to imagine that pointless evilness exists in any group of people. That’s why some people have to be compelled to do what they should. Did you glue her to her chair later, or something? It’s not the preferred route, but you know what the demand is for publicly provided legal services is today.
Maybe something more like a "guardian ad litem" arrangement would suffice, where a trained volunteer would be assigned to look out for the pregnant woman’s interest and that of the child’s father. That is more or less how GAL programs work, isn’t it? And how are they funded anyway? Certainly such a program would be cheaper than one employing real lawyers. Given the increasing number of putative father registries, potential fathers need a quick pre-coitus course in adoption law.
Yeah. "Here, before we do it, put this on and read this." Yup. The first step is getting them all under an agency licensing system with some teeth in it, then setting up an enforcement unit with some power and then making sure that the consumers (p-b and p-a parents) know that it exists.
I was thinking of an accrediting body similar to the one that oversees hospitals. Though they’re not a government agency, they are a holy terror and derive their authority, I believe, in part from the federal government’s using JCAHO accreditation as a standard for Medicare participation and so on. Email me a safe address and I’ll send you a bag of dark roast beans grown on a small farm in the central mountains of Honduras.
Are you serious? whoever salivating
Response:
As conservators of my father-in-law, we received the bill for his GAL -which was paid for from his income. His GAL was a "real lawyer".
Yes, I should have specified that I meant guardians ad litem for children, of whom some are lawyers and some are not. whoever and some are decaf.
Response:
Maybe if we used glow-in-the-dark temporary tattoos that women could apply to areas of male interest?
Reminds me of William F. Buckley for some reason. That will require some uniform legislation, won’t it?
Aha! I knew I had left something out of my modest proposal. Uniform legislation is the first thing we need, but not the Unnatural Act. Email me a safe address and I’ll send you a bag of dark roast beans grown on a small farm in the central mountains of Honduras. Are you serious? Of course. Use the email address at the bottom.
I’m trying to get the address of a coffee safe house from my coffee co-conspirators right now. whoever looking for a coffee drop
Response:
My best advice to a woman threatened with medical bills is to tell the agency and paps to fuck off and to call a bankruptcy attorney [1] if the medical community comes after her for payments she can’t reasonably make.
I know of one naive woman who was told to either hand over the baby or hand over the money.. She handed over the baby.. Did not know her rights.. Jackie
Response:
(J.) It’s not the preferred route, but you know what the demand is for publicly provided legal services is today. Maybe something more like a "guardian ad litem" arrangement would suffice, where a trained volunteer would be assigned to look out for the pregnant woman’s interest and that of the child’s father. That is more or less how GAL programs work, isn’t it? And how are they funded anyway?
As conservators of my father-in-law, we received the bill for his GAL - which was paid for from his income. Certainly such a program would be cheaper than one employing real lawyers.
His GAL was a "real lawyer". Kathy 1
Response:
It couldn’t hurt to expect an objective social worker to know where to find this information, though. Then again, it may not be reasonsable to expect to find an objective social worker in every position. Or even a social worker of any description. Who counsels the birthmother in a "private" adoption?
Medical receptionists, according to the latest first-person reports on a.a. If an agency’s or facilitator’s website is any indication, many of them do provide a minimal amount of information, usually not enough to truly inform someone. Here in MN, the model documents provided by DHS accurately convey their rights to rescind, but in language some may not understand. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Heaven help anyone who hopes to get useful information out of the Marcy Chosen Childs of this world. A digression: [snip horrifying bureaucratic anecdote] I wonder if that attitude still prevails and ot what extent its counterpart exists in adoption agencies. I can’t even begin to imagine what the woman thought she was accomplishing by preventing you from helping someone. What was the point? … which I suppose, really, is the point. I’d have to imagine that pointless evilness exists in any group of people. That’s why some people have to be compelled to do what they should. Did you glue her to her chair later, or something?
Me? No, I lead a minor rebelllion on other matters, leading to my retirement from that field. It’s not the preferred route, but you know what the demand is for publicly provided legal services is today. Maybe something more like a "guardian ad litem" arrangement would suffice, where a trained volunteer would be assigned to look out for the pregnant woman’s interest and that of the child’s father. That is more or less how GAL programs work, isn’t it? And how are they funded anyway? Certainly such a program would be cheaper than one employing real lawyers.
That’s my understanding of the present GAL system for minors. The district court in my county actively solicits lawyers as GAL volunteers, but trains others. Given the increasing number of putative father registries, potential fathers need a quick pre-coitus course in adoption law. Yeah. "Here, before we do it, put this on and read this."
Maybe if we used glow-in-the-dark temporary tattoos that women could apply to areas of male interest? Yup. The first step is getting them all under an agency licensing system with some teeth in it, then setting up an enforcement unit with some power and then making sure that the consumers (p-b and p-a parents) know that it exists. I was thinking of an accrediting body similar to the one that oversees hospitals. Though they’re not a government agency, they are a holy terror and derive their authority, I believe, in part from the federal government’s using JCAHO accreditation as a standard for Medicare participation and so on.
That will require some uniform legislation, won’t it? Email me a safe address and I’ll send you a bag of dark roast beans grown on a small farm in the central mountains of Honduras. Are you serious?
Of course. Use the email address at the bottom. J. whoever salivating
Reply to jmhjmdATaolDOTcom
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – One particular old snarky story concerns a pregnant 17-year old Cuban refuge in foster care here in Columbus.. Her baby was removed from the foster family’s custody with the foster mother announced her intention to adopt both the fdaughter and the baby. A few days later the fdaughter was removed as well, and put into an institution temporarily and then into another fosterhome.. The foster mother continued her fight for custody of both, and lost. If she had succeeded wouldn’t that make the mother her daughter’s legal sister. Bizarre. BTW, did the mother and daughter wind up in separate homes?
It was a mother and son. And yes. They were seprated in an anon adoption of the son. The girl was stuck in foster care and let loose when she was 18. When I met the woman a couple years ago she was searching. He’d just turned 18. Marley Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (J.) Hi, who. Good to see you back. Thanks, it’s good to see that the old place never changes. [snip Floyd B. Olson] We’re also a moralistic lot, although I suspect this exclusion’s a federal restriction as well as a state restriction. I suspect it of being a federal restriction, too. My understanding is that it is now much harder to qualify a minor pregnant woman as a household than it was a few years ago. That would leave a young woman in a difficult position if her parents refused to pay her hospital bills but the state considered their income and denied her aid. Somewhat off subject, but I think still relevant. Back in the late 1970s my neighbor was on welfare. Her long time very wealthy common law husband (that that’s exactly what he was–they’d lived together for years and they presented themselves as husband and wife to the public) walked out on her when their kid was born. Unfortunately because of his family’s political connections he made her life a living hell (including harassment by the cops) , and she ended up moving in with her parents and collecting ADC. So, to maintain a "separate" household among other things, she had to set up a separate kitchen for the two of them. Separate food, separate dishes and eating utensils–though golly they could use the same stove but she had to get a separate refrigerator. . To make sure she was doing that, the friendly welfare worker would make surprise visits. Marley
I think it’s still the rule, Marley, at least for food stamp recipients. J. Reply to jmhjmdATaolDOTcom
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi, who. Good to see you back. Thanks, it’s good to see that the old place never changes. [snip Floyd B. Olson] We’re also a moralistic lot, although I suspect this exclusion’s a federal restriction as well as a state restriction. I suspect it of being a federal restriction, too. My understanding is that it is now much harder to qualify a minor pregnant woman as a household than it was a few years ago. That would leave a young woman in a difficult position if her parents refused to pay her hospital bills but the state considered their income and denied her aid.
It would indeed. I posted this in an attempt to inform the discussion Shame on you. Have you forgotten that this is alt.adoption? and to show how readily available the information is. It is, yes. But my own difficulties in staying employed have taught me that one’s mental state can interfere quite a bit in accomplishing what may seem easy.
I’m familiar with emotional interference with thought processes, on an intensely personal level. It couldn’t hurt to expect an objective social worker to know where to find this information, though. Then again, it may not be reasonsable to expect to find an objective social worker in every position. A digression: a little over 20 years ago , I worked with a state department of labor administering a CETA (Comprehensive Education and Training Act, if memory serves) program, intended to place the unemployed in program-funded positions with public and private employers. (The program was quickly transformed into a means of funding local government employees, but that’s another story.) One morning I received a call from a young woman in dire straits, in need of far more than a job. I gave her information on our program and directed her to a local contact. In the process, I suggested some potential resources for her more immediate needs. It wasn’t long before my supervisor heard of it and had me in her office to inform me that we weren’t the welfare office and that in the future I was to confine my referrals to our program offices or the local state job service office. I wonder if that attitude still prevails and ot what extent its counterpart exists in adoption agencies. My best advice to a woman threatened with medical bills is to tell the agency and paps to fuck off and to call a bankruptcy attorney [1] if the medical community comes after her for payments she can’t reasonably make. That sounds so sensible that I find it surprising that it’s not often (or possibly never before been) suggested here. Yup. What do you suggest? I’ve come more and more to believe that only government agencies should handle adoptions. If that’s not practical, then "private" adoptions should be illegal and adoption agencies should be accredited.
I like the idea of private agencies contracting with the state to provide adoption services, under a contract which spells out the agencies disclosure obligations to all parties and which incorporates some performance standards other than number of placements. Preventive strategies include requiring agencies to inform all the parties of their actual legal responsibilities up front; In writing.
And in plain English. mandatory referral to the local Medicaid eligibility tech is another. That too. Requiring that the p-bmom be supplied with independent legal counsel of her choice is yet another. I don’t like the idea of the PAPs’ paying for it, though.
It’s not the preferred route, but you know what the demand is for publicly provided legal services is today. Even if legal aid offices were required to give priority to parents coonsidering adoption, it would be hard to assure that they received competent advice. No disrespect to any legal aid attorney intended, but there’s a lot to learn about domestic adoption in any given ste, not to mention interstate adoptions. The LA attorneys I’ve met are already working long hours for not a hell of a lot of money. I wish public funds could be found to pay for independent counsel for both parents before relinquishment. I think many "birth" fathers need it too.
Given the increasing number of putative father registries, potential fathers need a quick pre-coitus course in adoption law. Knowing her rights won’t be enough if she can’t stand up and spit in their eyes when the time comes, though. I know that, and I know we can’t do everything for people who won’t do anything to help themselves, but I think we could do better, and we could certainly require adoption "professionals" to behave as such.
Yup. The first step is getting them all under an agency licensing system with some teeth in it, then setting up an enforcement unit with some power and then making sure that the consumers (p-b and p-a parents) know that it exists. Unfortunately, our legal system is such that a claim of coercion based on such a threat faces a hard, if not impossible, road. And that assumes she can find a lawyer to take the case. I wasn’t really suggesting that. I don’t think it’s realistic. [1] Many bankruptcy attorneys in my area typically require advance payment of only the filing fee, a few hundred dollars at most. Gee, I wonder if Beneficial Finance would lend me the money to file?
LOL. Only if you don’t tell them what the money is for. J. whoever or a dime for a cup of java
You don’t need a loan. Email me a safe address and I’ll send you a bag of dark roast beans grown on a small farm in the central mountains of Honduras. Reply to jmhjmdATaolDOTcom
Response:
One particular old snarky story concerns a pregnant 17-year old Cuban refuge in foster care here in Columbus.. Her baby was removed from the foster family’s custody with the foster mother announced her intention to adopt both the fdaughter and the baby. A few days later the fdaughter was removed as well, and put into an institution temporarily and then into another fosterhome.. The foster mother continued her fight for custody of both, and lost.
If she had succeeded wouldn’t that make the mother her daughter’s legal sister. Bizarre. BTW, did the mother and daughter wind up in separate homes?
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (J.) Source: http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/hlthcare/asstprog/mmap.htm I had a look at this site and read part of the law at another site. I must say, Minnesota’s coverage seems fairly comprehensive and reasonably generous. You all a bunch of socialists out there? I note, though, the usual exclusion of abortion, made morally hypocritical by the usual exceptions for rape and incest. I wonder if they cover Viagra. LOL I seem to remember some noise being made about that some time ago. I couldn’t figure out whether a pregnant woman living with her parents would be considered a "household" unto herself, or whether her parents would need to qualify for her to receive aid. Also — Some examples of net income limits: Net of what? Taxes? * On July 1, 2002, asset limits for families with children will increase to $15,000 for a household of one and $30,000 for a household of two. When is a "family with children" also a "household of one"? If a woman does not apply for assistance while pregnant, can she qualify retroactively after she gives birth? I think, but I’m not sure, that someone (Kat maybe) mentioned that you can apply 3 months retroactively.
I just signed on for the day and I have to sign off (hubby wants to go to Dairy Queen lol) so I won’t be getting to the rest of the posts but I wanted to address this point. Medicaid in Michigan will pay retroactively for three months if your income during those three months would have made you eligible. Kathy 1
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (J.) Hi, who. Good to see you back. Thanks, it’s good to see that the old place never changes. [snip Floyd B. Olson] We’re also a moralistic lot, although I suspect this exclusion’s a federal restriction as well as a state restriction. I suspect it of being a federal restriction, too. My understanding is that it is now much harder to qualify a minor pregnant woman as a household than it was a few years ago. That would leave a young woman in a difficult position if her parents refused to pay her hospital bills but the state considered their income and denied her aid. But….can a minor who is pregnant be considered emancipated? Anybody
know? I think they have to go court. I know of pregnant minors in fostercare who were not emancipated. Just read a story about one today in the paper One particular old snarky story concerns a pregnant 17-year old Cuban refuge in foster care here in Columbus.. Her baby was removed from the foster family’s custody with the foster mother announced her intention to adopt both the fdaughter and the baby. A few days later the fdaughter was removed as well, and put into an institution temporarily and then into another fosterhome.. The foster mother continued her fight for custody of both, and lost. Marley
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi, who. Good to see you back. Thanks, it’s good to see that the old place never changes. [snip Floyd B. Olson] We’re also a moralistic lot, although I suspect this exclusion’s a federal restriction as well as a state restriction. I suspect it of being a federal restriction, too. My understanding is that it is now much harder to qualify a minor pregnant woman as a household than it was a few years ago. That would leave a young woman in a difficult position if her parents refused to pay her hospital bills but the state considered their income and denied her aid.
But….can a minor who is pregnant be considered emancipated? Anybody know?
Response:
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – (J.) Hi, who. Good to see you back. Thanks, it’s good to see that the old place never changes. [snip Floyd B. Olson] We’re also a moralistic lot, although I suspect this exclusion’s a federal restriction as well as a state restriction. I suspect it of being a federal restriction, too. My understanding is that it is now much harder to qualify a minor pregnant woman as a household than it was a few years ago. That would leave a young woman in a difficult position if her parents refused to pay her hospital bills but the state considered their income and denied her aid.
Somewhat off subject, but I think still relevant. Back in the late 1970s my neighbor was on welfare. Her long time very wealthy common law husband (that that’s exactly what he was–they’d lived together for years and they presented themselves as husband and wife to the public) walked out on her when their kid was born. Unfortunately because of his family’s political connections he made her life a living hell (including harassment by the cops) , and she ended up moving in with her parents and collecting ADC. So, to maintain a "separate" household among other things, she had to set up a separate kitchen for the two of them. Separate food, separate dishes and eating utensils–though golly they could use the same stove but she had to get a separate refrigerator. . To make sure she was doing that, the friendly welfare worker would make surprise visits. Marley – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –
Response:
Hi, who. Good to see you back.
Thanks, it’s good to see that the old place never changes. [snip Floyd B. Olson] We’re also a moralistic lot, although I suspect this exclusion’s a federal restriction as well as a state restriction.
I suspect it of being a federal restriction, too. My understanding is that it is now much harder to qualify a minor pregnant woman as a household than it was a few years ago.
That would leave a young woman in a difficult position if her parents refused to pay her hospital bills but the state considered their income and denied her aid. I posted this in an attempt to inform the discussion
Shame on you. Have you forgotten that this is alt.adoption? and to show how readily available the information is.
It is, yes. But my own difficulties in staying employed have taught me that one’s mental state can interfere quite a bit in accomplishing what may seem easy. My best advice to a woman threatened with medical bills is to tell the agency and paps to fuck off and to call a bankruptcy attorney [1] if the medical community comes after her for payments she can’t reasonably make.
That sounds so sensible that I find it surprising that it’s not often (or possibly never before been) suggested here. Yup. What do you suggest?
I’ve come more and more to believe that only government agencies should handle adoptions. If that’s not practical, then "private" adoptions should be illegal and adoption agencies should be accredited. Preventive strategies include requiring agencies to inform all the parties of their actual legal responsibilities up front;
In writing. mandatory referral to the local Medicaid eligibility tech is another.
That too. Requiring that the p-bmom be supplied with independent legal counsel of her choice is yet another.
I don’t like the idea of the PAPs’ paying for it, though. I wish public funds could be found to pay for independent counsel for both parents before relinquishment. I think many "birth" fathers need it too. Knowing her rights won’t be enough if she can’t stand up and spit in their eyes when the time comes, though.
I know that, and I know we can’t do everything for people who won’t do anything to help themselves, but I think we could do better, and we could certainly require adoption "professionals" to behave as such. Unfortunately, our legal system is such that a claim of coercion based on such a threat faces a hard, if not impossible, road. And that assumes she can find a lawyer to take the case.
I wasn’t really suggesting that. I don’t think it’s realistic. [1] Many bankruptcy attorneys in my area typically require advance payment of only the filing fee, a few hundred dollars at most.
Gee, I wonder if Beneficial Finance would lend me the money to file? whoever or a dime for a cup of java
Response:
Here’s a rundown on Medicaid as it works in my state. Btw, it required a single three word search to find this information in the first hit on Google. J. Source: http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/hlthcare/asstprog/mmap.htm Medical Assistance (MA) (Minnesota
Categories: Temporary Tattoos | 
No Comments »
LOL. Believe it or not, I think a stand-alone marathon beats me up more than an Ironman. I’d much rather do the IM. 
Love that Scooby Doo!