- 24 May 2022 02:39
#15229195
I recently heard a story about a mother who has a special needs child. During the pandemic, when there were state-imposed shutdowns, she was not able to bring him to school or to temporary supervisory care. This special needs child occasionally had periods of emotional outbursts that could last for up to two days and the child was not always easy to control during these times. Sometimes the mother would bring him to a temporary care facility for half a day, a day, or sometimes leave him there overnight, when she was not able to deal with him, although she did not need to use that too often.
In order to be able to receive any help and have someone else supervise her son, the mother was forced to make the difficult decision to put him into full-time residential care, where he will permanently be away from the home and not see his mother. The child was put in residential care for two years. The school district paid $60,000 per year for the child to be there.
Obviously this situation was not practical or pragmatic. It was a bureaucratic cookie-cutter solution imposed from higher up (close all schools and temporary care facilities), and was not a cost-effective expenditure of money, it was extremely wasteful. This child did not need to be in full-time residential care, and the care he was receiving before cost only a fraction of that.
It's not just all a matter of money. This was not good for the child, to have to be separated from his mother. These residential facilities can be difficult places for special needs children to be.
I know there are many on the Left who don't seem to care at all about any amount of money being spent. But maybe think of it in these terms: This wasted money was money that could have been handed out to everyone for free, or allow the working class to pay lower taxes, or spent on something else that you care about. Government has a limited amount of money, and money wasted one place is going to mean somewhere else where that money can't be spent.
$60,000 a year is probably the entire amount of money the mother earned each year, before taxes. It's ridiculous that this was done.
In order to be able to receive any help and have someone else supervise her son, the mother was forced to make the difficult decision to put him into full-time residential care, where he will permanently be away from the home and not see his mother. The child was put in residential care for two years. The school district paid $60,000 per year for the child to be there.
Obviously this situation was not practical or pragmatic. It was a bureaucratic cookie-cutter solution imposed from higher up (close all schools and temporary care facilities), and was not a cost-effective expenditure of money, it was extremely wasteful. This child did not need to be in full-time residential care, and the care he was receiving before cost only a fraction of that.
It's not just all a matter of money. This was not good for the child, to have to be separated from his mother. These residential facilities can be difficult places for special needs children to be.
I know there are many on the Left who don't seem to care at all about any amount of money being spent. But maybe think of it in these terms: This wasted money was money that could have been handed out to everyone for free, or allow the working class to pay lower taxes, or spent on something else that you care about. Government has a limited amount of money, and money wasted one place is going to mean somewhere else where that money can't be spent.
$60,000 a year is probably the entire amount of money the mother earned each year, before taxes. It's ridiculous that this was done.