Okay, I think people came away with some wrong impressions.
To clarify:
1. My in-laws did not get $600 a month in food stamps.
There was a surplus on their EBT card from up in Washington. Food costs more there, the cost of living is higher there (especially in what was their situation) and so you get more money in assistance up there. (Also, Washington is more liberal. I’m just sayin’…)
So, with the influx of November’s benefits, there was somewhere over $600 on the car. “Was” being the operative word.
2. Sorry, but I don’t consider some candy and, admittedly, too much soda to be an “abuse” of the food stamp system.
Did they spend imprudently? You betcha. Is some sugar-free candy for herself (the only kind of dessert she can have) a mark of someone gaming the system? Not so much.
Remember, they were stocking a pretty bare cupboard. They brought non-perishables, but it can be surprisingly expensive to get yourself back to square one in the food department.
No, they didn’t spend it anywhere close to perfectly or ideally or even responsibly. But I refuse to agree that, if you have enough in benefits, you aren’t allowed to occasionally get some crackers or some candy.
It’s just that, here, the occasional indulgence got a lot less occasional. They weren’t gaming the system. They spent a month spending imprudently, with bad results for all of us. And, yes, taxpayers can be pissy that so much money was spent imprudently; but please don’t claim they’re scamming the food assistance.
Unfortunately, as in so many other respects, their deprivation caused a too-long period of imprudence once things got easier. It’s their M.O. and I really wish I had been more proactive about it while there were funds to save.
The reasons behind it (I think)
As I’ve calmed down — that is, as I’ve accepted that the deed is done and there’s no fixing the past — I’ve begun to see a few reasons of how things got this far.
1. She felt like she was contributing.
Nadine said that helping out with groceries made her feel like she was contributing. So she may have worried about saying no to requests. That explains a little, but not most of it.
2. They escaped the oppressive debt.
From their point of view, anyway. They’re not in Washington, paying $600 of space rent out of the $1150 a month (minus her Medicare premiums of $160ish). They’re going to declare bankruptcy and be rid of the worst of the bills.
As I said above, they tend to go through extreme deprivation — even if they often have a hand in creating the dire straits — and then rejoice to be out of it. Too much. It’s how they went through Marc’s “retirement” money. From what Tim tells me, it’s a bit of a leit motif.
3. This month is “a wash.”
If you’re like me, you have no idea what this means. I actually had to ask Tim. Because Marc and Nadine were offering to pay for half of some expensive Magic cards. I voiced concern about them saving the money for their own needs. Nadine said, “Well but this month is kind of a wash anyway.”
First of all… (sound of my head imploding)
I can’t believe that, after everything they’ve been through over the last 5 years, they think they can AFFORD to call a month “a wash.” Of course, it’s because of those years, I’m sure, that they want to indulge.
All in all…
Clearly, I need a game plan. I need to sit them down and do a budget. I need to get them in the frame of mind that months can’t be “a wash” and that the thing to do with extra funds is not to spend it. Unless it’s to pay us back or start a car fund. Or both.
Any ideas/suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I’m calmer, but still not calm about this mess. So if I try to talk to them about it, I fear that I’ll either start yelling or my head WILL actually implode while talking to them.
I’m off to do some deep breathing.
TEN says
If I am understanding you; the $600 is an accumulation of extra benefits from over the past few months, year, etc. I would hope that that money did go to restocking the pantry, but that is not how it was presented. It was presented as they purchsed a $55 roast, which is crazy.
I am one of those that is uncomfortable with using SNAP benefits to purchase soda, candy, chips, etc. Since SNAP is supplemental, I believe that the person's own money should go towards these type of products.
Everything that you have written here is consistent with your previous descriptions of your in-laws. They have behaviors that have led them to this place (bankrupt, living with their son). These are not going to change and I am fearful for you and the energy you will expend on this. It would seem that the other three adults in the house, who I believe are all not working, need to step up and get a grip.
Abigail says
TEN,
It did go to restocking the pantry partially. Just not enough of it was saved. I guess I'm just teetering between frustration and making sure people don't picture them dining on roast every night.
They need to have saved those funds rather than spend so much on soda, candy, etc. I think the problem is that Nadine started to see the funds as free. It seems like she stopped even checking prices much. Just: need it, get it.
So, yes, it should not have been spent on nearly as many incidentals. It seems like everyone got carried away, and I didn't stop it.
Tim and I sat down and made something of a plan, which I'll post about later. Hopefully it will help.
Suzanne says
I think I voiced my concern for your health getting into this situation with your in laws a while back. We may not agree on what food stamps should be spent on but I truly hope you will take care of yourself Abigail.
Abigail says
I am concerned about my health too. Now that the weather is changing, I'm fighting some sort of fun cold again. I'm taking Vitamin C tablets — except that I have to wait awhile to take my Adderall when I take those, sigh — and trying to get lots of sleep.
Also, as I said to TEN, Tim and I did sit down last night and start working up a plan. I'll post more about it in a bit.
Cindy Brick says
First, I want to mention how much I've enjoyed reading your blog over the past year or so. Thank you for sharing your life with us.
I'm guessing that because of the distance, you were aware of general financial problems, but not specifically how your in-laws got themselves into this pickle. So what your mother-in-law is buying now is, I'm guessing, what she's been buying all along — and one of the reasons they're in trouble now.
Although I could understand an occasional indulgence, I have a very strong feeling that these were the norm — not an occasional splurge. And I do have a problem with using taxpayers' money for that. I can't afford to go buy a roast whenever I feel like it — why should I then be just fine with someone using their foodstamps to do it?
Granted, I am just a little frustrated right now with this whole public aid thing, after reading an article in the weekend Parade magazine, showing someone asking for help with their fuel costs — and pictured in a room of custom leather furniture that cost a pretty penny. (Husband said, "Why don't they sell the furniture, so they can pay their bill?")
The hard part for you is going to be standing your ground. Your mother-in-law is going to expect you to pay for more items that you feel uncomfortable about, once she runs out of food stamps and other aid. (You can plan on it — why would your in-laws change their behavior now, since they've done it for so many years…)
How will you deal with that, especially if Tim is uncomfortable backing you up?
Abigail says
Cindy,
I have definitely been aware of their trend — "celebrate" making it through the hard spots by exhibiting behavior that is what helped get them there. They deplete the resources when they have them, which means they go through long, hard dry spells… then celebrate again when those end. Endless cycle.
And since I wasn't there on shopping trips, I am not really sure what percentage was splurge vs spend. Based on what I saw, it was definitely too high a ratio. I know too much was spent on soda — at least 8 or so 12-packs in the past month, which will add up even shopping at Walmart — and other indulgences.
Tim and I did sit down and discuss things last night. I'll try to outline that in a bit. Once I got him straight on some of the details, he realized a bit more how badly this past month's food bill was handled.
Emma says
You've done this a couple of times now where you post something negative about your in-laws, people judge, and then you jump to defend them. If you post things like this about them, people are going to get wound up for the same reasons you were when you initially posted the story. You post, you judge, and then you get upset when others join in.
I certainly hope that your in-laws don't read your blog. If I were Nadine I'd be absolutely mortified knowing that total strangers are judging her and her ways and that her daughter-in-law had a hand in it.
Abigail says
Emma,
I actually did realize this, and am going to try harder to be a little clearer from the start. When I wrote the initial piece, I didn't realize I wasn't making clear that the $600 was a surplus rather than a monthly allotment.
And while I do think that we all — myself included for my hand in it — deserve some judging for how those funds got spent, I took issue with the people who stated unilaterally that food assistance should never be used for candy or snacks. Assuming you can make use food assistance wisely enough (that being the emphasis) that a bag of candy every once in awhile is an option, I think it's ridiculous that it or a box of crackers denounces you as wasteful.
That said, the spending that was done from this household was far less than "occasional" and far less than "wisely" spent.
I do need to try to let people voice their opinions, yes. That said, even when I am very, very careful (which I admittedly wasn't in that last post) people misconstrue facts. I did feel the need to clarify.
And I still say that one month of (very unwise) overspending does not mean someone is "scamming" or "gaming" the system. It just means that they were being vastly imprudent.
As for the blog, I'm sure there are a good number of relatives and spouses and friends and neighbors and colleagues who would be pretty mortified to read what's being written about them. Not all bloggers even attempt anonymity.
Nadine knows I write a blog. She chooses not to read it. I don't know if that's from a desire not to know whether I write about her or whether she simply doesn't have the energy/interest.
if that changes, I'm sure we'll have a mighty unpleasant discussion.
Emma says
That said, I completely understand why you judged and were frustrated to begin with. It was a totally valid emotional response to the obvious frittering away of money when you've done so much and spent so much to relieve them of their money worries. What she SHOULD have done, instead of going nuts at the store, is given you the card and a list of things they NEEDED. It would have been a show of gratitude, good faith, and humbleness that you have saved them from possible homelessness. I think that because they are living with you rent-free, and likely utility-free, they should automatically hand over their food stamps to you and Tim just to contribute to the household as a whole. You and your husband seem to be getting a pretty raw deal in this arrangement.
Abigail says
As for rent and utilties… They are paying. Not much, but they're paying. The guest house takes up roughly 1/3 of the house, so we're asking just under 1/3 rent since they're also helping out with groceries via food assistance. Just in a vastly different manner in the future.
Utilities will be split. But yes I sense that if things aren't dealt with soon we shall quickly see just how raw a deal we can get. We have to all knock this passivity off. It got them into this, and it got me into letting them continue.
Time to suck it up and talk about unpleasant things… like budgets.
jestjack says
I always wondered who bought those "$50 and up roasts" at my grocery store. Now I know….Unfortunately with a kid in college, i can't afford these. It's the $1.99 stuff for me!!
Abigail says
Jestjack… It's the $1.99 stuff for most of us. If I still ate red meat, it would still be that for me.
That is one of the few parts of this I'm not sure I can actually get over.
CandiO says
I thought the lack of attention regarding their own medical care was telling, this behavior was exactly what I expected. How did you think they got to the point that they needed to move in with their adult child? As to how to stop it ( or at least your participation), that's up to you. You are now their landlord. You can choose set boundaries but those only work if you are actually willing to act on them. You have to be willing to have consequences and do it when you know they have crossed the line (and they will cross the line). But from what you have posted, I don't really see that working. So my advice would be for everyone to either go to family therapy or financial therapy or both. Yes I know having "no" money will make this difficult, but get on a waiting list now [should have been on a few before they moved in] as there are always a select few places that offer services for low or no cost.
Abigail says
CandiO,
The family therapy actually isn't a bad idea. By May, three of the four of us will be on Medicare. So it's actually relatively viable.
Tim and I started the hard talks yesterday, and it looks like we're going to have to follow up again tomorrow. And we'll probably have to follow up again after that. We're all a little squeamish and things are still being sorted out on a lot of levels.
Laura P says
I understand how hard it is to change habits. My husband and I have worked hard to do this as well.
If the in-laws are going to be eating dinner with you every night, plan the meals for the week. My in-laws live with us too. They are getting older and making sure they eat a nutritional meal every day is something we do. So they eat dinner with us each evening. I make sure they have lunch meat and fruit and snacks like that.
Getting the in-laws on a budget to start saving money will make them feel great once they are started.
Maybe once a week you and your mother in law could roast a chicken or two (or just chicken breasts if you don’t want to deal with a whole chicken), and freeze some so you can just pull it out, defrost, and add some veggies, and bake some potatoes. Another night, make chicken soup. If you cut up the veggies the day you’re roasting the chicken and keep them in a bag, it’s real easy to throw into the pot and make. Or on the days your feeling good, cut up veggies, or cook extra and freeze it.
Getting an extra freezer is great for bargains on meats and other freezer items like frozen veggies, or even pre-made casseroles. When you’re not feeling good it would be nice to have a casserole in the freezer that you can have Tim throw in the oven.
Keep yourself and Tim healthy.
ManicMagic says
Thanx Laura, we’re doing our best, & trying 4 better.
Abigail says
Laura,
Actually, Tim is learning to cook from his mother. I can cook but don't know many recipes and don't have the energy to spare. So she's helping him learn some dishes.
Also, they did bring a freezer with them. Which we all intend to make use of. However, the garage currently doesn't have any working outlets (ah, the joy of home ownership) so we need to get our electrician friend over to do some side work for us.