Heater, Mother of Lance

Something to chew on

1,197 Comments
  • Chelley

    2008/10/02 at 6:16 pm

    Depends… are they sharing this crack with me?

    Totally kidding. This is a tough one.

  • Anonymous

    2008/10/02 at 6:17 pm

    I think hunger is the greatest human error we could possibly make. A crack head suffers, but no child should ever have to suffer for something they have no control over.

  • Anonymous

    2008/10/02 at 6:17 pm

    I’d give the money.

  • Sarah

    2008/10/02 at 6:17 pm

    You asked a simple question, and rather than give you a diatribe, I’ll answer it – yes. It would be worth it to help those who truly needed it.

  • cattitude

    2008/10/02 at 6:18 pm

    hmmm…hard one. but I think the needs of the hungry family would outweigh the *sigh* outrage of feeding the crack habit.

  • Lisa

    2008/10/02 at 6:18 pm

    Let them eat cake, and let them eat crack. If a family is desparate, they need our help, right? So we help them.

  • MommaStone

    2008/10/02 at 6:19 pm

    Yes. It is my responsibility to help when I can regardless of how the money is used.
    It is not up to me to ensure the money is used “properly”

  • Meg

    2008/10/02 at 6:20 pm

    Depends on which you find more valuable: providing for those who have not, or withholding from those that shouldn’t. Why do you ask?

  • obamabot

    2008/10/02 at 6:20 pm

    Donation? Sure.

    But if someone was going to throw me in jail if I didn’t? Well then you’re talking about taxes, and just playing semantics to try and prove a naive point.

  • Meghan

    2008/10/02 at 6:21 pm

    I’d donate the money without hesitation. Drug addicts aren’t lost causes and the snowball effect of keeping a family going trumps the negativity of a crackhead buying drugs. Something good WILL come of helping a family. A crackhead only hurts themselves.

    I’m off to balance something on my head while I watch the debates!

  • megan

    2008/10/02 at 6:21 pm

    absolutely I would give the money. If I felt at all uncomfortable with my decision, I would give a little money to some sort of secular rehab program that has a reputation for helping addicts.

    But don’t you always wonder if you would actually do what you would hypothetically do? I wonder all the time.

  • Amanda

    2008/10/02 at 6:21 pm

    This is a toughie because I’ve seen what crack can do first hand to a relative…

    I would give the money. I couldn’t control it either way since it’s a gift. Like, you can’t be mad at the bum on the street for going to buy alcohol with the money you drop in his cup b/c once you give it it’s not yours anymore… I feel like the same kind of applies here.

    Or I just sounded really stupid.

  • Andy

    2008/10/02 at 6:21 pm

    Yes.

    Being the cynic I am, I am convinced the crack-head would score the drug with or without my money. Maybe by robbing and stealing.

    But the hungry family would stay hungry.

    Alas, this is not a choice that scales well (i.e. helping one third world country, but only if you help a neighboring dictatorship).

  • Mrs McP

    2008/10/02 at 6:22 pm

    Yes I would.

  • Moriya

    2008/10/02 at 6:22 pm

    No. Funny you should post this today because after a lot of soul searching I’ve recently come to conclusion that if anything regarding money resulted in a negative outcome, EVEN if part of it was positive, that it’s not worth it.

    1 good + 1 bad = right where you started.

    Good timing, Dooce. Love your blog.

  • Anonymous

    2008/10/02 at 6:22 pm

    If children are involved, yes. And then I would intervene through legal channels and my own resolve, because the crack addicted parent or relative connected to this family might be responsible for this family’s desperation. Extract the children and remain involved. Child advocacy is what my life is all about.

  • Jannie

    2008/10/02 at 6:22 pm

    Sure, because the crack-head’s gonna find the drug somewhere anyway but the hungry ones may be depending on me alone.

  • Lerren

    2008/10/02 at 6:22 pm

    Yup. And already have. Doesn’t bother me.

  • Unbalanced Libra

    2008/10/02 at 6:23 pm

    I already donate to poor people – the government takes that from me via taxes. You know, the money tat goes to all those government programs that the bleeding heart liberals feel we need.
    You can take the crack addict out of the equation, I still wouldn’t donate to the poor family.

  • Jo

    2008/10/02 at 6:23 pm

    Absolutely I would. Didn’t even have to think about it really.

  • Ashee

    2008/10/02 at 6:23 pm

    Without thinking, yes, I would give the money if I had it.

  • Amy

    2008/10/02 at 6:24 pm

    I think I would. You never know when a kind gesture changes the life of another.

  • obamabot

    2008/10/02 at 6:26 pm

    Try this one on for size:

    Would you make this donation, even if you knew there was a possibility that the guy who bought crack would kill those children on the street?

  • Jess

    2008/10/02 at 6:27 pm

    Yes, without a second thought.

  • kalen

    2008/10/02 at 6:27 pm

    no.

    think of it this way – you give money to someone you know would use it for crack & during a binge one night, they run into the family you helped feed. they are high & out of it and in a daze, they crash their car into the family as they cross the street, or their drug dealer fires & kills one of the children during an argument, etc.

    butterfly effect.

    one cancels out the other.

  • April

    2008/10/02 at 6:27 pm

    This is a tough question. I think I would do it because I would be feeding a family. The person who will buy crack will buy it no matter where they get the money from. People often steal things to buy drugs. At least, they wouldn’t be committing another crime to get the drugs. You’re not forcing it on them, and only they can or should decide what to put in their own body. I think the good you do outweighs the potential for bad.

  • Laura

    2008/10/02 at 6:28 pm

    Sure! Let the crack head go screw himself! If it’s a desperate family with hungry children? You betcha. Why should the children suffer because the crackhead has a problem?

  • Adrienne

    2008/10/02 at 6:29 pm

    Yes, without a thought, yes.

  • Anonymous

    2008/10/02 at 6:30 pm

    #23, there’s a possiblity that the crackhead “might” kill the children on the street.
    There’s also the possiblity that he might not. I’d take the risk.

  • Judith

    2008/10/02 at 6:30 pm

    I would help them, too, and also without hesitation. No need to punish them for someone else’s addiction.
    Especially, but not only, if children are involved.

  • Sunny

    2008/10/02 at 6:32 pm

    yes, without hesitation. i would always rather err on the side of mercy than judgement.

  • Jordan

    2008/10/02 at 6:32 pm

    Yes. Absolutely.

  • Judith

    2008/10/02 at 6:34 pm

    And the “cancels each other out”-thing doesn’t apply here at all, since for the crackhead a fix more or less doesn’t really make a difference (yeah, I know, unless it’s the last one yadda yadda), whereas help for someone desperate makes a world of difference.

  • Jen

    2008/10/02 at 6:35 pm

    Yes. I think the good outweighs the bad in this scenario.

  • Karen

    2008/10/02 at 6:35 pm

    The hungry family may not necessarily be decent people – maybe they sell crack. You just say they are desperate and willing to use the donation to feed their children. The people who buy crack … maybe they are more desperate than the family who needs the food. Who knows? No matter, I wouldn’t want children to suffer and go hungry, so I would donate so they could be fed and know kindness. Maybe the crack users were once children that no one helped feed – and they grew up only knowing desperation.

  • Johnny

    2008/10/02 at 6:36 pm

    False alternative. Why would you have to give the same money to the crack addict?

  • maya

    2008/10/02 at 6:36 pm

    yes.

  • Kathy

    2008/10/02 at 6:36 pm

    Yes, I would.

  • Tracy

    2008/10/02 at 6:36 pm

    Yes, of course.

  • Kate

    2008/10/02 at 6:37 pm

    Yes. Chances are, the person on crack would find another way to get it-perhaps even stealing, or mugging, hurting someone else to get it- but that family will probably not have another option.

  • cara

    2008/10/02 at 6:37 pm

    no. because the crackhead would just steal the food from the family while he was high on crack.

  • Melanie

    2008/10/02 at 6:39 pm

    yes..

  • jamie

    2008/10/02 at 6:39 pm

    Of course. (I suspect this question is about politics, but it doesn’t really matter.) Why would you withhold good from someone?

  • Steph

    2008/10/02 at 6:39 pm

    The amount of crack would be considerably smaller than the amount of food. While I’m not for supporting someone’s fatal habit, if that’s what they choose then I wouldn’t knowingly let anyone starve just to prevent it, especially knowing that an addict will feed their addiction regardless. I don’t think there’s any canceling out – a good doesn’t just erase a bad, but a bad doesn’t erase a good either.

  • Ms.Moon

    2008/10/02 at 6:40 pm

    Donate the freaking money.

  • Kristin A.

    2008/10/02 at 6:40 pm

    Yes I would give the money.

  • mpotter

    2008/10/02 at 6:41 pm

    i would because i know that the crack addict would get the drugs anyway. i’m not naive enough to think that b/c i didn’t give the addict money it would cure them.

    i’m also not naive to think that the donation to help the family is a permanent fix, either. i feed them once, and tomorrow they’re asking for more.

    but i do what i can to help in the way that i can.

  • Wendy

    2008/10/02 at 6:41 pm

    Yes.

    Here is what would happen.

    The hungry family would get food.

    The crackhead would get crack.

    The crackhead would not steal the money needed to buy the crack that you just paid for, thereby helping ANOTHER family that the crackhead didn’t steal from.

    So it’s a TWO-FER! Two people win against the one crackhead who is now really high. Pros outweigh the cons. see? I can rationalize ANYTHING. It’s a gift I have.

  • Jodi aka so NOT cool

    2008/10/02 at 6:41 pm

    Interesting scenerio … I think that I would do it, give the money, thinking that it’s sort of a method of population control. Some people will be saved, and the self-destructive drug addict might die a little quicker.

    Just a thought, but not necessarily the *right* one.

  • steph

    2008/10/02 at 6:42 pm

    #36, because she is alluding to the welfare system.

1 2 3 24

Heather B. Armstrong

Hi. I’m Heather B. Armstrong, and this used to be called mommy blogging. But then they started calling it Influencer Marketing: hashtag ad, hashtag sponsored, hashtag you know you want me to slap your product on my kid and exploit her for millions and millions of dollars. That’s how this shit works. Now? Well… sit back, buckle up, and enjoy the ride.

read more

SaveSave