Which life will you choose? The struggle, or the success? Case study by Suzannah Dacre into welfare.
The case study below shows the impact we have on vulnerable individuals, and also the role they play in their own success, and a recommendation to completely overhaul the welfare system of Australia.
For the purpose of this case study, the real identification of the individual has been withheld, as we are here to help people, not name and shame.
This is Del.
Del is unemployed, and a mother of 8 children, and a person the world judged because of her situation and culture.
If you are to have children, you are to provide for them, and this is why we believe there should be a criteria met before having children, or some level of discipline. Nonetheless, we don’t exist to crucify you for your choices, but to help you remain sustainable in life despite your circumstances. We take no victims in our service.
Del is from a church family, and her husband is a pastor. Society loves church, and religion, for the good that they do in community.
Del contacted us, we provided a home, but also investment and job opportunities for Del and her family.
Del had a family emergency, and asked for a postponement in rent if she could pay it back within a month, we said yes, because everyone deserves help.
Del is working for a known business of which we provided the opportunity for her employment there. Del also receives government benefits which are meant to pay for life’s necessities.
Del is $4000+ behind in rent, and was given three months to resolve it. Del also hasn’t paid the outgoings of the property.
Del saved $5000 to go on a family holiday to the Gold Coast at Christmas, instead of paying for her rent or bills.
Del is being evicted this week.
Del chose her path, we refer to it as the negative path.
Had Del chosen the positive path, and acted upon opportunity provided, all adult family members would have full time employment, the investment would be providing well, and the family would be happy, and in a position to purchase the property.
Instead, Del now has two options, the better of the two being Del works with us to resolve her mistakes and debts, so we may continue to support her and her family’s future. And we treat this situation as a positive ending, that they’ve learnt from their mistakes, or;
The alternative consequence being a bad tenant history, the debt being registered, and Del’s situation being used as a case study for our vision, as to how the laws need to evolve to support problem solving, but also humanity to get back on their feet.
We support a total review of the welfare system in Australia.
Having had a mother die from Motor Neuron Disease, and have tenants milking the system entirely, a full review needs to be completed to review the success of Centrelink processes, and instil a bit of discipline and consequence.
With us, Del had a fulltime job, an investment delivering 1000 units per year, and a home which she could potentially buy. But Del had to choose to be successful, or lose the opportunity entirely.