When my 5th child was born, he had an extended stay in the NICU, 31 days to be exact. When we finally got to take him home, a hospital social worker came in while we were getting ready. She told me that a home health nurse would be visiting us ‘sometime’ in the next thirty days. My husband asked why and she responded that it was standard with NICU babies, which sounded reasonable. With the first four kids, the visits were never offered. When a nurse came by about ten days later, we were both put off by how cranky she was, but she didn’t do anything besides ask how our son was, asked if we had questions, etc. She admitted she was exhausted and left after about 20 minutes. The visit was fine and it didn’t raise any red flags with us, in fact, friends had mentioned these helpful visits in the past. One friend got help signing up for the Women, Infant, Children (WIC) program that paid for some supplemental food while she was breastfeeding.
The next baby we had was at another hospital in the area. He had survived a very traumatic birth with serious injuries to his face. He was put in the NICU for a short time. Days later, on September 11, our country was attacked. The hospital was a gigantic white building on one of the highest peaks in our city. We rushed to the hospital as soon as we realized planes were intentionally hitting targets, thinking it could be one itself. His release was very rushed (and against medical advice) and no one asked about any visits, they didn’t have time! However, when our next child was born, we were again told a nurse would be visiting. I told her it wouldn’t be necessary, this was our 7th child and if there were any issues, we’d call his doctor. A few minutes later, the hospital social worker came in and asked why I had a ‘problem’ with a nurse visiting. I told her the same thing as the other gal. When my husband went to take things to our car, as he passed the nurse’s station, they asked him why we didn’t want a visit! I felt very pressured and like I was doing something wrong, but I stuck to my guns. When our last son was born, I made it clear we didn’t need help…period.
This morning, my husband saw a news report about a program within the Affordable Care Act, ‘Obamacare‘, that caught his attention. They were talking about the ‘Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program‘ (MIECHV). As we knew from experience, there was already a home visiting program in place so I wasn’t sure I understood what the problem was. I discovered that what’s actually taking place is a grant program. In order to receive a huge grant ($224M) to continue these programs, they must demonstrate how successful they are and how they will include the new criteria required by Obamacare. They have to design “evidence-based models” for “home visitation.” Some things that flag for the need of a home visit:
- Family members serving or who formerly served in the Armed Forces, including such families that have members of the Armed Forces who have had multiple deployments outside of the United States.
- Eligible families with children with developmental delays or disabilities.
- Eligible families that are or have children with low student achievement.
- Eligible families that have users of tobacco products in the home.
- Low-income eligible families.
- Eligible families who are pregnant women who have not attained age 21.
WND asks, “And ever wonder how a government program would be aware of just who is using tobacco? Or have a disability? Or exactly what is “low student achievement?” The American Vision says, “This new program is a classic federal buy-off: the federal government is merely creating a grant program as a trade-off. Already existing agencies can choose to take the money if they agree to the new provisions. And since most of these local agencies (Child Protective Services, School Boards, Social Workers, etc.) are run by liberals (or in conservative locales, a combination of liberals and crypto-conservatives), they will gladly take the money, gladly compete to get the money, and will more than gladly implement such provisions. They will more than gladly ‘visit’ people’s homes as they wish endowed with their new money and new powers, paid for by you.”
The White House’s mouthpiece, Media Matters, jumped on FOX News and others for ‘falsely reporting’ that the program can include forced visits. Indeed, the wording of the document under the heading, ‘Compilation of the Social Security Laws‘ on the Social Security website says, ‘the participation of each eligible family in the program is voluntary’. Not everyone believes that. Rep. Bill Chumley (R-South Carolina) was concerned enough about home visits included in the Affordable Care Act that he introduced a bill, H.3101 that would nullify certain provisions of Obamacare. It would have made forced home inspections under Obamacare illegal in South Carolina. It passed in the House but died in the senate.
BenSwann.com reports that Constitutional attorney and author Kent Masterson Brown stated, “This is not a ‘voluntary’ program. The eligible entity receiving the grant for performing the home visits is to identify the individuals to be visited and intervene so as to meet the improvement benchmarks. A homeschooling family, for instance, may be subject to ‘intervention’ in ‘school readiness’ and ‘social-emotional developmental indicators’. A farm family may be subject to ‘intervention’ in order to ‘prevent child injuries’. Although the Obama administration would claim the provision applies only to Medicaid families, the new statute, by its own definition, has no such limitation. Intervention may be with any family for any reason.”
Parents who have dealt with the state regarding their children already express concern over the tactics used. For example, when the authorities knock on the door for a visit, they may use coercive tactics such as saying it would ‘look bad’ if they didn’t allow them in. The Home School Legal Defense Association (HSLDA) maintains that the provision mandating home visits by government social workers is not true. “Under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, no government official can ever enter your home against your wishes unless he or she has a court-issued warrant or there are exigent circumstances such as your children facing imminent death or physical injury.” However, they point out that if you get any type of government benefits, you may be subject to forced visits. “For this reason, HSLDA cautions families about accepting government funds, such as virtual charter school programs that are run by the local public school.” It does make you wonder why they push for so many people to join government programs. Being able to barge into someone’s home without cause is a nice perk for them, isn’t it?
Like many parts of Obamacare, things are vague and can easily lead to a slippery slope. Every day there is a new report of some new and outrageous part of this mess. People are losing their jobs over the costs of Obamacare, others are losing certain benefits. It was recently announced that United Parcel Service is going to remove thousands of spouses from its medical insurance and the company cites the Affordable Care Act as part of the reason. They claim they can get their health coverage elsewhere. The government is offering money to people for them to create videos that sell people on Obamacare, and the ex-‘government affairs chief’ for ACORN is running it! They know that if the young people of the U.S. don’t sign up in droves they’re doomed, so what better way than typical Obama propaganda to make it pretty? So, while there’s still some confusion over the MIECHV program, there are just far too many problems, many yet to be seen, in Obamacare. The home visit program has had great success as a voluntary program, forcing it to meet Obamacare criteria is seems dangerous. We have to stop this insanity before it’s too late.