Are food stamps humiliating?

December 30, 2008

An interesting question came in yesterday (see comment #32) from Susan, who is planning to apply for Food Stamps (now called SNAP - Supplemental Food Assistance Program).  Susan writes: “I am afraid of being humiliated by my employers and/or coworkers when they find out…My main concern is my employers will humiliate me when they discover I applied for FS/Snap. Any responses?”

Mine: SNAP is an entitlement program. If Susan qualifies, she is entitled to the benefits.  Other ideas?  


12 Comments

  1. I’m in the middle of this same issue with my mom. A few years ago, she would never have let me apply for food stamps for her, but after trying to live on Social Security alone, now she’s totally game. Plus, Wisconsin, where she lives, has a special set of checks that Seniors can use only in Farmers Markets in the summertime, which is sort of cool. As far as worrying about co-workers finding out — are they following you to the grocery store? Just don’t tell them, and if your employer gives you a hard time, ask for a raise so you won’t need food stamps!

    Comment by Charlotte — December 30, 2008 @ 11:46 am

  2. I am sorry but if you are worried about being embarrassed by food assistance then you are not really hungry enough. It has been too long since you went a few days without food. It hasn’t been that long for me. I know what it feels like to go to bed hungry and know that there won’t be any food the next day either. If you are more worried about what your friends will think than getting food in your stomach then you probably don’t need the assistance.

    Comment by Dave — December 30, 2008 @ 12:24 pm

  3. We would worry less about what others think of us if we realized how seldom they do. Barrett, Ethel

    Susan, this doesn’t have to be public knowledge you could keep this information privy and even shop at a different grocer. I’m guessing that your workplace doesn’t allow harassment even if it were to occur. If the info gets to them, I guess you’ll find out who your friends are!

    Comment by Daniel Ithaca,NY — December 30, 2008 @ 12:57 pm

  4. If you are eligible for food stamp benefits, you should feel free to take them without embarrassment. The eligibility rules for SNAP are carefully negotiated in Congress. There is a “benefit reduction rate” so that people who have some resources and are just barely eligible receive only a small SNAP benefit (as low as $10 month). There are time limits and work requirements for able-bodied adults without children. There are fairly strict documentation rules. All these rules are hard on some people, but they greatly increase the political acceptability of the SNAP program with the voting public. If you are eligible under these tough rules, you are welcome to the food assistance.

    Comment by Parke Wilde — December 30, 2008 @ 3:34 pm

  5. Don’t increased applications for food stamps and other benefits increase the chances of such programs getting more federal funding? Seen in that light (especially in a time when federal funds could make a huge difference to states struggling to balance their budgets), participation is practically a public service! If anything, Susan’s employers should be humiliated at their failure to pay their workers a living wage. (Then again, Wal*Mart isn’t ashamed to encourage their workers to apply for Medicaid for lack of employer-sponsored health insurance… I digress.)

    Comment by Tracy — December 30, 2008 @ 8:51 pm

  6. In San Francisco food stamps are on a debit style card, the people behind you in line at the grocery store wouldn’t even know what you’re swiping.

    As for employers ridiculing her - I agree that it is her employers who should be embarrassed.

    Comment by Emily — December 31, 2008 @ 2:12 am

  7. In todays economy the use of food stamps or other forms of assistance may be needed just to make ends meet.

    We are blessed to have that as an option for those who may need it and qualify.

    We never know when that person may be us.

    Employers hopefully will consider these issues as a part of their own public/corporate image.
    “Do they provide a work environment & benefits package that will attract and retain a quality workforce?”

    As for the worker in todays economy, just maintaining employment is a plus.
    If you qualify for a program that will help you or family, use it.

    Not that it makes a difference, but the auto makers and banks owners have far more options than the average person and yet they are availing themselves of supplements to get through. One hopes they are saving quality jobs with that money.

    The average person who qualifies for government help is attempting “just get by” until they can get back on their feet and should never feel bad about getting help.

    Comment by sheep 67 — December 31, 2008 @ 9:27 am

  8. Should they be humiliating? NO. Are they? Depends on the person. It always surprises me what other people find embarrassing.

    This is a bit of a tangent but follow me here… This summer, my cat began peeing on my carpet. I tried everything I could think of to make her stop. Vet visits, special litter, you name it. For a month I thought she HAD stopped, until I opened my closet and found the entire floor soaked in cat pee. Finally, I moved to a place with hard wood floors.

    The other day I had a conversation with my mom and she told me she didn’t like sharing “embarrassing” details about her life even with her closest friends. She told me her best friend had asked her why I was moving and she struggled to come up with an answer more respectable than “the cat wouldn’t stop peeing on the floor.” To her, it’s embarrassing - to me it’s a funny story to tell people. Furthermore, it amazes me the lengths my mom will go to to keep her “facade” intact. So would she find food stamps humiliating? Quite possibly. And it’s very sad that she or anyone else would find a government nutrition assistance program humiliating, and that the negative emotion might keep some people from obtaining the help they need.

    Comment by Jill — January 1, 2009 @ 4:32 am

  9. If you are used to and/or have been able to pay for your food on your own and now you cannot it is presumably natural to feel a bit embarrassed to need assistance.

    As a product of the welfare system (a child raised on welfare), I say its better to survive than let a little embarrassment stand in the way of feeding you (and your family, if applicable). I know, still to this day, I become overwhelmed with sadness, which eventually turns to anger when I go without food for extended periods of time.

    Millions of people go through what you are going though, some situations worse, some better. If you have been told you qualify for this assistance take it now and don’t worry about being proud. If you delay the assistance, it may not be there later. Times are tough and more and more people are turning to the government for assistance.

    And like the other poster mentioned, if your boss ridicules or judges you for this, maybe he should give you a raise

    Comment by Aprella — January 1, 2009 @ 5:30 pm

  10. Yes, you should be very embarrased that you are mooching off of the hard-working people. You need to try harder and not depend on other people’s money.

    Comment by Jox — January 6, 2009 @ 10:36 pm

  11. The humiliation should be held by Susan’s employer, for not paying a living wage.

    Comment by Allison Daskam — January 7, 2009 @ 1:52 pm

  12. I agree, food stamps should not be humiliating! However, I get extremely upset when families come into where I work(so I can stay off SNAP) and all they purchase is soda, chips, candy and energy drinks! How is this helping them? They are the first families in line to recieve the free handouts because they do not have enough to purchase food. This is our tax dollars being used by these families that need help, I would seriously think that a revision in eligible foods should be made! Energy drinks, candy and chips and soda are NOT healthy choices, and when I work full time and go to college full time and can not afford to buy soda or chips or candy, there is something wrong with the government if they continue these actions allowing this abuse!!

    Comment by Sue — January 14, 2009 @ 11:57 am

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Topics

activity additives agriculture alcohol Alice Waters allergies American Dietetic Association animals antibiotics antioxidants beef bisphenol A books Bottled Water breast feeding Brian Wansink burger king calcium calorie labels Calories Canada Cancer cdc center for consumer freedom Cereals childhood obesity China chocolate climate change cloned animals Coca Cola colbert consolidation corn corn sweeteners corrections Country of Origin Labeling CSPI Dairy diabetes diet and energy drinks dietary guidelines diets e coli eat less move more eating liberally farm policy fast food fats and oils FDA fiber fish food art food assistance Food Composition food crisis food deserts food industry food marketing food miles food policy food safety food stamps food systems Framingham Heart Study Fruits and Vegetables FTC functional foods GAO genetically modified grassfed health claims hfcs Hugo drinks hyperactivity India infant formula Interviews irradiation juice drinks junk food kellogg kids diets King Corn Korea Labels lawsuits mad cow Margarines marketing to kids McDonalds Meat meat safety media melamine Michael Pollan Monsanto movies natural New Zealand obama action obesity obesity in kids Omega 3 Fats organic fish organic standards organics partnerships peanut butter PepsiCo pesticides pet food Phil Lempert photos Portion sizes price fixing price of food probiotics pyramid Quotes from What to Eat restaurants revolving door salt San Francisco Chronicle school food scoring systems soft drinks sponsorship stevia Sugars supermarkets supplements surveys sweeteners taste taxes television tomatoes toxins trans fat USDA vegetarian and vegan Vending machines videos vitamins wall street Whole Foods Whole Grains WIC Yearly Kos