The front-page article ``Washington Eyes California's Model for Welfare Moms,'' March 16, contains a sentence that seems uncharacteristic of the Monitor. It says of a hypothetical welfare recipient: ``She sits home all day watching soap operas on TV.''
I find that sentence ignorant, presumptuous, inflammatory, sexist, and classist. I have read that in comparison to the funds spent on welfare programs, the mortgage-deduction program takes twice the funds from the federal Treasury. Do you have the same attitude about people who take that deduction? Pat Cloutier, Minneapolis
Welfare Does Not Relieve Moms' Workloads
I get angry when I read that welfare moms at home spend their time ``watching soap operas on TV'' (implying that they do no ``real work''). I am a stay-at-home mom (not on welfare). With small children and a household to run, I am busy with much real work and have no time to watch soap operas. Even if I did, what would be wrong with taking a break out of my 16-hour day (plus on-call at night)? Are moms on welfare different from me? Do they not take care of their children at home?
Why is working, at a fast-food restaurant for instance, considered more important than raising one's children oneself? A child needs his or her parent full time, in the first few years at least. I am angry that we begrudge children proper care and do not respect parental responsibilities, yet consider it OK to spend millions on armaments, cosmetics, etc. Society's values are upside-down. Joyce D. Jarvis, Dixon, Mo.