commentator
Senior Member
"I suspect there is a great variety in what is available by region, practice and specific training. I have seen many clinical MAs who are required to aid with patient transfer. And that can be back-breaking."
Very much agree with the comments above. In most situations, this training and these types of jobs can be good and can be very rewarding. I am thinking very much of most nursing type positions, which are different in different parts of the country. Here in my 3rd world southeastern state (no Medicare expansion on the horizon, horrible new ideas about testing block grants to the state for Medicaid coming up) the care facilities keep demanding more warm bodies ( and requiring less and less qualifications) to work to death.
I understand that there is a whole lot of difference in the treatment and pay of employees in health care between Georgia, where this woman is, and say, Massachusetts. If it were possible to relocate someone with her types of experience and training, even with her back issues, which may or may not be serious enough to portend SSDI in her future, she could probably get a much better job. Unfortunately, people tend to get stuck where they are, and it is very hard to get people to load up and relocate for the job opportunities in an unfamiliar place without their support network. So most job seekers are limited by what's around them, in their immediate area.
It is interesting to me that it is reported way back at the beginning of this thread that the doctor's office where this ex used to work has extended her an open ended "come right on back anytime" job opening offer. I really have almost never heard of anything like this, even with the best of employers when one has left under the best of circumstances. If this were true and the woman is truly physically able to work, this would sure cause her lots of problems with receiving any kind of public assistance.
And I can certainly see how, in many parts of Georgia, with a back injury, and subsidized retraining in a field that quite frankly we did not when I was working for the Dept. of Labor find particularly easy to place people in, this middle aged woman would not be terribly heavily recruited. And if she's on social programs, though she might be obligated to do a whole lot of job searching she might not come up with anything. We really do not know if she has lasting problems/restrictions with her back.
So many times the parent who's doing child support has a real bitterness pertaining to the level of dedicated job search that is been done by the other parent. But when it comes down to it, there's really not much the court is likely to do in terms of commanding this person to find a job and relieve him of some of his child support obligation. As I've said before, I've seen these folks sent to workforce offices and threatened with jail time by the court, and this is just not sounding like one of the most blatant and obvious cases of refusal to get another job (voluntarily unemployed or voluntarily underemployed) that I've ever heard of.
It comes off sounding more like an ex chewing on a grievance when he doesn't really have a lot of the facts. I think the courts would not like his approach unless, as if I said, the ex wife comes out and really misbehaves, thus demonstrating she's the bigger problem in this case.
Very much agree with the comments above. In most situations, this training and these types of jobs can be good and can be very rewarding. I am thinking very much of most nursing type positions, which are different in different parts of the country. Here in my 3rd world southeastern state (no Medicare expansion on the horizon, horrible new ideas about testing block grants to the state for Medicaid coming up) the care facilities keep demanding more warm bodies ( and requiring less and less qualifications) to work to death.
I understand that there is a whole lot of difference in the treatment and pay of employees in health care between Georgia, where this woman is, and say, Massachusetts. If it were possible to relocate someone with her types of experience and training, even with her back issues, which may or may not be serious enough to portend SSDI in her future, she could probably get a much better job. Unfortunately, people tend to get stuck where they are, and it is very hard to get people to load up and relocate for the job opportunities in an unfamiliar place without their support network. So most job seekers are limited by what's around them, in their immediate area.
It is interesting to me that it is reported way back at the beginning of this thread that the doctor's office where this ex used to work has extended her an open ended "come right on back anytime" job opening offer. I really have almost never heard of anything like this, even with the best of employers when one has left under the best of circumstances. If this were true and the woman is truly physically able to work, this would sure cause her lots of problems with receiving any kind of public assistance.
And I can certainly see how, in many parts of Georgia, with a back injury, and subsidized retraining in a field that quite frankly we did not when I was working for the Dept. of Labor find particularly easy to place people in, this middle aged woman would not be terribly heavily recruited. And if she's on social programs, though she might be obligated to do a whole lot of job searching she might not come up with anything. We really do not know if she has lasting problems/restrictions with her back.
So many times the parent who's doing child support has a real bitterness pertaining to the level of dedicated job search that is been done by the other parent. But when it comes down to it, there's really not much the court is likely to do in terms of commanding this person to find a job and relieve him of some of his child support obligation. As I've said before, I've seen these folks sent to workforce offices and threatened with jail time by the court, and this is just not sounding like one of the most blatant and obvious cases of refusal to get another job (voluntarily unemployed or voluntarily underemployed) that I've ever heard of.
It comes off sounding more like an ex chewing on a grievance when he doesn't really have a lot of the facts. I think the courts would not like his approach unless, as if I said, the ex wife comes out and really misbehaves, thus demonstrating she's the bigger problem in this case.
Last edited:
