RSS Feed
Print Story
E-mail Story
Man challenges interpretation of welfare law
| Monday, Jul 16 2007 10:05 PM
Last Updated: Monday, Jul 16 2007 10:09 PM
A Bakersfield man is challenging the state's interpretation of laws that prevent welfare recipients from receiving more money for giving birth to additional children.
BAKERSFIELD.COM HOT TOPICS:
Loading Stories
Advertisement
A volunteer attorney representing the man said parents across the state who have never been on welfare and know nothing of these laws are being punished for the actions of the other parent.
In this case, the Kern County Department of Human Services is asking James Belk of Bakersfield to repay more than $15,000 it says he should never have received. Belk and his girlfriend had a daughter, Jamiah, on March 28, 2001.
The Human Services Department, which distributes state money to impoverished parents, determined the girlfriend could not receive money for Jamiah, her youngest child, because she had been receiving assistance for at least one other child before she conceived Jamiah, according to the lawsuit filed in Kern County Superior Court.
State law mandates a person cannot receive more money to support children conceived and born while the family is receiving assistance.
But Belk never knew of this law, his attorney said. He took custody of the couple's daughter and was awarded cash assistance starting in May 2002 because her father was unable to support her, according to the lawsuit.
Belk lives off Social Security benefits because a gunshot left him partially blind and brain damaged.
In November 2005, the county told Belk he could not receive state money to support Jamiah and that he needed to repay the sum.
In denying money to Belk, the county reasoned that if the girl's mother could not receive state aid for Jamiah, Belk could not either, according to the lawsuit.
Pat Cheadle, director of the Department of Human Services, said the department is required by law to ask for repayment, even if the department is at fault.
Cheadle said she could not talk about this case specifically.
Belk appealed the decision to an administrative law judge but lost, prompting the Western Center on Law and Poverty in Los Angeles to file a lawsuit on his behalf June 11.
His attorney, Jen Flory, said many people in the state have the same problem as Belk -- one parent is denied assistance because the other parent was on welfare when the child was conceived and born.
But she said it is rare for an agency to distribute the money, then ask for it back.
The law mandates the state inform a family receiving assistance about the law 10 months before the last child is born.
The state believes that if one parent has been given proper notice, neither parent can receive assistance. Flory believes the state is misinterpreting the law and wants a Kern County Superior Court judge to make the law clear.
Oscar Ramirez, a spokesman for the state Department of Social Services, said it is the department's policy not to comment on pending litigation.
Belk's attorney said she believes the state made other mistakes in his case. Flory said Belk's girlfriend was not given notice 10 months before she gave birth, as the law mandates. Further, she did not receive assistance for two months while she was pregnant, which would also make her eligible to receive assistance.
Flory also said Belk should not have to repay the money because the county made such a large error for such a long period of time.
She said Greater Bakersfield Legal Assistance also has worked on the case.