The Dilemma of Asking For and Accepting Help

I keep thinking about a friend I'll call Edna. Edna is a divorced mother of two. Because she's had to juggle child care, her job history over the past 15 or so years has been rather checkered-- nothing bad has happened, but she's had to stitch together various part time jobs that would allow her to be there for her kids. She'll do pretty much anything, from cleaning out someone's basement to cold-call selling on a commission-only basis to bartending, but many of her jobs have been temporary so she's never had a chance to really establish herself in a career. Her husband has paid child support, but she's just barely made ends meet-- one of the kids is now old enough to have her own part time job, and she made more money last year than Edna did. I learned this fact during a dinner when another friend of Edna's urged her to apply for food stamps, which Edna did not want to do.

The friend's argument was that these government assistance programs exist precisely for people like Edna-- she does her best to find sources of income but is trying to look after her kids without being a burden to anyone. Her income in some years is basically at or below poverty level though there are times when she manages to do better. Shouldn't she accept some help?
But Edna hates to ask for help, which leads us to another fascinating aspect of her situation: Edna's parents are quite wealthy.
They have several other children. Some of those children have been given quite a bit of financial assistance-- particulary the male children: there seems to be just enough of a generational gap that girls were seen as needing only to find a husband, while boys needed education... and cars and clothes and apartments and so on. But although they've occasionally paid Edna to do work for them, they are otherwise very stingy with her. They barely even give gifts to Edna's kids, and when they do, there's often a whiff of goodie-bag re-gifting about it. Edna hates to ask them for anything, and rarely does, but at one point she reluctantly reminded them of an offhand promise they'd once made to chip in when it came time to pay for sending Edna's kids to college-- this time they kind of winced and alluded to money being tight for them... but of course this is in the context of them having two luxurious homes where they do lots of entertaining, and other trappings of an upper-class life.

I'm way over-simplifying the situation here to avoid too many identifying details, not to mention writing a mile-long post, but it's an interesting dilemma, isn't it? Should someone who is not wealthy herself but has a wealthy family turn to government for assistance? Is it the family's obligation to help her first? Some will no doubt say "neither" but what is someone in such a situation supposed to do? Leave her kids unattended? Pay money she doesn't have for day care programs? Edna's ex-husband is a mess, so he's not much help. It's hard to imagine anyone being more responsible and less prima-donna-ish than Edna... but she just can't seem to make all this work on her own.
Within a few years, both of her kids will be in college, and whether or not they get financial aid, that will be another drain on her resources, even if it does free up her time for a full-time job. But she's already been looking, and it's tough-- with the resume of a stay-at-home-mom who's fit odd jobs in around child-rearing, she's not going to be the most attractive job candidate in a climate like today's, where employers can probably be more picky. But she did mention that she will be going on a second interview for a job that pays about $40,000 a year, an amount she referred to as "life-changing."

Interestingly enough, she told me about the potential job while we were both at the home of another friend who has become something of an art collector. As I was listening to Edna, I was looking up at a painting above the fireplace that supposedly cost $50,000. It was such a collision of worlds... and it leads me to one more facet of these kinds of situations among friends:

Whenever Sweetie and I have dinner with Edna, we'll often cook something at home in order to avoid the issue of whether Edna can afford to go out. Sometimes we do end up going out, and sometimes we'll just pick up the check ourselves and tell Edna it's our treat-- but again, Edna has a lot of pride and won't always let us do that. The art collector friend hadn't seen Edna in a long time and invited us all to visit for a weekend in the country. I had thought we'd just be barbequeing, but we went out to dinner one night, and when the check came, we all split it evenly. I guess on one level that's totally fair, and just because one person makes 10 (or 20 or 100) times more than another doesn't mean it's their obligation to pay. But I personally think that if you invite someone to spend the weekend with you, they are your guest for the whole weekend, which means the host should cover the dinner bill, while the guest will hold up their end of the bargain by bringing wine or some sort of gift and offering to chip in for dinner but not arguing too much when the hosts insist that they'll get it. That rule doesn't have to be set in stone-- maybe going out to dinner one night is the thank-you gift to the host/hostess, to show your appreciation and relieve them from having to cook so you can all just relax and talk. But in this situation it seemed a little insensitive...