story here
I just wonder what will happen to the children in this case. The crime Amanda Webber committed is serious and she should be punished but taking the mother away from her 8 children for up to 4 years will have a damaging effect on these children. The sentence should be in the community and involve her paying back society with work, making a contribution - not being housed in a prison.
This is not to undermine the seriousness of the offence I just can't see the 'benefit' to society of locking this person up - she is not dangerous - she does need to accept what she has done is so very wrong and make amends this can be done in a community sentence surely. The children should not be punished if it can be avoided.
Just my thoughts on hearing the news.
AIBU?
not to be overjoyed that a mother of four is being sent to jail for massive benefit fraud?
bigmouthstrikesagain · 24/05/2013 18:39
YABU.
And I don't agree with people saying that she should be let off prison as it would be cheaper and better for the children. 
Saintly I also vaguely knew her, she runs a theatre school with a name and particularly nice animation implying a SN provision, but nothing about why, or obvious provision for them in any of the services offered. Closer reading gives the name was because ?they were ?different? from other schools.?
She was selling herself as a musical director (either husband or a son was listed as staff) and publicised her children as having ?caught the acting bug from her?, and ?all been trained by their mother? and their successes, but never mentioning either them, or other pupils having SN?s, or the school offering provision for SN?s other than a single line on one page ?we have much experience in children with special needs.?
It seemed odd that so much was implied by the name and animation, but not specified, and I was suspicious, but of something different. It's making sense now.
I think I know how she backed up her claims, and the authorities would have had a hard time unravelling it.
I don?t feel great about her going to prison, but people like her are part of why people like me are afraid to claim DLA.
I need people to trust and believe me when I say visibly severely brain damaged d/d can do some things that she doesn?t look like she can and help her try, and help less visible high achieving d/s with ASD, when we ask for access arrangements, help, supervision, mentoring, and understanding, (not money) especially when he?s lost the plot and stopped knowing how to cope.
Often the only thing I can say to people who say ?he doesn?t look like he needs it?, or who are disbelievingly shocked on discovering him not coping, or what his paperwork says, is why do you think a teen would live like, or do this, if they didn?t have to?
It?s a compelling argument that grants acceptance, until people like her supply them with an alternative answer. 
Despite impressions to the contrary I do not have sympathy for the benefit fraudster, I do question the utility of a prison sentence - not just due to costs. I do not think Amanda Webber should be allowed to 'get away' with anything. Hearing her story prompted a train of thought which I shared with MN - in a way she is a bad example as her fraud is so very extreme and despicable.
I do think it is unhelpful to place 'criminals' in a classification of their own deserving to all be treated the same. It is not true, crimes are not all the same. The people who commit crimes are not all the same.
Many people who would not consider themselves 'criminals' do something against the law in their lifetimes - speeding, under age drinking, serving drinks to someone under age, taking recreational drugs, stealing from a shop 'by accident', so many petty crimes and more serious ones. Knowingly and deliberately and repeatedly defrauding the state is a terrible crime, but is a prison sentence the only recourse? I do not know, I just wanted to ask a question. Many people are content with the prison sentence. That is fine, I just wonder if there are other ways that people can be made to address their offending behavior in a way that could help others. That a devious mind could be turned to make a positive contribution. I am not a Christian but I do believe it is possible to redeem people.
If crime and punishment policy was purely decided on a majority rules basis then I imagine that we would have very severe sentencing and the death penalty. I am not sure the US example is very reassuring in modelling that approach. I would not feel safer in a state where convicted criminals are killed. Obviously I am in a minority - that does not make me feel safe either 
Bigmouth, I can see where you?re coming from. In this case if what this woman has done is what it seems she has, then it goes past simple fraud and theft, as she?s indirectly damaged so many people who are already very vulnerable to being suspected of not needing help, and that is a hidden outcome of her crime which I feel needs a huge deterrent outcome to stop others.
I can?t see a restitution based approach achieving that, and frankly if you told me I could give my children an amazing life full of opportunities through crime, and then pay for it later in ways that didn?t affect them, given that I can?t achieve it any other way, you?d lay huge temptation at my feet.
I don?t find her unredeemable as a person but think you have to look at the big picture as to what is most or least damaging to society case by case.
To the best of my knowledge she's left and is in a different relationship, the children will stay either with dad, or the new partner, she'll serve around two years if she plays the game, and nasty and hideous as it sounds, actually the children do need a clear message that their mum's descisions aren't those of a heroic mum giving them a wonderful life of opportunity.
When your parents commit crime as a way of life, you get punished in many ways and it can't be avoided.
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.