Volume 7 – Issue 3 – 2003
Heather E. Bullock, Wendy R. Williams, and Wendy M. Limbert
Christopher M. Duncan and Diane B. Moore
Shanta Pandey, Shirley Porterfield, Hyeji Choi-Ko and Hong-Sik Yoon
“Decoding Responsibility: Welfare Recipients and the Enforcement of Parental Obligations”
Heather Worth
University of Auckland
Abstract: In 1998 a “Code of Social and Family Responsibility” was proposed by the New Zealand Coalition Government of the time. This paper will examine responsibility from a Derridean perspective, arguing that, while couched in general terms the Code was aimed primarily at welfare beneficiaries’ parental responsibilities, and used to justify the possibility of programmes of surveillance and control of the poor. While the Code was subsequently scrapped, I will argue that not only did the Code’s notion of responsibility lack respect for beneficiaries, it also enabled the enactment of policies, practices and strategies which have since become integral to government agencies even though there has been an election of a more left-leaning government. Central to these is the Health Funding Authority’s “Strengthening Families” programme, ostensibly aimed at helping beneficiaries achieve better outcomes for their children by helping them meet their care, control and support responsibilities. In effect this programme is an enforcement of parental responsibility – state surveillance of welfare beneficiaries beginning at the very birth of a child.
“Predicting Support for Welfare Policies: The Impact of Attributions and Beliefs about Inequality”
Heather E. Bullock
University of California – Santa Cruz
Wendy R. Williams
University of California – Santa Cruz
and
Wendy M. Limbert
University of California – Santa Cruz
Abstract: This study assessed the relationship between attributions for wealth and poverty, beliefs about income inequality and support for progressive and restrictive welfare policies. An updated scale was developed to measure attributions for poverty. “Culture of poverty” items and new structural items loaded strongly, contributing to the development of a more contemporary scale for measuring attributions for poverty. Support for progressive welfare policies was predicted by structural attributions for poverty, dissatisfaction with income inequality, and attributing wealth to privilege, whereas restrictive welfare policies were predicted by individualistic attributions for poverty and wealth. Strategies for building support for progressive welfare policies are discussed.
“SES and Other Correlates of Health in a Youth Cohort”
Richard K. Caputo
Yeshiva University
Abstract: This paper reports results of a study that examines the influence of socioeconomic status and other correlates on the health status of a maturing US cohort of adolescents and young adults (N=969). Findings indicate that SES and race/ethnicity/sex remain robust predictors of physical health, while race/ethnicity/sex remain a robust predictor of mental health when controlling for hereditary, lifestyle, structural, psychological, and cumulative factors. Findings provide an empirical basis for expanding Rawls’ index of social goods to include social determinants of health. They also suggest that appeals to social justice to improve physical health have more solid grounding if cast in terms of relative gains based on gender. Findings also reaffirm the importance of professions like social work that stress the importance of self-determination and empowerment enabling individuals to enhance their own social functioning, and improve conditions in their communities, as well as in society at large and that incorporate social justice as an essential component of practice.
“Welfare Reform in Rural Missouri: The Experience of Families”
Shanta Pandey
Washington University
Shirley Porterfield
Washington University
Hyeji Choi-Ko
Washington University
and
Hong-Sik Yoon
Washington University
Abstract: This paper documents the impact of the 1996 federal welfare legislation on rural families in Missouri. We analyze primary data obtained from interviews with 162 single-mother families with children residing in six rural counties in Missouri who are either former or current welfare recipients. This information was substantiated by focus group interviews with current or former welfare recipients conducted between 1998 and 2000. The results provide useful insights into the impacts of welfare reform on families in rural America. Welfare recipients in rural areas have higher levels of education and job experience than the general welfare population in the nation, but they live in areas with fewer job opportunities and very poor public transportation. Those who are employed are making an average of $5.50 per hour and continue to live in poverty. With the economy slowing down across the nation, rural welfare recipients are beginning to increase again, after several years of decline. For rural women to exit welfare, improvement in a variety of work support programs, including wages, EITC, Food Stamps, childcare, and transportation, will have to be made. In addition, opportunities for postsecondary education must be available for low-income women who want to pursue their education beyond high school.
“Catholic and Protestant Social Discourse and the American Welfare State”
Christopher M. Duncan
University of Dayton
and
Diane B. Moore
University of Dayton
Abstract: John Tropman (1986, 1995), among others, develops the notion of a Catholic ethic which he juxtaposes to the more traditional (at least in America) notion of the Protestant ethic as theorized by Max Weber (1905). Using his work and discourse analysis as our starting points, we attempt to construct our own complimentary conception of the Catholic ethic through a series of readings of historical documents and make a case for comprehending the general tone and direction of the discourse on the American welfare state during the New Deal and Great Society eras under the idiomatic rubric of this ethic. Subsequently, we will make the case for understanding the social and political discourse surrounding the proposal and passage of TANF in light of the more traditional Protestant ethic. The ultimate goal of the work is to re-frame the welfare debate in America as a struggle not just between competing methods of “problem solving,” but, more importantly, as a paradigmatic competition between two divergent aspirants for political-cultural hegemony in the arena of American social discourse.