A couple of weeks ago there was a news article in the Arizona Republic describing the changes in the Women, Infant and Children (WIC) programs requiring healthier choices of food for the women and children participants. Some of the changes include more fresh fruits and vegetables choices and less processed foods. The article cites that the change was necessary after a study found that individuals on food allowance vouchers, particularly women had a higher body mass index compared to people who did not receive the assistance. I believe that it is good change for the health and well-being of the children and mothers receiving the food allowance to teach them healthier eating habits at a young age thus encouraging them to make better food choices as they get older. According to the article this revision is the first in 30 years which makes it clear that the programs currently made available for women and children might be inadequate if they were designed for a family some decades ago. The Arizona Department of Health is also pushing for a revision of the food stamp program to require similar restrictions and in addition offer incentives for recipients to make better choices. Overall, the change will help the families live healthier and with a lesser risk of becoming obese.
Of course, this is a single issue that has been addressed and there are many more that need similar attention. Health care for example, is a major concern for the near poor because they do not qualify for state Medicaid due to their working status. After 14 years, it would be a good time to revisit the effectiveness of welfare and reform it where it is necessary so that children are cared and provided for adequately and with their best interests in mind. Given the present state of the economy there is an increasing number of children falling victims to poverty. I continue to believe that in a country as rich as ours that spends more on war rather than education is indicative of the government having shifted their focus in the wrong direction and it is time that it too be reformed. Give the American people the opportunity to provide for themselves by bringing jobs back, giving them health care and guaranteeing us a livable wage!
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/10/01/20091001wicfood1001.html
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Blog #10
Working mothers in Chaudry’s study were forced to become more flexible making their work schedule fit the child care schedule. In addition, it was necessary that they use both money and subsidies in order to afford child care while they worked. After the welfare reform shifted the focus from the well-being of children to work first, many women found themselves scrambling for work because their benefits were only offered to them for a limited time. To have to find child care quickly did not always translate into effective and successful outcomes as depicted in the working mothers’ stories. They face child care, transportation, and education issues that make exiting poverty much more difficult. Although the welfare reform reduced the number of women on assistance it has not made it possible for working mothers to find the support they need in order to get ahead as they have to continue to rely on other social services such as healthcare and child care assistance. Therefore one can conclude that the number of people that came off the welfare rolls simply shifted to other services.
It is absolutely essential for the working mother to have dependable and quality health care in order to succeed in the workforce. The women in Chaudry’s study often had to take numerous days off of work in order to submit the proper documentation to obtain approval from the State and when the subsidies fell through and the providers were not paid on time or correctly for that matter, that jeopardized the entire situation creating a burdensome worry for the working mother that again needed to act fast and find new child care arrangements when the previous ones didn’t work out. And throughout the time period that mom is seeking adequate care for her children so that she can work; the children are put at risk for delayed development that may be difficult to overcome later in childhood by exposing them to continuous change and instability.
Working women would like to make it a priority to find a safe and stable environment for their children. However, when that option is not available due in part to “all the red tape” involved with obtaining child care assistance in order to exit the welfare system and enter the work force, it makes it much more difficult for the women to be able to provide for their family. And when the women do find child care they find that it takes up most of their income again leaving the mother at the risk of experiencing financial hardship.
Contrary to what some people might believe about poor families being lazy and dumb, Chaudry found that they are in fact hardworking members of society except working hard is still not enough to keep them afloat. Sometimes it requires working women to have more than one job and this means that they spend less time with their children. Not being able to care for their own children is a great concern for the working mothers but they remain torn between caring for the children themselves and ensure their emotional well-being or keep the children in day care for 10-12 hours days to ensure they are physically taken care of.
I agree with Chaudry recommendation to increase the funds for children’s programs because the children are the ones that require the stability in their critical early years of life so that they can develop and progress normally because if they are not given that opportunity then we are failing these children from the beginning when they did not ask to be born into poverty. It is not fair to penalize the children for the parents’ unfortunate circumstances. If we do not help single working mothers by enabling them to take their children to head start for the benefit of the child’s educational future simply because her single income of $10 is too much in the chart then the message to those mothers is that the lack of assistance comes with the territory of being the working poor. Chaudry argues that it is necessary to also provide access to stable child care for all eligible families because by providing stable child care will benefit the children first. And by making the care accessible to eligible working mothers and families we will see healthier and happier children in addition to increased productivity in the work place by working mothers.
It is absolutely essential for the working mother to have dependable and quality health care in order to succeed in the workforce. The women in Chaudry’s study often had to take numerous days off of work in order to submit the proper documentation to obtain approval from the State and when the subsidies fell through and the providers were not paid on time or correctly for that matter, that jeopardized the entire situation creating a burdensome worry for the working mother that again needed to act fast and find new child care arrangements when the previous ones didn’t work out. And throughout the time period that mom is seeking adequate care for her children so that she can work; the children are put at risk for delayed development that may be difficult to overcome later in childhood by exposing them to continuous change and instability.
Working women would like to make it a priority to find a safe and stable environment for their children. However, when that option is not available due in part to “all the red tape” involved with obtaining child care assistance in order to exit the welfare system and enter the work force, it makes it much more difficult for the women to be able to provide for their family. And when the women do find child care they find that it takes up most of their income again leaving the mother at the risk of experiencing financial hardship.
Contrary to what some people might believe about poor families being lazy and dumb, Chaudry found that they are in fact hardworking members of society except working hard is still not enough to keep them afloat. Sometimes it requires working women to have more than one job and this means that they spend less time with their children. Not being able to care for their own children is a great concern for the working mothers but they remain torn between caring for the children themselves and ensure their emotional well-being or keep the children in day care for 10-12 hours days to ensure they are physically taken care of.
I agree with Chaudry recommendation to increase the funds for children’s programs because the children are the ones that require the stability in their critical early years of life so that they can develop and progress normally because if they are not given that opportunity then we are failing these children from the beginning when they did not ask to be born into poverty. It is not fair to penalize the children for the parents’ unfortunate circumstances. If we do not help single working mothers by enabling them to take their children to head start for the benefit of the child’s educational future simply because her single income of $10 is too much in the chart then the message to those mothers is that the lack of assistance comes with the territory of being the working poor. Chaudry argues that it is necessary to also provide access to stable child care for all eligible families because by providing stable child care will benefit the children first. And by making the care accessible to eligible working mothers and families we will see healthier and happier children in addition to increased productivity in the work place by working mothers.
Blog #9
The statistics posted by the National Center for Children in Poverty reflect that 18% percent of the nation’s children live in poverty. Now we are talking about the richest nation in the world and we have 13 million children living in poverty. How is this possible? First of all, as found by the NCCP it takes about twice the poverty income to actually make ends meet for a family of four. With the rising cost of living, the working mothers are less able to provide adequately for their children resulting in neglected care and supervision of the children of the working poor. In Arizona, the rate of poverty among children is 20 % and in other states it is higher but particularly among minorities that are twice as likely to experience financial hardships. According to the NCCP, minorities are living in poverty at the rates of between 29% among American Indians and as high as 35% for African-Americans compared to a 10% rate of poverty for their white counterparts. In a border state such as Arizona, having immigrant parents (as I do) increases the rate of poverty by 10% (from 16%-26%) compared to children with native born parents.
The conditions of working women make it difficult for them to not only earn enough to enable them to provide for the children’s basic needs but also increase the vulnerability of the children because they lack adequate nutrition and health care. Because a large percentage of poor children do not have healthcare coverage and because their mothers cannot afford to take the time off of work let alone pay for a doctor visit, children are often sent to school sick and the parents themselves have to go to work sick. Overall, the situation of the working poor is one that places both the parents and the children just shy of homelessness and children should not have to worry about those insecurities at such a young age.
As a mother, I strive to work hard to provide my two children with everything they need but if I lost my job tomorrow and my husband was the only one working, I too would find my children among the 13 million children in poverty and my heart breaks to watch these hard working parents trying to do everything they can to provide for their families and it is still not enough.
The conditions of working women make it difficult for them to not only earn enough to enable them to provide for the children’s basic needs but also increase the vulnerability of the children because they lack adequate nutrition and health care. Because a large percentage of poor children do not have healthcare coverage and because their mothers cannot afford to take the time off of work let alone pay for a doctor visit, children are often sent to school sick and the parents themselves have to go to work sick. Overall, the situation of the working poor is one that places both the parents and the children just shy of homelessness and children should not have to worry about those insecurities at such a young age.
As a mother, I strive to work hard to provide my two children with everything they need but if I lost my job tomorrow and my husband was the only one working, I too would find my children among the 13 million children in poverty and my heart breaks to watch these hard working parents trying to do everything they can to provide for their families and it is still not enough.
Blog #8
Urban poverty creates unique problems for poor working mothers in particular because tehe environment that they are in puts them at risk for raising children single handedly with a great number of fathers in jail and unable to contribute to the household . In additions children are attending failing schools, children and their mother are going to bed hungry, parents have to choose between keeping the house warm and put food on the table over purchasing and taking necessary medication so that they can stay healthy and continue to work. In essence, the family structure is unable to function properly to ensure that everyone can strive, particularly the children because in urban neighborhoods there are less available jobs that pay well. Another issue is the degree of violence present in urban poor communities where there is a higher concentration of drug use thus rendering the environment unsafe and unfit for children to grow up in.
The working poor are working just as hard as the next person and yet it is still not enough to bring them out of poverty. Some of the videos reflect women who are working hard and have the desire to become more but they are held back by the fact that they cannot afford to pay for college on minimum wage, they cannot afford to buy new clothes and shoes because what they earn is just enough for rent (at their parent’s house), food and bills. Whereas if the children were raised in mixed income neighborhoods, the schools are better, the resources are more plentiful and the overall environment is a better situation for the children to grow up in. Children can play outside, make friends and experience a more normal childhood than those who live in urban poor communities forced to stay inside watching television in order to stay safe. Every child in this country deserves the right to be happy and protected and it is time that we do more for the hard working mothers who are trying to do just that.
The working poor are working just as hard as the next person and yet it is still not enough to bring them out of poverty. Some of the videos reflect women who are working hard and have the desire to become more but they are held back by the fact that they cannot afford to pay for college on minimum wage, they cannot afford to buy new clothes and shoes because what they earn is just enough for rent (at their parent’s house), food and bills. Whereas if the children were raised in mixed income neighborhoods, the schools are better, the resources are more plentiful and the overall environment is a better situation for the children to grow up in. Children can play outside, make friends and experience a more normal childhood than those who live in urban poor communities forced to stay inside watching television in order to stay safe. Every child in this country deserves the right to be happy and protected and it is time that we do more for the hard working mothers who are trying to do just that.
Blog #7
The biggest factors that contribute to the instability of child care that Jaqueline and Julia experienced included inability to pay and work and class/internship schedules. Julia was not by any means a lazy poor person who just didn’t try. As a matter of fact, she was trying very hard to find adequate child care arrangements as any mother would do for her child so that she could go to school and work to enable her to provide for herself and Jaqueline. The inability to pay was a major factor affecting the stability of Jaqueline’s quality of care because although the arrangement with Sonia was working out well in terms of a safe and stable environment, Julia was forced to end the arrangement because she could not afford to pay for it.
As seen on the slides, in Arizona for example there is a greater number of women compared to men living in poverty. If the women are mother, they face even greater challenges when attempting to enter the workforce given they to make additional arrangements and sacrifices so that they can work. Minimum-wage jobs are usually accompanied by minimally tolerant absence policies that do not offer paid time off which means that if the nanny/sitter becomes ill and is unable to care for the child or if the child becomes ill and needs to be taken to the doctor, mom is not only going to make less during the pay period but she will be at risk of losing her job for having to take time off.
Also, most people employed at minimum-wage are unable to afford adequate transportation or health care making them more vulnerable to unforeseen circumstances that may cause them to lose time away from work thus translating that into the inability to make ends meet.
Once again, it is the children that ultimately pay the price of poverty because if the parents are having to work more than one job to adequately provide for the family and if you add to that the need to use public transportation, the children miss out on the opportunity to build a bond with the parent because the parents are too busy “taking responsibility” and the result could prove to be devastating particularly for the children to have the parent(s) around.
As seen on the slides, in Arizona for example there is a greater number of women compared to men living in poverty. If the women are mother, they face even greater challenges when attempting to enter the workforce given they to make additional arrangements and sacrifices so that they can work. Minimum-wage jobs are usually accompanied by minimally tolerant absence policies that do not offer paid time off which means that if the nanny/sitter becomes ill and is unable to care for the child or if the child becomes ill and needs to be taken to the doctor, mom is not only going to make less during the pay period but she will be at risk of losing her job for having to take time off.
Also, most people employed at minimum-wage are unable to afford adequate transportation or health care making them more vulnerable to unforeseen circumstances that may cause them to lose time away from work thus translating that into the inability to make ends meet.
Once again, it is the children that ultimately pay the price of poverty because if the parents are having to work more than one job to adequately provide for the family and if you add to that the need to use public transportation, the children miss out on the opportunity to build a bond with the parent because the parents are too busy “taking responsibility” and the result could prove to be devastating particularly for the children to have the parent(s) around.
Blog #6
I agree that all children including low-income and poor children should be protected and given the opportunity to develop during a very critical early years of life when they are developing mentally and emotionally. However, this has become an arduous task for working mothers because their income limits their child care choices. Mothers like Annette and Brittany are example of women that are forced to find the quickest and easiest forms of child care because it is necessary if it means that they were going to have the opportunity to work. Their choices were not reflective of the best interest of the children or the most ideal arrangement because without the ability to pay, the choice of the mother is almost non-existent. Judging by the cost, it seems as though quality child care is a luxury considering it costs more than college tuition in every state for an infant.
Because quality child care by a licensed provider is not readably affordable, low-income mothers resort to care by provided by the father, older siblings, other relatives, family day care centers, nursery programs, head start, or specialized care of some sort. It is a common occurrence that when children are cared for by care-givers that are over-burdened by many other children or if they lack knowledge in child development, the television will act as the sitter. In other instances children are inadequately supervised because the care giver’s responsibility exceeds the ability to care for numerous children. Preferably, any mother would wish that their child would have individual attention and the opportunity to develop, learn and play in a safe environment but what the low-income mother prefers is not necessarily what she will receive for her child because she is unable to pay. Thus, low-income mothers find themselves using patchwork for care creating an unstable environment for the continuous development of the children.
In the Applied Research Center link, we find that children born to poor families do not receive the same quality of care compared to children who have parents that can pay. As for care providers who work for the state, they too suffer from having to wait for reimbursement thus jeopardizing the affordable care that they offer to low-income families. For some states such as California that cannot afford to oversee the child care industry makes it even more hazardous for children because if care facilities are not regularly checked then there is no incentive for the provider to be looking out for the best interest and well-being of the children in their care. Ultimately, it is the children born in poverty that are placed at even a greater risk because our government has failed to direct their attention to those who need it most, the most vulnerable population, our children.
Because quality child care by a licensed provider is not readably affordable, low-income mothers resort to care by provided by the father, older siblings, other relatives, family day care centers, nursery programs, head start, or specialized care of some sort. It is a common occurrence that when children are cared for by care-givers that are over-burdened by many other children or if they lack knowledge in child development, the television will act as the sitter. In other instances children are inadequately supervised because the care giver’s responsibility exceeds the ability to care for numerous children. Preferably, any mother would wish that their child would have individual attention and the opportunity to develop, learn and play in a safe environment but what the low-income mother prefers is not necessarily what she will receive for her child because she is unable to pay. Thus, low-income mothers find themselves using patchwork for care creating an unstable environment for the continuous development of the children.
In the Applied Research Center link, we find that children born to poor families do not receive the same quality of care compared to children who have parents that can pay. As for care providers who work for the state, they too suffer from having to wait for reimbursement thus jeopardizing the affordable care that they offer to low-income families. For some states such as California that cannot afford to oversee the child care industry makes it even more hazardous for children because if care facilities are not regularly checked then there is no incentive for the provider to be looking out for the best interest and well-being of the children in their care. Ultimately, it is the children born in poverty that are placed at even a greater risk because our government has failed to direct their attention to those who need it most, the most vulnerable population, our children.
Blog #5
Chaundry argues that “we are asking the least fortunate to strive and work harder” because the people living in poverty are essentially being asked survive off of what is not survivable. As a result of the 1996 Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, many working mothers were forced to enter the work place but without the adequate support system to enable them to enter the job market. Annette’s case for example is reality for many single mothers and they are not all fortunate enough to have an understanding prospective employer that is willing to wait for them to find child care arrangements in order to go to work. And although there are programs such as AmeriCorps that will train mothers with skills to enter the workforce, the waiting list for stable and quality child care to be able to join the program is often times lengthy and challenging to secure. The PRWORA took away the focus of the children’s wellbeing and instead shifted the focus on the mothers to take “personal responsibility” for their own children needs and the result has been devastating for children born in poor families. Just because children are born to a poor family or in a disadvantaged environment does not mean that they are any less worthy of having opportunities made available to them in terms of care, education and healthcare but the government has basically made poor people work harder to be able to provide for their family and they are still unable to due to the increasingly high cost of living and disproportionate wages. According the poverty guidelines a family of four is poor if they are making $20, 614 or less but the truth is, is that it is almost impossible for a family to survive on that income making them desperate rather than poor in my opinion. Annette worked her way up and found herself making from $16,000 to $22, 000 yet she still depended on public housing, food stamps and help with child care. If she was making well over the poverty level for her family of three, why was she unable to provide housing, food and care out of her income alone? Undoubtedly, the poverty guidelines are not realistic.
Interestingly, the public also understands that the working poor are essentially those that are working full time and still unable to provide for their basic needs. Some of the responses describe what is needed to be done in order for them to be able to go to work and make their income work to keep them out of poverty. Healthcare and minimum wage were two things that most people would change because without a decent pay it is impossible to make a living. We really need to visit these issues if the government’s intent is for people to “take responsibility” and provide for their kin. We need to ensure that the opportunities exist otherwise the new generations born into poverty will be unable to break the cycle. It sounds easy to say that we should all pull ourselves by our own bootstraps but what if you don’t have boots to begin with?
Interestingly, the public also understands that the working poor are essentially those that are working full time and still unable to provide for their basic needs. Some of the responses describe what is needed to be done in order for them to be able to go to work and make their income work to keep them out of poverty. Healthcare and minimum wage were two things that most people would change because without a decent pay it is impossible to make a living. We really need to visit these issues if the government’s intent is for people to “take responsibility” and provide for their kin. We need to ensure that the opportunities exist otherwise the new generations born into poverty will be unable to break the cycle. It sounds easy to say that we should all pull ourselves by our own bootstraps but what if you don’t have boots to begin with?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
