Suchergebnisse

Exploring the connections between family policies, individual and family well-being and political culture, this volume examines several research projects and concludes that their results challenge the view that governmental social programmes in the United States have been detrimental to family life. The results also clarify the relationship between states' political cultures and the kinds of family policies enacted. Additionally, Zimmerman provides guidelines to aid the development of a policy agenda designed to enhance the well-being of individuals and families - regardless of where they l

Taking the perspective of political culture theory, this paper focuses on findings on child and family well-being in 13 states using information from the National Survey of America's Families reported by Child Trends and the Urban Institute. The four states on which this discussion focuses are California, Florida, Minnesota, and New York. These states, with the exception of Minnesota, represent states with mixed political cultures. The present discussion is based on the assumption that just as states' political culture can be a source of variation in states' policy approaches to families; it also can be a source of state variation in child and family well-being. Political culture appears to have some bearing on family well-being. At the very least, the data suggest the need for social work practice and research that contextualize family functioning and well-being in terms of states' political cultures. Because most states represent a mix of political cultures, social workers are likely to find the most support for their efforts among like-minded groups in states with a strong moralistic strain. In other states, they will require the help and support of their national organizations to counter state and local tendencies that are likely to compromise the well-being of children and families as well as social work's goals and values.

Taking a broad rather than a narrow approach to family policy, this paper identifies three trends that call for responses that could become a part of a family policy agenda in the future: growing wage and income disparities among American families, the increased labor force participation of mothers with young children, and increased life expectancy. The latter is discussed within the context of Social Security reform and the need for opportunity structures to accommodate changing demographic realities. In that vein, it also addresses labor force participation of mothers with young children, within the context of the need for a family care system to accommodate parents' expanded roles in the face of societal expectations. An agenda created around each of these three interrelated trends could help to ensure the viability of families as social systems and their ability to perform their functions over the life span, bringing into better balance transactional interdependencies within families, and between families and the systems in their environment with which they interact. Implications for family policy advocates, educators, and researchers are discussed.

An earlier examination of the relationship between states' per capita expenditures for public welfare and their divorce rates found no relationship between the two for observations prior to 1985. However in 1985, the two were related, states' public welfare expenditures being inversely predictive of their divorce rates: the less states' spent for public welfare, the higher their divorce rates, and conversely, the more they spent, the lower their divorce rates. Translated, this meant that family life was less stable in states that did less to support family life and more stable in states that did more to support family life. This finding is important because of the wide‐spread belief that government social programs undermine family life and foster family break‐up.

To rationalize federal cutbacks in spending for public welfare, President Reagan charged that public welfare programs are responsible for leading to a "national tragedy involving family breakdown, teen‐age illegitimacy and worsening poverty." Yet analysis of 1980 and 1982 census data for the 50 states suggests that if this is so, it is because of low, not high, spending for public welfare. While low state spending for public welfare is predictive of high teen illegitimacy rates and directly linked to high state poverty and divorce rates, higher state spending for public welfare is predictive of lower teen birth rates, and linked to lower rates of family breakup and poverty. Despite limitations inherent in the analysis, the findings challenge the contention that spending for public welfare contributes to family breakup, teen illegitimacy and poverty.