Essay on Flat Broke with Children by Sharon Hays

People generally enjoy working and being productive members of society. The positive effects of the Welfare Reform Act is moving to eventually end poverty in America and promote economic growth. According to the 2005 report measuring welfare dependents “Poverty in 2003 remains much lower than in 1996, the year of passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act. The official poverty rate for 2003 was 12.5 percent, compared to 13.7 percent in 1996.” ( Gil Crouse, Susan Hauan, Julia Isaacs, Kendall Swenson and Lisa Trivits, 2005 ) States that design welfare-to-work policies that emphasized getting recipients into jobs by shifting to “work-first” welfare systems can modify program rules to allow more earned income,

In 1996, the United States came up with the welfare to work law, which is now known as the Welfare to Work program (Hill). The purpose of this program was to encourage Americans on welfare to go back to work and not just stay at home and do nothing (Hill). The main goal was to reduce welfare by increasing the income of people on welfare (Greenberg). The program required people to get in an education program, get some type of training, or try to find a job (Greenberg). These requirements were intended to eventually get welfare recipients to get a job and not depend on welfare (Greenberg). Like

President Clinton signed the new reform bill for welfare in 1996. According to Martin (2014), this bill was called the “Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act” (p.37) and it was said to have underlying principles about the causes of poverty. Representatives have used the term welfare queen in order to reduce pity for the poor and gain the support of the public for the welfare cuts (Martin, 2014 p.35). The changes that were made to the bill put a restriction on benefits and also had work

The current (US) welfare reform consists of more than cash payment that the poor US citizen could bank on. There is a monthly payment that each poor person received in spite of their ability to work. The main people who received this payment were both mothers and children. Moreover, the payment does not have time limit and those people could not remain on the welfare for the rest of their live.

While welfare reform did benefit many people, welfare reform ended up costing the government more in "tax credits, food stamps, and Medicaid," according to CBO (Washington Post). This was essentially welfare all over again wrapped in a less conspicuous packaging. Moreover, most families in poverty do not receive welfare. Just a little above 23 percent of all families with children living in poverty receive aid, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. This is because of the strict policies and hidden limitations that the new reform set. Education and training were required to get a mandatory job which then allowed for one to receive welfare. Also committing a crime would void welfare, even if it was done to feed one's family according to the article, Picture this: Images and Realities in Welfare to Work (italicize), by Olson, Muhammad, Rodgers, and Karim. The reality is that many of the ads for the new welfare system were "misleading...[as many realized] that they would need education and training to get jobs that would allow them to support their families" (Karim). It was like asking someone to commit to two things separately in separate places. It was almost impossible to keep track of one's family and train and go to school at the same time. Hence, about 67% of families in poverty did not receive welfare. In fact, most of the job opportunities that were shown did not "pay enough to really

Through interviews with welfare workers and recipients, Hays demonstrates the high costs welfare has had on the moral, economic, physical and mental well-being of poor women and their children due to what she considers to be the conflict between the two opposing aspects of reform: work values and family values. She believes that these conflicting values and the inherent weaknesses in the Act contribute to serious and ongoing problems for welfare recipients.

The welfare systems are based on the principle of public responsibility on equitable wealth distribution and equality of opportunities to citizens who are unable to afford minimal levels of quality and good life, through provision of universal education programs, health care and subsidised housing. In most of the states, welfare systems are not used in the right manner they are intended to. Although the systems are meant to reduce the poverty level and at least assists individuals to get decent jobs, many recipients develops news ways every year to prolong their dependency in the system. Statistics show that women easily abuse the welfare system by simply having more children each year since this means that more money will come in their mails. Most of the recipients on welfare are able to work

Welfare, enacted by one of the greatest presidents of the United States’s existence, Mr. Franklin D. Roosevelt, is an effective and useful means to assist American families in need. Throughout history, welfare has proven to help people get back on their feet and into society. Despite the system’s many useful benefits, like most attributes in this world, welfare has kinks in the system. In fact, welfare has yet to be perfected, even though it was established in the year of 1935 and is still in use today. The system may never be perfected, but it can be improved. There are many different thoughts and ideas pertaining to how welfare should change. Some believe it should be eliminated entirely. In doing so, many people all across the nation would be harmed in financial and mental manners. How can welfare be reformed? Is it even possible? The answer is absolutely. It must be reformed, and many would agree on the matter. It is, however, a sensitive and controversial topic to most. Political parties tend to take interest in the discussion of welfare reform, as well. The typical, left-wing Democrat wishes to give more to welfare users, while the standard right-wing Republican would like to decrease what is given to Americans. If everything has its imperfections, why should welfare be reformed? Why not leave it the way it is and let the government figure out the fine print? There are those that take this sort of stance on welfare reform, and there are some that believe differently.

The clip from Claudine displayed stereotypes that welfare is for single black women who have multiple kids and no husband. Also, in Cinderella Man, if you were a white person receiving welfare it was a disgrace and you were looked down upon or disowned. Holly wood reflects public assistant recipients by making people feel ‘unworthy, undeserving, or like a charity case’. For instance in Cinderella Man, he literally had to beg the ‘worthy’ or rich people for money to help cover the rest of his bills. Recipients may feel dependent on a system that cares nothing for their safety and security. Welfare can reflect recipient view of work. They may feel if they work too hard, they were be forced to be independent and provide everything (food, shelter, affordable home) on own, therefore no longer receiving

The intentions of welfare reform is simply to reduce dependency, reduce child poverty, and to strengthen marriages (in line citation website). However, taking away a low income families chance for help is not going to help their poverty. The idea of getting rid of the help a family needs, in order to help the family end their poverty is contradictory. This is more likely to leave families stuck in poverty, or even send them below if their aid gets removed.

United States Government Welfare began in the 1930’s during the Great Depression. Franklin D. Roosevelt thought of this system as an aid for low-income families whose men were off to war, or injured while at war. The welfare system proved to be beneficial early on by giving families temporary aid, just enough to help them accommodate their family’s needs. Fast forward almost 90 years, and it has become apparent that this one once helpful system, has become flawed. Welfare itself and the ideologies it stands on, contains decent fundamentals; furthermore, this system of aid needs only to be reformed to better meet the needs of today’s society.

The history of welfare reform reveals that the question of personal responsibility versus assistance to those in need has been a constant in the debate over welfare. In the 1950s and 1960s, welfare reform was limited to various states' attempts to impose residency requirements on welfare applicants and remove illegitimate children from the welfare rolls. During the 1970s advocates of welfare reform promoted the theory of

The Working Poor: Invisible in America is a story that takes personal stories and accounts of people lives to describe the injustices that people face every day. Poverty is damaging to both the economy and the people who face it. Many times social policies are created to assist the people who are working but still struggle to get basic needs like food, utilities, gas, and medical. Poverty is a perpetuating cycle that is intended to keep the poor oppressed and discriminated against. Respectfully, this critique will address the social problems that are identified in the book, the major social welfare policy issues, the social values and beliefs that are critical and the implications for future social welfare policy and social work practice.

However, welfare for families who cannot work remains low (..,...). Many who experience poverty are dependent on income support as their main source of income, however, this 'safety net' still remains below the defined level of poverty (Middleton, 2005, p.24, Piachard, 2005, p.6). The Social Exclusion Unit (2002) found that Jobcentre Plus and housing Benefit offices were inexperienced and lacked the expertise to deal with families of prisoners. Additionally, families may not claim benefit due to lack of education surround their eligibility, the stigma attached to benefits or failure to meet strict eligibility criterion (...,.....). .... also reports that some families had to wait 12 weeks without income while anew benefit claim/ revised claim is processed. In 2004, the HM Treasury aimed to tackle child poverty through the introduction of the 'New Deal' (NDLP). The aim of this scheme was to make 'work pay' by encouraging lone parents to find employment. However, this scheme's primary aim was the get parents off welfare and into employment. This proposal overlooked the social, emotions and moral complexities associated with having a parent/partner in prison and can be seen as a capitalist approach to solving unemployment (Williams, 2004,

This week’s literature analyzed social dynamics as they relate to women as workers, mothers, foster-care mothers, and recipients of government support. The authors concluded that the cause and persistence of social problems such as poverty to imperfect labor markets and other systemic malfunctions fall within the conservative or behavioral analyzation or the liberal or institutional examination. This author argued that the behavioral explanation of social problems has influence social work practice and social welfare policy. This adaption allows professionals and intervention technique to blame individuals for social problems, specifically women. Engaging in the same argument, author Diana Pearce focused on the welfare reform adaption of the