Poverty and Social Work Essay example

The Hull House was founded in Chicago and became the mecca for other settlement houses that was birth do to the success of the Hull House. This establishment operated by building a social bridge that connected social classes. “Addams believed the settlement house provided a service both yo the volunteer residence, who needed a purpose in life, and to an increasingly stratified society at large (Wendy L. Haight & Taylor, 2013).” There were three purposes the settlement house served which was to provided services and assistance to immigrants, policy advocacy, and an important piece that heightened national social reform to the next level; “Jane Addams noted social reform was imperative if the poor were to have any help (Dale &

Around the 1600’s, New England started to develop a drastic population growth. This growth caused several problems for the occupants including, high prices on food, land, and a shortage of work for many because of the aggressive competition. Immigrants from New England began to prepare for a voyage that would be beneficial for some travelling to Massachusetts and not so much those who were travelling to Virginia. Although the settlers from the Chesapeake Bay and New England came from the same country, these colonies established different societies because of varying elements such as religious freedoms, economy, government’s role in society and unity.

The 1700 hundreds was a time for people’s imaginations able to soar free in their heads and see the “New World” for all its infinite possibilities. There were many reasons for people to look for refuge or wealth in the newly discovered world. Some wanted to escape from harsh laws and strict religions of the European government, and others went for glory and money. When the new colonies like Jamestown was formed, so was two new societies. Both areas were settled for different reasons. The different reasons led to distinctive social, political, economic, and cultural hardships and rewards. The New England colonies and the Chesapeake colonies are prime examples of two different societies at the

Welfare has been an arguable topic throughout United States history (“Brief”). Some people agree with it and others do not like it at all. Welfare did not exist until the 1930s during The Great Depression (“Brief”). With millions of people unemployed, Franklin D. Roosevelt developed the welfare system to help these people during the Great Depression (“Brief”). After the Great Depression was over,, the government came up with new programs to help assist the welfare program and help more people in poverty (“Brief”). Some of those programs were Medicaid, public housing, food stamps, and Supplemental Security programs (“Brief”). Theses programs helped and hurt the country at the same time (“Brief”). By having these programs, many people would not look for jobs because they knew they were better off living on welfare (“Brief”).

Many reformers at this time such as Jacob Riis focused on the poor and immigrants moral improvements and ignored the crippling impact of low wages and dangerous working conditions. Organizations expelled immigrants from drinking and other forbidden behaviors such as prostitution and gambling. What these reformers didn’t understand was that the conditions that immigrants faced, led them to act these ways. Jane Addams realized this. Addams developed a new weapon against poverty: the settlement houses.

Between 1450 and 1700, attitudes toward the European poor changed dynamically, roughly following a three-part cycle. In the late 1400's, the poor were regarded with sympathy and compassion; generous aid from both public and religious institutions was common. By the 16th Century, however, the poor were treated with suspicion and harsh measures, to ensure that they were not becoming lazy, using welfare as a substitute for labor. Beginning in the 17th Century, the attitudes toward the poor again shifted, returning to more sympathetic views and responses, though many members of the upper-class still retained the negative outlook on the destitute of the 16th Century.

The life of living as a poor settler or an immigrant was a problem in the urban life. Most of the immigrants faced poverty that needs to be secured with food, shelter, healthcare, and money. For example, if there were no food for the immigrants to eat, they will starve to death. A shelter was one of the most important things they need because it keeps them securities from harm and it is a cozy place for them to sleep. Another source they need was health care because without medical attention most of them had the disease. The disease like cholera, yellow fever, and typhoid came from bad hygiene which was preventing bad sanitation. The health factor was

The influx of immigrants to the colonies was an overwhelming part of economic success. People were pouring in from ships with different causes and incentives. One example is of the Puritans. They were against the Church of England and they fled to America in 1620. Not only were they ready to go, the local government was more than happy to see them leave. Another instance where this occurred was with the overpopulation of Europe. Document 6 mentions that the middle and low classes were a crowded society, and America was looked upon as a place with space for everybody. Here also, people were eager to go for more space, as well as the Europeans who were happy to send off people from crowded regions. There were also many debtors in Britain. Instead of rotting away in prison, James Oglethorpe decides that they deserve a second chance. King George II accepts his request and the debtors settle in Georgia, happy to lead a new life. Indentured servants were also a form of

During the mid 15th century to the early 18th century almost half of Europe’s total population could be considered poor and destitute. The attitudes of the clergy and the attitudes of the socially elite toward these people varied from pity to disgust, and their proposed solution to these problems differed. Some suggested helping all of the poor by giving them alms, some warned others to be careful of whom the money was given to and some people believed that being poor was a voluntary decision and if they wanted to get out of that situation, they do so without the help of others. In particular the clergy supported alms giving, government officials and the nobility advocated controlled giving, and some of the middle class were suspicious

During the start of the 1800s major poor citizens of New York City outer the South bears a resemblance to poor of Europe. These people were majorly widows, orphans, seasonal workers out from season, or persons too sick or too old to do work. Local governments provide them “Outdoor relief” comprising of firewood, food, or slightest amount of cash named as alms, initially from an intellect of communal responsibility or paternalism. State poor Laws innate from customs of English, necessitates cities to care for their poor citizens.

The concepts of “worthy” and “unworthy” poor came about during the English Poor Laws that were introduced in the 1500’s. The English poor laws classified poor or dependent people into three major categories and established many requirement before aid was provided. Dependent persons were categorized as: vagrant (nomadic; with no permanent home or employment), the involuntary unemployed and the helpless. In effect, the poor laws separated the poor into two classes which were the worthy and the unworthy. The worthy were classified as orphans, widows, handicapped, or the frail elderly. The unworthy were the drunkards, suspicious, or lazy. (Hansan, J.E. (2011). Poor relief in early America)

This paper explores Peter Singer’s argument, in Famine, Affluence, and Morality, that we have morally required obligations to those in need. The explanation of his argument and conclusion, if accepted, would dictate changes to our lifestyle as well as our conceptions of duty and charity, and would be particularly demanding of the affluent. In response to the central case presented by Singer, John Kekes offers his version, which he labels the and points out some objections. Revisions of the principle provide some response to the objections, but raise additional problems. Yet, in the end, the revisions provide support for Singer’s basic argument that, in some way, we ought to help those in need.

Peter Singer’s central idea focuses around how grim death and suffering from lack of food, shelter and medical care really is. He further argues that if we can prevent something this unfortunate from happening, without sacrificing anything morally significant, we ought to do it. In other words, as privileged citizens, we ought to prevent all of the death and suffering that we can from lack of food, shelter and medical care from happening by giving our money and resources to charity (Chao, 2016, in-class discussion). In the terms of this argument, death and suffering from poverty are preventable with the

     How many times have you been on your way home, or somewhere around downtown, and at a stoplight you see someone sitting at the intersection with a cardboard sign that reads something along the lines of, “Homeless and hungry”? If you have ever been in a car that passes through a large city in the U.S., then like most others you probably have. What have these people done to be in a situation like this? What can you do to help? Are they really homeless? These are commonly asked questions, however few really take the time to find the answer. An outstanding injustice that I see prevalent in today’s society is the amount of people living in poverty in the United States.

Usually when a person thinks of the poor and the homeless, they think about those that are living and sleeping on park benches or under bridges. They think of those who are dirty, with ragged clothing, worn out shoes, and those begging or panhandling for food. The truth of the matter is that poverty and homelessness can affect people of any age, race or gender. More Americans are at the risk of poverty and homelessness today. There are many circumstances that can cause a person to live in poverty and become homeless. The lack of affordable housing, low paying jobs or lack of employment, and insufficient federal aid all contribute to poverty and homelessness.