The Uncontrollel Model Of Social Welfare

The three principal elements have become identified in practice within the institutional model of welfare. “The key elements are social protection, and the provision of welfare services on the basis of right.” (Spicker2014)

The welfare system has been controversial throughout U.S. history. It is constantly under attack and is often the chosen topic of political debates. In 2015, 35.4% of Americans were on welfare (Boyd). Welfare is a government ran program, where the government gives benefits to people who cannot afford to take care of themselves or their family (“Brief”). The benefits that the government gives to the people are money and the necessities they need to live a normal life (“Welfare” 825). The welfare system is an interesting topic and has many layers. Although it is necessary, at the same time it is frustrating for many politicians and U.S. citizens. Numerous people abuse the welfare system everyday. People have found many ways to take

Changes within the welfare system as a result of policy shifts and by new thinking, more generally in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), have had many methods, but the one that seemed most important, was that welfare recipients were required to do much more to justify their income support payments than before. The foundation of this new idea is that income support programs should allow individuals to maximise their participation in work. Due to the general shift in welfare administration, the number of activity test requirements an individual in Australia must meet in order to receive unemployment benefits, has expanded significantly since the early 1990s. This complex, overly bureaucratic process means that disadvantaged individuals cannot access the income support payments they require.

America spends an annual amount of 131.9 billion dollars on welfare alone (Department of Commerce). So many facts about welfare are overwhelming, such that over 12,800,000 Americans are on the welfare system. The entire social welfare system is in desperate need of a complete reform. In order for a proper reform to ensue, the people of America must combine efforts with the U.S. government to revitalize the current welfare system. This reform would involve answering two important questions. First, how has today’s welfare system strayed from its original state and secondly, how is the system abused by welfare holders in today’s economy?

There remains a remnant of citizens who honestly cannot do without the welfare system and who abide by the regulation of the welfare system, however, the system unintentionally invites scam artists. The ways of abusing the welfare system continuos to grow. Here are just a few of the examples. Citizens are staying single parents in order to receive aid. Parents view having more children as a gateway to receiving more money from the system. Recipients refuse to search for jobs and report employment in order to continue receiving assistance. People seem to easily make false claims, requesting assistance when they do not need it. Although, there is a set time period for receiving funds many citizens become comfortable and lazy during assistance. The whole purpose of the system is to get citizens through rough economical problems and back to a independent lifestyle without government aid. However, the systems seems to encourage complacency in society and provide fraud play in

This paper was prepared for Social Welfare Institutions and Program, SWK, 639, Section 81, taught by Professor Yvonne Johnson

Social welfare programs and rugged individualism can and do interrelate, as long as government assistance doesn’t inhibit an individual in working to his maximum capabilities, but instead helping him succeed. This in turn, allows the society to prosper, as illustrated in this

When the topic of welfare is brought into an ethical discussion most individuals would surely see it as an ethical act that genuinely helps those in need. This is true to an extent, but is it possible that welfare does more harm than good? Most would argue that the hand out of money to those less fortunate is being socially responsible. The question that drives this ethical issue is where does social responsibility end and personal responsibility pick up? This question is difficult to answer because every family in need is in a different situation. Government benefits are supposed to be used as a crutch for families to get back on their feet, but about

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

In this article the welfare approach discussed in Sandel’s Justice is used. The welfare approach recognizes that maximizing welfare, improving the standard of living, and aiding economic growth promote prosperity.

As defined by Oxforddictionaries.com (2013), welfare is “the health, happiness, and fortunes of a person or group.” Whether or not a citizen’s welfare is the responsibility of the government had been a long standing debate in the United States. The answer came in the form of the U.S. Welfare program, also defined by Oxforddictionaries.com (2013) as a “statutory procedure or social effort designed to promote the basic physical and material well-being of people in need.” Now, to what extent is the government responsible? There are unforeseeable events that affect people’s financial state in a decreasing economy such as people losing jobs or wages getting cut. Welfare is meant to aid citizens in these hard times until they can manage on their own. In theory, welfare is an excellent idea but in practice, it does not always accomplishes its mission. Unfortunately, many cases fall through the cracks, people abuse the system and then Welfare becomes a clutch. The question then becomes whether or not welfare is more beneficial or harmful.

Over the last decades social protection programs have been developed to mitigate damaging impacts from economic crises and

The institutional approach to social welfare is proactive. It addresses needs and problems that may arise before the need is seen/developed in individuals. Examples of this include social security, public education, and tax exemptions for the number of children in a household (Segal, Gerdes, Steiner, p.40). The institutional approach tends to be broader and less detailed in terms of resources, money, and the size of the population in need.

Institutional Social welfare is designed to prevent problems. “They are proactive and provide benefits or services to people before problems arise.” (Segal, pg. 39). It's a system in which one's need is accepted as normal part of social life. It is not just for the poor, but for everyone. A view that emphasizes on preventative role of social welfare of the individual is the responsibility of the social collective. The market is unable to meet the needs and goals of people, therefore, the optimal distribution of welfare is only achieved by acknowledging that there is a significant role for a publicly-funded and organized system of institutions. At my institution we focus on Service members budgets. We are designed to help service members in a time of need and future. For instance we do what we call FFP (financial fitness plan,) if we see a service member relies on us too often, we have administer an FFP. An FFP is where we add up all expenses and show the service member where their money is going and how to budget and save. I think Institutional welfare is a positive way to prevent future problems and almost everyone benefits.