The social welfare policy of focus for the instant essay is the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) established vide the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act (PRWORA) of 1996. The welfare policy was designed to give temporary pecuniary relief to poor parents with dependent children. However, this assistance is limited to a particular period of time within which the organizers seek to find a job for the member with a view to create future subsistence (Slack et al, 2014). Normally, the maximum period of assistance is 60 months albeit some states have reduced this maximum threshold (Ziliak, 2015). Having children is not per se a problem in the USA but poverty is. When a poor person has a child, the infant is forced to live under difficult circumstances at no fault of itself. Child rearing is also historically a gender parity problem as the burden mainly falls on the mother (Ziliak, 2015).
Among the theories explaining the advent and proliferation of the problem in the USA is the increase in teenage births with another theory being the racial issue as the ratio colored mothers raising children is higher in the USA (Ziliak, 2015). In my opinion however, the widening of the lower social stratum in the pyramid of the American social strata is the main cause of the increase in the problem. As more people of all races live in poverty, more children are raised in poor homes. The objective of the policy is to ensure that all American children are raised in homes that have the bear minimum income to support their basic needs costs (Ziliak, 2015). This is premised on the value that children should not have to suffer inordinately due to the circumstances of their parents. The expectation is to provide income to parents until they get stable jobs and their own income. The target population traverses the entire nation and entails parents with dependent children who live in poverty (Ziliak, 2015).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The objectives of the policy is to provide money for basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter for needy children being raised by their own parents in America costs (Ziliak, 2015). The covert objective seems to be to avoid too many children being abandoned by their parents and also reduce propensity for child abuse and juvenile delinquency. Another covert objective would be to try and provide a way for the children to take care of their parent in old age. The overt objectives reflect caring by government whereas the covert objectives reveal circumspect economic cunning by government which in helping the parents is also reducing its eventual cost. The expectation by policy makers was long term and involved having the ability to put more parents in stable jobs so as to be able to cater for their children (Slack et al, 2014).
The target segments of the program involve parents living in poverty and do not have jobs yet have dependent children. Dependent children in this regard are defined as children under the age of 19 years or students under the age of 24 years (Ziliak, 2015). However the targeted age would be younger due to the short duration of the program. According to Center American Progress (2017) 13.5% of Americans lived in poverty by 2015, making approximately 42 million people. Within this group, 14.5 million had children under the age of 18 years and are the main targets of the policy. The highest percentage of this group is African Americans, followed by Hispanics then White Americans ( Center American Progress, 2017).
Effects of the Policy
The effects of the policy as envisaged by the lawmakers who passed PRWORA was to provide basic needs for poor children and their parents as well as a hope for the future for both parties aforesaid through education and jobs respectively. Among the unintended results that have ensued is the presentation of childbirth as a ticket out of poverty a fact which resulted from the desperation among the American underclass. The program runs for approximately 60 months which is 5 years.
Within this period, the families affected will have a stable source of basic needs, the children will be able to attend school, and the parents to take up jobs and perhaps begin to save (Falk, 2016). By the time the initial 5 years end, the families will have stabilized with the children in school, the parents perhaps already having a mortgage and full time jobs. The long term effects therefore include well educated children, living in stable homes and having a bright future. The children will also be able to cater for their aging parents in future. The implication of the policy is generally positive and a lot of good has been achieved in the few years that it has been operational (Slack et al, 2014).
Changes in the Distribution of Resources
Traditionally, destitute children would be taken by the children’s department and placed in foster homes. In many cases, the desolate parents would just have more children exacerbating the problem (Slack et al, 2014). The instant policy takes some of the monies that government spent on foster care and places it in the hands of the biological parents while also creating conducive environment for these parents to work and earn (Ziliak, 2015). This has the direct result of increasing income among the poor and reducing government expenditure contemporaneously. It also has the direct effect of actually reducing acute, chronic and endemic poverty in America. The outcome of the policy includes transforming members of the underclass in the very least into members of the working poor with a hope that their children might leave the lowest echelons of the social stratum (Falk, 2016).
Alternative Policies
Money makes only part of the problems that the underclass in America have. Many of them have no hope of ever getting good jobs because of illiteracy and others mental instability due to past drug abuse. A better policy would be tailor-made and focused on the material needs of the families involved over and above money. In the instant case, only part of the families survive past the end of the 5 year initial period with many reverting to poverty and old ways thus rendering the monies spent waste (Slack et al, 2014). A holistic and tailor-made solution that considers one case at a time would be ideal. The program would provide some form of vocational training for the illiterate parents, investment opportunity for those who qualify and rehabilitation for those who have been using drugs. This not only helps the children even after the program but also create better citizens. Finally, the threshold should also be tailor made and without a ceiling to ensure that needy parents get help for as long as they need it (Slack et al, 2014).
References
Center American Progress. (2017). Basic statistics . Retrieved from https://talkpoverty.org/basics/
Falk, G. (2016). The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant: Responses to frequently asked questions . Retrieved from https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32760.pdf
Slack, K. S., Kim, B., Yang, M. Y., & Berger, L. M. (2014). The economic safety net for low-income families with children. Children and Youth Services Review , 46 , 213-219.
Ziliak, J. P. (2015). Temporary assistance for needy families (No. w21038). National Bureau of Economic Research.
