Blog # 11
After searching through tons of research on Working Poor women one research PowerPoint stood out to me because it was very informative, structure, and showed what women are going through. This PowerPoint Presentation is by Mary Gatta, Ph. D. from Rutgers University at the Center for Women and Work. She addresses the statistics for women, what they are being paid, what the problems are and why they are the working poor of America and also helps suggest ways we can help.
In the United States women make up 46% of the workforce and 99% of all women will work at some point in their lives. Out of all of these women that are working: 2/3 of them are married, about 60.7% of them have children that are under 3 years old. 47% are on their own, 27% are single, and 20% are divorced. Even though women can and do work just as hard as men they are only earning about 74% of what men are working (PowerPoint, Gatta). How are these statistics just for equal rights in America? As shown through are readings over the past couple of weeks: women are the ones that take care of the children, women are the ones that work two jobs by going to work during the day and taking care of children at night, women struggle and juggle their lives and child care, women work just as hard as men if not harder so why are they being paid less?
In thought the government created the Equal Pay Act over 40 years ago the pay gap between men and women has only lessened by half. In the United States two out of three women are making less than $30,000 a year, 9 out of 10 are making less than $50,000, less than 2 percent of African American women are making more than $75,000, and 62% are making less than $25,000. The fact is that because women are not making the same amount as men they are 1/3 more like to be among the statistics of the Working Poor. This means that they are trying to get ahead, they are working full-time, but yet they can not make enough money to get out of poverty. For people that are stuck in this cycle they need to get education and training, but some times if not a lot they can not get the training that they need because of their child care needs, irregular work schedules, transportation, and little access (PowerPoint, Gatta).
Some ways in which we can implement programs to help working poor mothers get the education and training that they deserve are online classes which creates flexibly, saves money on child care, creates classes that were not accessibly before because of transportation, and gets rid of anxiety of going to class. Another program that is helping working poor mothers is the New Jersey Pilot Program which helps them get online learning. In this program each person that qualifies for it will get a computer, Internet, a printer, and class for a year. This program showed great success and some went on to other educational outlines such as college (PowerPoint, Gatta).
This was a great source of information and statistics on Working Poor women in the United States. It shows what the problems are, how women are being treated unfair with the pay gap, and what some people are doing about this to help them.
Power Point-
Mary Gatta Ph. D.:
http://www.etsliteracy.org/Media/Research/pdf/conf_achgapwomen_gatta.pdf
Sunday, October 4, 2009
UNIT B: Blog 10: Working Women's Unpaid Labor, Reform
Blog # 10
After the Welfare Reform mothers had to adapt to their new conditions. These mothers that were living on welfare now had to be more flexible, change their working situations so it would fit into the child care schedule, and they had to be creative in the fact that in order to get center child care they had to use their money and “work” subsides ( PowerPoint Ch. 5 & 6). These mothers that were adapting to the welfare reform were using the strategy of bring together their work and child care and planning them based on one another in order to get public subsides. After they did this then they could afford a higher quality, more consistent, and more reliable place of child care for their children. The mothers in Chaudry’s study that he spoke to in Chapter 5 of his book clearly stated that they “saw work and care strategically interrelated.” This means that they planned their child care around their work schedules and some other mother did the opposite by scheduling their work around their child care schedules. In all cases, Chaudry states, that all the mothers did not know what to put first when dealing with work and child care. They thought of the process of deciding work and child care as a simultaneous process that they had to figure both out at the same time (Chaudry, 180).
An example of this strategically interrelationship is of Cassandra and her son Cedric. Cassandra was a nurse and when her son turned two she was tasked with making a work schedule and finding a good child care facility for her son. She first changed her work schedule so that it would fit into the child care schedule, but after this strategy she had to switch this idea and change her child care needs according to her work schedule (Chaudry, 180). These new strategies of the health car reform point to interrelations between work and child care for these mother because in order for them to survive, make it through the day, make money, and still provide great care for their children they need to intertwine, strategize and work both of the work and child care schedules together in order for them to work.
These women struggle and face many obstacles in their every day lives because of their options. The problem in the United States is that there are no unified systems of child care, the child care that is provided is limited and help is limited PowerPoint Ch, 5 & 6, slide 10). This is the problem with these obstacles, the children of the United States are our future, but yet the United States does not provide adequate child care and policies for all children. In order to fix these injustices the government, as Chaudry states, needs to increase the funding for children programs, unify are broken down system of child care, the United Sates needs to create a policy for working single mothers that acknowledges them and helps them, and they need to work and strive for a policy in which we can break this cycle of poverty (PowerPoint Ch. 5 & 6, slide 12). The fact is the statistics show that these recommendations are just and need to address in the United States. Statics and our reading alone show that there are millions of families struggling, families that can not afford food, families that can not get adequate child care, families because they can not get child care can not work, and so on. There are millions of people struggling day to day and paycheck to paycheck and the government needs to do something about this. For example, to make a point that these things need to be fixed, is from our readings “US Families struggle to Eat.” The family in this story is the Hamilton’s. They are a hard working family, which the parents try to get any job they can, save money, are always worrying about money, and are trying to raise their children. The father can only make $15,000 a year and they are struggling to make payments on rent even with subsides that they are getting. They are to the point where the have to hunt for food. On thing that does help is the Salvation Army in the summer where the go to the park and get lunches for their children where hundreds of other children gather for the same reason ("US Families Struggle to Eat" video).
The government needs to change their policy and structuring of the welfare plan to help these people. We need to implant more programs such as the Salvation Army does because they help these people out more than anyone thinks. These are hard working people that are stuck in the poverty cycle that the government needs to break.
After the Welfare Reform mothers had to adapt to their new conditions. These mothers that were living on welfare now had to be more flexible, change their working situations so it would fit into the child care schedule, and they had to be creative in the fact that in order to get center child care they had to use their money and “work” subsides ( PowerPoint Ch. 5 & 6). These mothers that were adapting to the welfare reform were using the strategy of bring together their work and child care and planning them based on one another in order to get public subsides. After they did this then they could afford a higher quality, more consistent, and more reliable place of child care for their children. The mothers in Chaudry’s study that he spoke to in Chapter 5 of his book clearly stated that they “saw work and care strategically interrelated.” This means that they planned their child care around their work schedules and some other mother did the opposite by scheduling their work around their child care schedules. In all cases, Chaudry states, that all the mothers did not know what to put first when dealing with work and child care. They thought of the process of deciding work and child care as a simultaneous process that they had to figure both out at the same time (Chaudry, 180).
An example of this strategically interrelationship is of Cassandra and her son Cedric. Cassandra was a nurse and when her son turned two she was tasked with making a work schedule and finding a good child care facility for her son. She first changed her work schedule so that it would fit into the child care schedule, but after this strategy she had to switch this idea and change her child care needs according to her work schedule (Chaudry, 180). These new strategies of the health car reform point to interrelations between work and child care for these mother because in order for them to survive, make it through the day, make money, and still provide great care for their children they need to intertwine, strategize and work both of the work and child care schedules together in order for them to work.
These women struggle and face many obstacles in their every day lives because of their options. The problem in the United States is that there are no unified systems of child care, the child care that is provided is limited and help is limited PowerPoint Ch, 5 & 6, slide 10). This is the problem with these obstacles, the children of the United States are our future, but yet the United States does not provide adequate child care and policies for all children. In order to fix these injustices the government, as Chaudry states, needs to increase the funding for children programs, unify are broken down system of child care, the United Sates needs to create a policy for working single mothers that acknowledges them and helps them, and they need to work and strive for a policy in which we can break this cycle of poverty (PowerPoint Ch. 5 & 6, slide 12). The fact is the statistics show that these recommendations are just and need to address in the United States. Statics and our reading alone show that there are millions of families struggling, families that can not afford food, families that can not get adequate child care, families because they can not get child care can not work, and so on. There are millions of people struggling day to day and paycheck to paycheck and the government needs to do something about this. For example, to make a point that these things need to be fixed, is from our readings “US Families struggle to Eat.” The family in this story is the Hamilton’s. They are a hard working family, which the parents try to get any job they can, save money, are always worrying about money, and are trying to raise their children. The father can only make $15,000 a year and they are struggling to make payments on rent even with subsides that they are getting. They are to the point where the have to hunt for food. On thing that does help is the Salvation Army in the summer where the go to the park and get lunches for their children where hundreds of other children gather for the same reason ("US Families Struggle to Eat" video).
The government needs to change their policy and structuring of the welfare plan to help these people. We need to implant more programs such as the Salvation Army does because they help these people out more than anyone thinks. These are hard working people that are stuck in the poverty cycle that the government needs to break.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
UNIT B: Blog 9: Working Women’s Unpaid Labor
Blog # 9
The working poor are a huge problem in the United States. There are 13 million children in the United States that are living in low income families that are only making $20,000 a year of a family of four. Today there are 1.3 million more children that are living in poverty than there were in 2000. The problem with families and children living in poverty is a huge one that will always be an increasing problem with the United States does not do anything about it. The problem is that millions are children, who are our future, are living in poverty and not getting the resources that they deserve because their mothers are not able to get out of poor working conditions. From our reading “Who are America’s poor children?” it states that research shows that “on average families need an income that is twice the amount of the federal poverty line.
In 2005 28 million or 39% of the United States children are living in low income and poverty homes. These numbers along with the research that families making $40,000, two times as much as the poverty line, such be considered low income and such be subsidized by the government. Officials know that this policy is “flawed” to say the least, but they have yet to be any action in changing it. Another question is who and why are these children living in poverty and there is an explicit line coming from their parents as to why. Children that have immigrant parents are living in poverty. In states with the highest immigrant rates the number of children living in poverty ranges from 14% to 40%, and 26% of children that are immigrants in total are poor. The fact is that children are living in very poor and poverty stricken situations where they have no outs because they are young. In the United States 16% of household with children are living with fears of not having food and 19%
of poor children do not have health care.
In 2005, in 13 states across the United States 20% of children were living in poverty, this mostly see in the southern and most eat coast states. Also 15% to 19% of children were living in poverty in 19 states spread out around the United States which include CA, FL, IL, IN, KS, OH, OK, TN, WA, WI, MO, MI, and more. In 17 other states in the United States 10% to 14% of the children were living in poverty such as AK, CO, ID, IA, MA, MN, NV, ND, WY, and more. In 2005 the highest ranking ethic background for children living in poverty in the United States were African American children at 35% of the poverty rate followed by American Indians at 29%, Latinos at 28%, Asian at 11%, and then white children at 10%. Another statistical chart from 2005 shows that children that have parents that are not native born are more likely to be living in poverty than children who’s parents are born in the United States across all states varying a little by states within different regions, but still maintains the structure of this claim. For example, children of immigrants parents in poverty in CA are 26%, in FL it is 20%, IL 20% and so on and then for children who’s parents are native-born and are in poverty in CA it is 14%, in FL it is 18%, and then IL it is 17%. Children all over the United States are living in poverty because of their families’ situations. AS discussed in previous blogs women’s poor working conditions is a cycle in which they can not get out of, which causes poverty in the family, and the causes their children to live in poverty and not get everything that they need.
The working poor are a huge problem in the United States. There are 13 million children in the United States that are living in low income families that are only making $20,000 a year of a family of four. Today there are 1.3 million more children that are living in poverty than there were in 2000. The problem with families and children living in poverty is a huge one that will always be an increasing problem with the United States does not do anything about it. The problem is that millions are children, who are our future, are living in poverty and not getting the resources that they deserve because their mothers are not able to get out of poor working conditions. From our reading “Who are America’s poor children?” it states that research shows that “on average families need an income that is twice the amount of the federal poverty line.
In 2005 28 million or 39% of the United States children are living in low income and poverty homes. These numbers along with the research that families making $40,000, two times as much as the poverty line, such be considered low income and such be subsidized by the government. Officials know that this policy is “flawed” to say the least, but they have yet to be any action in changing it. Another question is who and why are these children living in poverty and there is an explicit line coming from their parents as to why. Children that have immigrant parents are living in poverty. In states with the highest immigrant rates the number of children living in poverty ranges from 14% to 40%, and 26% of children that are immigrants in total are poor. The fact is that children are living in very poor and poverty stricken situations where they have no outs because they are young. In the United States 16% of household with children are living with fears of not having food and 19%
of poor children do not have health care.
In 2005, in 13 states across the United States 20% of children were living in poverty, this mostly see in the southern and most eat coast states. Also 15% to 19% of children were living in poverty in 19 states spread out around the United States which include CA, FL, IL, IN, KS, OH, OK, TN, WA, WI, MO, MI, and more. In 17 other states in the United States 10% to 14% of the children were living in poverty such as AK, CO, ID, IA, MA, MN, NV, ND, WY, and more. In 2005 the highest ranking ethic background for children living in poverty in the United States were African American children at 35% of the poverty rate followed by American Indians at 29%, Latinos at 28%, Asian at 11%, and then white children at 10%. Another statistical chart from 2005 shows that children that have parents that are not native born are more likely to be living in poverty than children who’s parents are born in the United States across all states varying a little by states within different regions, but still maintains the structure of this claim. For example, children of immigrants parents in poverty in CA are 26%, in FL it is 20%, IL 20% and so on and then for children who’s parents are native-born and are in poverty in CA it is 14%, in FL it is 18%, and then IL it is 17%. Children all over the United States are living in poverty because of their families’ situations. AS discussed in previous blogs women’s poor working conditions is a cycle in which they can not get out of, which causes poverty in the family, and the causes their children to live in poverty and not get everything that they need.
UNIT B: Blog 8: Working Poor Women
Blog # 8
New urban poverty created loss in jobs, the real estate market decreased, and the loss of “legitimate enterprise.” New urban poverty also created an increase in mothers in poverty and welfare, increased crime, created empty streets, created poor school and decreased their learning environments. It brought about violence, increased the number of people that self-medicated, drug abuse rose, isolation of people rose, and the along with all of these things the chance for hope for recovery became smaller and smaller. The fact that this new urban society arose caused increased concerns for mothers and their children. They were worried that their children’s lives would be affected due to the fact that parents were being incarcerated and drug use among people was increasing and they were worried that child might find it appealing. Also because of this society down fall mothers were worried that their children would become violent and get pregnant at a younger age (PowerPoint Ch.4).
An example of these fears is from Jessica, a case study in the 7 days @ minimum wage videos. She worried for her children’s safety in their neighborhood because of the violence so her children are not aloud to play outside. For mothers and children that are living in the low income neighborhoods it is worse for them than women living in mixed income neighborhoods. A case study from Chapter 4 for Traci and Tariq shows how the affects of the new urban society or the “outcast ghetto” that they live in makes her fear for her child’s future. For example Tariq’s father was incarcerated and she worried that this fact and violence that he was surrounded by would affect him. For mothers that are living with children in low income family neighborhoods their fears are much greater, but not much greater than mothers with children that are living in mixed neighborhoods. They both have to worry about financial issues, job related issues, child care issues, but for mothers with children in lower income neighborhoods they have an increased problem with violence and not letting their children being by themselves.
New urban poverty created loss in jobs, the real estate market decreased, and the loss of “legitimate enterprise.” New urban poverty also created an increase in mothers in poverty and welfare, increased crime, created empty streets, created poor school and decreased their learning environments. It brought about violence, increased the number of people that self-medicated, drug abuse rose, isolation of people rose, and the along with all of these things the chance for hope for recovery became smaller and smaller. The fact that this new urban society arose caused increased concerns for mothers and their children. They were worried that their children’s lives would be affected due to the fact that parents were being incarcerated and drug use among people was increasing and they were worried that child might find it appealing. Also because of this society down fall mothers were worried that their children would become violent and get pregnant at a younger age (PowerPoint Ch.4).
An example of these fears is from Jessica, a case study in the 7 days @ minimum wage videos. She worried for her children’s safety in their neighborhood because of the violence so her children are not aloud to play outside. For mothers and children that are living in the low income neighborhoods it is worse for them than women living in mixed income neighborhoods. A case study from Chapter 4 for Traci and Tariq shows how the affects of the new urban society or the “outcast ghetto” that they live in makes her fear for her child’s future. For example Tariq’s father was incarcerated and she worried that this fact and violence that he was surrounded by would affect him. For mothers that are living with children in low income family neighborhoods their fears are much greater, but not much greater than mothers with children that are living in mixed neighborhoods. They both have to worry about financial issues, job related issues, child care issues, but for mothers with children in lower income neighborhoods they have an increased problem with violence and not letting their children being by themselves.
UNIT B: Blog 7 : Working Poor Women’s Paid Labor
Blog #7
When Julia gave birth to Jacqueline days after her family consisting of themselves, her two other children and Jacqueline’s father were granted a housing arrangement. At this time was getting public assistance, but wanted to get off welfare so she started to attend community college. One factor that contributed to her instability for child care was the fact that she didn’t have money and was living on assistance. While she started college the first child care arrangement was with Jacqueline’s father who watched her and Julia’s two other children. After her first semester Julia and Jacqueline’s father broke up and Julia took care of the children during the summer because she was still on assistance. Later she reflected that this was one of the hardest points in her life because they did not have food stamps and starved, and she had no way of getting money. During the next semester of college Julia’s sister moved in with them to help, but again this was only temporary because after five months she couldn’t anymore because of her own work related issues. Another factor that caused her instability was the fact that she not longer had family members that she could turn to.
At this point she had no options for child care so she tried to an Agency for Child Development and was put at the bottom of the list. This forced her to work more and be the primary care provider for her child which in turn caused her to stop attending classes at the community college. Through the Work Experience Program (WEP) she was able to get child care benefits which let her use family day care and let her go back to school. Another instability issue with her child care was the fact that WEP was late on payments for the family child care and this made Julia pay for their mistakes. After this she used a nanny which stayed with them for a while, but in the end she could not afford the $8 an hour that she had to pay. She then had no choice, but to leave her children with their grandmother who was ill.
In Chapter 3 this story was picked because as the author states, it was a information and good story to show how unstable child care is for mothers that are living in poverty, welfare, and trying to get out by bettering themselves, but them system of child care providers keeps brings them back down. The fact is that women that are not making enough money, working in minimum wage jobs, and have no other options that choices for good child care are slim to none. This is shown in Julia’s case. Julia was working at a burger place where she got minimum wage, her expenses and debt were adding up so she had o get rid of the only care provider that she and her daughter actually liked; she could not afford the good and quality child care the she needed. In “7 days @ Minimum wage” Jessica has four children that she has been raising for 16 years and she makes minimum wage at only $5.25 an hour. She is living in a very low income neighborhood, does not eat some nights so her children can, can not afford to shop at anything but thrift stores and can not get out of her minimum wage living. She goes to work early and stay hours late, but yet she does not get paid more. She can not find a higher paying job because they will only pay her what her occupation job is paying her. So, she is stuck in a cycle of minimum wage work life. She is a hard worker that does anything and everything to get ahead, but she can not get out.
When Julia gave birth to Jacqueline days after her family consisting of themselves, her two other children and Jacqueline’s father were granted a housing arrangement. At this time was getting public assistance, but wanted to get off welfare so she started to attend community college. One factor that contributed to her instability for child care was the fact that she didn’t have money and was living on assistance. While she started college the first child care arrangement was with Jacqueline’s father who watched her and Julia’s two other children. After her first semester Julia and Jacqueline’s father broke up and Julia took care of the children during the summer because she was still on assistance. Later she reflected that this was one of the hardest points in her life because they did not have food stamps and starved, and she had no way of getting money. During the next semester of college Julia’s sister moved in with them to help, but again this was only temporary because after five months she couldn’t anymore because of her own work related issues. Another factor that caused her instability was the fact that she not longer had family members that she could turn to.
At this point she had no options for child care so she tried to an Agency for Child Development and was put at the bottom of the list. This forced her to work more and be the primary care provider for her child which in turn caused her to stop attending classes at the community college. Through the Work Experience Program (WEP) she was able to get child care benefits which let her use family day care and let her go back to school. Another instability issue with her child care was the fact that WEP was late on payments for the family child care and this made Julia pay for their mistakes. After this she used a nanny which stayed with them for a while, but in the end she could not afford the $8 an hour that she had to pay. She then had no choice, but to leave her children with their grandmother who was ill.
In Chapter 3 this story was picked because as the author states, it was a information and good story to show how unstable child care is for mothers that are living in poverty, welfare, and trying to get out by bettering themselves, but them system of child care providers keeps brings them back down. The fact is that women that are not making enough money, working in minimum wage jobs, and have no other options that choices for good child care are slim to none. This is shown in Julia’s case. Julia was working at a burger place where she got minimum wage, her expenses and debt were adding up so she had o get rid of the only care provider that she and her daughter actually liked; she could not afford the good and quality child care the she needed. In “7 days @ Minimum wage” Jessica has four children that she has been raising for 16 years and she makes minimum wage at only $5.25 an hour. She is living in a very low income neighborhood, does not eat some nights so her children can, can not afford to shop at anything but thrift stores and can not get out of her minimum wage living. She goes to work early and stay hours late, but yet she does not get paid more. She can not find a higher paying job because they will only pay her what her occupation job is paying her. So, she is stuck in a cycle of minimum wage work life. She is a hard worker that does anything and everything to get ahead, but she can not get out.
UNIT B: Blog 6: Cost of Child Care
Blog 6
For mothers who are living in a low income situation the issue of how they are going to take care of their children let alone themselves is a very hard question to answer. Some mothers as in the case of Brittney and her child Bethany could get some rent help, food stamps, and WIC, and help from her family. As Brittney was trying to go back to work she left her daughter in the care of her uncle, which was her only choice. SO in Brittney’s case she was lucky to have family who would help her so she could try to make a living. After a while she starting living Bethany at her sister’s because her uncle was not responsible enough to take care of her. After she did finish her training for her new job she looked into family child care providers through her work were she temporarily found care. After which she had Bethany stay with her father and this time it was a matter a trust rather than money. Brittney would have preferred a better child care situation for all those years, but these were her only choices if she wanted to work and make money (Chaudry, 28-29).
The different types of child care that are presented in the book “Putting Children First” are: Home-based, individual care provided by family members, nannies, or informal care, Family child care in the caregiver’s house provided by a licensed family day care, day care network, or day care group, a Center care provided by child care professions in a community setting through Pre-K, preschools, and nursery programs, and finally there are mother’s care while working, special needs care, and day care in hospitals, shelters, or institutions (Chaudry, 34).
In the second case in Chapter two Annette wanted to leave welfare and work, but needed to provide care for her son Aaron. The advantage that she had over Brittney as the fact that she had another older son and could use a different type of childcare , the home-based child care where her older son would take her of her younger son. She also used friend’s help, informal care, and group care, but most of them were not good enough and were a good situation. Her situation of not having the right kind of finances forced her to use care providers that were not qualified and gave bad quality of care (Chaudry, 35-36).
The factors that challenge and constrain child care choices are financial issues, whether you have choices from family and friends at your disposal, the lack of structure and quality in the care that these mothers could afford (Chaudry, 48) and the conditions of the setting of where the mothers had to leave there children because they didn’t have a choice (Chaudry, 55). Some child care centers had too many children and did not provide the attention and right amount of care that they needed and their schedules did not conform to parents needs (Chaudry, 62). In kin care children are babysat, spoiled, stimulated less and it is usually for a short time and informal (Chaudry, 70). In Family day care children structured less, less stimulated and is seen as babysitting and not providing individualized care (Chaudry, 71).
In “Underprotected and Undersupported” it outlines some major issues in child care. It points out that many centers are not being help to any standards that they saw a center that had only two people working for 58 children there. This type of neglect does not provide a safe, stimulating, and enriching environment that children need to be in. The fact is that there are some child care providers out there that are following the minimum standards, if they are even doing this, of children care. In the United States there is an alarming rate for different kinds of child care providers that are not up to standard and the ones that are woman that are living under or right above the poverty line with child can not afford them. The woman with children that can not afford the pricey child care providers should be able to get the same type of quality of child care for their child as well. This is an injustice in are world and needs to be fixed.
For mothers who are living in a low income situation the issue of how they are going to take care of their children let alone themselves is a very hard question to answer. Some mothers as in the case of Brittney and her child Bethany could get some rent help, food stamps, and WIC, and help from her family. As Brittney was trying to go back to work she left her daughter in the care of her uncle, which was her only choice. SO in Brittney’s case she was lucky to have family who would help her so she could try to make a living. After a while she starting living Bethany at her sister’s because her uncle was not responsible enough to take care of her. After she did finish her training for her new job she looked into family child care providers through her work were she temporarily found care. After which she had Bethany stay with her father and this time it was a matter a trust rather than money. Brittney would have preferred a better child care situation for all those years, but these were her only choices if she wanted to work and make money (Chaudry, 28-29).
The different types of child care that are presented in the book “Putting Children First” are: Home-based, individual care provided by family members, nannies, or informal care, Family child care in the caregiver’s house provided by a licensed family day care, day care network, or day care group, a Center care provided by child care professions in a community setting through Pre-K, preschools, and nursery programs, and finally there are mother’s care while working, special needs care, and day care in hospitals, shelters, or institutions (Chaudry, 34).
In the second case in Chapter two Annette wanted to leave welfare and work, but needed to provide care for her son Aaron. The advantage that she had over Brittney as the fact that she had another older son and could use a different type of childcare , the home-based child care where her older son would take her of her younger son. She also used friend’s help, informal care, and group care, but most of them were not good enough and were a good situation. Her situation of not having the right kind of finances forced her to use care providers that were not qualified and gave bad quality of care (Chaudry, 35-36).
The factors that challenge and constrain child care choices are financial issues, whether you have choices from family and friends at your disposal, the lack of structure and quality in the care that these mothers could afford (Chaudry, 48) and the conditions of the setting of where the mothers had to leave there children because they didn’t have a choice (Chaudry, 55). Some child care centers had too many children and did not provide the attention and right amount of care that they needed and their schedules did not conform to parents needs (Chaudry, 62). In kin care children are babysat, spoiled, stimulated less and it is usually for a short time and informal (Chaudry, 70). In Family day care children structured less, less stimulated and is seen as babysitting and not providing individualized care (Chaudry, 71).
In “Underprotected and Undersupported” it outlines some major issues in child care. It points out that many centers are not being help to any standards that they saw a center that had only two people working for 58 children there. This type of neglect does not provide a safe, stimulating, and enriching environment that children need to be in. The fact is that there are some child care providers out there that are following the minimum standards, if they are even doing this, of children care. In the United States there is an alarming rate for different kinds of child care providers that are not up to standard and the ones that are woman that are living under or right above the poverty line with child can not afford them. The woman with children that can not afford the pricey child care providers should be able to get the same type of quality of child care for their child as well. This is an injustice in are world and needs to be fixed.
Unit B: Blog 5 Identifying the Working Poor
In 1996 there was a shift of welfare requirements from the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act which called for stricter work requirements for families who want help from social services. This change in requirements forced some mother to go to work. This policy is was drove a new work based society in the United States (Chaudry, 13). The United States moved into a work based society and strive for citizens that could support themselves; the legislature wanted people to be “self sufficient”, work for themselves, and support themselves standing on their own two feet (Chaudry, 14). This is why they “were asking the less fortunate to strive to work harder and deeply discounting our public responsibility for the children born in poor families and disadvantaged communities.” The working poor is a public problem and not a personal problem because it is a nation wide phenomenon affected thousands of people who are trying to work, but can not make ends meet because of the welfare conditions. This people work for anything they can, make minimum wage, live paycheck to paycheck, live on food stamps, and yet when they need food stamps the most the government cuts them according to the plan (Living with a hole video). In American there are 37 million poor under the poverty line, but there are 53 million American that are living just right above the poverty line which makes it even harder for them to get help or benefits (Prof. Newman video). The poverty problem in the United States is a public one and not a personal because millions of people are suffering. There would not be that many people living in poverty if it was just a personal issue, but because there are millions upon millions in poverty it shows you that there is a problem in government’s system for assistance, welfare, and help problems.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)