Advertisement

Introduction

New Family Policy: How the State Shapes Parents’ Lives
  • Jill Duerr Berrick
  • Bruce Fuller

Abstract

Parents in America, until quite recently, crafted their daily lives according to their own moral commitments and economic interests, free of government intrusion. Yet these lives, especially those led by poor and working-class mothers and fathers, have become the subject of sharp public debate over the past generation. Following closely behind, increasingly aggressive policies have been enacted aimed at improving how parents lead their lives at home or work, even where and by whom their children are raised. Americans have rarely been so divided over the government’s proper role in “fixing” the practices of families that don’t seem to fit the mainstream.

Keywords

Child Care Child Support Welfare Reform Family Policy Russell Sage Foundation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abramovitz, M. (1988). Regulating the lives of women: Social welfare policy from colonial times to the present. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
  2. Amato, P. R. and Booth, A. (1997). A generation at risk: Growing up in an era of family upheaval. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Berrick, J. D. (1996). From mother’s duty to personal responsibility: The evolution of AFDC. Hastings Women’s Law Review Journal, 7(2), 257–273.Google Scholar
  4. Bielby, WT. and Bielby, D. D. (1989). Family ties: Balancing commitments to work and family in dual earner households. American Sociological Review, 54, 776’789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blank, R. and Haskins, R. (eds.) (2002). The new world of welfare. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institute.Google Scholar
  6. Blankenhorn, D. (1995). Fatherless America: Confronting our most urgent social problem. New York: Harper Collins Publications.Google Scholar
  7. Burris, B. H. (March, 1991). Employed mothers: The impact of class and marital status on the prioritizing of family and work. Social Science Quarterly, 72(1), 50–66.Google Scholar
  8. Camasso, M.J. (1998). A final report on the impact of New Jersey’s family development program: results from a pre-post analysis of the AFDC case heads from 1990–1996. Unpublished document. New Jersey: Rutgers University School of Social Work.Google Scholar
  9. Cancian, M. and Meyers, D. R. (2002). Responding to changing family organization. Focus, 22(1), 87–92.Google Scholar
  10. Curran, L. (1999). Deadbeat dads and down-and-out daddies: Contemporary social welfare interventions into men’s fathering. Unpublished manuscript. Berkeley, CA: University of California at Berkeley, School of Social Welfare.Google Scholar
  11. DeParle, J. (2004). American dream. New York, NY:Viking.Google Scholar
  12. Dion, R. and Devaney, B. (2003). Strengthening relationships and supporting healthy marriage among unwed parents. Princeton, NJ:Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.Google Scholar
  13. Duncan, G.J. and Brooks-Gunn, J. (eds.) (1997). Consequences of growing up poor. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  14. Ehrenreich, B. (1983). The hearts of men: American dreams and the flight from commitment. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  15. Fremstad, S. and Neuberger, Z. (June 6, 2002). Side by side comparison of family formation provisions in TANF reauthorization legislation. Washington, DC: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.Google Scholar
  16. Fuller, B., Kagan, S. L., Caspary, G. L. and Gauthier, C.A. (2002). Welfare reform and child care otions for low-income families. Future of Children, 12(1), 97–119.Google Scholar
  17. Furstenberg, F F and Cherlin, A. J. (1991). Divided families: What happens to children when parents part. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Ganow, M. (August, 2001). Family formation resources for welfare decisions. Welfare Information Network. http://www.welfareinfo.org/familyformation.htm.
  19. Gordon, L. (1994). Pitied but not entitled: Single mothers and the history of welfare. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Gornick, J. C. and Meyers, M. K. (2003). Families that work: Policies for reconciling parenthood and employment. New York: The Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  21. Jones, A. P. and Butler, M. C. (1980).A role transition approach to the stress of organizationally induced family role disruption.Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 367–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kamerman, S. and Kahn, A. (eds.) (1997). Family change and family policies in the West. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Lamb, M. E. (1997). Fathers and child development: An introductory overview and guide. In M.E. Lamb (ed.), The role of the father in child development. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  24. Lawson, A. and Rhode, D. L. (eds.) (1993). The politics of pregnancy: Adolescent sexuality and public policy. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Lerman, R. (2001). Marriage as a protective force against economic hardship. Paper presented at the 23rd Annual Research Conference of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Washington, DC, November 1–3.Google Scholar
  26. Loeb, S., Fuller, B., Kagan, S. and Carrol, B.(2004). Child care in poor communities. Child Development, 75, 47–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Loprest, P. (2002). Making the transition from welfare to work: Successes but continuing concerns. In A. Weil and K. Finegold (eds.), Welfare reform: The next act. Washington, DC:The Urban Institute.pp. 17–32Google Scholar
  28. Mason, M. (1994). From father’s property to children’s rights: The history of child custody in the United States. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Miller, C., Garfikel, I., and McLanahan, S. (1997). Child support in the U.S.: Can fathers afford to pay more? Review of Income and Wealth, 43(3), 261–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Office of Family Assistance. (2003). Temporary assistance for needy families: Fifth annual report to Congress. Washington, DC: Administration for Children and Families.Google Scholar
  31. Oklahoma Marriage Initiative. (July 15, 2002). http://www.governor.state.ok.us/policy.htm.
  32. O’Neill, J. (1994). Report concerning New Jersey’s Family Development program. Unpublished paper. NewYork, NY: CUNY, Baruch College, Department of Economics.Google Scholar
  33. Pavetti, L. (July, 1997). How much more can they work? Setting realistic expectations for welfare mothers. Washington, DC:The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  34. Pleck, J. G. (1977). The work-family role system. Social Problems, 24, 417–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Pleck, J. G. (1997). Paternal involvement levels, sources, and consequences. In M. E. Lamb (ed.), The role of the father in child development. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  36. Popenoe, D. (1996). Life without father: Compelling new evidence that fatherhood and marriage are indispensable for the good of children and society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Reardon, E., DeMartini, C., and Klerman, J.A. (2002). Statewide CalWORKs evaluation: Results from the California Health and Social Services survey. Unpublished document. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation.Google Scholar
  38. Report of the Committee on Economic Security. (1985). Reprinted in 50th Anniversary issue, the Report of the Committee on Economic Security of 1935 and other basic documents relating to the Social Security Act. Washington, DC: National Conference on Social Welfare.Google Scholar
  39. Rutgers University. (1998). A final report on the impact of New Jersey’s Family Development program: Results from a pre-post analysis of AFDC Case Heads, 1990–1996. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University.Google Scholar
  40. Scott, E. K., Edin, K., London, A. S., and Mazelis, J. M. (2002). My children come first: Welfare-reliant women’s post-TANF views of work-family trade-offs and marriage. For better and for worse. NewYork: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
  41. Sorenson, E. (1997).A national profile of nonresident fathers and their ability to pay child support. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59(4), 785–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Sorenson, E. (2002). Helping poor nonresident dads do more. Assessing the New Federalism. Short Takes on Welfare Policy, (3). Washington, DC: Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  43. Sorensen, E. and Oliver, H. (2002). Child support reforms in PRWORA: Initial impacts. Assessing the new federalism. Discussion Paper 02–02. Washington, DC:The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  44. Sorensen, E. and Zibman, C. (2000). To what extent to children benefit from child support? Assessing the new federalism. Discussion Paper 99–19. Washington, DC:The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  45. Sonenstein, E., Halcomb, P., and Seefldt, K. (1993). What works best in improving paternity rates? Public Welfare, 51(4),26–33.Google Scholar
  46. Thomas, A. and Sawhill, I. (2001). For richer or for poorer: Marriage as an antipoverty strategy. Brookings Institution Working Paper. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.Google Scholar
  47. Tiedje, L. B., Wortman, C. B., Downey, G., Emmons, C., Biernat, M., and Lang, E. (1990). Women with multiple roles: Role-compatibility perceptions, satisfaction, and mental health.Journal of Marriage and the Family, 52, 63–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. U.S. Census Bureau. (2001). Age, sex, household relationship, race and Hispanic origin—poverty status of people by selected characteristics in 2000. http://www.ferret.bls.census.gov.
  49. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. (2000). Trends in the well-being of America’s children and youth. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  50. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Office of Child Support Enforcement. (2001). http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/cse.
  51. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (February 3, 1999). Labor force participation of fathers and mothers varies with children’s ages.http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/1999/Jun/wk1/art03.htm.
  52. Washington Post. (2001). Help before the honeymoon. February 25, C1.Google Scholar
  53. Weil, A. and Finegold, K. (2002). Welfare reform: The next act. Washington, DC:The Urban Institute.Google Scholar
  54. The White House. (February 2002). Working toward independence. Washington, DC:Author.Google Scholar
  55. Zelizer, V A. (1985). Pricing the priceless child: The changing social value of children. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Jill Duerr Berrick and Bruce Fuller 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jill Duerr Berrick
  • Bruce Fuller

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations