Resisting the Welfare Mother: The Power of Welfare Discourse and Tactics of Resistance

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of dominant discourses on welfare on the lives of women caught up within the American welfare system, focusing primarily on community differences in levels of stigma and the possibility for resistance to the dominant practices. Based upon interviews with 36 women conducted in 1997, one year after the passage of the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, the paper compares women living in concentrated poverty in the inner cities with those living in rural and suburban communities. The levels of stigma vary dramatically between the two areas, with women in mixed class communities experiencing much more negative treatment and internalizing the punitive welfare discourse to a far greater extent. Women experiencing lower levels of welfare stigma are able to enact more resistive practices to counter the effects of the dominant discourse.

Attitudes Toward Never-Married Single Mothers and Fathers: Does Gender Matter?

“…Thus, their children struggle not just economically but in other aspects of life as well. Additionally, the findings from the AWSP are consistent with the literature on single mothers who receive welfare, which suggests that the economic status of a mother is related to the perceived quality of parenting she provides (Davis & Hagen, 1996;Jarrett, 1994Jarrett, , 1996McCormack, 2004).…”

“…Historically, research on single mothers has focused almost entirely on views about single mothers who are welfare recipients (Cahill, 2005;Davis & Hagen, 1996;Jarrett, 1994Jarrett, , 1996McCormack, 2004). However, there is a small but growing body of literature that examines societal views about single mothers outside the context of welfare (Ganong & Coleman, 1995;Ganong et al, 1988).…”

“…However, the research on attitudes about single parenting (Bennett & Jamieson, 1999;Rhodes & Johnson, 2000), single mothers (Cahill, 2005;Ganong & Coleman, 1995;McCormack, 2004), and single fathers (Troilo & Coleman, 2008) has found that negative views of single parent headed households continue to exist. If these negative attitudes indeed exist, it is necessary to examine them because research has shown that individuals who internalize stigmas associated with negative societal views are more likely to feel shame, which may lead to psychological distress (Furåker & Blomsterberg, 2003;Schmader, Johns, & Forbes, 2008).…”

Theorizing Reactive Reflexivity: Lifestyle Displacement and Discordant Performances of Taste

“…Cate's despondent reaction to this form of regulatory power can be usefully compared to the experiences of low-income women who have long been immersed in the welfare system and other forms of public assistance (see Gustafson 2011;McCormack 2004) or, in our theoretical parlance, for whom public assistance institutions and governmental practices had become naturalized aspects of their lifestyles. While also struggling against processes of stigmatization, research on low-income women indicates that they have developed a compensatory institutional knowledge that enables them to interpret their situations in ways that mitigate these negative feelings; to employ strategies and attributions that humanize these encounters; and to circumvent rules and regulations in ways that serve their perceived interest, the latter which often inspires feelings of resilience and resistant autonomy (Gustafson 2011;McCormack 2004 By invoking a normalizing comparison to the official poverty line, Gail's father insinuates that her precarious financial circumstances might reflect poor financial management; a responsibilizing interpretation (Giesler and Veresiu 2014) that attributes her plight is due to illadvised actions and decisions, rather than structural constraints.…”

“…While also struggling against processes of stigmatization, research on low-income women indicates that they have developed a compensatory institutional knowledge that enables them to interpret their situations in ways that mitigate these negative feelings; to employ strategies and attributions that humanize these encounters; and to circumvent rules and regulations in ways that serve their perceived interest, the latter which often inspires feelings of resilience and resistant autonomy (Gustafson 2011;McCormack 2004 By invoking a normalizing comparison to the official poverty line, Gail's father insinuates that her precarious financial circumstances might reflect poor financial management; a responsibilizing interpretation (Giesler and Veresiu 2014) that attributes her plight is due to illadvised actions and decisions, rather than structural constraints. In justifying her monthly struggle to make ends meet, Gail invokes the good mother narrative and recounts a number of monthly expenditures that are directed at enhancing her children's well-being.…”