Welfare Reform in the United States: gender, race and class matter

Abstract

This article argues that gender, race and class matter in welfare reform. It provides a brief historical overview of the US welfare programme for single mothers; describes the main provisions of welfare reform (enforcing work, promoting marriage and limiting the role of the federal government in wider society); and identifies the impact on women and children. It concludes that welfare reform is best understood as part of the neo-liberal/Right attack on the state.

Causes and Consequences of the Divergent Working-Time Patterns of Employed Mothers in the UK and the US: Developing a Comparative Analysis

“…In the US, social welfare benefits are minimal, for instance, receipt of unemployment benefits is limited to 5 years over the lifetime. Under these conditions the expectation is that mothers will work full-time regardless of childcare responsibilities [1,64]. Transformations in welfare policy have huge consequences for employed mothers, particularly for lone parents, since welfare receipts are closely tied to the personal responsibility to seek work-some States practically 'enforcing work' [57], which effectively transforms the 'welfare-dependent poor' into the 'working poor' [21].…”

“…Welfare reform shifted in 1996 with the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, which transformed a programme aimed at helping single mothers stay at home with their children (Family Support Act) into a more restrictive programme, which focuses on mothers taking up paid employment (Temporary Aid to Needy Families). The latter limits the time recipients can claim welfare benefits and requires them to seek employment and, in addition, women on welfare without a job must 'work-off their benefits' by carrying out unskilled tasks in the community [1]. Indicative of this policy shift and the 5 year life-time limit on welfare benefits, between 1996 and 2004, the US welfare case load dropped from 4,159,369 to 1,974,751 families [1].…”

“…The US and the UK are associated with a neo-liberal agenda in both economic policy [17,44] and welfare provision [1,21,28,29]. However, the way flexibility and working-time patterns are carried out by women is markedly different in the US and the UK, motivating two questions.…”

Image Construction as a Strategy of Resistance by Progressive Community Organizations

“…The literature discusses how members of social service organizations are well aware of the impact of this context on how they serve and whom they serve (Dominelli and Hoogevelt, 1996 ;Razack, 2002 ;Smith, 2007). For example, the literature reports that social service organizations are dealing with more bureaucracy, and workers are finding themselves spending less time with service users (Abramovitz, 2006(Abramovitz, , 2005.…”

“…Burnout, job instability, and more stressful work environments have been a common story for many workers in the field making them more vulnerable to the ills of a market driven society (Jones, 2000). With financial support diminishing for social justice and community-oriented practices (Aronoson and Sammon, 2000 ;Cox, 2001), and the demands from funders to focus on individualized work with clients rather than community development initiatives (Abramovitz, 2006(Abramovitz, , 2005, members of progressive social service organizations are struggling to meet the immediate demands of their various stakeholders, and keep true to their original approaches. They often find themselves juggling multiple identities and strategies to meet such demands.…”