From Boys Town to Oliver Twist: Separating fact from fiction in welfare reform and out-of-home placement of children and youth.

Abstract

Recent debate following the suggestion to place children of "welfare mothers" in "orphanages" illustrates the need to evaluate the relative goodness of residential care and to examine many of the basic assumptions underlying current welfare reform proposals. Nearly half a million children and youth are currently in government-funded out-of-home care in the United States. As custodians of this challenging population, child and youth care workers are neither parents nor therapists, but appear to perform both of these roles as "therapeutic parents." Two comprehensive and mature literatures--common factors of therapist efficacy and parental correlates of offspring psychopathology--provide theoretical and empirical support for this model of child and youth care. Current welfare reform proposals are evaluated in the context of the therapeutic parent model; assumptions about welfare mothers are also examined.

Poverty, Welfare, and Patriarchy: How Macro‐Level Changes in Social Policy Can Help Low‐Income Women

“…These myths not only are fostered by the media but are promulgated in our social and educational institutions (Lott, this issue). Stereotypes about the poor channel anxiety toward a target and give justification for social policy (Shealy, 1995). If we blame the poor mother for her lack of incentive, the proposed solutions are likely to be personal and individual.…”

Attributions for Poverty: A Comparison of Middle‐Class and Welfare Recipient Attitudes1

“…poor people and welfare recipients are stereotyped as being dishonest, dependent, lazy, and disinterested in self-improvement. Despite evidence to the contrary (Corcoran, Duncan, & Hill, 1984;Ellwood & Summers, 1986;Shealy, 1995;Sidel, 1996;Wilcox, Robbennolt, O'Keeffe. & Pynchon, 1996;Wilson & Neckerman, 1986), women on welfare are frequently stereotyped as promiscuous, as devaluing twoparent families, as having additional children to increase their welfare benefits, and as being unfit mothers.…”

Locating children's group homes: The politics of neighbourhood participation

“…On the one hand many health professionals claim group homes should in no way replace foster homes, advocating funding to increase the pool of foster and adoptive families to meet current needs (Levine et al, 1998). Others argue that given the shortage of available foster families nationwide, group homes should be upgraded to meet pressing needs, claiming that with well-paid and qualified staff, trained to treat mental and physical health problems, group homes can offer stable housing to needy children, encourage healthy bonds with caregivers and provide nurturing and resource-rich environments that enable children to thrive in the mainstream (Shealy, 1995;Levine et al, 1998).…”