In pursuit of "the welfare trait": recycling deprivation and reproducing depravation in historical context

Abstract

Adam Perkins' The Welfare Trait outlines the most recent attempt to provide substance to the existence of an underclass, based on the idea of a shared 'welfare-induced', 'employment-resistant' personality amongst benefit claimants. Following in the footsteps of historian John Macnicol who went 'in pursuit' of the underclass, this article travels 'in pursuit' of the welfare trait by situating its claims in historical context through a comparison of the post-war study by William Tonge, Families without Hope, which sought to identify a common psychological maladjustment in 'problem families.' The common intention, methods and recommendations of the two studies underline their shared purpose: to transfer the social and policy problems associated with poverty from their socio-economic context and the culpabilities of the state to finding the problem in individual families, identifying their behaviour as problematic and proscribing solutions rooted around cultivating personal responsibility.

All the ACEs: A Chaotic Concept for Family Policy and Decision-Making?

“…Far from pioneering new ground, contemporary efforts to optimise biological development in children tread familiar ground. In the early twentieth century the Eugenics Society were similarly concerned to reposition disadvantage as a public health issue and were likewise fixated on 'problem families' and their biological consequences (Lambert, 2016). While attention may have shifted from genetic to social inheritance, a eugenic logic of predicting and preventing abnormality and weakness remains.…”

Talking Back to ‘Family’, ‘Family Troubles’, and ‘the Looked-after Child’

“…Researchers seeking to confirm alleged intergenerational effects such as transmission of cultures of worklessness have found little evidence and alternatively suggest that structural and economic explanations are key (Shildrick et al, 2012). Even so, the blameworthy family is a recurring theme in policy rhetoric (Garrett, 2007; Lambert, 2016; Welshman, 2013); policy examples have included Problem Families (1940s and 1950s), the Respect Agenda (2000s), and Troubled Families (2010s). In each case, certain families are said to propagate harm to themselves and others and significant cost to the public purse (Boddy et al, 2015; Crossley, 2016).…”

“…Overlaid on these national policies, local bodies may implement interventions according to their own understanding of local needs and priorities; furthermore, individual professionals may deliver services according to their own views. Fidelity to particular national initiatives may therefore be low, producing different approaches in different areas and for different families (Hayden and Jenkins, 2014; Lambert, 2016). The extent to which the resulting interventions align with family formulations of trouble is moot, and family members may see services as more or less helpful in addressing any troubles they feel they have.…”