The Quality of Life Paradox: A Study of Former Public Assistance Recipients

Altman, Julie Cooper; Goldberg, Gertrude Schaffner

doi:10.1300/j134v11n04_04

Cited by 9 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results presented here are counter to the individual benefits described by the Australian government prior to the introduction of the welfare to work program (Commonwealth of Australia, 2005a, 2005b), which were used as a rationale for the program's implementation. The findings reported here are also contradictory to the findings of Altman and Goldberg (2008) who reported improvements in quality of life for single parents who were making the welfare to work transition in the United States.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…To this end, a small group of statistical studies from Australia and the United States provide insight into single parents' SWB in light of their new-found welfare to work requirements (Alzate, 2006; Altman and Goldberg, 2008; Cook et al ., 2009). These studies have highlighted the poor health status of welfare to work participants but have not yet provided convincing evidence of a quality of life benefit as a result of this transition.…”

Section: Defining Welfare Policy Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies have highlighted the poor health status of welfare to work participants but have not yet provided convincing evidence of a quality of life benefit as a result of this transition. For example, the one study that did report a wellbeing benefit relied on participants’ retrospective evaluations of their life since leaving welfare (Altman and Goldberg, 2008) and did not make use of a validated measure of SWB (for a review of SWB measurement see: Andrews and Withey, 1976; Diener et al ., 1985; Pavot and Diener, 1993; Cummins, 1996). What this study seeks to evaluate is how a compulsory transition from welfare to work affects single parents' SWB over an eighteen-month period.…”

Section: Defining Welfare Policy Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Single Parents' Subjective Wellbeing over the Welfare to Work Transition

Cook

2012

Social Policy & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Australian government purports that employment will improve welfare recipients' wellbeing. However, longitudinal analysis of the subjective wellbeing (SWB) of 135 single parents who were compelled to make the transition from welfare to work revealed that as work hours increased, subjective wellbeing did not improve, and in some cases worsened. Participants who were employed at baseline increased their work hours by an average of 4.75 hours per week; however no change was detected in their SWB. Conversely, participants who moved from not working at baseline to working at follow-up increased their work hours by an average of 15.84 hours per week. For these participants, the change in work hours negatively predicted 20–34 per cent of the variance in SWB. From these data, it is concluded that those parents who were already working were those who faced fewer barriers to employment compared to those who were compelled to work. Those who were previously unemployed may not have the material, social and psychological resources to make a successful work transition.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Defining Welfare Policy Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Defining Welfare Policy Successmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Single Parents' Subjective Wellbeing over the Welfare to Work Transition

Cook

2012

Social Policy & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One problem is that the majority of former recipients only commanded entry‐level jobs in the service and retail sector (Corcoran et al, 2000; Lein et al, 2005; Loprest & Zedlewski, 2006). Such jobs were frequently part‐time, poorly paying ($7 to $8 an hour on average), and without benefits (Altman & Goldberg, 2008; Danziger, Heflin, Corcoran, Oltmans, & Wang, 2002; Johnson & Corcoran, 2003; Loprest & Zedlewski). Exacerbating matters, welfare recipients and leavers often were unstably employed after welfare reform (Johnson & Corcoran; Lein et al, 2005; Wood et al).…”

Section: Families In Poverty In the Context Of Welfare Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite these struggles, however, evidence overwhelmingly indicated that welfare recipients, leavers, and working poor generally still believed in the importance and value of work, perceived improved quality of life when they worked, and expressed much optimism about future upward mobility though employment (Altman & Goldberg, 2008; Newman, 2006). Even when faced with erratic, part‐time, or “dead end” jobs with few benefits, they often reported satisfaction in their jobs, derived dignity and self‐worth from being employed, had a greater sense of efficacy, and believed they were better role models for their children (S. Anderson et al, 2004; London, Scott, Edin, & Hunter, 2004; Newman; J.…”

Section: Families In Poverty In the Context Of Welfare Reformmentioning

confidence: 99%

Poverty and the American Family: A Decade in Review

Edin

Kissane

2010

J of Marriage and Family

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Because of dramatic levels of economic volatility and massive changes in welfare policies, scholars in this decade worried anew about whether our official poverty measure, adopted in the 1960s, is adequate. Poverty's causes continued to be debated, with demographic factors often pitted against policy and maternal employment changes. Some scholars focused on events that trigger spirals into poverty or poverty exits. The literature on consequences of poverty featured new techniques for identifying underlying processes and mechanisms. Researchers also explored “neighborhood effects” and focused on poverty deconcentration efforts. Finally, scholars produced a voluminous literature on the efforts to reform welfare and their subsequent effects.

show abstract

Has the US Child Welfare System Become an Informal Income Maintenance Programme? A Literature Review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anti‐poverty policies and income maintenance programmes aim to reduce poverty and income inequality, yet rates of poverty and income inequality have remained stable or increased in 20 of 29 developed nations. Although poverty and income inequality have increased in the USA, the depth and reach of income maintenance programmes have eroded, placing undue strain on other societal systems like education and child welfare. The burden of poverty on child welfare is troubling given the strong association between poverty and child welfare involvement. We conducted a literature review to examine the extent to which the US child welfare system acts as an informal income maintenance programme. Three interrelated research questions were explored: (a) How and when, and under what circumstances, does the US child welfare system provide families with cash and in‐kind transfers, that is, income, food, shelter and durable goods? (b) Which cash and in‐kind transfers are most common in the US child welfare system? (c) How do cash and in‐kind transfers impact families in the child welfare system? Our review yielded eight articles. These articles indicated that cash and in‐kind transfers improve programme retention and reduce child welfare involvement. Implications for research, policy and practice are discussed.‘We conducted a literature review to examine the extent to which the US child welfare system acts as an informal income maintenance programme’Key Practitioner Messages US child welfare programmes offer cash and in‐kind transfers similar to those provided in centralised income maintenance programmes. Cash and in‐kind transfers like food, housing and strollers reduce child welfare involvement and increase programme retention. Conditional cash transfers are cash incentives that boost recruitment and retention in parenting programmes. Even inexpensive material support like donated clothing improve family and programme outcomes in the child welfare system.

show abstract

The Quality of Life Paradox: A Study of Former Public Assistance Recipients

Cited by 9 publications

References 13 publications

Single Parents' Subjective Wellbeing over the Welfare to Work Transition

Single Parents' Subjective Wellbeing over the Welfare to Work Transition

Poverty and the American Family: A Decade in Review

Has the US Child Welfare System Become an Informal Income Maintenance Programme? A Literature Review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About