Family Caps
This is an interesting article regarding the “Family Caps” that we spoke about in class. The article has a more conservative lean, which I thought might be appealing. <http://www.i2i.org/main/article.php?article_id=439>
My favorite part of the article is when the author points out that when a working family has more children, their employer doesn’t go and give them a raise—similarly, why would welfare recipients expect increased benefits when they have more children? It just doesn’t make sense.
Some highlighted points in the article:
“A system that tells a mother with two small children on welfare, “Go ahead, have more children, and we’ll give you more money,” is not doing the right thing for the mother or for her small children.”
“The more important effect of the cap was its moral message: The government will not subsidize irresponsible behavior. Of course, everyone…is still free to have as many children as they want, but not with a public cash bonus for having children at the wrong time in one’s life.”
“Under the family cap, a person who is already on welfare, and who then has additional children, does not get extra cash for having the additional children. The new children are still fully eligible for Medicaid and the family gets additional food stamps for them. The adults, however, do not receive extra cash.”
The article also has some statics which prove that unwanted pregnancy has decreased in states that have enacted the Family Caps program.
September 26th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Hey, I tried to access the article, but it isn’t working. I’m really interested in reading further about the Family Caps program. Can you possibly post the site again?
September 26th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
This is Roshni Ally, by the way.
September 26th, 2008 at 5:01 pm
This argument is adressed in Sheila Collins book – I wonder what your opinion is of her take. She basically says (as do many people on the left) that this is not an appropriate metaphor – to equate aditional benefits to a salary increase – because the amount of additional support that a mother gets for an additional child is so low that it would be inconcievable to think it could even cover all of the additional costs of a new child. In other words – she says that it is a myth that many women on welfare make their decisions to have extra children for financial reasons.
However, she does also readily admit that family caps do lower the birth rate of poor women (and they also raise the abortion rate – something that pro-life conservatives who support family caps don’t like to acknowledge) — but in her opinion there is another issue at stake – which is the civil liberties of these women – whom she feels are being disrespected by having their reproductive lives regulated by the state. The logic behind family caps is that women who are poor should no longer have autonomy over their reproductive/sexual lives – but that the state should be allowed to regulate this most private part of their existence – something that no one else in the US is forced to tolerate. So the argument would go – that it is not fair to discriminate against poor women in this way – and subject them to extra regulations and to deny their privacy in ways that no one else has to deal with. Poverty should not be a reason to lose your rights as a citizen. Thats the argument.
I think its worth trying to separate the ends and the means that are involved and to assess each of them independently. Maybe there are desired ends and undesireable means? And if so, what could we think of as an alternative means to the same ends?
September 26th, 2008 at 8:37 pm
Who has the right to say whether a woman should reproduce or not? “NO HUMAN.” like we discussed in class a woman should have the right to choose whether she want to reproduce children regardless if she is rich, poor, black, white or any other race. Like the declaration said “Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance…..” what kind of care do these poor women get “a caseworker who treat them like they are worthless because they seek out help from the government: who then say these women should be placed under a “cap” “more children no more welfare…” lol when we all know that the money being used for welfare programs are “tax payers money” not the “government money”
September 26th, 2008 at 9:58 pm
“having their reproductive lives regulated by the state.”
How is the government regulating the lives of women and infringing on their civil liberties? Just because the govt won’t dish out additional aid? These women have complete control over their lives. They had enough control to have sex, have yet another baby, and continue to not make enough money to support herself, or her children. These women make choices every single day, and their choices ultimately let them to this very point.
Infringing on their civil liberties would assume the government is some how inhibiting them. When in fact, all the govt is doing is controlling the amount of money a receipt is eligible to receive. These women have inhibited their own lives. They have all the freedom in the world to have as many children as they wish, but its unrealistic to assume that she doesn’t have to take responsibly, and that she can continue to rely on the government for aid.
Obviously, if the woman is on welfare, it might not be the right time to have additional children. All she is doing her harming herself, and the vulnerable children around her, creating a cyclical life of dependency and poverty.
October 1st, 2008 at 11:52 am
I believe that if an individual is on welfare then they should be fully aware that they don’t have the means to support additional children and themselves. I think if you are a receiptient of government aid, its because you don’t have the money to support yourself, so why have kids if you know you can’t provide for them?…why rely on taxpayers money to support yourself and your family?…It’s not a simple matter in regards to a woman’s reproductive lifestyle, but if you are smart enough and educated enough then you will know not to have children if you don’t have the money or the means to support them and yourself in an adequate way. Wait until you are settled in life to have kids (eg… get a job, save enough money, have a roof over your head, and be sure you can take care of your kids properly…)
October 1st, 2008 at 11:52 am
Roshni Ally^^^^