Poverty, TANF, and Parenting – Understanding the Connection. Jill Duerr Berrick School of Social Welfare University of California at Berkeley. October, 2009. Presentation Overview. Poverty, child well-being, and parenting Poverty, welfare and maltreatment
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Jill Duerr BerrickSchool of Social Welfare
University of California at Berkeley
Poverty tends to co-occur with other risks.
Low-income parents are more likely to use “negative” parenting strategies.
Child welfare population
Behavioral Requirements:*Teens live at home*No drug felonies*Paternity establishment*Immunizations
Effects on Parenting:
Complicated or Unknown
CalWORKs Child Welfare Effects
Assess barriers to self-sufficiency
Assess child safety
Assess family problems and needs
Access servicesPoverty / MaltreatmentTypical Service Responses
and Child Well-being
Child welfare staff need to understand the effects of poverty on child well-being if they are to promote well-being as an outcome.CalWORKs staff need to understand the effects of poverty on child well-being if they are to effectively help parents gain employment that will raise family income.
Infant deaths poverty on child well-being if they are to promote well-being as an outcome.
Chronic health conditions
Poor quality education
High drop-out rates
Brain developmentPoverty’s Effects on Child Well-Being
Linkages helps staff in CalWORKs and Child Welfare agencies work together to promote child safety and well-being in the context of family self-sufficiency.
Courtney, M., Piliavin, I., Dworsky, A., & Zinn, A. (2001). Involvement of TANF families with child welfare services. Paper presented at Association of Public Policy Analysis and Management Research Meeting. Washington, D.C., November 2, 2001.
Ehrle, J., Scarcella, C.A., & Geen, R. (2004). Teaming up: Collaboration between welfare and child welfare agencies since welfare reform. Children and Youth Services Review, 26, 265-285.
Frame, L., & Berrick, J.D. (2003). The effects of welfare reform on families involved with public child welfare services: Results from a qualitative study. Children and Youth Services Review, 25(1-2), pp. 113-138.
Geen, R., Fender, L., Leos-Urbel, J., & Markowitz, T. (February, 2001). Welfare reform’s effect on child welfrae caseloads. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute.
Goerge, R.M., & Lee, B. (2000). Changes in child social program participation in the 1990s: Initial findings from Ilinois. Chicago, IL: Chapin Hall Center for Children, University of Chicago.
Needell, B., Cuccaro-Alamin, S., Brookhart, A., & Lee, S. (1999). Transitions from AFDC to child welfare in California. Children and Youth Services Review, 21(9-10), 815-841.Nelson, K.E., Saunders, E.J., & Landsman, M.J. (1993). Chronic child neglect in perspective. Social Work, 38 (6), 661-671.
Morris, P.A., Scott, E.K., & London, A. (in press). Effects on children as parents transition from welfare to employment. In J.D. Berrick & B. Fuller (Eds). Good parents or Good Workers? New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Ovwigho, P., Leavitt, K., & Born, C. (2003). Risk factors for child abuse and neglect among former TANF families: Do later leavers experience greater risk? Children and Youth Services Review, 25 (9-10), 139-163.
Thanks to the following for their collaboration on welfare – child welfare projects in the CSSR: Laura Frame, Stephanie Cuccaro-Alamin, Barbara Needell, Jodie Langs, and Lisa Varchol.Acknowledgements