Negative Reactions to Women on Welfare in America
I believe that there is a strong negative reaction to women on welfare for two reasons: First, the general public perceives welfare for women, especially single mothers, as a government handout to assist individuals who suffer the consequences of their bad choices, such as poor family planning and unprotected sex. These stereotypes are prevalent in the US. The second reason is that welfare is primarily focused on poor women rather than men, creating a discrepancy seen as favoritism.
Perceptions of Welfare for Farmers
Assistance to American farmers is perceived differently because farming and agriculture are associated with jobs as well as provisional security of the country. It is expected that thriving agriculture will pay for welfare it receives through taxes.
Perceptions of Welfare for Financial Institutions
The general public is negative about subsidies to the Wall Street financial institutions but believes them to be necessary to prevent the collapse of the banking sector.
Article Analysis
The article I read did challenge some of my views regarding handouts and the effectiveness of education. However, the article, just like most other ‘Top Ten’ lists, misinterprets the information in order to fit their narrative. Single parenthood is an issue recognized by social workers and the academic community at large. One of the first claims of the article states that “only 9 percent of low-income, urban moms have been single throughout their child’s first five years. Thirty-five percent were married to, or in a relationship with, the child’s father for that entire time” (Eichelberger, 2014, par. 1).
This quote confirms what has already been known and stated in various sources, that over 45% of low-income mothers are left single to raise a child on their own. Additional expenses on children do not vanish after 5 years of age, as children require money for clothing, hobbies, and education, further exacerbating the issue. As a social worker, I would seek income assistance to poor clients based not on the national poverty rate, which is often two times lower than the minimal living rate for more than 620 cities (Eichelberger, 2014). Instead, I would advocate for connecting income assistance with the average prices of living in a particular location.
Reference
Eichelberger, E. (2014). 10 poverty myths, busted.Web.