essay on child poverty

Poverty Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on poverty essay.

“Poverty is the worst form of violence”. – Mahatma Gandhi.

How Poverty is Measured?

For measuring poverty United nations have devised two measures of poverty – Absolute & relative poverty.  Absolute poverty is used to measure poverty in developing countries like India. Relative poverty is used to measure poverty in developed countries like the USA. In absolute poverty, a line based on the minimum level of income has been created & is called a poverty line.  If per day income of a family is below this level, then it is poor or below the poverty line. If per day income of a family is above this level, then it is non-poor or above the poverty line. In India, the new poverty line is  Rs 32 in rural areas and Rs 47 in urban areas.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Causes of Poverty

According to the Noble prize winner South African leader, Nelson Mandela – “Poverty is not natural, it is manmade”. The above statement is true as the causes of poverty are generally man-made. There are various causes of poverty but the most important is population. Rising population is putting the burden on the resources & budget of countries. Governments are finding difficult to provide food, shelter & employment to the rising population.

The other causes are- lack of education, war, natural disaster, lack of employment, lack of infrastructure, political instability, etc. For instance- lack of employment opportunities makes a person jobless & he is not able to earn enough to fulfill the basic necessities of his family & becomes poor. Lack of education compels a person for less paying jobs & it makes him poorer. Lack of infrastructure means there are no industries, banks, etc. in a country resulting in lack of employment opportunities. Natural disasters like flood, earthquake also contribute to poverty.

In some countries, especially African countries like Somalia, a long period of civil war has made poverty widespread. This is because all the resources & money is being spent in war instead of public welfare. Countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc. are prone to natural disasters like cyclone, etc. These disasters occur every year causing poverty to rise.

Ill Effects of Poverty

Poverty affects the life of a poor family. A poor person is not able to take proper food & nutrition &his capacity to work reduces. Reduced capacity to work further reduces his income, making him poorer. Children from poor family never get proper schooling & proper nutrition. They have to work to support their family & this destroys their childhood. Some of them may also involve in crimes like theft, murder, robbery, etc. A poor person remains uneducated & is forced to live under unhygienic conditions in slums. There are no proper sanitation & drinking water facility in slums & he falls ill often &  his health deteriorates. A poor person generally dies an early death. So, all social evils are related to poverty.

Government Schemes to Remove Poverty

The government of India also took several measures to eradicate poverty from India. Some of them are – creating employment opportunities , controlling population, etc. In India, about 60% of the population is still dependent on agriculture for its livelihood. Government has taken certain measures to promote agriculture in India. The government constructed certain dams & canals in our country to provide easy availability of water for irrigation. Government has also taken steps for the cheap availability of seeds & farming equipment to promote agriculture. Government is also promoting farming of cash crops like cotton, instead of food crops. In cities, the government is promoting industrialization to create more jobs. Government has also opened  ‘Ration shops’. Other measures include providing free & compulsory education for children up to 14 years of age, scholarship to deserving students from a poor background, providing subsidized houses to poor people, etc.

Poverty is a social evil, we can also contribute to control it. For example- we can simply donate old clothes to poor people, we can also sponsor the education of a poor child or we can utilize our free time by teaching poor students. Remember before wasting food, somebody is still sleeping hungry.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Child Poverty in the United States: A Tale of Devastation and the Promise of Hope

Alyn t. mccarty.

University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center for Women’s Health and Health Disparities Research

The child poverty rate in the United States is higher than in most similarly developed countries, making child poverty one of America’s most pressing social problems. This article provides an introduction of child poverty in the US, beginning with a short description of how poverty is measured and how child poverty is patterned across social groups and geographic space. I then examine the consequences of child poverty with a focus educational outcomes and child health, and three pathways through which poverty exerts its influence: resources, culture, and stress. After a brief review of the anti-poverty policy and programmatic landscape, I argue that moving forward we must enrich the communities in which poor families live in addition to boosting incomes and directly supporting children’s skill development. I conclude with emerging research questions.

SECTION I: Introduction

In 2014, 15.5 million children—or 21.1% of children under age 18—lived in families with incomes below the federal poverty line, making children the largest group of poor people in the United States ( DeNavas-Walt & Proctor 2015 ). Rates are even higher for the youngest children: 25% of children under age 3 are poor ( Jiang et al. 2015 ). These figures position the US second only to Romania in rankings of child poverty rates among 35 industrialized countries ( Adamson 2012 ).

Poor children in the US face a widening economic chasm between themselves and their more affluent peers ( Autor 2014 ). Income inequality has grown substantially in the last forty years; after decades of decline, income inequality now harkens back to levels similar to those during the Great Depression ( Piketty & Saez 2014 ). What’s more, children from impoverished backgrounds in the US have a tougher time getting out of poverty than children in other similarly developed countries. Rates of social mobility are lower in the United States than most continental European countries ( Bjorklund & Jantti 2009 ; Duncan & Murnane 2011 , pg. 5–6; Hertz et al. 2008 ) and have remained unchanged since 1979 ( Lee & Solon 2009 ).

High rates of child poverty, income inequality, and social immobility motivate a sense of urgency and importance in research and policy focused on poor children and their families. In this article, I review the latest research on child poverty across multiple social and behavioral science disciplines. Together, this work tells two stories: One narrative warns of the long-term negative impacts associated with child poverty, but the other offers hope of resilience through policies and programs designed to reduce child poverty and mitigate its damages.

In Section II, I begin by describing how researchers define and measure poverty. Section III offers a descriptive portrait of what child poverty looks like in America today. In Section IV, I review literature on the impact of child poverty educational outcomes and child health. I discuss new types of data and approaches to the study of child poverty that have uncovered nuance in the impact of child poverty. In Section V, I describe three pathways through which poverty exerts its effects on children: resources, culture, and stress. Section VI briefly reviews anti-poverty policies that aim to reduce the rate of child poverty and early childhood interventions that aim to limit its effects. In Section VII, I argue that providing economic benefits to poor families and investing early on in children’s human capital may be more effective if paired with investments in the communities in which poor families live. Finally, in Section VII, I conclude with emerging research questions.

SECTION II: Definition of Poverty & Measurement

Approximately 46.7 million people in the United States live below the poverty line, a rate of 14.8 percent ( DeNavas-Walt & Proctor 2015 ). Of these, 15.5 million—about a third—are children. Children account for about 23 percent of the overall US population, which means that children are overrepresented among the poor ( US Census Bureau 2015 ). Figure 1 shows 2014 poverty rates for children across multiple age groups using data from the American Community Survey. 1 Overall, 21.7% of children are poor. Poverty rates are higher among younger children and lower among older children: approximately 24% of children ages 5 or younger are poor compared to about 18% of youth ages 16 or 17.

Source: Author’s calculations using American Community Survey (ACS) data, 2014.

Accurately measuring child poverty and how it varies over time and place gives us…

Accurately measuring child poverty and how it varies over time and place gives us insight into how rates of child poverty are shaped by economic, demographic, and public policy change ( Cancian & Danziger 2009 ). On its face, measuring poverty should be quite simple. Yet, there is some debate about how best to categorize a family’s poverty status ( Haveman et al. 2015 ). Since the early 1960s, poverty status has been determined by comparing a household’s pre-tax cash income (e.g., wages and salaries) to a threshold that accounts for inflation using the Consumer Price Index. The child poverty rate is the proportion of families with children who have incomes below the threshold. The threshold is anchored at three times the cost of a subsistence food budget. 2 The threshold is adjusted for family size, composition, and age of householder, but it is the same no matter where a person lives in the US.

The official poverty measure is intended to reflect the proportion of the population for whom the resources they share with others in their household are not enough to meet their basic needs ( Haveman et al. 2015 ). However, a number of criticisms of the measure have been raised, revealing the significant shortcomings of the way poverty is officially determined ( Citro & Michael 1995 ). In response to these criticisms, the Census Bureau now reports a supplemental poverty measure (SPM) each year, which (1) takes into account necessary expenses (e.g., taxes and childcare) and cash and in-kind government benefits (e.g., cash welfare, housing subsidies, WIC and SNAP benefits); (2) broadens the definition of household to include foster children and unmarried partners; (3) updates the poverty threshold annually rather than “anchoring” it to a set poverty line; and (4) reflects housing costs reported in the American Community Survey, thus varies by place of residence ( Haveman et al. 2015 ).

For most groups, the SPM rates are higher than official measures; however, for some groups—including children—the SPM rates are lower ( Short 2015 ). The lower SPM child poverty rate largely reflects the impact of government anti-poverty policies, many of which explicitly target families with children such as the Child Tax Credit, school lunch subsidies, and WIC benefits ( Fox et al. 2015 ). According to Short (2015) , the official poverty rate for children under 18 in 2014 was 21.5 percent, which exceeds the 2014 SPM rate of 16.7 percent by about 4.8 percentage points. 3

SECTION III: A PORTRAIT OF CHILD POVERTY IN AMERICA

The burden of child poverty is unequally distributed across population subgroups in the US. In this section, I describe patterns of child poverty in our society, drawing on research that explores the social and economic factors that generate and maintain poverty for some groups more than others, over time, and across geographic space.

The Color of Child Poverty

There are dramatic disparities in child poverty rates by race/ethnicity: in 2014, child poverty rates were highest for children who are non-Hispanic Black or African American (38%), American Indian (36%), or Hispanic or Latino (32%), while rates were lowest for children who are non-Hispanic White (13%) or Asian and Pacific Islander (13%) ( Kids Count 2015 ).

Though rates help us understand the disproportionate burden of child poverty for some racial/ethnic minorities, it is also revealing to examine the total population of children in poverty by race/ethnicity (see Figure 2 ). First, poverty affects all children, regardless of racial/ethnic background. Second, contrary to racialized stereotypes about who is poor in America, there are more non-Hispanic white children in poverty (4.9 million) than non-Hispanic Black or African American children (3.9 million). Third, the majority of children in poverty are of Hispanic origin (5.7 million). Fourth, for each racial/ethnic group, most children in poverty are between 0 and 5 years of age.

High levels of child poverty among Back, American Indian, and Hispanic children…

High levels of child poverty among Black, American Indian, and Hispanic children reflect changes over time in the economy, public policy, and institutional practices that disproportionately affect people of color, such as declining relative wages of less educated men, declining availability of full-time jobs, and rising incarceration rates ( Wilson 1996 ). The disproportionality of poverty by race/ethnicity also reflects past and current discrimination in schooling, housing markets, and labor markets ( Cancian & Danziger 2009 ; Desmond 2016 ; Stokes et al. 2001 ).

Immigration and Child Poverty in the US: A Growing Concern

Immigrant status is also closely associated with poverty. Children of recent immigrants are a rapidly growing share of the child population in the United States: from 2006 to 2011, the number of children with at least one immigrant parent grew by 1.5 million, from 15.7 to 17.2 million ( Hanson & Simms 2014 ). Thus, children of immigrants account for nearly a fourth of all children in the United States. The majority of children of immigrants are Hispanic, and more than 40% have parents from Mexico.

Similar to many racial/ethnic minority groups, immigrant children are disproportionately likely to experience poverty relative to children whose parents were born in the US. In 2009, 18.2% of children with native-born parents were poor compared to 27.2% of children with “established immigrant” parents (i.e., those who have been in the US for more than ten years), and 38.5% of children with parents who recently immigrated to the US (Wight et al. 2011).

Since immigrants represent an increasing share of the US population and poverty rates among the foreign born tend to be high, immigration directly affects the overall child poverty rate ( Raphael & Smolensky 2009 ). Theoretically, immigration could also affect child poverty rates by driving down the wages and employment of native-born workers, though there is little evidence to support this claim ( Raphael & Smolensky 2009 ).

Declining Rates of Marriage and the Growing Burden of Child Poverty

Child poverty rates are substantially higher for children in single-mother families than for those in married-couple families, in part because single-mother families have fewer potential earners, and many have difficulty collecting child support payments from fathers ( Mather 2010 ). In 2014, 30.6% of single mother families were poor, compared with only 6.2% of married families with children ( DeNavas-Walt & Proctor 2015 ).

During the 1970s and 1980s, there was a rapid increase in single-mother families in the US, and rates have remained high since the 1990s; nearly one-fourth of children under 18 live in single-mother families ( Mather 2010 ). 4 Cancian & Reed (2009) note that though women are now less likely to be married than previously, women also tend to have fewer children, are more educated, and are more likely to be working than in the past. The researchers argue that these trends have countervailing influences on the child poverty rate: increased maternal employment has offset the poverty increasing effects of single motherhood. Still, recent changes in family structure have increased the child poverty rate, all else being equal.

Poverty of Place: How Child Poverty is Spatially Distributed in the US

In addition to their race/ethnic identification, immigrant status, and their parents’ marital status, where children live can also put them at a greater risk of growing up poor. Though many conceive of poverty as an urban problem, 95 of the 100 counties in the US with the highest child poverty rates are located in rural areas, whereas most counties with the lowest child poverty rates tend to be in wealthy suburbs of large metropolitan areas ( O’Hare & Mather 2008 ). Poverty disproportionately affects children living in rural areas as a result of recent economic changes in rural communities where key industries have disappeared (e.g., family farms) or moved overseas (e.g., textiles manufacturing) ( O’Hare 2009 ; Vernon-Feagans et al. 2012 ). The service sector jobs that have replaced these industries contribute to higher rates of poverty because they are less stable and lower paying, and rural areas have not benefitted from the rise of technology-related companies in the same way as have urban and suburban areas ( O’Hare 2009 ).

Child poverty is also a highly clustered regional phenomenon. The South has a regional poverty rate of over 16%, and there are hotspot clusters of high rates of child poverty in the Mississippi Delta region, the Black Belt, Appalachia, southwest Texas and New Mexico, southern South Dakota, and northern Nebraska ( Voss et al. 2006 ). Regional variation in child poverty can in part be explained by their social and economic contexts. Structural factors such as racial/ethnic composition and industry combine to influence the social processes that generate levels of child poverty in different areas. For example, racial/ethnic composition is more strongly associated with child poverty in farming dependent areas, which in part explains the higher levels of child poverty that are observed in the South ( Curtis et al. 2012 ).

The supplemental child poverty rate varies widely across states, which in large part reflects variation in state anti-poverty policies ( The Anne E Casey Foundation 2015 ). In an analysis of the US Census Bureau Supplementary Poverty Measure Public Use Research files in 2012–2014, The Anne E Casey Foundation (2015) found that federal benefits, which generally do not adjust for differences in costs of living, have a smaller impact on reducing child poverty rates in states where cost of living is high. In addition, though most government benefits are funded at the federal level, states vary with respect to the ins-and-outs of policy implementation, particularly for welfare: income eligibility limits, benefit levels, financial incentives to work, time limits, eligibility requirements for two-parent families, and the stringency of rules that reduce or terminate benefits for families that are non-compliant ( McKernan & Ratcliffe 2006 ; Soss et al. 2001 ). Many of these welfare policy variations are associated with variation in poverty levels by state, making the state that children are raised in particularly consequential for their economic well-being ( McKernan & Ratcliffe 2006 ).

SECTION IV: Consequences of Poverty

The literature on the consequences of child poverty is enormous, and the latest scholarship is increasingly methodologically sophisticated (see recent review by Duncan et al., 2012 ). Recent research has moved away from cross-sectional analyses, which capture a snapshot of children’s lives at one point in time, toward longitudinal analyses, which allow the linking of trajectories of poverty exposures during infancy and early childhood to outcomes across the life course. As such, it is increasingly common for studies to address the dynamics of exposure to poverty, including intensity, timing, and duration (e.g., short term vs. long term poverty). Furthermore, studies are paying increasing attention to the context of children’s lives beyond their families’ own socioeconomic status by explicitly modeling the impact of economic resources of others around them, for example in their schools and neighborhoods.

These new ways of studying the effects of child poverty have revealed that: 1) most differences in outcomes between poor and non-poor children remain after adjusting for potentially confounding factors (i.e., factors other than income that are associated with both poverty and child outcomes); 2) poverty exposure may be especially harmful during early childhood, a period of rapid brain growth and development; 3) the longer a child is exposed to poverty, the greater the risk of negative outcomes; 4) the effects of poverty can accumulate over time or lie dormant for years, only to be revealed in adulthood; and 5) the socioeconomic context of neighborhoods and schools matter for children’s outcomes net of their own family’s resources ( Brooks-Gunn et al. 1993 ; Duncan & Magnuson 2011a ; Duncan et al. 1998 ; Duncan et al. 2010 ; Elder 1985 ; Entwisle et al. 2005 ; Foster & Furstenberg 1999 ; Harding 2003 ; Hertzman 1999 ; Kuh & Shlomo 2004 ; McLeod & Shanahan 1996 ; Ratcliffe & McKernan 2010 ; Sastry & Pebley 2010 ; Turley 2003 ).

In the next few pages, I review literature on two domains of child well-being: academic achievement and child health. Due to lack of space, I do not focus on other outcomes, though they remain the focus of much of the current academic research on the consequences of child poverty across the life course, including learning and developmental delays, criminal activity, teenage childbearing, marriage, and adult health and socioeconomic outcomes ( Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 1997b ; Duncan & Brooks-Gunn 1997 ; Duncan et al. 2010 ; Duncan et al. 2012 ).

A Growing Academic Achievement Gap Between Rich and Poor

One of the most widely studied outcomes of childhood poverty is success in school. The focus on schooling is rooted in the widespread belief that children who do well in school have a better chance of escaping poverty when they are adults. Indeed, education is increasingly necessary for economic wellbeing in the US, in part due to a growing earnings gap between those who are college-educated and those who are not ( Goldin & Katz 2008 ). Success in school also strongly predicts a wide variety of other desired outcomes, such as civic participation, adult health, and life expectancy ( Attewell & Levin 2007 ; Hout 2012 ; van Kippersluis et al. 2011 ). Yet, the challenge of succeeding academically for children living in poverty is a difficult one. Poverty has large and consistent associations with academic outcomes, including achievement on standardized tests, years of completed schooling, and degree attainment ( Bailey & Dynarski 2011 ; Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 1997a ; Duncan & Magnuson 2011b ; Entwisle et al. 2005 ). Differences between poor and non-poor children are observable early on and persist across the school years: gaps in academic achievement are evident in kindergarten, and by age 14, students from the bottom income quintile are a full academic year behind their peers in the top income quintile ( Duncan & Magnuson 2011b ; Duncan & Murnane 2011 ). What’s more, income inequality in academic achievement is getting worse rather than improving over time: the achievement gap between the 90th and 10th percentiles of the income distribution among children born in 2001 is 30–40 percent larger than among children born twenty-five years earlier and is now larger than racial gaps ( Reardon 2011 ). The growing income-achievement gap is driven by a strengthening of the association between family income and children’s academic achievement for families above the median income level, which reflects increasing parental investment in children’s cognitive development among the more economically advantaged ( Reardon 2011 ). 5

Impact of Poverty on the Physical and Mental Health of Children

Poverty is also key social determinant of infant and child health, which can have lasting effects on educational attainment, earnings, and adult health ( Aber et al. 1997 ; Duncan & Brooks-Gunn 1997b ; Wagmiller et al. 2006 ). The central role of poverty in shaping child health is increasingly clear. Recently, the American Academy of Pediatrics released a policy statement and technical report that recognizes this centrality, drawing on research demonstrating a causal relation between early childhood poverty and child health ( Council on Community Pediatrics 2016 ).

For infants, poverty increases the risk of a number of birth outcomes including low birth weight, which is a general indictor of a baby’s in utero environment and development and a precursor to subsequent physical health and cognitive and emotion problems ( Bennett 1997 ; Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 1997b ; Starfield et al. 1991 ). Poverty increases the risk of infant mortality, another widely accepted indicator of the health and well-being of children ( Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 1997b ; Corman & Grossman 1985 ). With an infant mortality rate of 6.1 in 2009, the US lags far behind European countries, ranking last in a comparison of 26 OECD countries ( MacDorman et al. 2014 ). The excess infant mortality rate in the US is largely driven by post-neonatal deaths (those that occur between one month and a year after the birth) among low-income mothers ( Chen et al. forthcoming ).

For children, poverty is associated with a number of physical health insults: increased risk of injuries resulting from accidents or physical abuse/neglect; more frequent and severe chronic conditions (e.g., asthma, diabetes, and problems with hearing, vision, and speech); more frequent acute illnesses; poorer nutrition and growth; lower immunization rates or delayed immunization; and increased risk of obesity and its complications ( Aber et al. 1997 ; Starfield 1991 ; Currie & Lin 2007 ; Case et al. 2002 ).

In addition to physical health problems, the disadvantages associated with poverty and economic insecurity can trigger significant mental health problems for children, including ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and mood and anxiety disorders (Costello et al. 2004; Cuellar 2015 ; Perou et al. 2013 ). Mental health problems are more common than physical health problems, and their effects can be more pervasive ( Currie & Stabile 2006 ; Currie 2009 ). Approximately one fourth of youth experience a mental disorder during the past year and about a third across their lifetimes ( Merikangas et al. 2009 ). These problems, which are the dominant cause of childhood disability, can restrict children’s social competence and opportunities to learn ( Delaney & Smith 2012 ; Halfon et al. 2012 ).

Estimates across poverty status for mental disorders combined are not available. But, according to a recent summary of mental health surveillance among children in the US between 2005–2011 by the Center for Disease Control, prevalence rates are higher for children living in poverty compared with non-poor children for ADHD, behavior or conduct disorders, and mood/anxiety disorders ( Perou et al. 2013 ). The only exception to the pattern is among children who have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, who are more likely to come from more economically advantaged families.

Beyond The Individual: How Neighborhood Poverty Affects Children

A rising share of US children live in high-poverty neighborhoods, defined as a neighborhood with poverty rates of 30 percent or more: more than 10 percent of US children lived in a high poverty neighborhood in 2010, up from 8.7 percent in 2000, a 25% increase ( Mather & Dupuis 2012 ). There are small but clear negative effects for children of growing up in a poor neighborhood that are beyond the effects of growing up in a poor family (see Sastry 2012 for a summary of this literature). Children growing up in high-poverty neighborhoods are at a higher risk of health problems, teen pregnancy, and dropping out of school ( Shonkoff & Phillips 2000 ; Brooks-Gunn et al. 1993 ). What’s more, the effects of neighborhoods may linger across generations. Many caregivers themselves grew up in the neighborhoods in which they are raising their children ( Sharkey 2008 ), and neighborhood environments experienced over multiple generations of a family influence children’s cognitive ability: exposure to neighborhood poverty over two consecutive generations can reduce a child’s cognitive ability by more than half a standard deviation ( Sharkey & Elwert 2011 ).

Section V: MechanismS of Influence

There are several pathways through which poverty affects children’s outcomes, which have been linked to three main theoretical frameworks: resources, culture, and family and environmental stress ( Duncan et al. 2014 ). This section reviews these frameworks, emphasizing the particular mechanisms that link poverty to child outcomes that each bring to light.

Material and Social Resources

Parents who struggle to make ends meet do not have enough income to fulfill basic material needs for their children, such as food, clothing, adequate and stable housing, and quality educational environments ( Becker 1991 ). Families who are poor also tend to be less socially connected to others, are less emotionally supported, and have more frequent negative social interactions ( Lin 2000 ; Mickelson & Kubzansky 2003 ). Inequality in access to resourceful social networks contributes to—and even reproduces—social inequality (for a review and discussion, see Lin 2000 ; DiMaggio & Garip 2012 ). In some ways, material and social resources work in tandem to disadvantage families in poverty. For example, high rates of mobility in areas of concentrated economic disadvantage erode the social fabric of neighborhoods, a process which has negative consequences for families who are able to stay put ( Jacobs 1961 ). As Desmond (2016) emphasizes in his ethnography Evicted , housing instability and evictions operate as mechanisms that degrade the social connectivity upon which resourceful neighborhoods are built. Evictions are not rare—one in eight families face involuntary moves each year nationwide—and evictions disproportionately affect low-income families with children. Many poor families that are in need of stable social environments to raise their children struggle to maintain stable housing, and are forced to move from place to place when a combination of their good will and financial supports give way to a rental market that profits from tenants’ financial instability ( Desmond 2016 ). Facing eviction, these families are not motivated to invest in their neighborhoods, emotionally or otherwise, and the ties that are formed between those crippled by the weight of their housing situations are often “disposable,” made for the short-term benefits they provide but easily discarded ( Desmond 2012 ). Disposable ties can add stress rather than reduce it, making them ill-suited to rebuff the negative consequences of poverty on child outcomes.

A Renewed Focus on the Culture of Poverty

After a considerable absence from the research agenda of social scientists, the study of culture within poverty scholarship has been reinvigorated. A culture perspective asks questions about how and why people cope with poverty and how they escape it, focusing on individuals’ beliefs, preferences, orientations, and strategies in response to poverty as well as anti-poverty policies and programs ( Small et al. 2010 ). Unlike much of what proceeded it, current culture of poverty scholarship avoids blaming the victim for their problems, rather focusing on why poor people adopt certain frames, values, and repertoires, and how people make meaning of their social status in relation to others ( Small et al. 2010 ).

Central to literature that addresses child poverty from a cultural perspective are studies of how parenting practices operate as a mechanism through which poverty affects children. For example, Lareau (2003) observes families from different class backgrounds with school-aged children in order to understand how social class differences in child-rearing strategies might contribute to stratification processes. She argues that social class position shapes parents’ cultural logics of child-rearing. Middle and upper class families practice “concerted cultivation,” wherein parents actively foster and assess their child’s talents, opinions, and skills. In contrast, working class and poor families are more likely to see the development of their children as an “accomplishment of natural growth,” allowing for unstructured free time socializing with family and community members and teaching children to be deferential and quiet. As a result of these different approaches, Lareau argues that middle-class children exhibit a sense of entitlement that puts them at a distinct advantage within schools and other institutions, while working-class children develop a sense of constraint in relation to schooling and the wider social world and are less adept at responding to school demands and practices. While Lareau’s theory is intuitively appealing, the small scope of her study leaves many questions unanswered. Nonetheless, her study is a primary example of the culture of poverty approach, which highlights parenting practices as key to understanding the mechanism through which poverty impacts children.

The Stress of Poverty

In contrast to the material, social, or cultural pathways that highlight social, cultural and economic factors and how they affect children, the stress pathway turns our focus inside the body. Living in poverty is a stressful, often chaotic experience ( Thompson 2014 ; Vernon-Feagans et al. 2012 ; Evans and Wachs 2010 ). The term “toxic stress” is often used to describe the potential impact on body systems of living in the disorganized, unstable, and unpredictable environments of impoverished families ( Garner & Shonkoff 2012 ). Toxic stress refers to strong, frequent, or prolonged activation of the body’s stress response system ( Thompson 2014 ). In contrast to positive or tolerable stress responses, which refer to more mild and adaptive changes in the body’s stress response system or stronger changes over a short period of time, a toxic stress response can undermine the organization of the brain. In some cases, toxic stress can challenge the body’s ability to respond to subsequent stressors, even those of the positive or tolerable variety ( Ladd et al. 2000 ). This lowered threshold makes some poor children less capable of coping effectively with stress as they age, influences genomic function and brain development, and increases the risk of stress-related physical and mental health problems later in life ( Blair et al. 2011 ; Danese & McEwen 2012 ).

SECTION VI: Anti-Poverty Policy and Interventions

It is clear that the consequences of growing up poor are substantial, particularly when children are exposed to conditions associated with poverty early on and for long stretches of time ( Duncan & Magnuson 2011a ). Government policies and early childhood interventions represent society’s response to the burden of child poverty. A comprehensive review of anti-poverty policies is beyond the scope of this review (see Cancian & Danziger 2009 and Haveman et al. 2015 for excellent analyses of anti-poverty efforts over the past 60 years), but the consensus is that anti-poverty policies successfully lift many people out of poverty, especially people with children ( Danziger and Wimer 2014 ; Haveman et al. 2015 ). In particular, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which is an income-based monthly benefit that can be used to purchase food at authorized stores, has become one of the most effective anti-poverty policies, particularly for households with children living in deep poverty ( Bartfeld et al. 2015 ). Yet, economic benefits of current policies constitute proportionately less of their income for poor families now than in prior decades ( Danziger & Danziger 2009 ). The public benefits that remain available to low-income families are mostly concentrated among families with earnings, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC), mostly come in the form of in-kind benefits—like SNAP—rather than cash assistance ( Shaefer et al 2015 ), and often fall very short of full coverage for those in need. For example, Section 8 housing choice vouchers, which guarantee that a family will pay no more than 30 percent of its income for housing, are available only to a third of poor renting families ( Desmond 2016 ).

In addition to anti-poverty policies that supplement income or increase employment for families with children, there are also programs and interventions that help redress the negative effects of poverty on children’s life chances. Rigorous evaluations of a number of famous early childhood programs (e.g., the Perry Preschool program, The Incredible Years, and the Abecedarian project) are often cited as evidence that such programs can at least partially compensate for the disadvantages associated with growing up poor, promoting cognitive skills and non-cognitive traits such as motivation (Cuhna et al. 2006). The positive effects appear to be long-lasting, and early interventions produce larger effects than programs focused on older children. Ultimately, though expensive at the outset, the returns on early investments come in the form of a more productive workforce, a reduction in expensive treatment for mental and physical problems, reduced reliance on public assistance, and less involvement in the criminal justice system ( Heckman et al. 2010 ).

In contrast to small-scale early childhood interventions, Head Start, which is administered by the Administration for Children and Families within the Department of Health and Human Services, serves over 1 million low-income children ages birth to 5 ( Administration for Children and Families 2014 ). Head Start services generally focus on early learning, health and developmental screenings, and strengthening parent-child relationships. Though children who attend Head Start score below norms across developmental areas including language, literacy, and mathematics, at both Head Start entry and exit ( Aikens et al. 2013 ), Head Start is associated with modest improvements in children’s preschool experiences and school readiness in certain areas compared to similarly disadvantaged children who did not attend Head Start ( Puma et al. 2012 ). However, the benefits appear to wane over time.

Another large scale program designed to address the needs of low-income families with children is the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV) ( Michalopoulos et al. 2015 ). MEICHV began as a pilot initiative in the Bush administration and a full fledged program in 2010 as an expansion to the Affordable Care Act. Between 2010 and 2014, it provided $1.5 billion to states for home visiting. For the most part, states used the MIECHV funds to expand the use of four evidence-based home visiting models: Early Head Start – Home Based Program Option; Healthy Families America; Nurse-Family Partnership; and Parents as Teachers. Home visiting programs vary quite a bit, but generally consist of visits from social workers, parent educators, and/or registered nurses to low-income pregnant women and new parents. Participants receive health check-ups and referrals, parenting advice, and guidance with navigating other programs. The duration and frequency of the visits vary depending on the program and age of the child. Some continue until the baby is two years old, others support families until children complete kindergarten. A recent review of 19 home visiting models suggests that home visiting programs have favorable impacts on a number of child outcomes including child health, child development, and school readiness ( Avellar et al. 2015 ). Many of the programs have sustained impacts at least one year after program enrollment.

SECTION VII: A Community approach to combating child poverty

Anti-poverty policy and early childhood interventions are successful, but both typically focus on individual families and children. This focus draws away from the ecological underpinnings of the poverty experience. Multiple ecologies of children’s lives—the variety of institutions with which families interact, the relations among these institutions, and the social networks of families—contribute developmental and educational inequalities among children (e.g., Bronfenbrenner & Morris 1997 ; Coleman 1988 ; Durlauf & Young 2001 ; Gamoran 1992 ; Turley 2003 ; Vandell & Pierce 2002 ). Given evidence of the increasing spatial concentration of poverty and the impact of living in areas of concentrated economic deprivation ( Jargowsky 2013 ; Sastry 2012 ), I argue that child and/or family-centered approaches may be more effective and longer lasting if paired with approaches that directly and purposefully target the communities in which low-income families live, thus in the ecological contexts of poor children.

A community approach should involve both indirect investments through institutions such as stable and affordable housing, schools, and labor markets, and direct investments through programs explicitly designed to strengthen social connectivity among parents. Indeed, a crucial aspect of breaking the cycle of poverty must directly build resourceful social connections among the caregivers of poor children. Resourceful social connections are those that are rich in social resources, like social support (e.g., listening to problems or plans for the future), social control (e.g., maintaining consistent expectations among parents and others within the social network), advice and information (e.g., regarding program eligibility, effectiveness of teachers and other institutional agents), and commonplace reciprocal exchanges (e.g., car pooling, child care) ( Domina 2005 ; Thoits 2011 ; Small 2009 ). As many low-income families know all too well, it takes a lot of effort, energy, and human capital to take advantage of the benefits the state provides ( Edin & Lein 1997 ). Building resourceful social connections within high-poverty neighborhoods can make these tasks less daunting by spreading information about how to determine eligibility, sharing in child care responsibilities, and providing transportation to government agencies, doctors’ offices, school, and other institutions designed to help poor families. Additionally, perhaps by investing in the social resources of communities devastated by high rates of poverty, we can empower residents to fight for policy changes they identify for themselves as immediately warranted.

Sociological research is not unequivocal about the benefits of tight social networks. Similar to the depiction of “disposable ties” describe above, Portes and Landolt (1996) argue that we are remiss when failing to consider the pitfalls of close relationships in areas of concentrated disadvantage. Thus, merely connecting parents to each other may not be enough to benefit children. The quality of those connections is tantamount as well. One example of a community-based program that targets parental social resources for low-income families is Families and Schools Together (FAST). FAST is a multi-family group intervention developed using family stress theory, family systems theory, social ecological theory, and community development strategies ( McDonald and Frey 1999 ). Four randomized controlled trials of the program show that, compared to control groups, FAST participants exhibit reduced aggressive and withdrawal behaviors, increased academic competence, and more developed social skills ( Abt Associates 2001 ; Kratochwill et al. 2004 ; McDonald et al. 2006 ; Gamoran et al. 2012 ). The effect of FAST on child outcomes is mediated in part through its effect on parent social networks ( Turley et al. 2012 ). Parents who participate in FAST are more likely to know other parents in their child’s school, to report that other parents share their expectations for their children, and to participate in reciprocal exchanges with other parents ( Turley et al. 2012 ).

The FAST program and others like it take direct aim at the quantity and quality of parents’ social connections. Social resource interventions may break down insidious hurdles that may be difficult for children from low-income families to overcome than by intervening through income supplementation or skill acquisition alone. Of course, the success of these types of programs will be undercut by the high rates of residential mobility currently experienced in low-income neighborhoods. Thus, indirect investments in social resources, for example through expanding housing vouchers to enable more poor families to pay their rent and avoid eviction ( Desmond 2016 ), should be considered a requisite for a truly enriched community approach to combating child poverty.

SECTION VIII: Emerging research questions

Poverty is a persistent problem for over 20% of the children in the United States ( DeNavas-Walt & Proctor 2015 ). Child development is shaped by children’s interactions within and across social contexts ( Bronfenbrenner 2002 ). The social contexts in which children from impoverished backgrounds live can be devastatingly harmful: growing up in poverty exposes children to more stress or abuse in the home, neighborhood crime, and school violence ( Duncan and Brooks-Gunn 1997 ). Exposure to environmental conditions associated with poverty profoundly shapes their development, and the effects become more pronounced the longer the exposure to poverty ( Duncan et al., 1998 ; Foster & Furstenberg 1999 ). Empirical studies from multiple social science disciplines including sociology, psychology, economics, have consistently documented crippling disadvantages across a number of developmental domains, showing that the disadvantages associated with poverty are entrenched, wide-reaching, and constitute an immediate and pressing policy challenge.

Moving the field forward are emerging questions about who sets the anti-poverty policy and programmatic agendas (e.g., Bradshaw 2007 ; O’Connor 2001 ), what cultural and behavioral assumptions are made by specific policy and program components (e.g., Edin & Kefalas 2005 ; Steensland 2006 ), and how policies and programs interact with the ways in which poor people engage various institutions, each other, and those who profit from their disadvantaged status (e.g., Desmond 2016 ). Furthermore, as argued here, an examination of the ways that neighborhood institutions support or erode the social connectivity of low-income neighborhoods is key. Researchers should continue to centrally locate the analysis of the impact of policy and programs not only on individual children but also on the social ecological environments in which they live and learn. Investing in the communities in which poor parents and caregivers live may enhance the positive effects of anti-poverty policy and early childhood interventions. Poverty scholars should examine how institutional features shape the social networks of families in financial trouble, and how children fare under different organizational arrangements. In Unanticipated Gains , his study of day care centers in New York City, Mario Small (2005) offers a theoretical framework to think about how organizational features of institutions can promote the kinds of stable ties that benefit families with young children. Small documents the social network benefits of certain centers that, by virtue of the particular institutional conditions in place, connect families to each other and provide families, particularly single mothers with young children, relationships that support their health and well being. Rather than the “unanticipated gains” like those that were observed in Small’s study, we may find we can anticipate these gains as we invest in the social and economic opportunities for the poor.

These emerging research questions will bring us closer to an understanding what policies will work best for addressing the high rates of overall child poverty, the disproportionality of child poverty, and the most cost-effective mechanisms for buffering children from the negative effects of poverty and its associated conditions.

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by a National Institutes of Health T32 award (5T32HD049302-08) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).

1 These estimates are from American Community Survey data, whereas official estimates come from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement. The numbers are slightly different for overall poverty (21.7% vs 21.1%). These differences reflect the different samples included in the poverty universe: The ACS includes the civilian and military household population and excludes group quarters (e.g., nursing homes and college dormitories), whereas the CPS includes the civilian non-institutionalized population ( US Census Bureau 2014 ).

2 The logic behind defining the threshold this way reflects research in the 1950s that showed families spent a third of their annual budget on food ( Haveman et al. 2015 ).

3 The official child poverty rate reported in Short (2015) is 21.5%, which differs from the official rate of 21.1% reported by DeNavas-Walt and Proctor (2015) . This is because Short includes unrelated individuals under the age of 15 in her calculation of the official rate among families with children.

4 Though single father families and cohabiting partners have increased in recent years, the overwhelming majority of children in single-parent homes live with their mothers ( Mather 2010 ).

5 During the 1970s, middle class families on average spent about $3,700 per year on investments in their children, compared to today’s average of $9,300 per year. Poor parents have not been able to keep pace with these increases in investments, so that contemporary poor children lag further behind their affluent counterparts of fifty years prior. The current average annual spending of $1,400 on investments in children among poor families is not even twice the 1970s average of $880 per year ( Duncan and Murnane 2011 )

• Abt Associates. National Evaluation of Family Support Programs. Vol. B: Research Studies: Final Report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aber JL, Bennett NG, Conley DC, Li J. The Effects of Poverty on Child Health and Development. Annual Review of Public Health. 1997; 18 (1):463–483. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Adamson P. Measuring Child Poverty: New League Tables Of Child Poverty In The World’s Richest Countries. Florence, Italy: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Administration for Children and Families. [8 February 2016]; Head Start Program Facts: Fiscal Year 2014. 2014 Retrieved from: http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/data/factsheets/2014-hs-program-factsheet.html .
• Aikens N, Kopack Klein A, Tarullo L, West J. Getting Ready for Kindergarten: Children’s Progress During Head Start. Faces 2009 Report. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S., Department of Health and Human Services; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Attewell PA, Levin DE. Passing the Torch: Does Higher Education for the Disadvantaged Pay Off Across the Generations? New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Autor D. Skills, Education, and the Rise of Earnings Inequality Among the Other 99 Percent. Science. 2014; 344 (6186):843–351. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Avellar S, Paulsell D, Sama-Miller E, Del Grosso P, Akers L, Kleinman R. Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness Review: Executive Summary. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bailey MJ, Dynarski SM. Inequality in Postsecondary Education. In: Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ, editors. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. pp. 117–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bartfield J, Gundersen C, Smeeding TM, Ziliak JP, editors. Snap Matters: How Food Stamps Affect Health and Well-Being. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Becker G. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1991. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bennett F. The LBW, premature infant. In: Gross R, Spiker D, Haynes C, editors. Helping Low Birth Weight, Premature Babies: The Infant Health and Development Program. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1997. pp. 3–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bjorklund A, Jantti M. Intergenerational Income Mobility and the Role of Family Background. In: Salvedra W, Nolan B, Smeeding TM, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Income Inequality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2009. pp. 491–521. [ Google Scholar ]
• Blair C, Raver CC, Granger D, Mills-Koonce R, Hibel L, Family LPKI. Allostasis and Allostatic Load in the Context of Poverty in Early Childhood. Development & Psychopathology. 2011; 23 (3):845–857. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bradshaw T. Theories of Poverty and Anti-Poverty Programs in Community Development. Community Development. 2007; 38 (1):7–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. Preparing a World for the Infant in the 21st Century: The Research Challenge. In: Gomes-Pedro J, Nugent K, Young JG, Brazelton TB, editors. The Infant and the Family in the 21st Century. New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge; 2002. pp. 45–52. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U, Morris PA. The Ecology of Developmental Processes. In: Damon W, Eisenberg N, editors. Handbook of Child Psychology. New York: Wiley: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1997. pp. 993–1028. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks-Gunn J, Duncan GJ. Income Effects Across the Life Span: Integration and Interpretation. In: Duncan GJ, Brooks-Gunn J, editors. Consequences of Growing Up Poor. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1997a. pp. 596–610. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks-Gunn J, Duncan GJ. The Effects of Poverty on Children. The Future of Children. 1997b; 7 (2):55–71. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks-Gunn J, Duncan GJ, Klebanov PK, Sealand N. Do Neighborhoods Influence Child and Adolescent Development. American Journal of Sociology. 1993; 99 (2):353–395. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cancian M, Danziger S. Changing Poverty and Changing Anti-Poverty Policies. FOCUS. 2009; 26 (2):2–5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cancian M, Reed D. Family structure, childbearing, and parental employment: Implications for the level and trend in poverty. In: Cancian M, Danziger S, editors. Changing Poverty, Changing Policies. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2009. pp. 92–121. [ Google Scholar ]
• Case A, Lubotsky D, Paxson C. Economic Status and Health in Childhood: The Origins of the Gradient. American Economic Review. 2002; 95 (2):1308–1334. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen A, Oster E, Williams H. Why is Infant Mortality Higher in the Us Than in Europe? [21 Mar 2016]; American Economic Journal: Policy. Forthcoming. Retrieved From: https://www.brown.edu/research/projects/oster/sites/brown.edu.research.projects.oster/files/uploads/Why_is_Infant_Mortality_Higher_In_US.pdf . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Citro C, Michael R. Measuring Poverty: A New Approach. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
• Coleman JS. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology. 1988; 94 (S):S95–S120. [ Google Scholar ]
• Corman H, Grossman M. Determinants of Neonatal Mortality Rates in the Us: A Reduced Form Model. Journal of Health Economics. 1985; 4 (3):213–236. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Costello EJ, Compton SN, Keeler G, Angold A. Relationships Between Poverty and Psychopathology: A Natural Experiment. JAMA. 2003; 290 (15):2023–2029. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Council on Community Pediatrics. Poverty and Child Health in the United States. [9 Mar 2016]; Pediatrics. 2016 Retrieved From: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2016/03/07/peds.2016-0339 . [ PubMed ]
• Cuellar A. Preventing and Treating Child Mental Health Problems. Future of Children. 2015; 25 (1):111–134. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cunha F, Heckman JJ, Lochner L, Masterov DV. Interpreting the Evidence on Life Cycle Skill Formation. In: Hanushek EA, Welch F, editors. Handbook of the Economics of Education. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier B. V; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
• Currie J. Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise: Socioeconomic Status, Poor Health in Childhood, and Human Capital Development. Journal of Economic Literature. 2009; 47 (1):87–122. [ Google Scholar ]
• Currie J, Lin W. Chipping Away At Health: More on the Relationship Between Income and Child Health. Health Affairs. 2007; 26 (2):331–344. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Currie J, Stabile M. Child Mental Health and Human Capital Accumulation: The Case of ADHD. Journal of Health Economics. 2006; 25 (6):1094–1118. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Curtis K. Spatial Variation in Poverty-Generating Processes: Child Poverty in the United States. Social Science Research. 2012; 41 (1):146–159. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Danese A, McEwen BS. Adverse Childhood Experiences, Allostasis, Allostatic Load, and Age-Related Disease. Physiology & Behavior. 2012; 106 (1):29–39. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Danziger S, Danziger SK. The Us Social Safety Net and Poverty. In: Bane MJ, Zenteno R, editors. Poverty and Poverty Alleviation Strategies in North America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2009. pp. 233–261. [ Google Scholar ]
• Danziger S, Wimer C. The State of the Union: Poverty and Inequality Report. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Poverty and Inequality; 2014. Poverty; pp. 15–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Delaney L, Smith JP. Childhood Health: Trends and Consequences Over the Life Course. The Future of Children. 2012; 22 (1):43–63. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DeNavas-Walt C, Proctor B. Income and Poverty in the United States: 2014. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, Washington DC; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Desmond M. Disposable Ties and the Urban Poor. American Journal of Sociology. 2012; 117 (5):1295–1335. [ Google Scholar ]
• Desmond M. Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City. New York, NY: Crown Publishers; 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• DiMaggio P, Garip F. Network Effects and Social Inequality. Annual Review of Sociology. 2012; 38 (1):93–118. [ Google Scholar ]
• DiPrete T, Eirich G. Cumulative Advantage as a Mechanism for Inequality: A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Developments. Annual Review of Sociology. 2006; 32 :271–297. [ Google Scholar ]
• Domina T. Leveling the Home Advantage: Assessing the Effectiveness of Parental Involvement in Elementary School. Sociology of Education. 2005; 78 (3):233–249. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Brooks-Gunn J. Consequences of Growing Up Poor. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1997. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Brooks Gunn J, Klebanov PK. Economic Deprivation and Early Childhood Development. Child Development. 1994; 65 (2):296–318. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Magnuson K. Pathways. 2011a. Winter. The Long Reach of Early Childhood Poverty; pp. 22–27. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Magnuson K. The Nature and Impact of Early Achievement Skills, Attention Skills, and Behavioral Problems. In: Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ, editors. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011b. pp. 47–69. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Magnuson K, Kalil A, Ziol-Guest K. The Importance of Early Childhood Poverty. Social Indicators Research. 2012; 108 (1):87–98. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Magnuson K, Votruba-Drzal E. Boosting Family Income to Promote Child Development. Future of Children. 2014; 24 (1):99–120. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ. Introduction: The American Dream, Then and Now. In: Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ, editors. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. pp. 3–23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Yeung WJ, Brooks-Gunn J, Smith JR. How Much Does Childhood Poverty Affect the Life Chances of Children? American Sociological Review. 1998; 63 (3):406–423. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Ziol Guest KM, Kalil A. Early Childhood Poverty and Adult Attainment, Behavior, and Health. Child Development. 2010; 81 (1):306–325. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Durlauf S, Young HP, editors. Social Dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Edin K, Kefalas M. Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Edin K, Lein L. Making Ends Meet. New York: NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1997. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elder G. Life Course Dynamics: Trajectories and Transitions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 1985. [ Google Scholar ]
• Entwisle DR, Alexander KL, Olson LS. First Grade and Educational Attainment By Age 22: A New Story. American Journal of Sociology. 2005; 110 (5):1458–1502. [ Google Scholar ]
• Evans GW, Wachs TD. Chaos and Its Influence on Children’s Development: An Ecological Perspective. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Foster EM, Furstenberg FF. The Most Disadvantaged Children: Trends over Time. Social Service Review. 1999; 73 (4):560–578. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fox L, Wimer C, Garfinkel I, Kaushal N, Waldfogel J. Waging War on Poverty: Poverty Trends Using a Historical Supplemental Poverty Measure. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 2015; 34 (3):567–592. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gamoran A. Social Factors in Education. In: Alkin M, editor. Encyclopedia of Educational Research. New York, NY: Macmillan; 1992. pp. 1222–1229. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gamoran A, Turley RNL, Turner A, Fish R. Differences Between Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Families in Social Capital and Child Development: First-Year Findings From an Experimental Study. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. 2012; 30 (1):97–112. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garner AS, Shonkoff JP. Early Childhood Adversity, Toxic Stress, and the Role of the Pediatrician: Translating Developmental Science Into Lifelong Health. Pediatrics. 2012; 129 (1):e224–31. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldin CD, Katz LF. The Race Between Education and Technology. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halfon N, Houtrow A, Larson K, Newacheck PW. The Changing Landscape of Disability in Childhood. The Future of Children. 2012; 22 (1):13–42. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hanson D, Simms M. Children of Immigrants: 2011 State Trends Update. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2014. [1 December 2015]. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/413113-Children-of-Immigrants--State-Trends-Update.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Harding DJ. Counterfactual Models of Neighborhood Effects: The Effect of Neighborhood Poverty on Dropping Out and Teenage Pregnancy. American Journal of Sociology. 2003; 109 (3):676–719. [ Google Scholar ]
• Haveman R, Blank R, Moffitt R, Smeeding T, Wallace G. The War on Poverty: Measurement, Trends, and Policy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 2015; 34 (3):593–638. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haveman R, Smeeding T. The Role of Higher Education in Social Mobility. The Future of Children. 2006; 16 (2):125–150. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heckman JJ, Moon SH, Pinto R, Savelyev PA, Yavitz A. The Rate of Return to the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program. Journal of Public Economics. 2010; 94 (1):114–128. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hertz T, Jayasundera T, Piraino P, Selcuk S, Smith N, Verashchagina A. The Inheritance of Educational Inequality: International Comparisons and Fifty-Year Trends. BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy. 2008; 7 (2):1–47. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hertzman C. The Biological Embedding of Early Experience and its Effects on Health in Adulthood. In: Adler NE, Marmot M, McEwen BS, Stewart J, editors. Socioeconomic Status and Health in Industrial Nations. New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences; 1999. pp. 85–95. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hout M. Social and Economic Returns to College Education in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology. 2012; 38 :379–400. [ Google Scholar ]
• Institute of Medicine. How Far Have We Come In Reducing Health Disparities?: Progress Since 2000: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jacobs J. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York, NY: Random House; 1961. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jargowsky P. Concentration of Poverty in the New Millennium: Changes in the Prevalence, Composition, and Location of High Poverty Neighborhoods. New York: NY: The Century Foundation; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiang Y, Ekono M, Skinner C. Basic Facts About Low-Income Children: Children Under 18 Years, 2013. New York, NY: National Center for Children in Poverty; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kids Count. [19 October 2015]; Children in Poverty by Race and Ethnicity. 2015 Retrieved from: http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/44-children-in-poverty-by-race-and-ethnicity#detailed/1/any/false/869,36,868,867,133/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/324,323 .
• Kratochwill TR, McDonald L, Levin JR, Young BT. Families and Schools Together: An Experimental Analysis of a Parent-Mediated Multi-Family Group Program for American Indian Children. Journal of School Psychology. 2004; 42 (5):359–383. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuh D, Shlomo B. A Life Course Approach to Chronic Disease Epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ladd CO, Hout RL, Thivikrama KV, Neneroff CB, Meaney MJ, Plotsky PM. Long-Term Behavioral and Neuroendocrine Adaptation to Adverse Early Experience. In: Mayer EA, Saper CB, editors. Progress in Brain Research: The Biological Basis for Mind Body Interactions. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science; 2000. pp. 81–102. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lareau A. Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee CM, Solon G. Trends in Intergenerational Income Mobility. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2009; 91 (4):766–772. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin N. Inequality in Social Capital. Contemporary Sociology. 2000; 29 (6):785–795. [ Google Scholar ]
• MacDorman M, Mathews TJ, Mohangoo AD, Zeitlin J. International Comparisons of Infant Mortality and Related Factors: United States and Europe, 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports. 2014; 65 (5):1–6. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mather M. US Children in Single-mother Families. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau; 2010. [1 December 2015]. Retrieved from: http://www.prb.org/pdf10/single-motherfamilies.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Mather M, Dupuis G. Rising Share of U.S. Children Living in High-Poverty Neighborhoods. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau; 2012. [5 June 2014]. Retrieved from: http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2012/us-high-poverty-neighborhoods.aspx . [ Google Scholar ]
• McDonald L, Frey HE. Families and Schools Together: Building Relationships. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention; 1999. [ Google Scholar ]
• McDonald L, Moberg DP, Brown RB, Rodriguez-Espiricueta I, Flores NI, Burke MP, Coover G. After School Multifamily Groups: A Randomized Controlled Trial Involving Low-Income, Urban, Latino Children. Children & Schools. 2006; 28 (1):25–34. [ Google Scholar ]
• McKernan S, Ratcliffe CE. The effect of specific welfare policies on poverty. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute; 2006. [21 Mar 2016]. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/411334-The-Effect-of-Specific-Welfare-Policies-on-Poverty.PDF . [ Google Scholar ]
• McLeod JD, Shanahan MJ. Trajectories of Poverty and Children’s Mental Health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1996; 37 (3):207–220. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Merikangas KR, Nakamura EF, Kessler RC. Epidemiology of Mental Disorders in Children and Adolescents. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience. 2009; 11 (1):7–20. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mickelson KD, Kubzansky LD. Social Distribution of Social Support: The Mediating Role of Life Events. American Journal of Community Psychology. 2003; 32 (3–4):265–281. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Michalopoulos C, Lee H, Duggan A, Lundquist E, Tso A, Crowne SS, Burrell L, Somers J, Filene JH, Knox V. A Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation: Early Findings on the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program. A Report to Congress. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Connor A. Poverty Knowledge: Social Science, Social Policy, And The Poor In Twentieth Century U.S. History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Hare WP. The Forgotten Fifth: Child Poverty in Rural America. Manchester, NH: Carsey Institute; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Hare W, Mather M. Child poverty is Highest in Rural Counties in US. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau; 2008. [1 December 2015]. Retrieved from: http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2008/childpoverty.aspx . [ Google Scholar ]
• Perou R, Bitsko RH, Blumberg SJ, Pastor P, Ghandour RM, Gfroerer JC, Hedden SL, Crosby AE, Visser SN, Schieve LA. Mental Health Surveillance Among Children—United States, 2005–2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2013; 62 (Suppl 2):1–35. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Piketty T, Saez E. Inequality in the Long Run. Science. 2014; 344 (6186):838–843. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Portes A, Landolt P. The Downside of Social Capital. The American Prospect. 1996; 26 (94):18–21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Puma M, Bell S, Cook R, Heid C, Broene FJ, Mashburn A, Downer J. Third Grade Follow-Up to the Head Start Impact Study: Final Report. Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Raphael S, Smolensky E. Immigration and Poverty in the United States. FOCUS. 2009; 26 (2):27–31. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ratcliffe C, McKernan S. Childhood poverty persistence: Facts and consequences. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2010. [21 Mar 2016]. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/412126-Childhood-Poverty-Persistence-Facts-and-Consequences.PDF . [ Google Scholar ]
• Reardon S. The Widening Academic Achievement Gap Between the Rich and the Poor: New Evidence and Possible Explanations. In: Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ, editors. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. pp. 91–115. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sastry N. Neighborhood Effects on Children’s Achievement: A Review of Recent Research. In: Maholmes V, King R, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Poverty and Child Development. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 423–447. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sastry N, Pebley AR. Family and Neighborhood Sources of Socioeconomic Inequality in Children’s Achievement. Demography. 2010; 47 (3):777–800. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shaefer HL, Edin K, Talbert E. Understanding the Dynamics of $2-a-day Poverty in the United States. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. 2015; 1 (1):120–138. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharkey P. The Intergenerational Transmission of Context. American Journal of Sociology. 2008; 113 (4):931–969. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharkey P, Elwert F. The Legacy of Disadvantage: Multigenerational Neighborhood Effects on Cognitive Ability. American Journal of Sociology. 2011; 116 (6):1934–1981. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shonkoff JP, Phillips DA, editors. From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press; 2000. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Short K. The Research Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2014. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Small ML. Unanticipated Gains: Origins of Network Inequality in Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Small ML, Harding DJ, Lamont M. Reconsidering Culture and Poverty. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2010; 629 (1):6–27. [ Google Scholar ]
• Soss J, Schram SF, Vartanian TP, O’Brien E. Setting the Terms of Relief: Explaining State Policy Choices in the Devolution Revolution. American Journal of Political Science. 2001; 45 (2):378–395. [ Google Scholar ]
• Starfield B. Childhood Morbidity: Comparisons, Clusters, and Trends. Pediatrics. 1991; 88 (3):519–526. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steensland B. Cultural Categories And The American Welfare State: The Case Of Guaranteed Income Policy. American Journal of Sociology. 2006; 111 (5):1273–1326. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stokes C, Melendez T, Rhodes-Reed G, editors. Race in 21st Century America. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• The Anne E Casey Foundation. Measuring Access to Opportunity. Baltimore, MD: Anne E. Casey Foundation; 2015. [21 Mar 2016]. Retrieved from: http://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-MeasuringAccesstoOpportunityKC2-2015.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Thoits PA. Perceived Social Support and the Voluntary, Mixed, or Pressured Use of Mental Health Services. Society and Mental Health. 2011; 1 (1):4–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thompson RA. Stress and Child Development. The Future of Children. 2014; 24 (1):41–59. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Turley RNL. When Do Neighborhoods Matter? The Role of Race and Neighborhood Peers. Social Science Research. 2003; 32 (1):61–79. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turley RNL, Gamoran A, Turner A, Fish RM. Causal Effects of Social Capital on Child Outcomes. Presentation. Research Committee on Social Stratification (RC28) of the International Sociological Association; Hong Kong. May 2012.2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• US Census Bureau. [7 Nov 2015]; Fact Sheet: Differences Between CPS ASEC and ACS. 2014 Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/datasources/factsheet.html .
• US Census Bureau. [15 Jan 2016]; State and County Quick Facts. 2015 Retrieved from: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html .
• Van Kippersluis H, O’Donnell O, van Doorslaer E. Long-Run Returns to Education. Journal of Human Resources. 2011; 46 (4):695–721. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vandell DL, Pierce KM. After-School Programs and Structured Activities That Support Children’s Development. In: Garner R, editor. Hanging Out: Community-Based After-School Programs for Children. Westport, CT: Greenwood; 2002. pp. 167–178. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vernon-Feagans L, Garrett-Peters P, DeMarco A, Bratsch M. Children Living in Rural Poverty: The Role of Chaos in Early Development. In: Maholmes V, King R, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Poverty and Child Development. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 448–446. [ Google Scholar ]
• Voss PR, Long DD, Hammer RB, Friedman S. County Child Poverty Rates in the Us: A Spatial Regression Approach. Population Research and Policy Review. 2006; 25 (4):369–391. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wagmiller RL, Lennon MC, Kuang L, Alberti PM, Aber JL. The Dynamics of Economic Disadvantage and Children’s Life Chances. American Sociological Review. 2006; 71 (5):847–866. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wight VR, Thampi K, Chau M. Poor Children by Nativity. New York, NY: National Center for Children in Poverty; 2014. [7 Nov 2015]. Retrieved from: http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_1006.html . [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson WJ. When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor. New York, NY: Knopf; 1996. [ Google Scholar ]

• Homework Help
• Essay Examples
• Citation Generator
• Writing Guides
• Essay Title Generator
• Essay Outline Generator
• Flashcard Generator
• Plagiarism Checker
• Paraphrasing Tool
• Conclusion Generator
• Thesis Statement Generator
• Introduction Generator
• Literature Review Generator
• Hypothesis Generator
• Child Poverty Essays

Child Poverty Essays (Examples)

1000+ documents containing “child poverty” .

Filter by Keywords:(add comma between each)

Child poverty in arizona ironically.

Children need a congenial environment for their physical, emotional and mental development and that cannot be possible when they are left to reel under poverty. Alleviating childhood poverty should not just be a slogan, but a high priority issue that needs immediate addressal, and this can only be achieved by means of a collaborative effort, with both the state and federal governments and social organizations working together. ibliography CARSEY, "Child Poverty in Rural America: New Data Shows Increases in 41 States," Accessed 27th April, 2007, available at http://carseyinstitute.unh.edu/documents/rural_child_poverty_fact_sheet.pdf NCCP, "Arizona: Demographics of Poor Children, Accessed 27th April, 2007, Available at http://www.nccp.org/state_detail_demographic_poor_AZ.html NCCP, "Arizona: Demographics of Low-Income Children," Accessed 27th April, 2007, Available at http://www.nccp.org/state_detail_demographic_low_income_AZ.html Terry Goddard, " Arizona Meth Project," Accessed 28th April 2007, Available at http://www.azag.gov/Press_MyTurn/ArizonaMethOpEdApril2007.pdf Naomi Sheehan Groce, "U.S. Child Poverty on the Rise -- Statistics Mask Depth of Crisis," Accessed 28th April, 2007, available at http://www.wsws.org/articles/2005/jun2005/pove-j01.shtml Tim Vanderpool, "Monster Mash: Fighting Meth lock by lock,"….

Bibliography

CARSEY, "Child Poverty in Rural America: New Data Shows Increases in 41 States," Accessed 27th April, 2007, available at http://carseyinstitute.unh.edu/documents/rural_child_poverty_fact_sheet.pdf

NCCP, "Arizona: Demographics of Poor Children,

Accessed 27th April, 2007, Available at http://www.nccp.org/state_detail_demographic_poor_AZ.html

NCCP, "Arizona: Demographics of Low-Income Children,"

Child Poverty in the United

This usually ends up costing them even more money, both in unpaid days off of work and in medical bills, not to mention dramatically reducing the quality of life. Children that grow up in such conditions are also far less likely to finish high school, let alone o to college and get better-paying jobs, thus perpetuating the problem (National Center for Children in Poverty, 2009). The physical and economic realities brought on by this country's philosophy of self-sufficiency and the right to unfettered personal gain are devastating to a growing portion of our citizens, and these effects will also hit the rest of the economy. Poverty is a burden for the rest of society, too, and it is one that is often unforeseen and unaccounted for, making it that much more impossible to effectively handle. It is difficult to determine what to do about the poverty in this country, especially….

Hearts & Minds. (200&). "Children in poverty." Accessed 6 April 2009.  http://www.heartsandminds.org/articles/childpov.htm 

National Center for Children in Poverty. (2009). "Who are America's poor children?" Accessed 6 April 2009. http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_843.html

How Child Poverty Effects Crime Rates Amongst Teens and Young Adults in Today's Society

Child Poverty Effects Crime ates How Child Poverty Effects Crime ates Amongst Teens and Young Adults in Today's Society How Child Poverty Effects Crime ates How Child Poverty Effects Crime ates Amongst Teens and Young Adults in Today's Society The entire human race is in the midst of a breathtaking era that is attributed to numerous advancements and innovations. However, it is very unfortunate to state that this unbelievable industrialized world is full of social dilemmas that have made millions of people to suffer from its drastic impacts. While taking United States into consideration, the statistical records expose the fact that with the expansion of racial and minority groups, the nation has become an increasingly diverse society with numerous young people. In this diverse society, child poverty has become one of widespread and prominent social issue with serious consequences and wider implications (Lindsey, 2008). Indeed, in this contemporary world, the social issue of poverty has….

Arrighi, B.A. & Maume, D.J. (2007). Child Poverty in America Today: The promise of education, Volume 3. USA: Greenwood Publishing Group.

De Zutter, C.J. (2007). The Effects of a Teen-parent Program on Middle School Mothers. USA: ProQuest.

Lindsey, D. (2008). Child Poverty and Inequality: Securing a Better Future for America's Children: Securing a Better Future for America's Children. USA: Oxford University Press.

Maynard, D.C. & Feldman, D.C. (2011). Underemployment: Psychological, Economic, and Social Challenges. USA: Springer.

Education Building Canada Child Poverty and Schools

Education Building Canada: Child Poverty and Schools This article is written by the Canadian Teachers Federation (CTF), an organization of over 200,000 teachers in and around Canada. One of the primary initiatives of the CTF is to reduce the ongoing issue of child poverty. In 2008, the Campaign 2000's report card indicated that child poverty rates in Canada are as high as they were recorded in 1989. This staggering statistic is powerful for many reasons but primarily because reducing child poverty has been an initiative that Canada has aimed to address for many years now. This article provides a summary of powerful statistics that address child poverty and point out such things as the increasing rate of poverty in aboriginal communities, rates of food bank uses, number of families who would need to earn dramatically more money to even hit the poverty line. The article goes on to address child poverty….

Levin, B., and Riffel, J. Current and Potential School Systems Response to Poverty. Canadian Public Policy. Volume XXVI, No.2. 2000.

Urban Children in Poverty Cognitive Development

Sasha is 3 and Cayley is 1. Cayley is beginning to walk which is about normal for her age. Sasha is small for her age and could be considered underdeveloped. Cayley still uses a bottle and sleeps with the bottle for comfort and still puts everything in her mouth. Much of this is normal, though fewer things should be going in the mouth by about this time. She is able to say a few words which is good (often second children speak less than the first child anyway), and her interest in the blocks that the CPS worker brings is a good sign. Sasha is curious and interested in things, but she does not speak much and she does not listen well to basic commands. She also is abusive towards her sister and mother, which is a sign that she has not received the necessary amount of physical stimulation and….

Child Poverty and Its Effects on Education and Development

Child Poverty and Its Effects on Education and Development Beyond problems of financial inequality that occur when countless young children reside in poor as well as persistently inadequate households, poor children can easily perpetuate the never-ending cycle when they achieve adulthood. Prior study implies that children who're born poor as well as are constantly poor are considerably much more most likely to remain poor as grownups, quit school, give teenage premarital births, and also have spotty employment details than all those not very poor at birth (atcliffe and McKernan 2010). This previous research focused on the earliest cohort of youngsters reviewed here-children born in between 1967 and 1974 as well as who turned Thirty amid 1997 and 2004. An important query is whether or not this link has endured with time. Even though information aren't accessible to see outcomes via age 30 for children born within the subsequent two cohort groups….

Duncan, Greg, W. Jean Yeung, Jeanne Brooks-Gunn, and Judith Smith. 1998. "How Much Does Childhood Poverty Affect the Life Chances of Children?" American Sociological Review 63(3): 406 -- 23.

Ratcliffe, Caroline, and Signe-Mary McKernan. 2010. "Childhood Poverty Persistence: Facts and Consequences." Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Ratcliffe, Caroline, and Signe-Mary McKernan. 2012. "Child Poverty and Its Lasting Consequence." Washington, DC: Urban Institute

Vericker, Tracy, Jennifer Macomber, and Olivia Golden. 2010. "Infants of Depressed Mothers Living in Poverty: Opportunities to Identify and Serve." Washington, DC: Urban Institute.

Children and Poverty

Poverty and Homelessness in Children Poverty is the deficiency in the amount of money or material possessions considered to be acceptable for individuals in a particular country. Among families who are homeless with children 42% of homeless children are under the age of six years old. The majority of homeless families with children cited poverty as the third most common reason for their being homeless. A child is born into poverty every 33 seconds in the United States. Key professional and community organizations addressing this issue/population: There are several organizations addressing this issue including the U.S. Department of Agriculture with programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Program, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) seeking to provide affordable housing to everyone, the Children's Defense Fund, Voices for America's Children, the National Urban League, and the National Coalition for the Homeless. Local and community-based organizations such as The Salvation Army, The YWCA,….

Children's Defense Fund-purpose Needs Statement Children's

The Cook County CDED was formed in 1985 and is a private, non-profit organization supported by foundation and grants, as well as several individual donations annually. Our Mission To end disability-related discrimination and injustice through education and increased legal services for individuals and families with disabilities. This is accomplished through legal support and the support of local community families. To fight for and increase the rights of children with disabilities by changing discriminatory practices, policies and laws. To educate children, families and education professionals. To provide assistance to families with disabilities in need. To offer educational and extracurricular activities for children with disabilities as well as family members. To increase awareness overall. The CDED does not believe any individual or family should be denied the right to fair housing or education because of a disability. The CDED Community Center offers a place of solace for children with disabilities and families to gather, learn and spend quality time….

About Us. (n.d.). Children's Defense Fund (CDF): Health Care Coverage for All of America's Children, Ending Child Poverty, Child Advocacy Programs. Retrieved October 22, 2010, from  http://www.childrensdefense.org/about-us/ 

Epilepsy Fdn.-Mission Statement. (n.d.). Epilepsy Foundation-Epilepsy Foundation-trusted, reliable information for people with seizures, and their caregivers. Retrieved October 22, 2010, from  http://www.epilepsyfoundation.org/epilepsylegal/ 

Mission Statement. (n.d.). because a goblin is a terrible thing to waste.. Retrieved October 22, 2010, from http://www.goblindefensefund.org/mission.html

Child Abuse and Neglect

Child abuse and neglect is a highly discussed issue in the present day. For a long time now, the detrimental impacts of child abuse and neglect have been acknowledged. There are significant implications from child abuse and neglect in the United States and it is imperative to come up with the necessary ways of dealing with it. The solution is to have a propagating state program that encompasses poor and underprivileged children. There is also need for family programs that educate and teach households on better child treatment and attaining the necessary skills. Such programs should also be expanded to schools to determine their vulnerabilities and needs. Child abuse and neglect is a highly debated issue in the contemporary. For a lengthy period now, the detrimental impacts of child abuse and neglect have been acknowledged. Adverse childhood events (ACEs) have been experientially demonstrated to be linked to an assortment of negative….

Child abuse and neglect recurs with children at home after intervention. (2005, May 23). The Free Library. (2005). Retrieved February 03, 2017 from https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Child abuse and neglect recurs with children at home after...-a0133049592

A research study undertaken by McMaster University Medical Facility steered Professor Harriet Macmillan, Professor of Psychiatry & Behavioural Neurosciences and Pediatrics showed that children that continue being in their homes subsequent to being abused or neglected by their parents, or are taken back to those homes subsequent to intervention by social service institutions are at a high risk for more abuse or neglect in a period of within three years. The conclusion made from examining 163 families with a long-established history of child abuse or neglect is that there is no intervention confirmed or established to decrease the rise of abuse or neglect when the children who have experienced such harsh conditions remain in the home.

The magazine article is pertinent to my paper as it indicates the recurrence of child abuse and neglect.

Cost of child abuse and neglect takes large toll. (2001, May 10). Columbus Medical Association.

Poverty and Public Policy Charles Blow Discusses

Poverty and Public Policy Charles Blow discusses in hits NYT op-ed column the issue of child poverty. He notes up front that his belief is that poverty can never really be ended, highlighting that the man has a realistic outlook on the issue. There are many different causes of poverty, not the least of which is that poverty is, ultimately, relative. What we call poverty today in America would be considered wealthy in half the other countries in the world. His point, however, is that even if you accept that there will always be some poverty, there is a societal obligation to keep the poverty rate as low as possible. He argues in particular against children living in poverty. This is where public policy comes into play. The United States, simply put, performs poorly on the issues of overall poverty and child poverty, and that is the direct result of public policy.….

Blow, C. (2015). Reducing our obscene level of child poverty. New York Times. Retrieved March 22, 2015 from  http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/28/opinion/charles-blow-reducing-our-obscene-level-of-child-poverty.html 

Borjas, G. (2011). Poverty and program participation among immigrant children. The Future of Children. Vol. 21 (1) 247-266.

Hall, D. & Cooper. D. (2012). How raising the federal minimum wage would help working families and give the economy a boost. Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved March 22, 2015 from http://www.jobsnowcoalition.org/reports/2012/federal-minimum-wage-9-80-boost_epi2012-08.pdf

Children's Poverty in Louisiana Poverty

60) creating what is being called a "School-to-Prison Pipeline." Even before the hurricane, New Orleans schools were the worst in the country. The school system had a history of financial mismanagement, failing test scores, crumbling buildings and facilities, and accompanying school violence and racial segregation. The schools have a prison-like atmosphere that is hardly conducive to learning. eal damage is being done to Louisiana's children by "turning simple acts of childishness into crimes punishable by incarceration" (p. 61). Although the schools alone cannot end the cycle of poverty, it stands to reason that children who lack education cannot break out of it. They are more likely to drop out, commit crimes, and end up in prison. "The single largest predictor of later arrest among adolescents is having been suspended, expelled, or held back..." (cited in Tuzzolo & Hewitt, 2006, p. 63). Most people would say they love their children and….

Cuomo, M. (1994). The New York idea: An experiment in democracy. New York: Crown.

Burger, W.R. And Youkeles, M. (2004). Human services in contemporary America (2004). Belmont CA: Wadesworth Publishing.

Katrina exposes our schools' shameful inequality (2006). The Education Digest, 71 (7) 27-31.

Linowes, D. (1995). The rational for privatization. Vital Speeches of the Day, 86-88.

Poverty Some Challenges Might Undermine the Effort

poverty, some challenges might undermine the effort of these strategies. Disability and health are the recurring themes in the article. The author argues that intervention to address unemployment needs a new social accord to generate policies and labor market reforms to create more jobs. This approach is subject to the threat of the deeper powers of inequalities, which influence the current regime of distribution. On the other hand, the alternative is the widespread continuation of policies generating jobless growth. The article reports that child poverty is a substantial health concern. It points to the adverse effects of low socioeconomic status on people's health such as their well-being. The author included a discussion of wide-reaching effects on the health conditions of the future and current generations around the globe. The author clearly illustrated the health-oriented significance of poverty and worked closely with various organizations and professionals to address poverty. The early years….

Strother S. (2013). A Study of Poverty: Its Causes, Effects, and Repercussions.

Rights of Children

Child Rights Children's Rights hat are the main debates on equality on the MDGs post 2015, and how is this important for the children's well-being? There are many debatable items and priorities that are associated the ongoing efforts in the 2015 Millennium Development Goals. One of the main priorities is to eradicate poverty. This is no easy task and has been a goal for the group since its origin. However, this issue is important to children in many ways. One particular way to help eradicate poverty is through education; especially the education of young females. One of the reasons education is especially important for young women is that education is linked to the age at which women marry and have children. In sub-Saharan Africa and in South and est Asia, child marriage affects one in eight girls; one in seven gives birth by the age of 17; education can empower these girls to have….

Works Cited

Rose, P. "The Great Debate." 25 September 2013. Reuters. Online. 30 March 2014.

UNICEF. "The Changing State of Global Poverty." July 2011. UNICEF. Online. 31 March 2014.

United Nations. "Conventions on the Rights of the Child." 2 September 1990. United Nations Human Rights. Online. 31 March 2014.

Critique on an International Relations Study on Poverty and Inequality Among Children

Poverty and Inequality Among Children Studies show that child poverty has been increasing at an alarming rate in the last decade. In 1994, 15.3 million children, or 21.8% of all Americans, were poor (Lichter 1997) and that, although children constituted only 26.7% of the population, 40.1% of all poor persons in the U.S. were children (U.S. ureau of Census 1996 as qtd in Lichter). These rising poverty rates are used by government agencies in determining the criteria for eligibility in social insurance programs and public assistance interventions developed by these government agencies. And, according to these criteria, the economic well-being of American children is on a downtrend, which indicates that tomorrow's adults will be less economically adjusted than adults today and that the future of today's children is materially and psycho-emotionally less promising (Lichter). In his study, Lichter (1997) pointed to the rapid changes in the most fundamental institutions -- family, school….

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Achs, Gregory and Megan Gallagher. Income Inequality Among America's Children. Urban Institute, 2000.  http://www.urban.org/url.cfm?ID=309307 

2. Lichter, Daniel T. Poverty and Inequality Among Children. Annual Reviews, vol 23, 1997.  http://links.jstor.org/sici=0360-0572%281997%2923%3C121%APAIAC%E2.0.C )%3B2-L

3. Smeeding, Timothy M, et al. U.S. Poor are Among World's Poorest, Luxembourg Income Study. New York Times, Aug 4, 1995. http://pangaea.org/street_children/nameri/poor.htm

4. Van Hook, Jennifer. Poverty Grows Among Children of Immigrants in U.S., Center for Family and Demographic Research. Migration Policy Institute, 2003.  http://www.migrationinformation.com/USfocus/display.cfm?ID=188

Child Adoption Is a Process

Gradually, there are lesser desired adoptive kids as society have come to accept single mother who parent their children compared to earlier. The disgrace of giving birth to a child outside marriage has lowered and hence, the bulk of single moms prefer to have their kids with them in place of "relinquishing them" for being adopted. Besides, thanks to advanced technology, "birth control" pills are instantly accessible to the fertile populace, and, as abortion has been legalized, a pregnancy which is unplanned could be stopped. A new dimension to the problem has emerged because of the decrease in the supply of desirable adoptable infants and the rising infertility among Americans. (Infant Adoption is Big Business in America) It is anticipated that out of every six couples, one couple has problems in conceiving and total infertile couples may number 5.3 million. A lot of adopters who are presently desirous of adoption….

Adoption is big business: Rationalizations for Adoption. http://www.adoption-articles.com/adoption_business.htm

Adoption: The Child Commodities Market is Big Business.  http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/224728/adoption_the_child_commodities_market.html?page=2 

Avery, Rosemary. J. Adoption Policy and Special Needs Children. Auburn. Westport: CT.

Cahn, Naomi R; Hollinger, Joan Heifetz. Families by Law: An Adoption Reader. New York

Children need a congenial environment for their physical, emotional and mental development and that cannot be possible when they are left to reel under poverty. Alleviating childhood poverty…

This usually ends up costing them even more money, both in unpaid days off of work and in medical bills, not to mention dramatically reducing the quality of…

Capstone Project

Child Poverty Effects Crime ates How Child Poverty Effects Crime ates Amongst Teens and Young Adults in Today's Society How Child Poverty Effects Crime ates How Child Poverty Effects Crime ates Amongst…

Education Building Canada: Child Poverty and Schools This article is written by the Canadian Teachers Federation (CTF), an organization of over 200,000 teachers in and around Canada. One of…

Sociology - Counseling

Sasha is 3 and Cayley is 1. Cayley is beginning to walk which is about normal for her age. Sasha is small for her age and could be considered…

Child Poverty and Its Effects on Education and Development Beyond problems of financial inequality that occur when countless young children reside in poor as well as persistently inadequate households, poor…

Poverty and Homelessness in Children Poverty is the deficiency in the amount of money or material possessions considered to be acceptable for individuals in a particular country. Among families who…

Business Proposal

The Cook County CDED was formed in 1985 and is a private, non-profit organization supported by foundation and grants, as well as several individual donations annually. Our Mission To end…

Research Paper

Child Abuse

Child abuse and neglect is a highly discussed issue in the present day. For a long time now, the detrimental impacts of child abuse and neglect have been acknowledged.…

Poverty and Public Policy Charles Blow discusses in hits NYT op-ed column the issue of child poverty. He notes up front that his belief is that poverty can never really…

60) creating what is being called a "School-to-Prison Pipeline." Even before the hurricane, New Orleans schools were the worst in the country. The school system had a history…

Family and Marriage

poverty, some challenges might undermine the effort of these strategies. Disability and health are the recurring themes in the article. The author argues that intervention to address unemployment…

Child Rights Children's Rights hat are the main debates on equality on the MDGs post 2015, and how is this important for the children's well-being? There are many debatable items and priorities…

Poverty and Inequality Among Children Studies show that child poverty has been increasing at an alarming rate in the last decade. In 1994, 15.3 million children, or 21.8% of all…

Gradually, there are lesser desired adoptive kids as society have come to accept single mother who parent their children compared to earlier. The disgrace of giving birth to…

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Harvard stargazer whose humanity still burns bright

Taiwan sees warning signs in weakening congressional support for Ukraine

How dating sites automate racism

Robert Sampson, Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences, is one of the researchers studying the link between poverty and social mobility.

Rose Lincoln/Harvard file photo

Unpacking the power of poverty

Peter Reuell

Harvard Staff Writer

Study picks out key indicators like lead exposure, violence, and incarceration that impact children’s later success

Social scientists have long understood that a child’s environment — in particular growing up in poverty — can have long-lasting effects on their success later in life. What’s less well understood is exactly how.

A new Harvard study is beginning to pry open that black box.

Conducted by Robert Sampson, the Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences, and Robert Manduca, a doctoral student in sociology and social policy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, the study points to a handful of key indicators, including exposure to high levels of lead, violence, and incarceration as key predictors of children’s later success. The study is described in an April paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“What this paper is trying to do, in a sense, is move beyond the traditional neighborhood indicators people use, like poverty,” Sampson said. “For decades, people have shown poverty to be important … but it doesn’t necessarily tell us what the mechanisms are, and how growing up in poor neighborhoods affects children’s outcomes.”

To explore potential pathways, Manduca and Sampson turned to the income tax records of parents and approximately 230,000 children who lived in Chicago in the 1980s and 1990s, compiled by Harvard’s Opportunity Atlas project. They integrated these records with survey data collected by the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods, measures of violence and incarceration, census indicators, and blood-lead levels for the city’s neighborhoods in the 1990s.

They found that the greater the extent to which poor black male children were exposed to harsh environments, the higher their chances of being incarcerated in adulthood and the lower their adult incomes, measured in their 30s. A similar income pattern also emerged for whites.

Among both black and white girls, the data showed that increased exposure to harsh environments predicted higher rates of teen pregnancy.

Despite the similarity of results along racial lines, Chicago’s segregation means that far more black children were exposed to harsh environments — in terms of toxicity, violence, and incarceration — harmful to their mental and physical health.

“The least-exposed majority-black neighborhoods still had levels of harshness and toxicity greater than the most-exposed majority-white neighborhoods, which plausibly accounts for a substantial portion of the racial disparities in outcomes,” Manduca said.

“It’s really about trying to understand some of the earlier findings, the lived experience of growing up in a poor and racially segregated environment, and how that gets into the minds and bodies of children.” Robert Sampson

“What this paper shows … is the independent predictive power of harsh environments on top of standard variables,” Sampson said. “It’s really about trying to understand some of the earlier findings, the lived experience of growing up in a poor and racially segregated environment, and how that gets into the minds and bodies of children.”

More like this

Cities’ wealth gap is growing, too

Racial and economic disparities intertwined, study finds

The study isn’t solely focused on the mechanisms of how poverty impacts children; it also challenges traditional notions of what remedies might be available.

“This has [various] policy implications,” Sampson said. “Because when you talk about the effects of poverty, that leads to a particular kind of thinking, which has to do with blocked opportunities and the lack of resources in a neighborhood.

“That doesn’t mean resources are unimportant,” he continued, “but what this study suggests is that environmental policy and criminal justice reform can be thought of as social mobility policy. I think that’s provocative, because that’s different than saying it’s just about poverty itself and childhood education and human capital investment, which has traditionally been the conversation.”

The study did suggest that some factors — like community cohesion, social ties, and friendship networks — could act as bulwarks against harsh environments. Many researchers, including Sampson himself, have shown that community cohesion and local organizations can help reduce violence. But Sampson said their ability to do so is limited.

“One of the positive ways to interpret this is that violence is falling in society,” he said. “Research has shown that community organizations are responsible for a good chunk of the drop. But when it comes to what’s affecting the kids themselves, it’s the homicide that happens on the corner, it’s the lead in their environment, it’s the incarceration of their parents that’s having the more proximate, direct influence.”

Going forward, Sampson said he hopes the study will spur similar research in other cities and expand to include other environmental contamination, including so-called brownfield sites.

Ultimately, Sampson said he hopes the study can reveal the myriad ways in which poverty shapes not only the resources that are available for children, but the very world in which they find themselves growing up.

“Poverty is sort of a catchall term,” he said. “The idea here is to peel things back and ask, What does it mean to grow up in a poor white neighborhood? What does it mean to grow up in a poor black neighborhood? What do kids actually experience?

“What it means for a black child on the south side of Chicago is much higher rates of exposure to violence and lead and incarceration, and this has intergenerational consequences,” he continued. “This is particularly important because it provides a way to think about potentially intervening in the intergenerational reproduction of inequality. We don’t typically think about criminal justice reform or environmental policy as social mobility policy. But maybe we should.”

This research was supported with funding from the Project on Race, Class & Cumulative Adversity at Harvard University, the Ford Foundation, and the Hutchins Family Foundation.

Share this article

You might like.

Seminar foregrounds Harlow Shapley, who helped scholars escape Nazi rule

Ambassador says if Russia is allowed to take over sovereign nation, China may try to do same

Sociologist’s new book finds algorithms that suggest partners often reflect stereotypes, biases

Yes, it’s exciting. Just don’t look at the sun.

Lab, telescope specialist details Harvard eclipse-viewing party, offers safety tips

Forget ‘doomers.’ Warming can be stopped, top climate scientist says

Michael Mann points to prehistoric catastrophes, modern environmental victories

Navigating Harvard with a non-apparent disability

4 students with conditions ranging from diabetes to narcolepsy describe daily challenges that may not be obvious to their classmates and professors

• High contrast
• Press Centre

Search UNICEF

• Child poverty

Children are more likely to live in poverty than adults. They’re also more vulnerable to its effects.

In recent years, the world has made remarkable strides advancing development. Yet hundreds of millions of people still live in extreme poverty. Children are disproportionately affected. Despite comprising one third of the global population, they represent half of those struggling to survive on less than $2.15 a day. An estimated 333 million children live in extreme poverty.

Children who grow up impoverished often lack the food, sanitation, shelter, health care and education they need to survive and thrive. Across the world, about 1 billion children are "multidimensionally" poor, meaning they lack necessities as basic as nutritious food or clean water.

The consequences are grave. Worldwide, the poorest children are twice as likely to die in childhood than their wealthier peers. For those growing up through humanitarian emergencies, the risks of deprivation and exclusion surge. Compounding crises – from the impacts of climate-related disasters, conflicts and COVID-19 – have stalled progress for the most vulnerable children. Even in the world’s richest countries, one in seven children still live in poverty.

No matter where they are, children who grow up impoverished suffer from poor living standards, develop fewer skills for the workforce, and earn lower wages as adults. But only a limited number of Governments have set the elimination of child poverty as a national priority.

UNICEF’s response

Child poverty is neither inevitable nor immune to efforts to address it. As many countries have already shown, it can be reduced and even eradicated through continued attention and action.

With the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), nations agreed for the first time in history to end extreme child poverty. The SDGs call for multidimensional child poverty – a measure of poverty that goes beyond income – to be halved by 2030, building a world in which all children have what they need to survive, thrive and fulfil their potential.

As part of this commitment, UNICEF mobilizes actors at the national, regional and global levels to help countries measure and address child poverty in all its dimensions. With the World Bank, we produce global statistics on extreme child poverty that help guide policymakers. We also work with Governments and partners on integrated policies and programmes, backed by the resources needed to put them into practice. Our efforts support the expansion of child-sensitive social protection programmes, including universal child benefits , which have been shown to positively impact children’s health, education and nutrition.

Since 2014, UNICEF has played an instrumental role in directing global attention to child poverty. The Global Coalition to End Child Poverty , chaired by UNICEF, has become a powerful initiative for raising awareness about child poverty and accelerating global efforts to tackle it. As part of the coalition, we produced a comprehensive guide to help countries reach the Sustainable Development Goals for child poverty.

More from UNICEF

Children’s futures at a crossroads

Geopolitical and geoeconomic fragmentation threaten the development and survival of children across the globe. But a more hopeful path exists

More than 1 in 5 children live in poverty in 40 of the world’s richest countries

Climate finance is about fulfilling obligations

It’s no longer about developed countries being “good-hearted”

Children bearing brunt of stalled progress on extreme poverty reduction worldwide

Ending child poverty: A policy agenda

Unicef’s commitment to ending child poverty and achieving the sustainable development goals, a practical guide to monetary poverty analysis, are countries committed to ending child poverty by 2030 a review of vnr reports from 2017 to 2021, a review of the use of multidimensional poverty measures, a world free from child poverty: a guide to the tasks to achieve the vision , global estimate of children in monetary poverty: an update, social policy analysis to inform the covid-19 response, ending extreme poverty: a focus on children, putting children first: a policy agenda to end child poverty, end child poverty global coalition: child poverty reports.

Tackling Child Poverty: A Comprehensive Approach Essay

Introduction.

The widespread problem of child poverty has direct or indirect effects on many groups in society, none of which are positive. Firstly, society as a whole suffers from the manifestation of this problem-it affects average levels of health, education, crime, and mortality. Secondly, businesses and the economy lose potential paying customers and future professionals. Thirdly, families with these children experience financial and mental problems, unable to pay for necessities or housing. Finally, the children themselves are the hardest hit by poverty: social isolation, lack of education, and poor quality of food and care can lead to poor health and other problems.

Accordingly, policies must take into account the needs of each of these groups to remedy the situation. Increased access to education, financial control assistance to the needy, and more active social services should help with this problem. For example, a tax credit exists for families with children under the age of 17, demonstrating work in this direction in the United States (Klevens et al., 2015). However, according to Kantor (2013), government efforts are still insufficient. Therefore, there is a need for additional initiatives development, or approval of such offered by community organizations to address the living quality of low-income households. One such suggestion for changing the policy would be to analyze the spending of families with children to assess the level of direction to take action if younger ones are ignored or discriminated against.

In general, one cannot disagree with the groups listed, although I do not think making schools a separate category is necessary. However, the emphasis on early childhood nutrition and education can be a reasonably working version. Their well-being is especially fragile at this age, and if the family cannot provide it, the state should help. Moreover, such assistance will ease the family’s financial burden and give them time to build up resources and fix the situation.

As for implementation strategies, we cannot agree that it is possible to redirect some of the money from school facilities to other needs. All of the children’s needs must be met, and instead of transferring funds, more attention and additional amounts of money are needed. Moreover, as long as human life is equal, every child is entitled to equal attention, which politicians and public figures should ensure. However, what other strategies could you suggest besides redistributing funds to eliminate child poverty?

Kantor, P. (2013). The two faces of American urban policy . Urban Affairs Review (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) , 49 (6), 821–850. Web.

Klevens, J., Barnett, S. B. L., Florence, C., & Moore, D. (2015). Exploring policies for the reduction of child physical abuse and neglect . Child Abuse & Neglect , 40 , 1–11. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2024, March 8). Tackling Child Poverty: A Comprehensive Approach. https://ivypanda.com/essays/tackling-child-poverty-a-comprehensive-approach/

"Tackling Child Poverty: A Comprehensive Approach." IvyPanda , 8 Mar. 2024, ivypanda.com/essays/tackling-child-poverty-a-comprehensive-approach/.

IvyPanda . (2024) 'Tackling Child Poverty: A Comprehensive Approach'. 8 March.

IvyPanda . 2024. "Tackling Child Poverty: A Comprehensive Approach." March 8, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/tackling-child-poverty-a-comprehensive-approach/.

1. IvyPanda . "Tackling Child Poverty: A Comprehensive Approach." March 8, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/tackling-child-poverty-a-comprehensive-approach/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Tackling Child Poverty: A Comprehensive Approach." March 8, 2024. https://ivypanda.com/essays/tackling-child-poverty-a-comprehensive-approach/.

• Redistributing Resources in the "Clueless" Film
• Rwanda as a Fragile State
• Hospital Pressure Injuries Resulting From Falls
• Kelly Kennedy: "They fought for Each Other: Triumph and Tragedy of the Hardest Hit Unit in Iraq"
• The Youth Issues of Burden Tackling
• Fragile X Syndrome Analysis
• Health Agencies in the Fragile States
• International Relations: Yemen as a Fragile State
• Obesity Tackling on Critical Thinking Standards
• Tackling Racism in the Workplace
• Unveiling the Complex Web of Global Poverty
• Aspects of the Poverty Simulation Experience
• The Difficulties Low-Wage Workers Encounter
• Homelessness and Its Causes in the United States
• Stereotypes About Poverty in the Maid Book by Land

Advertisement

Philosophical Reflections on Child Poverty and Education

• Open access
• Published: 12 January 2023
• Volume 42 , pages 49–63, ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Lorella Terzi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2258-6888 1 ,
• Elaine Unterhalter 2 &
• Judith Suissa 2  

5956 Accesses

1 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The harmful effects of Covid 19 on children living in poverty have refocused attention on the complex nature of child poverty and the vexed question of its relationship to education. The paper examines a tension at the heart of much discussion of child poverty and education. On the one hand, education is often regarded as essential for children’s flourishing and a means by which children can “escape” poverty; yet on the other hand, education systems, institutions, and practices, often reflect and entrench the disadvantages associated with poverty. Narratives concerning education as an escape from poverty tend not to deal in any depth with the injustices associated with poverty, stressing instead the transformative potential of education. By contrast, largely sociological analyses of the ways in which schooling reproduces inequalities tend to stop short of developing a normative account of how education can contribute to transforming the structural injustices related to poverty and its effects on children’s lives. In working to move beyond this analytic impasse, the paper shows how the cluster of concepts, which Robeyns (2018) locates as central to the capability approach, give insights which help to address these two different lacunae. The notion of conversion factors highlights the significance of taking account of existing relationships in education, while the distinction between capabilities and functionings helps guide practices regarding the education of children living in poverty. Drawing on literature on the heightened inequalities associated with poor children’s experience of lack of schooling during the COVID pandemic, the paper sketches some of the ways in which sociological analysis and normative evaluation can be linked in taking forward an “ethically engaged political philosophy” (Wolff, 2018) to discuss child poverty and education in real schools.

Similar content being viewed by others

Neoliberal schooling and subjectivity: Learning to desire lack

Engin Atasay

Potentials of Collaborative Educational Welfare Research - Theorizing Voice Plurality and Social Empowerment

Eli Smeplass, Anna Cecilia Rapp, … Jannicke Akse

Social Justice in Educational Policy and Practice with Particular Reference to Early Childhood

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

While exacerbating many of the harmful effects of poverty on children’s lives, the Covid years have brought into sharp relief the complexities of relationships of poverty and education and the ethical issues they raise. Two events exemplify this.

In January 2021, with UK schools closed due to the pandemic, children were not able to receive free meals at school, an essential support to thousands of families living in poverty. The government contracted a private company to distribute food to families receiving benefits. The food parcels were, however, of low nutritional quality and not at all plentiful. Mothers posted pictures on the internet recording the extremely meagre weekly food parcels they received in lieu of free school meals. For children living in poverty in England, the fears and disruptions of school closures associated with COVID were amplified by hunger, and carelessness of those in positions of authority distributing food. They were given a minimal handout, but indignity and exclusion were underlined.

In January 2022 Xolani Mtshali, a South African student, waiting to receive his final school leaving results, noted how impossible it had been for him to access the material distributed on TV and radio by the government when schools were shut: “ Even though I know there were TV and radio programmes for extra lessons, we do not have a TV at my house and on the radio they concentrated a lot on physics (which I did not study) and because I stay in a rural area people who would be able to help me with certain subjects stay very far from me, so it was difficult” ( Equal Education 2022 ). As the pandemic claimed millions of lives across the world it raised questions about what forms of social protection societies could offer those who were subjected to intense overt and covert discrimination. As many have noted, it also amplified the inequalities in societies (UNDP 2022 ; UNESCO 2022 ).

These two instances of the effects of Covid highlight many facets of the relationship of poverty and education indicating how the lack of resources in the households and communities of poor children, is compounded by cumulative effects of inadequate policy and practice, and experiences of social division. These incidents during the COVID pandemic prompt the need for philosophical reflection on the nature of the problem and how to address it.

Many studies of the effects of COVID, together with much of the academic work on children, education, and poverty, (e.g., Holt and Murray 2022 ; Hevia et al. 2022 ; Brehm et al. 2021 ), draw attention to the layers of these manifestly unjust conditions but they do not address the normative questions they raise for education. Our discussion examines this tension at the heart of much work on child poverty and education. We note how, on the one hand, education is often regarded as essential for children’s flourishing and as a means by which children can “escape” poverty. Education is thus a locus of values but the facts that shape those values are often not fully considered. Yet on the other hand, many accounts document how education systems, institutions, and practices, often reflect and entrench the disadvantages associated with poverty. In these largely sociological analyses drawing on statistical and empirical facts documenting the ways in which schooling reproduces inequalities, a number of which were assembled during COVID to record the effects of the pandemic on children’s lives (e.g., UNESCO 2021 ), there is a tendency for the discussion to stop short of developing a normative account of how education can contribute to transforming the structural injustices related to poverty and its effects on children’s lives. A range of facts is analysed, but the values to be addressed are often assumed more than directly articulated. In this paper we discuss problems with both these narratives. In attempting to overcome the limitations of both positions we adopt an approach of “ethically engaged political philosophy” (Wolff 2018 ) and seek to articulate the values and the factors that may advance the debate and inform practice. Our analysis, including a brief critical consideration of the values advanced by ideal approaches to justice, suggests that an interdisciplinary approach to these questions, informed by a normative ethical framework, can broaden out our understanding of the relationship between child poverty and education in a way that transcends the focus on the causal mechanisms by which poverty serves as a barrier to educational achievement and educational opportunities offer an “escape” from poverty.

The first part of the paper counterposes the two narratives about children’s education and poverty which arise from different perspectives and disciplinary foci, such as sociology of education and education and international development. The second part of the paper, in working to move beyond this analytic impasse associated with the two perspectives talking past each other draws on a cluster of concepts, which Robeyns ( 2018 ) locates as central to the capability approach. We use these to develop insights which help to address these two different lacunae and build some interdisciplinary framing that can help to link empirical analysis and normative evaluation in an attempt to better understand the complex interplay of child poverty and education.

Two Narratives of Poverty and Education

The two narratives we have identified in the literature on poverty, education, and childhood, which came to be deployed in the policy discussions at the time of COVID, are firstly a narrative of children shut out of quality education by poverty, and secondly a narrative of children shut up in poor schools because of poverty. We lay out some key features of each narrative and highlight work which exemplifies this. Different disciplinary concerns shape these two narratives. While both narratives are infused with values of justice and equality, albeit considered and articulated in different domains, the different ways in which these values are positioned has implications, constraining a wider analytic engagement.

In the first narrative, poor children are locked out of the opportunities for knowledge, skills, understanding, attaining learning outcomes and qualifications, autonomy, wellbeing, and relationships of flourishing associated with formal education. In these accounts, the problem of poverty is presented as external to the school, and is associated, for example, with poor housing, run down or violent neighbourhoods, families who do not value education, or do not earn enough to pay for good education, harsh government policies or inadequate delivery of education reform, because of a poverty of ambition by officials (e.g. Barrett et al. 2019 ; Pritchett 2019 ; Azevedo 2020 ;). During the COVID pandemic this narrative was often deployed showing how poor girls had less access to mobile technologies than boys and missed much more schooling (UNESCO 2022 ).

In this narrative, schools can mitigate the effects of poverty, if they can improve their ‘quality’. Policy work drawing on this narrative emphasises that the learning outcomes of poor children are behind where they should be, giving rise to significant inequalities of educational attainment. This emphasis on the learning gap has had much attention as an outcome of schools being shut during the COVID period in the UK and internationally (Education in England 2020 ; World Bank 2021 ; House of Commons Library 2021 ). In these versions of this argument there is no normative question to be addressed regarding the nature of quality education, rather, the focus is mainly on a distributional issue, regarding how to improve school organisation, learning outcomes and close the attainment gap (e.g., Weidmann et al. 2021 ; Akmal and Pritchett 2021 ). Education is equated with learning outcomes in a narrow range of subjects, with little attention to a wider range of relationships, processes, experiences, and knowledge forms. Raffo et al ( 2009 ) nuance this narrative and identify the complexity of the relationships between poverty and learning outcomes, distinguishing between accounts which document forms of poverty at the micro, meso, and macro levels. They note that perspectives on education can be divided between those which are oriented to a more functionalist view of education serving society, and those which focus on how education might develop critical perspectives (Raffo et al 2009 , 11–13). A mainstream version of the narrative that poverty is a problem of children out of school or learning little of value in school, we suggest, is more aligned with a functionalist view of education.

This articulates a clear perspective on the ways in which poverty or dysfunctional elements are to be kept outside the focus of education planning, which itself does not engage with the purpose of education beyond ‘learning’. This learning is generally narrowed down to a very limited number of outcomes in literacy and numeracy (Smith and Benavot 2021 ; D’Agnese 2017 ), which further contributes to the existing inequalities.

Thus, in the narrative that poverty is the problem, and education is a remedy or a way out, there is little space, firstly for understanding the perspectives and nuanced experiences of poor children, and what they and their parents say about school, and secondly for understanding the interconnection between macro, meso, and micro level political, economic, and socio-cultural relationships to produce and maintain poverty.

In contrast to the above narrative, attention to empirical research into the experience of children in poverty within educational contexts, can contribute to developing more nuanced and appropriate responses at school, community, national, and the international levels to make education a means for addressing poverty, and redistributing power. For example, Moletsane and Mitchell ( 2018 ) report on the use of participatory visual methodologies developed in partnership with poor girls in South Africa and Canada. These have demonstrated potential to contribute to ‘intensifying effort in relation to addressing the lived realities of girls who are marginalized and who suffer from persistent insecurity, injustice and abuse of power at the local level in otherwise democratic states’ (Moletsane and Mitchell 2018 : 437). This analysis does not bracket poverty ‘outside’ educational experiences but looks at how a range of actors – teachers, learners, social activists—can reflexively work together to take account of its many effects and processes for change. The significance of teachers, and their positioning in this work, is noted in the work Moletsane and Mitchell have done over many years (Mitchell et al. 2020 ; Moletsane 2022 ). Recent studies of the response to COVID 19 school closures and other disasters revealed how schools in areas of socio-economic deprivation worked to offer material and practical support to children and their families in ways that went far beyond the simple requirement to ensure that poor children are able to access the formal elements of schooling (Moss et al 2020 ). The mobilization of school staff in deprived areas in the UK to organize food banks and supplies of basic IT equipment for families experiencing hardship during the pandemic highlighted the ways in which there were important links between education, mental health and poverty in which teachers, parents and learners’ experiences were implicated (Kim and Asbury 2020 ; Holt and Murray 2021 ; Martin et al 2022 ). Pre-pandemic research into the shame experienced by poor children (Chase and Bantebya-Kyomuhendo 2015 ) both illuminates the emotional cost of poverty and draws attention, once again, to the need to articulate a normative framework to address the complex moral demands posed by the existence of child poverty in an educational context.

If, as in the first narrative, poverty is bracketed analytically outside the school, and education is seen as a form of remedy for poverty, the analytic focus becomes how schools can compensate, rather than understanding the process of the construction of the injustices of poverty and working to enact values of justice at all levels of the educational experience.

The second narrative is associated with a wide range of work in the sociology of education (e.g., Apple 2018 ; Allais et al. 2019 ; Ball 2016 ). Here the analysis made is that schools reproduce poverty because of the policy frameworks and injustices of distribution inside and outside schools, the ways they interconnect, and sporadic, sometimes not well thought out ways of addressing this. The problem of poverty is inside and outside the school with significant effect on children, teachers, and families. Here there are normative questions about what constitutes a good education, and what forms of justice and obligations are required to secure it, but many of the studies do not engage with this fundamental dimension. For example, two of the key works that have had major influence on this area of scholarship—Bowles and Gintis’ study of how schools reproduce the class relationships and labour market dynamics associated with capitalism, and Pierre Bourdieu’s work on cultural capital, schooling and social reproduction – do not engage with questions of what some of the positive features of education might be (Bowles and Gintis 1976 , 2002 ; Bourdieu and Passeron 1990 ).

Research into the “pedagogy of poverty” (Haberman 2010 ), for example, has shown how access to schooling and to material resources supporting poor children’s education is not sufficient to address the educational disadvantages they face. Such research has highlighted the ways in which children living in poverty are subject to low expectations and particular styles of pedagogical interaction on the part of educators. Hempel-Jorgensen ( 2019 ) sums up this research:

The ‘pedagogy of poverty’ experienced by learners in poverty is characterised by a focus on discipline, low intellectual engagement and a focus on attainment in tests. A study conducted in England shows how this can differ significantly in schools in which most children are not living in poverty…. This evidence suggests that English schools with low-income intakes are far more vulnerable to the pressures of high-stakes testing than schools with higher-income intakes, as children living in poverty are known to have significantly lower prior attainment. (Hempel-Jorgensen 2019 np)

Furthermore, a number of studies highlight how teachers’ misperception of poverty as caused by parents’ actions leads to negative and stereotypical behaviours which negatively affect their relationships with children (Schweiger and Graf 2015 ; Thompson et al. 2016 ; Unterhalter et al. 2012 ). As Treanor notes, children living in poverty express frustration at being shouted at in school, often for factors related to not having the correct equipment, which significantly affects children’s well-being, and results in progressing disengagement from learning (Treanor 2020 : 83).

Several studies enhance our understanding by looking not just at the effects of poverty on children’s academic achievement, life chances, and ability to engage with pedagogical content, but at the affective significance of living in poverty (e.g., Aber et al 2007 ). Vizard and Hills ( 2015 ), in a comprehensive review of the social policy actions of the Conservative government in the UK from 2015 to the eve of the pandemic in 2020, note the interplay of many processes resulting in conditions for child poverty and poor educational experiences and outcomes. These include erosion of the protective capacity of the welfare state, as resource, workforce and capacity pressures across public services result in a failure to meet needs, compromising quality, and eroding the resilience of public service to shocks. Thus, the widening of inequalities across multiple axes of disadvantage set conditions for increasing poverty, which were to be accentuated during the COVID. This study highlights how it is multiple relationships in and around school that shape poverty. However, it is also distinctive for identifying a number of normative positions on top of securing adequate funding for public services, which include strengthened social rights and accountability mechanisms, such as enhancing the eroded process of democratic accountability for schooling and developing multi-dimensional strategies for change. Vizard and Hill stress giving priority to the needs of the most disadvantaged and to comprehensive public action to reduce social inequalities, together with a new values-based approach to social policy: dignity and respect, recognition and valuation (Vizard 2021 ). This presents a wide range of areas for normative engagement in education, made more urgent by the COVID years.

Any articulation of a normative framework for addressing child poverty as an issue of justice is clearly enhanced by a more informed and in-depth understanding of the multiple disadvantages faced by children in poverty. However, the different ways in which values are articulated and understood has implications for shaping the ethical frameworks selected.

We have highlighted how two widely circulating narratives of children, education and poverty each tend to make the normative ethical framework to understand this process somewhat fuzzy. In the next section we highlight some elements from political theory associated with the dispersed meanings of normative concern we have charted.

Political Theory and Political Imaginaries

To summarise the above discussion, our exploration has indicated that the tension between addressing the background structural factors that create and sustain poverty and addressing the immediate educational needs of children living in poverty is a constant backdrop to the choices and judgements made by educators.

All these discussions, as Brando and Schweiger ( 2019 : 5) note, are philosophically relevant in light of the moral questions arising from conditions of disadvantage and inequality. Normatively, ideal theories of justice, such as the prominent 1971 Theory of Justice by John Rawls , provide principled positions that can guide both the analysis of what constitutes disadvantage and ways to conceptualise it, as well as principles that can guide a fair distribution of resources. Although offering also important insights for education, a thorough discussion of these is not feasible in this paper.

What can be noted, however, is that while ideal theories of justice can go some way towards offering a normative framework within which to make sense of and guide such choices and judgements, they are limited in a number of ways. Firstly, they often universalise culturally specific models of childhood, including assumptions about children’s agency and vulnerability. Within most work in liberal political theory, children are seen as young people whose capacity for moral agency in terms of self-determination, arguably an essential feature of adulthood, is not yet fully formed. They are therefore considered vulnerable and dependent, to various degrees, on the decisions and actions of adults, both within their families and other institutions, including the school. This, in turn, determines a duty of intervention to secure their material and emotional wellbeing and to defend and promote their fundamental interests, both as children and as the future adults they will become. Recent research on child poverty and education, however, questions normative positions about the moral status of children as vulnerable and dependent. Researchers have argued that such normative positions are situated in a Western and often highly abstract conception, related to the cultural and socio-economic realities of the Global North (Hanes 2019 ; Yasmin and Dadvand, 2019). Hanes ( 2019 ), for example, argues that in most of the Global South, children in poverty are considered autonomous and resilient agents. He also highlights how children whose life conditions and experiences do not conform to idealized conceptions of childhood suffer from marginalization and exclusion leading, in some cases, to forms of oppression, such as those seen, for example, in relation to First Nations child removal policies in Canada or the practices of transnational adoptions, whereby children from minority ethnic groups were removed from their families and respectively placed in institutions or adopted by white families (Hanes 2019 : 23, 30). Thus, although different models of childhood inform all theories dealing with children, perhaps the problematic feature of highly idealized views, abstracting from empirical and contextual factors, resides in how they lead to policies that, instead of protecting children, end up further disadvantaging them.

Indeed, the very question of why we should focus on child poverty—i.e., whether the moral significance of child poverty, in and of itself, is qualitatively distinct from the moral significance of poverty—already hints at these underlying ideas about the meaning and status of childhood. Thus, child poverty as a social phenomenon can be seen to involve intersecting normative and empirical dimensions, and educational questions lie at the nexus of these different dimensions.

Secondly, theories of justice often bracket out questions about the background political structures within which socio-economic inequality and poverty are inscribed, suggesting that issues of justice are best addressed within the given political sphere through measures of redistribution and institutional reform (see Sen 2006 ). While we do not deny the validity of this political point, we suggest that political structures and systems are also sustained partly through a political imaginary (Taylor 2004 ) which legitimates and normalises certain assumptions about our social and political life. For instance, Rawlsian theories of social justice, which have significantly informed the work of both political philosophers and educational theorists concerned with educational justice and equality, assume the existence of a degree of socio-economic inequality. Relatedly, the assumption, that poverty is an inevitable part of social, economic, and political arrangements, rather than the result of political choices, is a feature of much work within the first narrative sketched above. Education systems are one of the places in which this imaginary may well be reinforced, whether through teachers’ and administrators’ attitudinal and unconscious biases, the curriculum, pedagogy, or parental choices. This is not to deny, of course, that many individuals working within these systems recognize the needs and aspirations of children living in poverty.

We have drawn attention to some weaknesses of ideal theories of justice not to reject them, but to highlight the need for such critical reflection, and to illustrate how these theories interact in complex ways when they are brought to bear on questions of how to address child poverty within an educational context (Peters and Besley 2014 ). Educational spaces, our analysis has suggested, are spaces in which the complexity between these different models is often most clearly illustrated and where an ethical framework is required that holds together questions of structure, agency, facts, and values. Furthermore, as the World Inequality Report ( 2022 ) states in reflecting on some of the issues that emerged during the COVID years, ‘Inequality is always a political choice and learning from policies implemented in other countries or at other points of time is critical to design fairer development pathways.'

An Ethically Informed Perspective on Child Poverty and Education

As the discussion so far highlights, questions about the interplay of education and child poverty, brought into sharp relief by the Covid years, are best addressed with an ethically informed perspective, where the normative assumptions underlying empirical research and complex intersections of factors, including structural, cultural, and pedagogical, can be interrogated and overcome. This section shows how the cluster of concepts identified by Robeyns ( 2018 ) as central to the capability approach offers both a normative rationale for evaluating the educational disadvantage associated with poverty and insights to guide educational practice. These insights are particularly important now, in light of the widening educational inequalities resulting from the effects of the pandemic and the limited and often unsuccessful measures adopted by many countries to counteract them.

As a normative framework concerned with people’s freedom to achieve well-being, Footnote 1 the capability approach focuses on what people can do and be with the resources they have, and what kind of life they can truly lead (Robeyns 2017 : 24). At the core of the approach is a conception of well-being in terms of people’s real opportunities (capabilities) to choose among different states and activities (functionings), those that they value (Sen 4 , 1992 ). Being a pacifist, working as a gardener or participating in the life of the community are all examples of functionings that people may value, and capability corresponds to the set of real opportunities from which they can choose (Robeyns 2017 ).

Normatively, the approach is used to evaluate individual well-being, relative advantage or disadvantage, the just design of institutional arrangements, as well as social policies. The distinctive contribution of the approach to these evaluations resides in considering inequalities and disadvantage in the space of capability, that is, in terms of limitations (or deprivations) of real opportunities for well-being. Questions of justice and equality, thus, are best addressed in relation to the set of opportunities available to people to lead good lives.

In addition, Sen draws attention to the importance of considering people’s different ability to make use of the resources and opportunities they have, or their conversion factors, in the evaluative exercise of justice (Sen 1992 , 1999 ). These different factors refer to individuals’ internal features such as physical and psychological traits, as well as to factors emerging from society, for example social policies, cultural attitudes and norms, and the physical and built environment. A book, for instance, is a useful resource for reading, but not for a visually impaired person who will need a Braille version to achieve that functioning. What is important about conversion factors is that they provide information on where interventions need to be made in order to assess people’s relative disadvantage, and to expand their capabilities (Robeyns 2017 ). At the same time, considering these factors implies a multidisciplinary analysis, which draws on insights from different areas such as socio-economic analysis, development studies, and education, to name but a few (Robeyns 2017 : 36).

The above conceptual framework brings to the fore the moral dimension of poverty, and the multiplicity of factors that contribute to it, while providing an understanding that goes beyond commonly endorsed notions of poverty in terms of lack of income and external resources (Sen 1999 ). As Sen notes, different sources of deprivation may compound the disadvantage associated with poverty, thus making ‘real poverty … much more intense than we can deduce from income data’ (Sen 2009 : 256). And furthermore, the understanding and remedying of the persistence of poverty can ‘both be helped by explicit consideration of the relation between deprivation in different spaces, especially between incomes and the capability to lead secure and worthwhile lives’ (Sen 1992 : 9). Poverty is thus defined as a deprivation of capability Footnote 2 (Sen 2009 : 254) and identified at the level of deprivation of basic functionings, such as being well nourished, sheltered, healthy and, importantly, educated. The moral urgency of addressing poverty resides therefore in the level of deprivation and deep inequality entailed, as well as in its detrimental effects on overall well-being (Burchardt and Hicks 2018 ).

As stated earlier, we believe that the conceptual apparatus of the approach thus outlined offers an ethically engaged rationale that brings together normative evaluation and sociological and educational analysis in addressing the disadvantage emerging from the interplay of child poverty and education, highlighted during the COVID pandemic, while going beyond idealised approaches to justice too. The notion of conversion factors highlights the significance of taking account of existing relationships in education, while the distinction between capabilities and functionings helps guide practices regarding the education of poor children. These features, as we shall see, make the approach specifically apt to counteract the aftermath of the pandemic in ways that go beyond existing measures.

We begin by noting that an understanding of educational inequalities in terms of capability limitations has the normative advantage of highlighting and considering elements of inequality that are not readily evident if we focus only on material or educational resources, such as funding (Terzi 2021 ). If we consider, for example, the inequalities pertaining to the experiences of schooling faced by poor children, it seems evident that no amount of additional resources, in itself, can account for the limited pedagogical interactions related to the ‘pedagogy of poverty’ which, as we have seen, can characterise poor children’s schooling. This element is best accounted for by considering the socio-cultural factors that may affect a child’s use of their educational resources and adults’ response to this. Similarly, the attitudinal and unconscious biases of teachers towards poor children cannot be appropriately addressed without considering them among the socio-cultural factors that affect children’s learning. The capability approach does not discount the importance of resources in tackling these inequalities. Rather, it draws attention to how the usefulness of resources is conditioned by a complex interaction of factors and how such complexity needs to be explicitly accounted for both theoretically and practically, in relation to appropriate interventions. Thus, the approach endorses the use of resources for additional training for teachers or public campaigns to tackle discriminating attitudes, Footnote 3 for example. It is in this way that the process of socio-political and empirical analysis of conversion factors, which constrain or enlarge the capability space, becomes part of the normative discussion. These factors are not bracketed or treated as background, as the first educational narrative or indeed some ideal theories of justice seem to do but are part of the structuring of the normative framework. At the same time, the inclusion of these factors within a normative terrain facilitates incorporating the richness of sociological approaches to child poverty within an ethical framework allowing for acute analysis of crises like the COVID pandemic.

This is not only a theoretical evaluative approach, but one that can be translated into practice too. Many scholars working with the capability approach are able to use this core idea to incorporate multidimensionality into normative notions, and to develop more nuanced evaluative approaches to assessing social relationships in fields of education, health, and housing, to name a few (Chiappero-Martinetti, Osmani and Qizilbash  2020 ). As much of the extensive scholarship on the capability approach and education illuminates (e.g., Terzi 2005 ; Walker and Unterhalter 2007 ; Hart 2012 ; Walker 2019 ), the first narrative we outline, which suggests a solution of enhancing education quality inside schools, does not sufficiently attend to the complex intersecting ways in which inequality is formed both within and outside schools which the capability approach does by looking at a range of conversion factors.

The concept of conversion factors, which are environmental, political, economic, and social, highlights that the dynamics of the constraints on and expansion of capabilities entails normative choices and practical interventions. For example, a child needs literacy to enable her to access the curriculum taught at school and pass the school leaving examination. Being able to read is both a functioning and a capability. Considering environmental and political conversion factors brings to the fore how, even if a child can read, if no school has been built in her neighbourhood, or the school that is available to her is a long distance away and is staffed with teachers who lack enough experience to prepare her to enter the examination, do not talk her language, and assume children from her background are ‘backward’, the child will not be able to learn. Economic conversion factors draw attention to factors such as having to do long hours of work in the home, assisting with childcare, chores, and basic survival. Social conversion factors highlight attitudes which question, for example, a child’s school attendance because she has ‘too much book’ and does not marry young, thus incurring stigma and the risk of sexual assault. These factors need analysis both in how relationships inside and outside the school, and their interconnection , are understood. The two narratives we have sketched work in opposite directions and thus do not foster consideration of the processes associated with conversion factors working together. Drawing on the capability approach, in developing a framework to analyse literature on the gendered effects of school closures and return to school after COVID, a UNESCO overview report noted a wide range of conversion factors at play (UNESCO 2022 ).

Paying attention to conversion factors is particularly helpful in highlighting the increased inequalities of capabilities experienced as a result of Covid. As Anand et al. ( 2020a ) highlight, while the capability of learning has been significantly affected for all children around the world, existing inequalities in access to technology, parental education, and available support have exacerbated the disadvantage of children living in poverty. Specific capabilities, such as opportunities for speech and language development have been affected, particularly in the early years and more significantly for children with special educational needs and those from the most deprived neighbourhoods (Castro-Kemp and Mahmud 2021 ). As noted above, these inequalities are the result of complex interconnected environmental, social, political, and cultural factors, which are foregrounded and assessed by the capability approach. Relatedly, the opportunities to make up for the so called ‘learning loss’ caused by Covid differ too. And while some governments have attempted to address the learning loss by providing additional funding for specific programmes, for instance additional one to one and small group lessons or extended school time, such as the National Tutoring Programme deployed in England, the underlying structural social, economic, and educational inequalities have remained unchanged or have worsened, thus leading to the potential limited success of such initiatives. Consider, for example, the case of Janice, a year 7 student with insecure literacy skills attending a school in a poor neighbourhood. Janice had problems accessing remote learning and her learning has suffered as a result; moreover, she does not qualify for free access to school meals and often arrives at school hungry. Although teachers’ intervention is crucial in providing Janice with appropriate learning support, it is questionable whether such support will work, if the circumstantial factors of Janice’s situation are not addressed, and, importantly, the teaching and learning are based on limited notions of ‘catching up’. Through its attention to conversion factors, we suggest, an approach based on capability draws much needed attention to the role of schools in addressing disadvantage in interrelation with policies addressing circumstantial factors.

Finally, we posit, the conceptual apparatus of the capability approach, and its distinction between functionings and capability, offers insights that may prove helpful for addressing the education of children living in poverty. The importance accorded by the approach to well being and to the opportunities to lead good lives suggests, first and foremost, a shift from a functionalist view of education and its emphasis on a narrow set of learning outcomes, to a view of education aimed at the expansion of children’s capabilities. This more expansive view of education could, perhaps, include an expansion of the social imaginary associated with the dominant normative frameworks that we have outlined above. Thus, education is recognised as having a fertile role in enhancing children’s present and future well-being and providing real opportunities to develop functionings that will enable them to participate in the life of their communities and their broader society, and in work and leisure activities (Nussbaum 2011 ). At the same time, education itself can be one of the ways in which possibilities for social change can be imagined. A number of accounts using the capability approach to analyse educational relationships highlight this (e.g., De Jaeghere 2021 ; Walker et al. 2022 ; Unterhalter et al. 2022 ). While not discounting the importance of achieving functionings pertaining to, e.g., literacy and numeracy, the approach suggests instead a much broader conception of education, one more akin to promoting the full functionings pertaining to local, national, and global citizenship and the capacity to reflect on one’s values and goals and those of the surrounding society.

Moreover, the broader scope of education in relation to the expansion of capabilities is antithetic to any form of reductionist pedagogy, such as the pedagogy of poverty outlined earlier, but supports instead forms of pedagogical interaction and co-construction of the learning and teaching process (Brando 2020 ; Adamson 2021 ).

Lastly, the focus on capabilities, at least at the level of policy, helps unmask the inequalities of children living in poverty by considering the real opportunities they have, beyond the actual level of functionings or learning outcomes they may achieve.

It can be seen that the capability approach provides insights that allow us to address the lacunae identified in the two narratives of childhood, poverty and education we have sketched, and which continue to inform policy after the Covid years. In the first narrative the space of education is conceived as separate from the contexts of poverty, while in the second narrative the space of education is submerged by the structures associated with the perpetuation of poverty. The capability approach identifies the space of capabilities as different to these conceptions. Education has the potential to be a space of capabilities and opportunities that is not separated from social conditions, as the approach acknowledges the salience of conversion factors. But the capability space is also not simply a reflection of what may be the narrow set of opportunities offered by a society that is structured to reproduce inequalities. The capability space may be understood as a site of agency and opportunity contoured by the many historical and contemporary conditions that shape child poverty.

An ethical framework informed by the conceptual apparatus of the capability approach shows how values and ideals informed by the invaluable insights provided by educational, sociological and empirical studies can contribute to an understanding of the complexity of child poverty and the role that education plays in children’s life.

The Covid 19 pandemic has starkly refocused attention to the pressing and growing situation of children living in poverty worldwide. Capabilities threatened during the pandemic include opportunities for health, wellbeing, equity and inclusion. Work on the Covid pandemic and the capability approach has prompted a rich investigation of the ways in which institutions and innovations should be approached (Venkatapuram 2020 ; Anand et al. 2020 ; Ferrannini et al 2021 ; UNDP 2022 ). Our discussion has explored two dominant narratives about child poverty in its interplay with education and it has highlighted how each overlooks the complex ways in which normative values and contextual factors are related. The interdisciplinary conversations that enable theorists and practitioners to develop adequate responses to the pressing reality of child poverty, which has been starkly emphasised by the recent Covid 19 pandemic, we have argued, demand that we adopt an ethically informed, normative position on the desirability and the feasibility of intervening in our educational institutions, in ways that promote people’s real possibilities for leading a flourishing life. The modest, but also the possible radical potential of this perspective is captured in Jonathan Wolff’s suggestion that, at least in principle, ‘it is possible to improve individuals’ opportunities, and hence their capability set, by doing any of three interventions: improving a person’s internal traits such as strengths, skills etc., or improving their external resources including income, entitlement to services etc., and finally improving the social and cultural environment in which a person lives, including social policies, cultural attitudes and norms as well as their built environment’ (Wolff, 2007, Wolff, 2020). The normative framework we have articulated is perhaps a first step towards such an improvement on the existing situation.

Amartya Sen originally formulated the approach as an alternative to predominant accounts of well-being based on utility (Sen 1985 , 1992 ), while Martha Nussbaum further articulated it through a list of ten central capabilities deemed necessary to live a truly human life ( 2000 , 2010).

Sen’s position has however been critiqued for obscuring material deprivation as fundamental to poverty. See Lister ( 2004 ), for an articulated discussion.

We are grateful to an anonymous reviewer for pressing on this point.

Aber, J. et al. (2007). Poverty and child development: new perspectives on a defining issue . https://doi.org/10.1037/11486-009

Adamson, L. 2021. Language of instruction: A question of disconnected capabilities. Comparative Education 57 (2): 187–205.

Article   Google Scholar  

Akmal, M., and L. Pritchett. 2021. Learning equity requires more than equality: Learning goals and achievement gaps between the rich and the poor in five developing countries⋆. International Journal of Educational Development 82: 102350.

Allais, S., A. Cooper, and Y. Shalem. 2019. Rupturing or reinforcing inequality? The role of education in South Africa today. Transformation 101: 105–126.

Anand, Paul, Bob Ferrer, Qin Gao, Ricardo Nogales, and Elaine Unterhalter. 2020. COVID-19 as a capability crisis: Using the capability framework to understand policy challenges. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 21 (3): 293–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/19452829.2020.1789079 .

Apple, M. 2018. The struggle for democracy in education: Lessons from social realities . Oxford: Taylor and Francis.

Book   Google Scholar  

Azevedo, J. P. (2020). Learning poverty. World bank policy research working paper, Washington DC: World Bank

Ball, S. 2016. Neoliberal education? Confronting the slouching beast. Policy Features in Education 14 (8): 1046–1059.

Barrett, B., M.R. Carter, and J.P. Chavas, eds. 2019. The economics of poverty traps. C . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Google Scholar  

Bourdieu, P., and J.C. Passeron. 1990. Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage 4: 17.

Bowles, S., and H. Gintis. 1976. Schooling in capitalist America . New York: Basic Books.

Bowles, S., and H. Gintis. 2002. Schooling in capitalist America revisited. Sociology of education 75: 1–18.

Brando, N. 2020. Children’s abilities, freedom, and the process of capability-formation. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 21 (3): 249–262.

Brando, N., and G. Schweiger. 2019. Philosophy and child poverty . Springer.

Brehm, W. Unterhalter, E. and Oketch, M. 2021, States of emergency: Education in a time of Covid-19’ NORRAG special issue 06, September

Burchardt, T., and R. Hick. 2018. Inequality, advantage and the capability approach. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities. 19 (1): 38–52.

Castro-Kemp, S., and A. Mahmud. 2021. School closures and returning to school: Views of parents of children with disabilities in england during the Covid-19 pandemic. Front. Educ. 6: 666574. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.666574 .

Chase, E., and G. Bantebya-Kyomuhendo. 2015. Poverty and shame . Global Experiences: Oxford University Press, US.

Chiappero-Martinetti, E., Osmani, S. and Qizilbash, M. (eds.) (2020) The Cambridge Handbook of the Capability Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

D’Agnese, S. 2017. Reclaiming education in the age of pisa. challenging OECD’s educational order . London: Routledge.

De Jaeghere, J. 2021. A capability pedagogy for excluded youth: Fostering recognition and imagining alternative futures. Education, Citizenship and Social Justice 16 (2): 99–113.

Education in England (2020). Annual Report 2020—Education Policy Institute (epi.org.uk)

Equal Education, 2002. https://equaleducation.org.za/2022/01/19/media-statement-a-raw-deal-matric-class-of-2021-seriously-hurt-by-the-rotational-timetabling-system/

Ferrannini, A., E. Barbieri, M. Biggeri, and M.R. Di Tommaso. 2021. Industrial policy for sustainable human development in the post-Covid19 era. World Development 137: 105215.

Haberman, M. 2010. The pedagogy of poverty versus good teaching. Phi Delta Kappan 92: 81–87. https://doi.org/10.1177/00317217100920022 .

Hanes, D.W. (2019) Child poverty, impoverished parenting, and normative childhood: some words of caution. In: Philosophy and child poverty: Reflections on the ethics and politics of poor children and their families Eds. Brando N. and Schweiger G. 19–49, Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Hart, C.S. 2012. The capability approach and education. Cambridge Journal of Education 42 (3): 275–282.

Hempel-Jorgensen, A. (2019) Inequality of pedagogy in english schools: How significant is it? BERA

Hevia, F.J., S. Vergara-Lope, A. Velásquez-Durán, and D. Calderón. 2022. Estimation of the fundamental learning loss and learning poverty related to COVID-19 pandemic in Mexico. International Journal of Educational Development 88: 102515.

Holt, L., and Murray, L. (2021). Children and Covid 19 in the UK. Children's Geographies, 1–8 https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2021.1921699 .

Holt, L., and L. Murray. 2022. Children and Covid 19 in the UK. Children’s Geographies 20 (4): 487–494.

House of Commons Library (2021) Briefing Paper Number 7096, Poverty in the UK: statistics . UK Parliament

Kim, L.E., and K. Asbury. 2020. ‘Like a rug had been pulled from under you’: The impact of COVID-19 on teachers in England during the first six weeks of the UK lockdown. British Journal of Educational Psychology 90 (4): 1062–1083.

Lister, R. 2004. Poverty . Bristol: Policy press.

Martin, A., Partika, A., Johnson, A. D., Castle, S., Horm, D., & Tulsa SEED Study Team. (2022). Both sides of the screen: Predictors of parents’ and teachers’ depression and food insecurity during COVID-19-Related distance learning. Early childhood research quarterly.

Mitchell, C., Moletsane, R., MacEntee, K., and de Lange, N. (2020). Participatory visual methodologies in self-study for social justice teaching: A reflexive eye. International handbook of self-study of teaching and teacher education practices , 683–712.

Moletsane, R. and Mitchell, C. (2018). Researching Sexual Violence with Girls in Rural South Africa. The Wiley Handbook on Violence in Education: Forms, Factors and Preventions , 433. NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Moletsane, R. (2022). Using photovoice to enhance young women’s participation in addressing gender-based violence in higher education. Comparative Education 1–20.

Moss, G., R. Allen, A. Bradbury, S. Duncan, S. Harmey, and R. Levy. 2020. Primary teachers’ experience of the COVID-19 lockdown—Eight key messages for policymakers going forward . London: UCL Institute of Education.

Nussbaum, M. 2000. Women and human development: The capabilities approach . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nussbaum, M. 2011. Creating capabilities . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Peters, M., and T. Besley. 2014. Children in crisis: Child poverty and abuse in New Zealand. Educational Philosophy and Theory 46 (9): 945–961. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2014.935280 .

Pritchett, L. (2019). A review essay: The politics and governance of basic education: A tale of two South African provinces. RISE Research on Improving Systems of Education, Insight Series. Oxford, UK: Blavatnik School of Government, University of Oxford. https://www.riseprogramme . org/publications/book-review-politics-governance-basic-education-south-african-provinces .

Raffo, C., A. Dyson, H. Gunter, D. Hall, L. Jones, and A. Kalambouka. 2009. Education and poverty: Mapping the terrain and making the links to educational policy. International Journal of Inclusive Education 13 (4): 341–358.

Rawls, J. 1971. A theory of justice . Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.

Robeyns, I. 2017. Wellbeing, freedom and social justice: the capability approach re-examined . Cambridge: Open Book Publishers.

Robeyns, I. 2018. The capabilities approach. In The Oxford handbook of distributive justice , ed. S. Olsaretti. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Schweiger, G., and G. Graf. 2015. A philosophical examination of social justice and child poverty . Basingstoke: Springer.

Sen, A. 1985. Well-being, agency and freedom. The Dewey Lectures 1984. The Journal of Philosophy 82 (4): 69–221.

Sen, A. 1992. Inequality reexamined . Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Sen, A. 1999. Development as freedom . New York: Oxford University Press.

Sen, A. 2009. The idea of justice . London: Allen Lane.

Sen, A. (2006) What do we want from a theory of justice?. Journal of Philosophy . CIII (5).

Smith, W. and Benavot, A. (2021) Quality education and global learning metrics In Education and international development. An introduction Eds. McCowan T and Unterhalter E, 189–206. London: Bloomsbury.

Taylor, C. 2004. Modern social imaginaries . Durham: Duke University Press.

Terzi, L. 2005. Beyond the dilemma of difference: The capability approach to disability and special educational needs. Journal of Philosophy of Education 39 (3): 443–459.

Terzi, L. (2021) Child poverty and educational inequalities. Paper presented at the seminar series on Child Poverty and Education: Philosophical reflections. 25th March 2021.

Thompson, I., J. McNicholl, and I. Menter. 2016. Student teachers’ perceptions of poverty and educational achievement. Oxford Review of Education 42: 214–29.

Treanor, M. 2020. Child poverty. Aspiring to survive . Bristol: Policy Press.

UNDP, 2022, Human Development Report.

UNESCO, 2021, When schools shut: Gendered effects of covid 19 school closures Paris: UNESCO https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000379270

UNESCO, 2022, Evidence on the gendered effects of school closures. A systematic review Paris: UNESCO https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380935

Unterhalter, E., C. Yates, H. Makinda, and A. North. 2012. Blaming the poor: Constructions of marginality and poverty in the Kenyan education sector. Compare—A Journal of Comparative and International Education 42 (2): 213–233.

Unterhalter, E., H. Longlands, and R. Peppin Vaughan. 2022. Gender and intersecting inequalities in education: Reflections on a framework for measurement. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 20: 1–30.

Venkatapuram, S. 2020. Human capabilities and pandemics. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 21 (3): 280–286.

Vizard, P. 2021. The conservative governments’ record on social policy from May 2015 to pre-COVID 2020: Policies, spending and outcomes. In CASE Report, 136 , 12–15. London: London School of Economics.

Vizard, P and Hills, J. (ed.). The Conservative government's record on social policy from May 2015 to pre-COVID 2020: Policies, spending and outcomes. London: CASE (Centre for analysis of Social Exclusion), London School of Economics

Walker, M. 2019. Defending the need for a foundational epistemic capability in education. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 20 (2): 218–232.

Walker, M., and E. Unterhalter. 2007. Amartya Sen’s capability approach and social justice in education . Springer.

Walker, M., A. Boni, C. Martinez-Vargas, and M. Cin. 2022. An Epistemological break: Redefining participatory research in capabilitarian scholarship. Journal of Human Development and Capabilities 23 (1): 1–7.

Weidmann, B., R. Allen, D. Bibby, R. Coe, L. James, N. Plaister, and D. Thomson. 2021. Covid-19 disruptions: Attainment gaps and primary school responses . London: Education Endowment Foundation.

Wolff, J. 2018. Method in ethics and public policy: Applied philosophy versus engaged philosophy. In The Routledge handbook of ethics and public policy , ed. Annabelle Lever and Andrei Poama. London: Routledge.

World Bank. 2021. studies of learning losses internationally https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/education/publication/the-state-of-the-global-education-crisis-a-path-to-recovery?cq_ck=16385

World Inequality Report 2022, ( https://wir2022.wid.world/executive-summary/ )

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Gottfried Schweiger and Frank Jeffery, and all the participants to the Workshop on Ethics, children, education and the COVID-19 pandemic held on 28 and 29 September 2022 (University of Salzburg) for their comments and suggestions. We are also grateful to the participants to the Seminar Series ‘ Child Poverty and Education: Philosophical Reflections ’ funded by the Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain and held between January and June 2021 (University of Roehampton and IOE UCL’s Faculty of Education). We thank two anonymous reviewers for insightful questions and support.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

University of Roehampton, LDN, UK

Lorella Terzi

IOE, UCL’s Faculty of Education and Society, LDN, UK

Elaine Unterhalter & Judith Suissa

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorella Terzi .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Terzi, L., Unterhalter, E. & Suissa, J. Philosophical Reflections on Child Poverty and Education. Stud Philos Educ 42 , 49–63 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-022-09865-1

Download citation

Accepted : 20 December 2022

Published : 12 January 2023

Issue Date : February 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-022-09865-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Deprivation
• Conversion factors
•  Wellbeing 
• Inequalities
• Ethical engagement
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

America Pulled Children Out of Poverty. Now It’s Set to Reverse Course With a Vengeance.

By Nikhil Goyal

Dr. Goyal is the author of the book “ Live to See the Day: Coming of Age in American Poverty .”

The annual Census Bureau report released earlier this month revealed that child poverty more than doubled in the United States last year, the largest single-year increase on record. The news feels less like a surprise and more like a confirmation, if not a deliberate choice.

Many federal pandemic relief programs in health care, food assistance, housing and child care — most notably the expanded child tax credit — have either expired or are set to expire, which in all likelihood will ensure that child poverty will continue to accelerate. The list also includes emergency rental assistance , the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program emergency allotments and Medicaid continuous coverage . The implications of letting these policies lapse without replacement, one after the other, will likely be felt for years to come.

A significant blow arrives on Sept. 30, when child care emergency-relief funding terminates . According to a Century Foundation report , 3.2 million children are expected to lose access to care in the coming months. Seventy thousand child care programs are likely to close, and more than 200,000 industry workers could lose their jobs. Child care and preschool costs have been soaring faster than inflation, and the surviving centers could be forced to raise their fees. The lack of accessible and affordable child care could pull more women out of the work force, potentially leading to higher inflation and a slower economic recovery.

We should not be surprised by the outcomes that follow from subjecting children and families to chronic deprivation. Over eight years, I conducted an ethnographic study examining the lives of children growing up in Kensington, one of the poorest neighborhoods in Philadelphia. Babies born in the neighborhood are expected to live to 71, which is 17 years less than babies born no more than four miles away in the affluent, predominantly white neighborhood of Society Hill — and a life span on par with countries such as Egypt, Bhutan and Uzbekistan.

When I first met Emmanuel Coreano, a Puerto Rican student from Kensington, he was living with his disabled mother in a dilapidated row home that lacked hot water and electricity. The rooms were filthy and mold-ridden. The bathtub was at risk of falling through the cracked ceiling into the kitchen. One night, Emmanuel was sleeping when he woke up to a sharp pain. Tasting something metallic, he touched his lip, and in the glow of his phone screen he could see that his finger was stained with blood. A rat had bitten him.

Still, this was the best housing that his mother could find on her limited budget; she had no earnings and relied on Supplemental Security Income and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families. “I remember asking God to give me a happy home,” Emmanuel wrote in a poem. “One where the neighborhood was good, where I didn’t have to care about the anger in people’s hearts, where I didn’t have to worry about getting shot up in a park.”

Despite experiencing housing precarity and economic hardship, Emmanuel managed to graduate from El Centro de Estudiantes, a last-chance alternative high school, thanks to the support of caring educators. He was an adult when Donald Trump and Joe Biden enacted trillions of dollars of the most significant anti-poverty measures in decades — economic impact payments , expanded unemployment insurance and the expanded child tax credit . Tens of millions of Americans were kept out of poverty and economic insecurity as a result; in another world, a younger Emmanuel could have been one of them. The stark relief that pandemic programs brought to families is proof that poverty is not an intractable problem when there is sufficient political will.

The economist Amartya Sen has argued that poverty is not simply the condition of low income, it is also “the deprivation of basic capabilities,” which he defines as “the substantive freedoms he or she enjoys to lead the kind of life he or she has reason to value.” To guarantee such economic and social freedoms , we also need to reverse decades of privatization and austerity and invest in equitable public goods : education, health care, housing, child care, broadband, utilities, food and other sectors.

As a senior policy adviser for Bernie Sanders, who was then the chair of the Senate Budget Committee, I spent six months in 2021 helping my colleagues draft, revise and negotiate the details of the Build Back Better bill. ​​We dreamed of achieving a feat akin to the New Deal, so it was devastating to watch the original $6 trillion , 10-year spending plan get hacked to $3.5 trillion , and then $1.75 trillion , only to die in the Senate. A dramatically pared-down version of that bill, the Inflation Reduction Act, made transformative investments, but nearly all of Build Back Better’s original measures were left out. We should recommit to finishing the job and passing an agenda that will reduce child poverty and make life more affordable.

It is also up to the states to do their part. Buoyed by Democratic trifectas, some have become bona fide laboratories of social democracy. Fourteen states have adopted a state-level child tax credit, with many featuring a fully refundable provision so that families with little to no income can benefit. This year, New Mexico has expanded free preschool seats and made child care free for families earning up to four times the federal poverty rate — roughly $120,000 for a family of four. In the upcoming fiscal year, Minnesota will pour more than $250 million of additional funding into early childhood education to reduce the costs of child care and create thousands of new preschool slots. This includes $10 million to supplement funding of the federal Head Start program, which serves children up to the age of 5 and should be bolstered by states. Today, nine states have universal free school breakfast and lunch on the books. Just last month, the governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker, established a $20 million initiative that will help fund grocery stores in food deserts.

Millions of children are in the predicament that Emmanuel Coreano was once in, and more will join them if we refuse to act. The government has a choice here. It can deliver cash transfers , enact public goods and establish a floor of livelihood where nobody suffers from poverty or want — or it can allow children and families to go hungry, unhoused, indebted and abandoned on the altar of the market . It is time to once again use our immense power and resources to reduce suffering and save lives.

Nikhil Goyal is the author of the book “ Live to See the Day: Coming of Age in American Poverty .” He served as a senior policy adviser on education and children for Senator Bernie Sanders on the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions and the Committee on the Budget.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Twitter (@NYTopinion) and Instagram .

The impact of poverty on early childhood

For most parents, bringing a baby into the world and nurturing a young child brings both great joy and intense love, but it also comes with many changes, and sometimes stress, pressure and anxiety. Those pressures and stresses are likely to be much greater for families who are struggling to make ends meet.  In the UK today, more than one in four families with a child under five are living in poverty .  

Experiencing poverty can cause harm at any age, but particularly for the youngest children. This is when the foundations for their physical, emotional and social development are being laid. A substantial body of research shows that family poverty is associated with and can cause poorer academic attainment and social and emotional development. Perhaps not surprisingly, poverty can be highly detrimental if it is persistent, experienced in the first three years of life and combined with other disadvantages. Given this, addressing early childhood poverty is a vital part of the jigsaw of support needed to enable young children to flourish.

The harm that poverty can inflict begins during pregnancy and is shaped by the health and well-being of parents and their socio-economic status. Gaps in development between disadvantaged and advantaged children emerge very early on. Poverty impacts are also not the same for everyone and are further compounded by inequalities in relation to parents’ ethnicity, health and economic status. By the time a child reaches 11 months there are gaps in communication and language skills, and by the age of three inequalities in children’s cognitive and social and emotional skills are evident. A large body of analysis shows how these early disadvantages can go on to affect children’s development in later life.

Importantly, this is not to say that economic disadvantage inevitably leads to poor long-term outcomes; other factors – family circumstances, wider family support, social networks and connections, educational resources and public services - all play a vital role and can mitigate the effects of poverty.

Younger children are more likely to be in poverty than other groups 

Poverty here is defined as not having enough material resources such as money, housing, or food to meet the minimum needs - both material and social – in today’s society. While there have been some key changes over the last two decades, there is one constant – children are markedly more likely to experience poverty than adults or pensioners and it is younger children who are most at risk .

This is the result of a combination of factors including the costs of children and that households with younger children are less likely to have two parents in full-time work parents. The latest figures show that there are some 4.2 million children living in poverty in the UK, a rise of 600,000 over the last decade.

Most worryingly deep poverty has been rising, particularly affecting lone parents, large families, and people living in families with a disabled person. The Runnymede Trust found that Black and minority ethnic people are currently 2.2 times more likely to be in deep poverty than white people, with Bangladeshi people more than three times more likely.  The Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s report on Destitution in the UK 202 3 found that over 1 million children had experienced destitution at some point over 2022.

Poverty affects children’s material, social, educational and emotional well-being

Poverty affects young children’s experiences directly. Parents have less money to meet children’s material and social needs. The sharply rising costs of providing the basic essentials – food, warmth, lighting, housing costs, nappies, baby food, clothing - has created acute pressure for many families. Drawing on a survey of their service users, in 2022 Barnardo’s reported that 30% of parents said their child’s mental health had worsened in the previous four months, 16% said their child/ren had to share a bed with them or a sibling, and 30% were concerned about losing their home/being made homeless.

Recent research (Ruth Patrick et al. 2023 ) looked at the effects of benefit changes on larger families. It shows the many hardships that families are dealing with, the inability to meet their children’s needs and the stress and worry they feel as a result. But it also shows the resilience, strength and skills they employ to give their children the best possible life in the circumstances. Families spoke about the sheer amount of time it takes to manage on a very tight budget and its direct impact on children – from missing bath time to reading a bedtime story. This is affecting children’s educational outcomes. 95% of teachers surveyed by Kindred Squared believe that the cost-of-living crisis is going to impact school readiness next year.

Poverty gets under your skin; it takes a toll on the mental health of mothers, fathers, and wider family. The Family Stress Model, underpinned by research, shows the way in which economic stress - poverty, hardship, debt - creates psychological distress, lack of control and feelings of stigma. Not surprisingly, these stresses affect family relationships, both between parents and with children. Hardship, debt, deprivation and ‘feeling poor’ is linked to poorer maternal mental health and lower life satisfaction and this can make it more difficult to find the mental space to be an attentive and responsive parent. This in turn can affect young children’s social and emotional development and outcomes.

What can we do?

Explaining how poverty affects young children’s well-being and outcomes is important when it comes to developing effective responses: addressing poverty and hardship directly, supporting parents’, especially mothers’, mental health, and providing support for parenting.

The research also helps identify the protective factors that help to reduce the detrimental impact of poverty: wider family and neighbourhood support, good maternal and paternal mental health, access to high quality early education, warm parent-child interaction and financial and housing stability.

Early years professionals, health visitors, family support workers and many others are in the front line of the difficulties that families with young children are facing. They are responding to the legacy of the Covid pandemic and the rise in cost of living, working across service boundaries and in new ways, despite budgetary pressures.

Local services are working to meet the needs of families with young children in the round – including support for maternal mental health, parental conflict, parenting and the home learning environment. There are many voluntary initiatives, such as Save the Children’s Building Blocks, which combines giving grants to reduce the impact of material deprivation with supporting parents to play and learn with their children at home, initiatives to use local authority data to increase the take-up of benefit entitlements, and thebaby bank network, providing essential products and equipment as well as practical support for parents who are struggling.

Tackling early childhood poverty rests both on public policy which takes a holistic and joined up approach, as well as action at local level, whether that’s through local authorities, early years services in health and education, local businesses and community and voluntary initiatives.

In the Nuffield Foundation’s Changing Face of Early Childhood , we set out some core principles to address early childhood poverty including:

A multi-dimensional approach that reflects the range of socioeconomic risks and intersecting needs faced by families with young children.

Money matters - a financial bedrock for families with young children living on a low income, through improved social security benefits and access to employment, which takes account of the care needs of the under-fives.

Greater attention and investment in policies to support parental mental health and parenting from the earliest stage of a child’s life.

A more coherent, joined up and effective approach to early childhood would help to address the inequalities between children by supporting them early on in life and establishing deep roots from which they can grow and flourish.

Childhood Poverty Essay

We as Americans are extremely lucky. We live in a big country with many resources and almost all the luxuries we ever wanted. On the flip side, in America there are also many people who do not have these privileges. The lower class is a struggling class. For many years, people have been trying to pull themselves up from the lower class and the majority does not succeed. Childhood poverty is a large problem in the U.S. It is said that the poorest people in the United States are the children of the lower class. Childhood poverty could lead to a number of problems such as hunger, violence, physical and mental disabilities, educational problems, homelessness, family stress, sickness, and too-early parenthood. The sad truth is that …show more content…

This makes things much more difficult, especially for those women whom are single teen parents. Teenage mothers are more likely to drop out of high school and be dependent on welfare. The level of education for the parents is also another aspect of poverty. Other characteristics that contribute to poverty parents are their emotional status, or even mental retardation. Children are faced with many consequences due to growing up in poverty. Most children who live in poverty go to poor unsuitable schools, live in unexceptable housing, and grow up around more violence and crime than any other parent would wish for their child . As soon as the child is born into poverty, they begin to feel the effects of it. They tend to have low birth weight and contain a higher risk of dying during infancy. We watched a video in class that showed that poverty could take a toll on the child’s learning capabilities, and health status. There were stories of children with hyperactivity problems, chronic ear infections which caused hearing loss, and even children who were not receiving the proper amount of nutrients to be able to grow and function correctly. The first years of a child’s life are the most crucial because most of the development of the brain occurs then. A large problem of childhood poverty is malnutrition. Since these children are growing up in poverty, many of the parents have a hard time supplying food for their kids. Surprisingly, there

Poverty and Children in America

Malnutrition is being reported by medical professionals everywhere and is of major concern in almost every state in the nation. Children who suffer the effects of malnutrition contribute to a high number of those with negative health problems. Obesity is being associated as a side effect of malnutrition, as children who don’t get enough to eat regularly eat foods that are less healthy. Childhood hunger also contributes to health conditions like a deteriorated immune system, chronic fatigue, developmental problems, and behavioral issues. Many poor children in the United States today, experience an uneasy or painful sensation caused by lack of food, or hunger.

Child Poverty Essay

Poverty is not simply a deficiency in material resources, it is the complex situation of low income that limits ones access to many of the social determinants of health such as safe and suitable housing, food, child care, education, and can lead to social exclusion (Séguin et al, 2012). The experience of poverty in childhood, particularly early childhood, has been linked to many adverse health effects such as low birth weight, increased incidence of asthma, injuries, mental health issues and obesity (Sharma & Ford-Jones, 2015). The impact of childhood poverty continues into adulthood, increasing the risk of many chronic diseases. Perhaps even

Poverty and Children in the United States Essay

The United States is the richest nation, yet millions of Americans live below the poverty line and millions more struggle every month. The children in society today living in poverty is increasing daily. The majority of these children are from single-parent homes where sometimes parents are not working or have become disabled and therefore cannot work. Children who are raised in foster care and leave as adults do not have strong relationship ties most of the time and are at an increased risk for experiencing poverty, early parenthood and homelessness (American School Board Journal, 2007). The reason for most of the poverty in the United States is due to low family incomes.

The Causes And Effects Of Poverty In The United States

Poverty, a common problem in the US and yet, something that people consistently overlook. We are often unaware of the magnitude of poverty in the U.S and sometimes even disregard it. People living in destitution are at greater risk for behavioral and mental problems. Children or Teens who live in poverty are prone to poor academic achievements, become school dropouts , or grow subject to abuse or neglect. People in poverty also occasionally show signs of anxiety and depression.

Child Poverty In The United States Essay

It is known that the children are unable to determine their life circumstances, their families, and care solely for themselves without supervision. With this being said, children have little to no jurisdiction in determining the situations that they are confronted with. Most of the time when we ponder child poverty we think of low-income families or lack of food in the household, but it extends beyond that to “an environment that is damaging to their mental, physical, emotional and spiritual development” (“Children Under Threat,” 2005). Unfortunately, the prevalence of youth poverty in the United States may seem uncommon to those who are personally unaffected by the crisis; however, statistics show that 15 million children (21% of all children) live in families with incomes below the federal poverty threshold (Child Poverty, 2017). Moreover, when considering the demographics of impoverished children the following are true: a child in the U.S. has a 1 in 5 chance of being poor and the younger they are the poorer they are likely to be, and a child of color is more than twice as likely to be poor than a White child (Child Poverty, 2017). Research proves that poverty is the single greatest threat to a child’s well-being as it decreases the likelihood of a child graduating from high school, and it increases the chances of them becoming involved with the criminal justice system (Ending Child Poverty Now, 2017).

The Effects of Poverty on Children Essay

• 4 Works Cited

When analyzing children growing up in poverty a lot of factors come into play such as their physical, psychological and emotional development. To grow up in poverty can have long term effect on a child. What should be emphasized in analyzing the effects of poverty on children is how it has caused many children around the world to suffer from physical disorders, malnutrition, and even diminishes their capacities to function in society. Poverty has played a major role in the functioning of families and the level of social and emotional competency that children are able to reach. Children in poverty stricken families are exposed to greater and emotional risks and stress level factors. They are even capable of understanding and dealing with

Growing Up In Poverty Research Paper

It can be argued that an individual’s economic status is one of the most important aspects of a person’s place in society, almost more than race, gender, or religion. Poverty can be defined as a state of being extremely poor. In the United States and many other areas throughout the world there are many individuals who lack enough money to provide the basic necessities of life. Poverty is a chronic condition and so many children who grow up in it will face the effects over their lifetime. I see the main effects of growing up in poverty being poor health, a high risk for teen pregnancy, and the lack of education.

Argumentative Essay On Children And Poverty

Research done by Gunn and Duncan suggests that poverty in the first few years of life can undermine brain development, affect overall health status and can lead to diminishes success in school. In other words, having prolonged and extreme stress can put one at greater risk for poor outcomes; such as increased risk pf dropping out of school, poor adult health, and poor employment outcomes. Beyond having adverse consequences on the individual children, it is costly in economically. It has been estimated that one percentage increase in child poverty could cost the economy extra $28 billion annually in the future. Besides the economic costs the nation pays, with lack of education there will be increase criminal activity committed by those children which will also harm the nation. Thus, early intervention in the lives of poor children is especially important to provide them a better start in life and improve their life

Reducing Poverty Essay

Poverty is the United States is a major issue and continues to worsen as housing is becoming less affordable for many people across the nation. People that do find housing are often restricted to low-income areas that have few opportunities. In the low income areas there are few jobs and the quality of schools are poor and keep the people in the cycle. To offset this cycle money needs to be put into the education system in these lower income areas to offset this cycle. Education allows for people to have more opportunities and would increase the incentive to live in low-income areas. With a quality education that is equal to the suburbs it would give the children much more opportunities to improve themselves and exit the cycle. This cycle is living in low-income areas gives children a poor education due to the schools lacking money and resources; without the needed education the student is not able to get a good job. Without the well paying job that person is not able to afford housing and has to living in affordable housing that is located in the low-income areas. By breaking this cycle with increased education it is possible for people to get out the cycle that ties them to that area. Education is the foundation to success and it very important that is equal and everyone receives similar opportunities through that education.

A Study On Child Poverty Essay

“High rates of child poverty are a cause for concern, as low family income has been associated with a range of negative health, education, justice, labour market and social outcomes. Negative health outcomes include low birth weight, infant mortality, poorer mental health and cognitive development, and hospital admissions from a variety of causes” (Craig, Reddington, Wicken, Oben & Simpson, 2013, pg. 24).

Reasons that Can Cause Poverty Essay

Poverty can lead to serious effects. Children who grow up in poverty are likely to have frequent health problems than the children who grow in better financial circumstances. For example, infants who are born into poverty have a low birth weight, and they grow up with mental or physical disabilities. Not only are they sick, but they are most likely to die before their first birthday. Children who are raised in poverty might miss school often because of their illnesses, and they have a much higher accident rate than the other children. Nearly a billion of the world’s population can’t read nor write. Poor families experience stress much more than a normal family does. They are more likely to be exposed to negative events such as illness, job loss, death of a family member, and depression. Homelessness is another effect of poverty. Homeless children are less likely to receive proper nutrition, protection and they experience more health problems. Around 1.4 million children die each year from lack of access to safe and clean water and proper nutrition. Homeless women experience a high rate of low birth weight infants as well as miscarriages. Families who do not have homes receive much more stress than other families. They also have disruption in school, work, friendships, and family relationships. There are other effects of poverty such as drug abuse and addiction, child and woman abuse, debts pressure, and increase in crimes.

Essay about Social Work and Child Development

• 2 Works Cited

Poverty brings several things with it that increase the infant’s risk to physical, emotional, and cognitive harm. The infants and children raised in poverty are less likely to receive basic medical treatment. Untreated illnesses can have lifelong effect on a child. Poverty is a generational issue and often times the mothers has not been taught basic play and interaction skills with their newborn from their mother. It is rare that one moves beyond their scope of life experience. Poverty is one of the risk factors that have additional consequences that accompany it. The families are more likely to live in substandard conditions that expose the infant to environmental risks such as contaminated drinking water and lead. Additional stressors during this stage are financial stressors and depression among the infant’s caregiver. These issues can lead to ignoring of the infant’s emotional needs and the infant misses the opportunity to create a lifelong bond with another and trust in another being able to meet their needs. Inadequate parenting can occur over a child’s entire life span with different and yet still devastating results. As stated in by Hutchinson in her book Dimensions of Human Behavior, Changing the Life Course (2008):

Child Poverty in New Zealand

Socio-economic factors are widely acknowledged as important determinants of poverty. If an individual experiences adverse living conditions in childhood, majority of them will have inadequate income and result in low socio-economic status as adults (Carroll et al, 2011). Children born in poor households have difficulty in accessing the basic needs (e.g. food, clothing, and good living environment) and this can affect their learning ability at school, unable to focus. In other words, they have a higher chance of dropping out of school or lower education attainment, unable to provide appropriate qualifications when they move onto adulthood, seeking for job opportunities. These children are finding day-to-day life tough, they are living in cold, damp houses, do not have warm or rain-proof clothing, their shoes are worn, and many days they go hungry (Children's Commissioner, 2012). Often this has taken place over a long period of time, impacting on their development, behaviour and physical health furthermore limiting their potential as they grow into adults.

How to Overcome Child Poverty with Education Essay

• 8 Works Cited

Families besides providing for the basic necessities such as food, shelter, and clothes for their children, they also pass on cultural and educational values onto their children. According to the American Psychological Association, an important factor in poverty is a family’s socioeconomic status (SES) is often measured as a combination of education, income, and occupation. It is commonly thought of as the social position or class of an individual or group. Socioeconomic status in families is a key factor that influences quality of life for young children and their families. Low socioeconomic status is linked with lower education, poverty, and poor health. Proven studies show that low socioeconomic status is connected with higher levels of emotional, behavioral difficulties, and hostility. Socioeconomic status is proven to create achievement differences among children from low income families from those who come from well off families (Children, Youth and Families & Socioeconomic Status).

Poverty Is A Social Problem

Poverty is a considerable social problem; with a significant impact on those who suffer within. Growing up in poverty “reduces a child’s chance of growing up to be a healthy, well-adjusted, and contributing adult in our society” (Crosson-Tower, 2014, p. 59). Poverty is families having to struggle to afford necessities. Poverty does not know where your next meal is coming from or having to choose between paying rent and seeing a health care provider. The impact of poverty affects one’s ability through physical, social, emotional, and educational health. Even though individual overcome poverty it still extends across cultural, racial, ethnic, and geographical borders. Children represent the largest group of poverty in the United States. “Growing up in poverty places a child at a profound disadvantage and substantially lowers the chances that the child will mature into a well-adjusted, productive, and contributing

Related Topics

• Social class
• Mental retardation
• Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act

• Environment
• Information Science
• Social Issues
• Argumentative
• Cause and Effect
• Classification
• Compare and Contrast
• Descriptive
• Exemplification
• Informative
• Controversial
• Exploratory
• What Is an Essay
• Length of an Essay
• Generate Ideas
• Types of Essays
• Structuring an Essay
• Outline For Essay
• Essay Introduction
• Thesis Statement
• Body of an Essay
• Writing a Conclusion
• Essay Writing Tips
• Drafting an Essay
• Revision Process
• Fix a Broken Essay
• Format of an Essay
• Essay Examples
• Essay Checklist
• Essay Writing Service
• Pay for Research Paper
• Write My Research Paper
• Write My Essay
• Custom Essay Writing Service
• Admission Essay Writing Service
• Pay for Essay
• Academic Ghostwriting
• Write My Book Report
• Case Study Writing Service
• Dissertation Writing Service
• Coursework Writing Service
• Lab Report Writing Service
• Do My Assignment
• Buy College Papers
• Capstone Project Writing Service
• Buy Research Paper
• Custom Essays for Sale

Can’t find a perfect paper?

• Free Essay Samples
• Child Development

Child Poverty in the United States

Updated 23 August 2023

Subject Child Development

Downloads 45

Category Life ,  Family ,  Psychology

Topic Childhood

Poverty and its Impact

Poverty is considered to be one of the major issues affecting developing countries. However, it is important to note that is not an issue affecting developing countries in isolation but instead affects developed countries as well. the only difference is that the extent of poverty in developing countries is much critical than in developed countries.

The United States, a country famed for its economic power contends with the issue of poverty but that does not undermine its supremacy in various sectors especially considering its relentless efforts to alleviate this problem. Specifically, the US is focused on alleviating child poverty. Research has shown that about one in every five children is on in poverty in the united states. In fact, there have been assertions that child poverty in the united states is much higher than in other developed countries (Hymowitz, 2017). In a bid to gain better insight into this issue, this research will focus on discussing child poverty including statistics, milestones that have achieved so far and provided possible solutions to alleviate this problem completely.

Summary of Child poverty in the US

The federal government maintains a threshold upon which the wealth of households is measured. According to NCCP.org, (2018), about 15 million of children in the united states are born and live in families that have incomes that fall below the federal poverty threshold. This is estimated to be about 21% of all the children in the united states. Notably, these children do not live like that because they lack guardians. To the contrary. The reasons condemning these children to this kind of life include low wages and unstable employment for their guardians. These can be attributed to ills such as discrimination, lack of equal opportunity and unavailability of quality education among others. While poverty in itself is a critical issue that needs to be addressed what’s worse is the adverse effects that poverty has on children living in poor families. Poverty can get in the way of a child’s ability to learn, affect their emotional well-being, social skills and even cause them to develop behavioral problems to mention but a few. Children who have experienced deep persistent poverty from a very young age are considered to be most prone to these problems. A continuous cycle of poverty tampers with a child’s cognition making them think and even believe that things can’t get better regardless of the effort one puts in.

The Extent of Child Poverty in the US

Among all of the things that threaten a child’s wellbeing, poverty is thought to be the greatest and assertion that is backed by empirical evidence. The extent of child poverty in the US calls for urgent action especially considering that there are more children living in poverty in the country than adults. Notably, while it is estimated that 1 in every 5 children live in poverty, it is estimated that about 1 out of 8 adults live in poverty (Children.org, 2018). Furthermore, research has shown that among the developed nations, Mexico, Greece, Turkey, and Israel are the only countries that have higher child poverty rates than the US. In addition to that, it is estimated that about 40% of children in the US are forced to live in poverty for at least a year before they hit the age of 18 (Children.org, 2018). One might argue that the government has many pressing issues that should get priority over child poverty but again satisfying such issues will not make any sense if there will be no future generation to carry on the work. The value offered by children is unparalleled but that is dependent on how well they are taken care of from attender age to a point that they can fend for themselves.

The Role of the Government and Private Institutions

There are some private institutions that have relentlessly rallied efforts to help alleviate child poverty globally and even in the US specifically. One such organization is the Child Poverty Action Group. This notwithstanding, the biggest contributor to alleviating child poverty ought to be the government, something that has not be witnessed in some years in the past. during the period between 2012-2014, the level of government spending on child nutrition, social services, and education declined. Moreover, it is estimated that the government spends only 10% of its national budget as its contribution to children welfare (Children.org, 2018). In comparison, this is a mere fraction of what other developed countries spend on children which explains the extent of child poverty in the US. It goes without saying that children subject to poverty are highly likely to experience huger which is extremely risky considering that hunger is considered to have lifelong effects on the victims. Some of these long-term effects include frequent metal and health problems, behavioral and emotional challenges and even low scores in mathematics.

Milestones in Alleviating Child Poverty

Despite the significance of child poverty in the US, it is only fitting to highlight some of the milestones that have been achieved so far. The government has been targeting an unemployment rate of about 6.5% as at 2017, the economy was nearing full employment.in addition, the rate of child poverty reached a record low in 2016, a significant milestone considering the need to alleviate this problem (Lowrey, 2017). Specifically, the child poverty rate dropped to about 15.6% in 2016 implying that about 11.5 million children are living in poverty (Children.org, 2018). Notably, the drop is child poverty in the US is attributed to the establishment of a tighter labor market. To this end, more parents have been able to secure more jobs and the competition in the labor market has consequently driven the wages higher even for those who initially earned low incomes. The significant decrease in child poverty in about half a century cannot be attributed to improved economic conditions. In fact, the stagnation of low wages for years and reduced bargaining power has held back low-income families and income inequality has only benefitted the families enjoying higher incomes. Thus the decrease in child poverty is largely attributed to the expansion of the safety net through provisions such as Child Tax Credit, Income Tax credit, and food stamp programs.

Recommendations

While statistics show that child poverty has declined over the last number of years, the fact that there is still a large number of children living in poverty means more measures need to be implemented. One of such measures could be creating a welfare kitty specifically to cater for children living in low-income families. In this way, the children will be guaranteed of good education despite the hardships at home. Secondly, labor unions should seek for the reinforcement of equality in employment and fair and equitable remuneration. To this end, every employed person should be paid a salary that effectively places them above the federal poverty threshold.

Children.org, C. (2018). Facts About Child Poverty in the U.S.A. | Children International | US Poverty Facts. Children's International. Retrieved 4 March 2018, from https://www.children.org/global-poverty/global-poverty-facts/facts-about-poverty-in-usa

Hymowitz, K. (2017). The hidden driver of high US child-poverty rates. New York Post. Retrieved 4 March 2018, from https://nypost.com/2017/10/30/the-hidden-driver-of-high-us-child-poverty-rates/

Lowrey, A. (2017). America's Child-Poverty Rate Has Hit a Record Low. The Atlantic. Retrieved 4 March 2018, from https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/10/child-poverty-rate-record-low/542058/

Nccp.org, N. (2018). NCCP | Child Poverty. Nccp.org. Retrieved 4 March 2018, from http://www.nccp.org/topics/childpoverty.html

Deadline is approaching?

Wait no more. Let us write you an essay from scratch

Related Essays

Related topics.

Find Out the Cost of Your Paper

Type your email

By clicking “Submit”, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy policy. Sometimes you will receive account related emails.

Poverty and Child Neglect: How Did We Get It Wrong?

Poverty and child neglect are highly correlated and often impact families simultaneously; but poverty does not cause neglect.

Prevention is a hot topic in child welfare policy conversations, and for good reason. Preventing child maltreatment helps families thrive and reduces the frequency of tragic outcomes. The Family First Prevention Services Act of 2018 propelled prevention efforts forward and launched a national conversation about keeping children out of foster care except when absolutely necessary.

The State of Child Welfare

Child maltreatment rates have declined dramatically over the past 30 years. Between 1992 and 2019 , physical abuse declined by 56% and sexual abuse declined by 62%. Public policy, awareness programs and decreased stigma associated with seeking help contributed to these changes.

By contrast, rates of child neglect remain high. Neglect is the most common type of child maltreatment in the U.S. Until recently, federal child welfare policies primarily responded to maltreatment without much attention to addressing risk factors. The outcome was to inadvertently punish struggling families more than help them.

More than 480,000 children were impacted by neglect in 2020 , and it was a primary or contributing factor for 64% of children entering foster care the same year. By comparison, 13% of children entering foster care in 2020 were victims of physical abuse and 4% were victims of sexual abuse.

What Is Neglect?

Most experts agree child neglect occurs when the needs of a child are unmet by their primary caregivers. Inadequate clothing, food, shelter, medical and emotional care, along with unsafe environments, exposure to substance abuse and lack of supervision, are often included in definitions of neglect. Even with these definitions, pinpointing cases of neglect can be challenging. Policymakers and researchers are rethinking historical definitions, which often are intertwined with poverty . States have authority to define exactly what neglect means through legislation, and there is considerable variation .

Research shows the presence of one or more child maltreatment risk factors , such as poverty, can make a child more vulnerable to experiencing neglect. While risk factors do not cause maltreatment, buffering or reducing them is a promising prevention pathway .

Poverty Is a Risk Factor for Neglect

Poverty, much like neglect, is a complex problem. Census data show that rates of child poverty vary widely among the states, ranging from 8% to nearly 28% in 2021 . Childhood poverty is associated with a range of negative outcomes across the lifespan, such as poor health, lower educational attainment and more risk-taking behaviors.

Poverty and child neglect are highly correlated and often impact families simultaneously; but poverty does not cause neglect. Experts say it’s more complicated than that. Poverty produces material hardships for families. Such hardships often result in families experiencing toxic stress , which can impede children’s cognitive development and parents’ capacity to meet the needs of their children. Incapacity to provide is not the same as an unwillingness to provide. This distinction is at the crux of the challenge policymakers face to disentangle poverty from neglect.

Want to Go Deeper? The report Policy Levers for Preventing Child Maltreatment outlines strategies to reduce child abuse and neglect. NCSL offers a child welfare fellows program focused on preventing child maltreatment and reforming child welfare systems.

Poverty is experienced at higher rates by people of color and people living in rural areas , which can contribute to racial disparities within the child welfare system. Policies like redlining and the discriminatory use of home lending provisions in the GI Bill, for example, have had lasting generational effects, shaping the landscape of poverty across the country. While all children encounter  teachers, doctors and others required to report maltreatment, higher rates of poverty in a community are often associated with more reports of abuse . This doesn’t necessarily lead to more confirmed cases of child maltreatment, raising questions about whether over-surveillance of poor families contributes to disproportionate child welfare system involvement.

Some states have reworked their definition of neglect to recognize parents’ capacity or clarify that conditions of poverty alone do not constitute neglect. Iowa ( H 2507; 2022 ) defined neglect as “the failure on the part of a person responsible for the care of a child to provide for adequate food, shelter, clothing, medical or mental health treatment, supervision, or other care necessary for the child’s health and welfare when financially able to do so or when offered financial or other reasonable means to do so.”

Updating mandatory reporting and training policies to better respond to complex situations and relationships, such as those involving poverty and neglect, is another option. Colorado (H 1240; 2022 ) attempted to make mandatory reporting systems fairer, given evidence of disproportionate impacts of reporting systems on under-resourced communities. At least eight states enacted legislation in 2022 addressing mandatory reporting.

Evidence-Based Policy Options

Some policies appear to be particularly effective at reducing risk factors associated with neglect; examples include child care subsidies , affordable housing , home visiting and enhanced primary care . Preventing child maltreatment almost certainly requires diverse and integrated strategies. Nebraska ( L 1173; 2022 ) established a work group and called for an integrated, evidence-informed approach to transform its child welfare system to “support the well-being, permanency, and safety of children and families in Nebraska’s communities.”

Former Colorado Rep. Tonya Van Beber (R) and Rep. Jason Hughes (D) of Louisiana toured the Warren Village program in Denver as part of NCSL fellows programs last year. Warren Village provides resources, tools and a supportive environment for single parents with children to build skills and create the lives they want for their families. “When we see a public-private partnership of this quality that has actual outcomes and evidence-based processes that literally show us this does work, it was a wonderful thing to see,” Van Beber said at an NCSL Town Hall after the tour.

Hughes said the Warren Village tour reminded him that “poverty has to be addressed in a holistic way.” As states incorporate more comprehensive strategies to prevent child maltreatment, addressing neglect is especially pertinent.

Jill Yordy is a senior policy specialist in NCSL’s Children and Families Program.

This publication was made possible in collaboration with Casey Family Programs, whose mission is to provide, improve and ultimately prevent the need for foster care. The findings and conclusions presented in this report are those of the author alone, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Casey Family Programs.

Contact NCSL

For more information on this topic, use this form to reach NCSL staff.

• What is your role? Legislator Legislative Staff Other
• Admin Email

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

Time to lift children out of poverty

Labour’s priority must be to restore Sure Start and financial support to low-income families

There is a depressing reality related to the poverty figures that show that last year one in six British children lived in families suffering from food insecurity and one in 40 children lived in a family that accessed a food bank in the previous 30 days (“ Poverty data is a mark of shame for Tory rule ”). The punishing austerity package that George Osborne and David Cameron inflicted on those who are trapped in low-income families was the benchmark for the years of rising poverty levels that we see today.

You correctly highlight the need for Labour, if they win the next election, to prioritise lifting children and their families out of poverty. Alongside reversing tax cuts and borrowing to restore financial support to low-income families, they should also restore New Labour’s flagship Sure Start policy, invest in our crumbling schools infrastructure, incentivise teachers and ensure that NHS staff, rail workers and other people on low incomes are paid a decent wage in a secure job. Stuart Finegan Lewes, East Sussex

Despite the minimum wage, we have a very high percentage of poverty among families in which at least one person is in work (“ A minimum wage alone can’t fix the UK poverty scandal ”). So, what else needs to be done?

Surely we need a significant increase in social security spending which provides a universal basic income in kind, including rent controls, subsidised public transport, school meals for all, improved care services for people with severe disabilities and advanced old age. It will also entail the development of communities on the 15-minute neighbourhoods concept. Sadly, we have Labour’s Wes Streeting offering the false dichotomy of improved NHS or reducing child poverty, but not both. Why not? Alasdair Macdonald Glasgow

Probation service in ruins

The awful story of the murder of Michaela Hall by her partner follows similar accounts of untrained, inexperienced and/or poorly supervised staff not assessing effectively the risk posed by offenders (“ ‘They signed her death warrant’: how probation service failings left a violent man free to kill ”). This highlights the terrible consequences of the privatisation of most of the probation service in 2014 when Chris Grayling was secretary of state for justice. This ideologically driven policy has devastated an important public service. Yet another example of the wreckage that the Conservatives will hopefully leave behind after 14 years of rule. Roger McGarva West Bridgford, Nottingham

How to beat the bullies

That playground bullies end up in better paid jobs is not a surprise (“ Playground bullies do prosper – judging by their pay packets in middle age ”). They are more likely to become workplace bullies and be promoted and protected, at the cost of their victims. What is surprising is that one of the authors of the study argues that non-bullying children should be encouraged to become more aggressive, so that they can later compete effectively for the higher-paid jobs. This is a perverse conclusion. There are a finite number of the better-paid jobs that the bullies wriggle into. If their victims were more aggressive, who would get those jobs? Naturally, the most aggressive within the all-aggressive cohort. What a joy to look forward to.

Instead, these playground bullies should be disciplined better. When all bullies are effectively handled at that age, and when their victims see this, there will be a more level playing field, where competence will trump bully behaviour. Dr Ellen Kriesels London EC1

Thanks, Sir Reg

To the list of “mayors who made a mark” (side panel to “ The battle for London ”), I would add Labour’s Sir Reg Goodwin. Though not strictly a mayor, he led the Greater London Council and certainly made his mark on London. In 1973, he introduced the Freedom Pass (contrary to Boris Johnson’s claim that he had done so), hugely enriching the lives of pensioners, like me and my wife, and disabled people. David Murray Wallington, Surrey

Cancer: I’d rather be a royal

Isn’t the uproar over Kate Windsor’s cancer diagnosis displacing the real issues “ How Kate dropped her bombshell news ”)? As a mother with three growing children, her diagnosis is tragic, but she won’t die from lack of treatment. Whereas the ordinary UK citizen with cancer is already dying from lack of treatment due to government policy. Her plight highlights the two-tier medical care system adopted by successive Conservative and Labour governments and I would much prefer to be a member of the British royal family if I ever became seriously ill. Paulina Birchall Hornchurch, Essex

So much hot air

David Simonds’s cartoon of Rishi Sunak “bouncing back” on a deflating space hopper brought a smile to my face. In the 1980s, I was director of the “Bradford’s bouncing back” campaign under the auspices of Bradford metropolitan district. There had been a spate of riots near the city centre and general unease across the city. The idea was to both change the national image of Bradford and improve the city’s race relations. Switch to the prime minister as seen by Simonds – I didn’t know whether to laugh or cry. Tom Clinton Cononley, North Yorkshire

Cry cod for England

The French may be unimpressed with our cooking, but on a recent trip to Dieppe we were surprised to find every other restaurant in the busy harbour offering le fish & chips – photos and explanations in French provided for the uninitiated (“ ‘Beer louts with unhealthy diets’: why British cooking still hasn’t won over the French ”). As Dieppe is easily accessible from the south coast of England, it might be thought that enterprising restaurateurs were trying to cater for the tastes of British visitors, but it seems that tourists from this side of the Channel tend to pass through on the way to somewhere else; the diners that evening were mainly French.

Hoping to try the local speciality sole Dieppoise, I had to make do with cod in sauce Dieppoise, which seemed to be on every menu. Perhaps French fishermen are catching a lot of cod? Something we are now being asked to avoid for the sake of sustainability. Pamela Bridge Great Wakering, Essex

• Observer letters

Most viewed

Scotland's papers: Hate crime workload fears and child poverty warning

More from scotland's papers.

• The Scotsman
• Daily Record
• The Scottish Sun
• Scottish Daily Express
• The Telegraph
• The National
• The Courier
• The P&J
• Glasgow Times
• Edinburgh News