die Sozialhilfe

Welfare


This chapter of Socializing Care addressed the progression of welfare programs since their beginnings in 1935. Discourse regarding the definition and value of 'care' evolved from wanting to support a woman in caring for her children to displacing and masculinizing the definition of care to an economic model, where the woman uses money from waged work to support and 'care' for her children.

Another prime example of over-zealous privileged women trying to 'help' their less-fortunate female counterparts highlights the societal confusion of feminist goals, when teachers encouraged their welfare-mother students to treat their children as difficult or as a 'hindrance' (129). If you ask me, this just fuels the fire of the stereotype of the self-pitying welfare mom (or feminist...). Teachers are training the women to fight their battles alone. This is not an empowering mentality; it is isolating and pressuring, demanding of self-reliance when there is much more than the self involved.

That being said, the teachers were also pressured by the welfare policy itself. They had time limitations to whip these women into shape. They could only do their best to stuff their students with knowledge and skill. Time is money, and money is care, apparently.

What seems glaringly missing, until the end, thanks to Tronto and her critical analysis of and new visions for socializing care, is the gendered argument. (and even moreso missing, a racial critique). Socializing care is defined by these policies as providing financial support---the typical masculine role. Mothers are simply not going to thrive in their 'caring' through a program seemingly built for men.

Welfare has always been a trigger-word for me. Although I admittedly know very little about it, I have deep emotions connected to the issue. I remember being shocked when my parents recounted how they were on welfare when my sister was young. I mean, sure, we didn't have much and my clothes were never new, but I didn't think we were poor! (because we weren't...anymore...I was just a wee baby back then).

In high school, as my classmates became more and more proud and bloated with their AP-status, I first began to notice privilege at work in people my age. In our first government class, my classmates would describe welfare recipients as fat, lazy, alcoholic, abusive women who just have kids to get money. MY BLOOD WOULD BOIL. FIRST OF ALL, how does that argument even make sense????? Do people really think it is such a breeze to have a child? A free ride?
and second of all, YOU DO NOT KNOW MY MOM, my family, ME! My parents worked their asses off and were responsible teen parents. I am so proud of them. They benefitted from having large families and managed to escape the hellish cycle of poverty. But at that age, for the first time, I felt like the minority. I felt like they were calling me dirty and poor and worst of all, lazy.

It is my own personal story that helps me believe there is a place for the state in helping the family, that there is the possibility for it to work. However, we need to reassess what caring for a family means and what role each family member plays in supporting the home. I wonder how much President Obama's healthcare reform will help/harm welfare efforts? What is the updated situation since Little's essay? Looks like I have some research to do...