0% found this document useful (0 votes)

111 views24 pages

Understanding Families Supportive Approaches To Di... - (Chapter 6 Families Living in Poverty)

The document discusses the pervasive impact of poverty on families, highlighting its detrimental effects on health, child development, and educational outcomes. It presents statistics showing that over 15 million children live in poverty in the U.S., with significant disparities across racial and ethnic groups. The chapter emphasizes the complex pathways through which poverty affects families and the importance of supportive resources to help mitigate these challenges.

Uploaded by

Bianca S.

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

111 views24 pages

Understanding Families Supportive Approaches To Di... - (Chapter 6 Families Living in Poverty)

Uploaded by

Bianca S.

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 24

6

Families Living in Poverty

Marci J. Hanson

“Poverty demoralizes.”
— Ralph Waldo Emerson (1860, p. 90)

“It is not an ennobling experience. Poverty entails fear, and stress, and sometimes depression; it means
a thousand petty humiliations and hardships.”
— J.K. Rowling (2008)

“If a free society cannot help the many who are poor, it cannot save the few who are rich.”
— John F. Kennedy, Jr. (1961)

P
overty pervades every aspect of the life of an individual and a family. Income
deprivation influences whether families can meet the most basic needs for food
and shelter. It affects the health of family members. Poverty influences human
relationships and stresses parents’ abilities to care for and raise their children. Pov-
erty can exert a particularly devastating influence on children’s development, and it
is disproportionately represented across particular cultural and ethnic groups. With
limited access to resources that others take for granted and exposure to more peril-
ous living conditions, some individuals’ lives are rendered more difficult and at risk.
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

Persons living with economic hardships are more likely to have physical and mental
health concerns. Children growing up in low-income families are more likely to endure
compromised child development.
The effects of childhood poverty have been documented extensively with respect
to academic and school outcomes. Children growing up in poverty begin school behind
their peers who have more means, and they often continue to demonstrate lower skill
performance during their schooling (Duncan & Magnuson, 2011). The effects of envi-
ronmental conditions associated with growing up in poverty are especially troubling
for very young children who are undergoing rapid and important brain development.
Timing, thus, may be an issue. Harmful circumstances that occur early in a child’s life
during this particularly sensitive and vulnerable period of development may constitute
even greater risk from neglect or exposure to harm (Duncan & Magnuson).
The 2010 census revealed that the official U.S. poverty rate was 15.1%; this fig-
ure represents 46.2 million people (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, & Smith, 2011). Using a new

123
Hanson, M., & Lynch, E. (2013). Understanding families : Supportive approaches to diversity, disability, and risk, second edition. Brookes Publishing.
Created from nsc on 2023-11-19 21:21:51.
124 Hanson

supplemental poverty measure (SPM) that takes into account government benefits such as
nutritional supplements, medical costs, and housing subsidies, the poverty rate increases
to 49 million Americans, or 16% of the population (Short, 2011). These facts are particu-
larly alarming when one reflects on the official classification system, which defines the
federal poverty line as $22,113 for a family of four and as $24,343 using the new SPM.
Poverty rates have been increasing for most population groups, with the real median
income declining for both White and Black households—even those who are not classi-
fied as “poor” (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, & Smith). Over 15.5 million children, or nearly
one quarter of children in the United States, are growing up in low-income families (Chau,
Thampi, & Wight, 2010a, 2010b, 2010c; Wight, Chau, & Aratani, 2011). Of these children,
9% live in families considered to be at the extreme poverty level (less than 50% of the fed-
eral poverty line). The rate of poverty varies widely across the country, but these data indi-
cate that black, American Indian, and Hispanic children are disproportionately affected.
This chapter explores the meaning of poverty, how poverty affects family and child
outcomes, and how transactional models of development help family service providers
to understand and support family adjustment and adaptation. Although associations of
poverty with damaging developmental outcomes are well documented in the research
literature, the pathways whereby income deprivation influences an individual child or
family are complex. Lack of access to resources (e.g., adequate meals, health care, learn-
ing environments) or exposure to deleterious conditions (e.g., neighborhood violence)
can snowball and lead to conditions such as health concerns, depression and mental
health issues, less responsive caregiving, and compromised educational and learning
opportunities. The supports and resources that are provided to children and families
can influence these pathways; they can provide the mechanisms and opportunities to
strengthen families’ abilities to cope and adapt to stressful circumstances.

THE FACES OF POVERTY

Poverty has many faces. The stories that follow suggest the range of American families
who struggle through economic hardships, as well as the multiple effects created by eco-
nomic deprivation on families. Some families are able to overcome these difficulties,
whereas others succumb to the overwhelming uphill battle. Begin by considering these
different families, all of whom struggle with economic hardship to care for their children.
These families exemplify the many faces of poverty. As discussed briefly in
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

Chapter 1, poverty is found across all geographical regions, races, and family constel-
lations, although higher percentages of families living in poverty are found in certain
groups. Low-income families are more likely to be headed by a single parent (usually
a mother), reside in a city, and have not graduated high school. In addition, although a
larger number of people living in poverty are Anglo-American, a larger percentage of
African Americans, American Indians, and Hispanic/Latinos are poor (Dalaker, 2001).

Cecilee
Mary Anne and her daughter, Cecilee, who has cerebral palsy, share dinner with her large
family every Sunday when the family meets after church. Mary Anne and her daughter

Hanson, M., & Lynch, E. (2013). Understanding families : Supportive approaches to diversity, disability, and risk, second edition. Brookes Publishing.
Created from nsc on 2023-11-19 21:21:51.
Families Living in Poverty 125

live in a small trailer behind her mother’s house and most of Mary Anne’s relatives live
within 5 miles of them. Mary Anne feels fortunate to have her family close by. Someone is
almost always available to care for Cecilee for a short time or give her a ride to her Head
Start class or to a medical appointment. Mary Anne is unemployed; she recently was laid
off from her custodial job at a nearby paper plant. The long hours spent working at night
had been difficult for her, but now she is faced with unemployment and no income. When
Mary Anne is out searching for work, Cecilee’s grandmother tries to take care of Cecilee,
but her arthritic condition prevents her from being able to lift or move to assist Cecilee.

Hernandez Family
Graciela and Arnoldo Hernandez scramble to keep food on the table and a roof over their
heads. Graciela works during the morning and afternoon and then rushes to retrieve
their son from preschool and prepare the family meal before Arnoldo goes off to his
night job. They are worried about the health and safety of their three young children.
They confess to the family support coordinator from their child’s school that their apart-
ment is full of rats. However, they do not want to complain for fear of being evicted. They
try to keep the children off the floor and keep them close at night.

Ge
Ge is a 7-year-old girl who has a visual impairment. Ge’s father, Ly Chia, and her mother,
Mai Dao, immigrated to the United States from Laos and settled in a small farm com-
munity. Her family was forced to subsist on welfare after the economic recession that
shut down many local factories in their new community. Ly Chia’s brother lives nearby.
He manages to feed his own family from the produce of his small farm and to help Ly
Chia’s family as well. Ge is in first grade and is bussed to school with her 9-year-old
brother, while her 3-year-old sister remains at home during the day. Ge’s brother helps
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

her navigate and get to her classroom, where she receives specialized services for her
visual impairment.

Lamont
Lamont’s family lives in a large, urban area. When Lamont was born at City Hospital,
Jonalene, his mother, was told that he had Down syndrome and that he would need
pediatric care and an early intervention program. She and her husband, Carl, took him
back to the hospital emergency room several times over the next year— once when he
fell off the bed and stopped breathing, and again when he had a fever and was cough-
ing and wheezing so much that they were afraid he would die. A public health nurse

came to visit the family’s small apartment and helped them to get connected to a local
agency that provides services to infants with disabilities. Jonalene fully intended to get
Lamont registered in the program, but she and her husband split up and she had to
leave the apartment. She was forced to move from shelter to shelter. Just finding a roof
over their heads and getting a hot meal each day became her daily existence.

José
Arely and her 16-year-old son José immigrated to the United States 10 years ago. They
share a small apartment with Arely’s sister and her son in a suburban area. Both sisters
send whatever money they can to relatives in El Salvador who were left homeless by an
earthquake. Arely typically works 12 hours per day, and often 6 days per week, cleaning
houses. She is extremely worried about her son, who was expelled from high school after
threatening another student. She finds solace and support in her church; she goes every
Sunday (her one day off of work) and several nights a week to pray.

Dawn
Floyd and Nancy Marshall have two children, Dawn and David. Dawn’s birth was fraught
with difficulties, and she sustained brain damage during delivery. Subsequently, she had
numerous hospitalizations and health complications. Floyd works at the local mill and
earns minimum wage while Nancy tries to earn a few dollars here and there by helping
to care for elderly neighbors or children. Making ends meet each month is a challenge.
The family has borrowed money from Nancy’s parents, and they have relied on the
assistance of people in their community on more than one occasion. They often express
exasperation over the fact that their hard work does not seem to get them ahead or even
on par with their family’s needs.
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

Children and Poverty

Over 15 million children live in poverty (under the official poverty line of $22,113 per
year for a family of four); that number increased by 33% between 2000 and 2010 (Wight,
Chau, & Aratani, 2011) to represent 21% of all children. When the new supplemental
poverty measure is used to calculate the proportion of children living in poverty, the
percentage drops to 18% (Short, 2011). This reduction is due to the inclusion of family
resources from in-kind benefits, such as targeted government programs aimed at nutri-
tional supplements (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), children’s health care,
housing supplements, and child care. Nine percent of children (6.8 million children)
have families who live in extreme poverty (i.e., at less than 50% of the federal poverty
level or less than $11,000 for a family of four people; Wight et al.). The poverty rate for
infants and toddlers is higher than for any other age group (Krutsinger & Tarr, 2011;
Wight et al.). Immigrant families are likely to live in poverty (27%), and the poverty

rates for children vary by race/ethnicity: 36% for Black/African American children,
34% for American Indian children, 33% for Latino children, 15% Asian children, and
12% for White children (Wight et al.).
Studies show that families typically need at least twice the income level at the pov-
erty line (more than $44,000 for a family of four) to make ends meet (Chau, Thampi, &
Wight, 2010c). It is noteworthy that some 42% of children live in families at this level
(twice the poverty level), which is considered low income. The concerns of these families
typically mirror those for families considered to be “poor” and include issues of under-
employment or unemployment, child care, and health care.
As is evident, a large number of children live in poverty in the United States. These
conditions influence their exposure to risk conditions and reduce their access to environ-
mental conditions for optimal learning and development.

Poverty and Race/Ethnicity

Using 2010 census data, the official poverty rates by race/ethnicity are as follows (Short,
2011):
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

• Whites: 13.1% (31,959,000 people)

• Blacks: 27% (10,741,000 people)
• Asians: 12.1% (1,737,000 people)
• Hispanics of any race: 26.7% (13,346,000 people)
Poverty rates have been increasing across the board for most racial and ethnic
groups in the United States. However, the new SPM formula that takes into account gov-
ernment benefits (e.g., nutritional supplements, medical costs, housing subsidies) shows
the greatest increase for Hispanics, with the poverty rate shifting from 26.7% using the
official measure to 28.2% with the SPM (Short, 2011). The use of the SPM measure
shows a reduction in the poverty rate for Blacks (from 27.5% to 25.4%) due to participa-
tion in social programs.

Census reports also document the association of race and ethnicity with health
disparity indicators such as family composition (e.g., single parents), food insecurity,
health insurance coverage, environmental factors (e.g., exposure to secondhand smoke,
lead poisoning), health and dental care, and health issues including asthma, obesity, and
learning and behavioral problems (Seith & Kalof, 2011). Factors of race and ethnicity
also are associated with gaps in school readiness (Brooks-Gunn, Rouse, & McLanahan,
2007). These associations and disparities are disturbing given that an increasing number
of children of color are living in poverty.

Poverty and Disability

The links between poverty and disability are also compelling. Findings from the Insti-
tute for Women’s Policy Research analysis of disabilities among families reported that
low-income families are nearly 50% more likely to have a child with a disability or
a severe disability than are higher income families. Furthermore, they reported that
families receiving welfare benefits have an even higher likelihood of having at least one
child with a disability: 20% of all families receiving welfare benefits have a child with a
disability; of these families, 13% have a child with severe disabilities (Lee, Sills, & Oh,
2002). In addition, this analysis found that single-mother families were more likely to
have a child with a disability than were two-parent or single-father families. Disability
rates were also higher for single mothers in low-income families than for single mothers
with higher incomes. Approximately 29% of these low-income single mothers had a dis-
ability and 17% had a severe disability (as contrasted with 17% and 5%, respectively, for
higher income single mothers). The percentages were even more startling for single moth-
ers receiving welfare or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families—38% of these women
had a disability and 25% were reported to have a severe disability (Lee et al., 2002).
Other reviews related to welfare reform and disabilities estimated that 30%–40%
of families receiving welfare had either a mother or a child with some level of disability
(Loprest & Acs, 1996; Meyers, Lukemeyer, & Smeeding, 1996). A study conducted by
Fujiura and Yamaki (2000) gathered prevalence data that revealed a relationship between
poverty and risk for disability. The conditions of poverty that may lead to disability or
chronic illness and the provision of resources to low-income families who have members
with disabilities, however, have largely been overlooked in research and policy formation
(Rosman & Knitzer, 2001). Recommendations for addressing the needs of these families
who receive welfare and who have family members with disabilities have been made
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

to expand access to health care, child care, and vocational training and secure income
maintenance through Supplemental Security Income (Birenbaum, 2002).

Historical Trends in Poverty Rates

Poverty rates undeniably are linked to social and political time periods (e.g., the Great
Depression) and to the corresponding shifts in family characteristics and societal pres-
sures and opportunities. The increase in mother-only households is often cited as caus-
ally linked to increased poverty rates for children. However, the link may not be so linear
or clear cut as is often thought. Although lower income levels typically characterize
mother-only households, the low earnings of fathers and employment insecurity remain
prime contributors to increases in poverty as well (Hernandez, 1997). In addition, analy-
ses suggest that these issues (e.g., low salaries) may indirectly influence poverty and
family trends by necessitating that mothers work outside the home to increase family

income; thus, perhaps they contribute to separation and divorce (Hernandez). The issue
is not so much family structure as it is the economic and employment experiences and
opportunities for both mothers and fathers.
Poverty rates for families and children have varied over the past decades. In a
study of poverty between 1998 and 2000 (Dalaker, 2001), the average rates over the
3-year period for various populations were the following: 11.9% for all races, 25.9%
for American Indian/Alaska Natives, 23.9% for Blacks, 23.1% for Hispanics, 11.3% for
Asian/Pacific Islanders, and 9.9% for Whites (7.8% for white, non-Hispanic). The overall
poverty rate dropped between 1999 and 2000, undoubtedly due to a strong economy.
With the economic downturn in the early 21st century, more families and children
began living in impoverished circumstances. The percentage of children living in low-
income families increased from 37% in 2000 to 42% in 2009 (Chau, Thampi, & Wight,
2010c). The risks posed to the well-being of these families and children are many and
comprehensive. Duncan and Magnuson (2011), citing studies of child achievement
and adult employment, argued that the effects of poverty in childhood on later develop-
ment are particularly compelling and influential.

WHAT IT MEANS TO BE POOR

In the discussion thus far, the definition of poverty has centered on income level as
defined by the official federal poverty line for a family of four. Policy makers and
social scientists, however, have hotly debated the characteristics used to define poverty
or economic deprivation. Income alone hardly paints the whole picture. In fact, these
numbers and percentages are conservative markers for children and families living in
poor economic resource conditions. The official measure has failed to take into account
key government programs that affect family income, changes in standards for living,
job expenses, medical costs, changes in family situations, and geographic variations in
expenses (Short, 2011). A 1988 study by Hagenaars and de Vos (as cited in McLoyd,
1998a) described different methods for defining poverty: absolute poverty, in which one
does not have the minimum required for basic needs such as food, clothing, and hous-
ing; relative poverty, in which one has less than others in terms of what is typical for
most members of that society; and subjective poverty, in which a person feels that he or
she does not have enough to get along.
The absolute poverty marker refers to the official poverty line as determined by the
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

Social Security Administration in the 1960s; it is the most commonly used marker for
policy and research. This marker provides thresholds for families of different sizes and
compositions and was calculated to represent the cost of a minimum diet multiplied by
three. A number of difficulties are associated with this marker. First, it fails to adjust
for geographic location in living costs and variation in support programs, such as food
stamps and Medicaid. In addition, pretax income is used to determine who is below
the threshold of poverty. Also, this marker does not reflect the poverty gap—in other
words, how far below the threshold the family falls. For a history of the official poverty
measure, see Fisher (1997). For more information on measuring income and poverty, see
Citro and Michael (1995), Fass (2009), and Short (2011).
Other definitions offer a broader view of economic deprivation than that based on
a somewhat arbitrary cash marker of family income. In some research studies, socioeco-
nomic status (SES) has been used to categorize individuals. Components such as the
father and mother’s occupations, education levels, and certain lifestyle variables also have

been included. Both the concepts of poverty income and SES, however, are viewed as
ongoing and linked to conditions such as unemployment or low wages (McLoyd, 1998a).
Therefore, they may fail to account for events in the family’s life that produce economic
deprivation. For example, an employed person may experience a sudden loss or drop in
income. Although this may not push the individual into poverty, the impact of the eco-
nomic hardship affects the individual’s and the family’s functioning and dynamics. The
issues of the timing and terms of poverty are not always considered in research and policy
studies. Undoubtedly, living in persistent poverty has a different impact on children and
their families than does living through bouts of poverty. In addition, statistics reveal that
race and ethnicity interact with the persistence of poverty. African American and Latino
children experience higher rates of poverty; they also are more likely to live in poverty for
longer time periods than Anglo-American children (Brooks-Gunn, Duncan, & Maritato,
1997). Thus, family circumstance and structure, parental education, time, and degree of
poverty all may exert a profound effect on a family’s economic well-being. These issues,
coupled with how individual family members perceive or experience their economic cir-
cumstances, make it difficult to tease apart indicators or markers for poverty.
Regardless of the definition of poverty used, most definitions do not begin to cap-
ture the many differences in day-to-day living practices that children and families expe-
rience when existing under economically deprived conditions—particularly those that
persist over years. Such challenges run the gamut from a lack of basic necessities (e.g.,
food, clothing, housing) to irregular work or work schedules, lack of family support,
lack of child care, insufficient access to health care, safety issues, exposure to stressful
living conditions, and psychological stress, among many others. Similarly, ethnic and
cultural factors interact with these issues, as well as the timing of poverty and chronicity
of this deprivation. The many factors and dimensions make poverty difficult to define
and study. Policy makers and social scientists do concur that the effects of poverty are
pervasive and potentially devastating.

IMPACT OF POVERTY ON THE

WELL-BEING OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
Although many families manage to overcome adverse circumstances, living in poverty
unleashes a set of factors and events that pose great risk to the well-being and develop-
ment of children and their families. A proliferation of research in the 1990s analyzed the
impact of poverty on development (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997; Brooks- Gunn, Dun-
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

can, & Maritato, 1997; Brooks-Gunn, Klebanov, & Duncan, 1996; Duncan & Brooks-
Gunn, 1997; Huston, 1991; Huston, McLoyd, & Garcia Coll, 1994; McLoyd, 1998b) and
extensively documented the type and range of potentially deleterious effects. Highlights
from this research are briefly reviewed with respect to what is known about the impact
on child development and family functioning.

Poverty and Child Development

Given the crucial importance of early experience to an individual’s development, it is
alarming that so many children are growing up under circumstances that may place their
development at risk. In a landmark policy and scientific publication on the science of
early childhood development, Shonkoff and Phillips (2000, p. 275) noted, “One of the
most consistent associations in developmental science is between economic hardship
and compromised child development.”

Children living in impoverished conditions may be at greater risk of exposure to a

variety of risks including inadequate nutrition, environmental toxins, impaired parent–
child interaction, trauma and abuse, lower quality child care, and drugs and substance
abuse by parents (Krutsinger & Tarr, 2011; National Center for Children in Poverty,
1999). These factors further increase the risk of developmental impairment for children.
Because nearly one in five young children in the United States lives in poverty, the
urgency of this issue is apparent (Chau, Thampi, & Wight, 2010c). Scientific evidence
on early brain development underscores the importance of experience in the early years
to the child’s emotional, intellectual, and physical development (Shore, 1997). Advances
in neuroscience research have documented the course of early brain development and
highlighted the sensitive period for optimal brain development in the earliest years
(including prenatal development) of the child’s life. During these early years, exposure
to environmental stimulation has a profound effect on brain growth and development.
Likewise, early exposure to risks, such as those factors previously listed, also may impede
brain development.
In this light, consider again the risk factors identified by the National Center for
Children in Poverty (1999; see Figure 6.1). Malnutrition in children is associated with

Inadequate
nutrition

Substance
abuse

Maternal
depression
Early brain
Poverty
development
Exposure to
environmental
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

toxins

Trauma/abuse

Quality of
daily care

Figure 6.1. The effect of poverty on brain development in early childhood. (From National Center for
Children in Poverty [1999]. Poverty and brain development in early childhood [p. 1]. Retrieved from http://
www.nccp.org/publications/pdf/text_398.pdf; reprinted by permission.)

delays in physical growth and motor skills development, lower test scores in subsequent
years on academic subjects, social withdrawal, and, as a result, lower expectations from
parents and teachers. Research studies substantiate the link between degree of poverty
and degree of malnutrition (Brown & Pollitt, 1996). Substance abuse during and after
pregnancy also has been demonstrated to produce deleterious effects on brain develop-
ment (Mayes, 1996). Exposure to toxins such as lead also can damage or stunt brain
growth (Seith & Isakson, 2011). Furthermore, children who experience trauma or abuse
in their early years may have difficulties forming attachments, and they may display
more anxiety and depression. The stressors associated with poverty create more trauma
for these children (Brooks- Gunn et al., 1995).
The quality of care also is important to children’s well-being, particularly children’s
emotional and intellectual development. Mothers who suffer from depression are less
likely to provide appropriate and needed stimulation and interactions with their infants,
resulting in deficits such as lowered activity levels, withdrawal behaviors, and shorter
attention spans (Belle, 1990). Positive interactions and exposure to learning environ-
ments influence how the brain develops. Poor child care and parent–child interactions
likely impede a child’s development, whereas high-quality child care experiences have
been linked with enhanced child development (Burchinal, Lee, & Ramey, 1989; Cost,
Quality and Child Outcomes Study Team, 1995). Children living in poverty are dispro-
portionately exposed to risks, and thus their well-being is seriously threatened.
An extensive body of research literature has documented the association between
poverty and child outcomes. Family income can dramatically affect outcomes for chil-
dren and adolescents, and these negative effects are more apparent for some outcomes
than for others. In addition, these outcomes are linked to the depth and duration of pov-
erty (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997). Descriptive studies have linked poverty conditions
to teenage pregnancy, low academic achievement, and juvenile delinquency (Brody et al.,
1994; McLeod & Shanahan, 1993; Sampson & Laub, 1994). Furthermore, low income has
been associated with socioemotional difficulties, including conduct disorders, anxiety,
and depression (Bank, Forgatch, Patterson, & Fetrow, 1993; Dodge, Pettit, & Bates, 1994;
McLoyd, Jayaratne, Ceballo, & Borquez, 1994; Pinderhughes et al., 2001).
Brooks- Gunn and Duncan (1997), using data from large-scale, national, cross-
sectional databases, provided a comprehensive analysis of the links between family
income and child outcomes. The data sets analyzed included the Panel Study of Income
Dynamics, the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (NLSY), Children of the NLSY,
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

National Survey of Families and Households, the National Health and Nutrition Exami-
nation Survey, and the Infant Health and Development Program (IHDP). Outcomes
were examined in the areas of physical health (low birth weight, growth stunting, lead
poisoning), cognitive ability, school achievement, emotional and behavioral outcomes,
and teenage out-of-wedlock childbearing.
Brooks- Gunn and Duncan (1997) noted that different indicators of risk or well-
being were found at different periods in the child’s life (e.g., birth to 2 years, early child-
hood from ages 3 to 6, late childhood from ages 7 to 10, early adolescence from ages 11
to 15, late adolescence from ages 16 to 19). With respect to physical health, their analyses
revealed that children from low-income families were less likely to be in excellent health.
Children born to mothers with low incomes also were more likely to have low birth
weights—a factor itself associated with potential health, cognitive, and behavioral diffi-
culties in future development. Furthermore, children living in poverty were more likely
to manifest growth stunting and experience lead poisoning.

With regard to cognitive abilities, Brooks- Gunn and Duncan (1997) noted that chil-
dren living in poverty were 1.3 times more likely than children who were not living in
poverty to experience developmental delays and learning disabilities. In a related study
using the NLSY and IHDP data sets, children from families with lower incomes scored
lower on standardized tests of IQ , verbal ability, and achievement (Smith, Brooks-
Gunn, & Klebanov, 1997). In that study, the effects of poverty were found at each of the
ages tested between 2 and 8 years. Furthermore, duration of poverty was found to be a
crucial variable. Children who lived in persistent poverty (i.e., for more than 4 years)
fared worse than those who never lived in poverty, and they scored 6–9 points lower on
cognitive assessments. It is also noteworthy that these negative effects appeared to grow
stronger as the children got older (as demonstrated on the Peabody Picture Vocabulary
Test–Revised [Dunn & Dunn, 1981] as a measure for the IHDP sample). Effects of
income also were shown as early as age 2 for the IHDP children. In addition, the severity
or magnitude of poverty appeared to affect children’s outcome on cognitive measures.
Children in the lowest income group (i.e., family income less than 50% of the poverty
level) scored 7–12 points lower than children from families who had low incomes but not
at the lowest poverty level. The effect of poverty was noted to have some relationship to
school achievement in the older age groups as well (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan). Poverty
was shown to exert a small but negative impact on graduation rates and years of school-
ing attained. An increase in family income in the early years was associated with more
years of schooling completed, however.
Emotional and behavioral child outcomes were also analyzed (Brooks-Gunn & Dun-
can, 1997). Children who were poor were found to experience emotional and behavioral
difficulties more frequently than children who were not poor. Both externalizing behav-
iors (e.g., aggression, fighting, acting out) and internalizing behaviors (e.g., anxiety, social
withdrawal, depression) were studied. Again, results revealed that children growing up
in persistent poverty were more likely to experience both externalizing and internaliz-
ing behavior problems than were children who had not grown up in persistent poverty
(IHDP sample; Duncan, Brooks- Gunn, & Klebanov, 1994). Children who experienced
short-term poverty also demonstrated more behavior problems, but the effects were not
as great as for those in persistent poverty. Although studies demonstrated a link between
poverty and emotional outcomes, the effects of poverty were not as large in this area as
for cognitive outcomes (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan). Other research studies have noted
effects on socioemotional development and diminished adaptive functioning (e.g., rela-
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

tionships with peers, self-esteem, behavior problems, vulnerability to depression) for

children living in poverty (McLoyd, 1990, 1997). Brooks- Gunn and Duncan also exam-
ined the relationship of income to out-of-wedlock teenage births. Findings revealed that
the timing and duration of poverty did not seem to exert an effect, although the rate
of teenage out-of-wedlock births was nearly three times higher for teenagers from low-
income families than for teens not living in poverty.
In research on poverty, it is difficult to ferret out the effects of income poverty from
other interacting variables, such as timing of poverty and family structure. With respect
to timing, these data (Smith, Brooks- Gunn, & Klebanov, 1997) did not reveal differences
on cognitive indices. It must be noted that the time periods were short (within the early
years), however, and also that these negative outcomes were apparent by the age of 2.
Brooks- Gunn and Duncan (1997) cited additional data that the timing of family income
level affected a child’s years of schooling completed. They found that family income lev-
els in the child’s early years (younger than age 5) were more strongly linked to number

of school years completed than were family income levels when children were between
the ages of 5–10 or between the ages of 11–15. They noted further that a $10,000 increase
in mean family income between birth and 5 years was associated with an additional full
year of school attained for children from low-income families.

The Effect of Family Structure on Income Levels

The impact of family structure as it relates to family income levels and child develop-
mental outcomes has been of interest. Understanding the effect of different family struc-
tures and family shifts in response to changing societal programs (e.g., welfare reform)
and values is complex. Research suggests that the family structure makes a difference, and
growing up in families characterized by disruption does produce negative developmen-
tal consequences (McLanahan, 1997).
In the study by Smith et al. (1997), family structure did not influence outcomes
for either of the two samples across ages when income levels were controlled. In the
NLSY sample, however, when income level was not considered, the situation of living in
a female-headed household and the introduction of another new parent into the family
were both associated with lower verbal ability scores for young children. According to
Booth and Dunn (1994), these findings are in accord with others, suggesting that remar-
riage or first marriage for a never-married mother may bring stresses. Although surveys
indicate that the number of single-parent households has declined in recent years, trou-
bling new reports indicate that more children (particularly African American children
in cities) are living in households with no parent (e.g., living with relatives, friends, or
foster families; “More Kids,” 2002).

ECONOMIC WELL-BEING AND FAMILY VARIABLES

Economic hardship also has been associated with effects on family variables—parenting
behavior, parental and family functioning, marital relationships, and family processes
(Brody et al., 1994; McLoyd, 1990; Pinderhughes et al., 2001). One study was conducted
on a large sample of families in a rural Midwest region characterized by economic dif-
ficulty; the authors found economic stress was linked to marital and family conflict and
conflicts between parents and their adolescent children (Conger, Ge, Elder, Lorenz, &
Simons, 1994).
Other research has expanded knowledge of the relationship between economic
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

hardship and family and child functioning to include more diverse samples. For exam-
ple, this phenomenon was examined in a study with an ethnically diverse, low-income
sample of children who were African American and Hispanic and who lived in families
headed primarily by single mothers (Mistry, Vandewater, Huston, & McLoyd, 2002).
Results of this research confirmed that economic stress affected parenting behavior due
to adverse effects on parental psychological well-being. Parents reported feeling less
effective or capable in child disciplinary situations and were observed to be less affec-
tionate in parent–child interactions. These less optimal parenting practices were associ-
ated with higher ratings of behavior problems for children and lower teacher ratings
for positive child social behavior. Thus, a family economic stress model was used to
understand the impact of poverty on families and children. Although economic hard-
ship has been strongly associated with family stress, variables such as family ethnicity,
work history, geographical location and density (urban versus rural), and community
and personal resources may play crucial roles in determining how families actually

respond to economic distress (McLoyd, 1990). Living in poverty challenges the abilities
of families and parents to support and care for themselves and their children (McLoyd).

Pathways or Mechanisms of Influence

As is evident from the research reviewed, living in poverty can exert powerful nega-
tive influences on family functioning and children’s developmental outcomes. Of inter-
est are the pathways or mechanisms whereby income levels influence child outcomes.
Brooks- Gunn and Duncan (1997) discussed five potential pathways: health and nutri-
tion, home environment, parental interactions with children, parental mental health,
and neighborhood conditions. Each pathway is briefly considered and implications for
practice are presented later in this chapter.
Poor health can result from living under adverse economic conditions. Health
concerns also can serve as a pathway through which other child outcomes are affected.
For instance, low birth weight and increased levels of lead in the blood in young chil-
dren are both associated with deleterious consequences such as lower scores of cogni-
tive ability in later years. Recurrent ear infections and consequent hearing loss have
also been associated with lower IQ scores for children regardless of family’s income
level. Goldstein (1990) suggested that low birth weight, lead, anemia, and recurrent
ear infections may have accounted for up to 13%–20% of the difference in IQ scores
between 4-year-old children in families who were considered to be “poor” or “non-
poor” in the study.
Studies also have revealed links between adverse child outcomes for children liv-
ing in poverty and measures of home environment. Typically, researchers have used the
Home Observation of Measurement of the Environment (HOME) Inventory (Caldwell &
Bradley, 1984) to study this phenomenon. The HOME scale assesses learning materials
in the home, maternal warmth toward the child, and parent experiences with the child.
An overview of the research in this area (Brooks- Gunn & Duncan, 1997) suggested that
elements of the home environment accounted for a significant portion of the effect of
income level on children’s outcomes in cognitive ability. Studies have determined that
approximately half of the effect of poverty level on children’s IQ scores can be explained
by its effect on learning experiences in the home (Bradley, 1995).
Moving beyond an examination of home environmental issues such as materials
and activities, studies also have linked dimensions of parent–child interactions to child
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

outcomes and poverty. As reviewed by Brooks-Gunn and Duncan (1997), parenting

practices affect child achievement and adjustment. Some studies have suggested that
in families living in poverty, parents may be more likely to use harsh punishment and
display lower quality parent–child interactions. For example, a study on young children’s
mental health noted that children in homes characterized by poverty were spanked more
than those in higher income homes (McLeod & Shanahan, 1993).
Parental mental health is noted as another potential pathway through which pov-
erty affects child outcomes (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997). Less favorable physical and
mental health status is associated with poverty. In turn, parents experiencing conditions
associated with poorer mental health, such as depression, are less likely to provide quality
learning experiences for their children and to engage in optimal parent–child interactions.
Finally, poverty may serve as a mechanism for potentially altering child outcomes
in the way that it affects neighborhoods (Brooks-Gunn & Duncan, 1997; Levanthal &
Brooks- Gunn, 2000, 2003). Certainly, neighborhood environments characterized by

violence, crime, and limited resources for enhancing child development (e.g., play-
grounds, child care, school facilities) may interfere with families’ abilities to support one
another and their children. Such factors are likely to be associated with adverse child
outcomes. Although family effects may exert a more direct link to child outcomes,
the neighborhood effects may indirectly contribute to child outcomes, particularly in the
school-age years (Chase-Lansdale & Gordon, 1996; Chase-Lansdale et al., 1997). The
research suggests that families are the key agents for child outcomes, but neighborhood
circumstances may play an increasing role on children’s outcomes as they age, particu-
larly when children venture out of the home during school age and beyond (Brooks-
Gunn, Duncan, & Aber, 1997a).

EXAMINING RISKS AND SUPPORTS

THROUGH TRANSACTIONAL AND ECOLOGICAL MODELS
Scientific inquiry has shifted from “asking whether family resources affect child develop-
ment to asking why research shows so consistently that they do” (Shonkoff & Phillips,
2000, p. 267). As such, the impact of poverty on children and families is perhaps best
examined and understood through transactional and ecological models that underscore
the importance of the child’s and family’s interactions with the larger world. These
models provide a structure through which the complex array of factors and circum-
stances associated with living under economic hardship can be viewed and the interplay
between characteristics of children/families and the environments in which they live
can be better understood. The previous discussion of pathways suggests the importance
of this dynamic, transactional process.
Schorr painted a portrait of how a myriad of factors—all influenced by poverty—can
place child development in jeopardy:
The child in a poor family who is malnourished and living in an unheated apartment is
more susceptible to ear infection; once the ear infection takes hold, inaccessible or inatten-
tive health care may mean it will not be properly treated; hearing loss in the midst of eco-
nomic stress may go undetected at home, in day care, and by the health system; undetected
hearing loss will do long-term damage to a child who needs all the help he can to cope with
a world more complicated than the world of most middle-class children. When this child
enters school, his chances of being in an overcrowded classroom with an overwhelmed
teacher further compromise his chances of successful learning. Thus, risk factors join to
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

shorten the odds of favorable long-term outcomes. (1988, p. 30)

As this scenario so vividly portrays, children and families living in poverty face
increased risks for poor developmental outcomes. These risk factors interact with one
another to transform the developmental possibilities for individuals. Mediating factors
help to illuminate how poverty is related to adverse developmental outcomes and also
how protective factors can serve to support the well-being of children and families.
Reconsider for a moment the transactional model described in Chapter 3. This
model helps explain the outcomes in the previous example. It illustrates how environ-
mental factors (e.g., malnutrition, substandard living conditions) can lead to negative
developmental consequences for the child (e.g., developmental delay caused by loss of
hearing from ear infection). These consequences, in turn, can transform the child’s
development and lead to other outcomes. This child’s undiagnosed hearing loss will
likely lead to less participation in school activities and lessons, poorer interactions with

peers, and difficulties communicating with important adults in his environment, such
as his teacher. These factors produce a transaction: The child’s development is negatively
affected or transformed such that the child is less likely to be able to interact with or
benefit from important aspects of his environment. Furthermore, other characteristics
of the child’s environment, such as overcrowded schools, poor or inappropriate teach-
ing methods, inadequate or inappropriate health care, and/or lack of diagnostic and
intervention services, can exacerbate the negative consequences to the child. From this
simple example, one can witness that the child whose development is already at risk is
placed in an environment that is less likely to benefit or structure the child’s learning.
The result is a negative spiral of repercussions. The transactional model therefore helps
shed light on the mechanisms or pathways through which impoverishing conditions can
act to influence child and family functioning and developmental outcomes.
For the young child at a crucial point in brain development, living in poverty is
associated with many short-term risks; when these risks accumulate and interact, they
can produce long-term and major consequences. Such factors include the impact on
physical health (e.g., poor health and infectious disease, lower vaccination rates, greater
rates of asthma and anemia), family effects (e.g., parental depression, maltreatment,
exposure to alcohol and substance abuse), and environmental factors (e.g., lack of access
to safe play spaces, lead exposure, increased exposure to community and interpersonal
violence; Krutsinger & Tarr, 2011).
The number and types of risks faced by children and families also influence the
total impact of these risks on development and functioning. The health and develop-
mental status of the infant and quality of the home environment interact with family
economic circumstances; the more risks the child and family face, the more likely it is
that negative outcomes will arise (Sameroff, 1983, 2009; Sameroff, Seifer, Barocas, Zax, &
Greenspan, 1987). Economic circumstances, because of the long and overarching layer-
ing of risk conditions, can exert a major influence such that children born into families
who are not poor fare better than do those born into impoverishment, even when their
biologic or health status is more compromised. Children who are born with biologic
risks (e.g., prematurity, low birth weight) and also are born into poverty potentially face a
double hazard for even worse developmental outcomes (Escalona, 1982; Parker, Greer, &
Zuckerman, 1988).
A common saying is often true: The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. This
quip reflects the chronic nature and devastating effects of poverty. Indeed, families
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

often are said to live in a cycle of poverty. This cycle of poverty will likely continue and
intensify if children and families are not supported to escape its effects. Given the mag-
nitude and range of negative effects on children and families associated with poverty,
research and policy efforts have been directed toward identifying these needed supports.
Studies have provided clues for supportive interventions that minimize potential
deleterious outcomes for children and families living in poverty. For instance, research
demonstrated that the developmental outcomes of premature, low birth weight (LBW)
children living in poverty were linked to the quality of their caregiving environment
(Bradley et al., 1994). Children whose outcomes were more favorable received caregiv-
ing that was more responsive, accepting, organized, and stimulating than did children
with less optimal developmental profiles. Although the majority of LBW infants in this
sample who were born into poverty conditions had poor developmental prognoses, sev-
eral factors appeared to offset the potential for harm. The dimensions of the caregiving
environments that appeared to serve as protective factors included parental responsivity,

acceptance of the child’s behavior, variety of stimulation, availability of toys and materi-
als, and adequate space for privacy and exploration. Thus, some of the same pathways
or mechanisms that conspire to produce negative repercussions also can lead to more
positive outcomes.
These pathways or mechanisms occur at all levels of families’ ecological contexts.
Using the terminology proposed by Bronfenbrenner (1979, 1999) and Bronfenbrenner
and Morris (2006) that was reviewed in Chapter 3, these contexts and potential areas of
support and intervention are examined. At the microsystem level of the child and family
within the home environment, characteristics of children and/or parents that may add
stress include biologic risk conditions of a child at birth, disability, and chronic illness,
to name a few. Parental issues also may contribute positively to the child and family’s
functioning. These variables include parental mental health and sensitivity, coping strate-
gies, parent–child interaction styles and techniques (e.g., positive disciplinary techniques,
provision of learning activities and stimulation, responsivity), appropriate parental expec-
tations, and marital and family functioning. At the mesosystem level are the influences
of the neighborhood, child care resources, schools, health care facilities, houses of wor-
ship, and other community agencies charged with providing direct services to families.
These formal and informal institutions are activated based on the family’s desire and
ability to gain support and resources from them. These community contexts can promote
children’s abilities to actively explore their environments and participate in stimulating
learning opportunities (e.g., exposure to language, print, numbers) and provide families
with safety and security to do their jobs as caregivers and nurturers. Government and
community agencies (e.g., health, educational, social service, employment, housing) and
other legislative and regulatory networks are considered exosystem contexts that influ-
ence children and families through the policies and programs that they provide and the
priorities that they establish. Indeed, census data on reduction of poverty in some groups
(Short, 2011) documents the value of these programs that provide crucial supports such
as nutrition supplementation, health care, housing, and child care.
Finally, at the most global or macrosystem level are societal attitudes and values
regarding poverty, ethnic and/or racial groups, and families’ lifestyles and structures.
The impact of broader cultural and societal values such as the freedom from racism,
acceptance of different family structures and practices, and compassion towards others
creates a climate that has a profound effect on the institutions that more directly and
daily influence children and families. Each of these levels of the ecological context
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

for families reveals a potential intervention point to support individual children and
their families living in poverty.

SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES LIVING IN POVERTY

What can be done to prevent, ameliorate, and/or counteract the effects of poverty? It is
beyond the scope of this text to consider or debate the myriad of government and com-
munity programs that have been attempted in an effort to prevent or overcome poverty
in the United States. Politicians and policy makers will continue to debate appropriate
interventions to mitigate the effects of poverty, including education and employment
programs, wage increases, food programs, nutrition supplements, health care, housing
subsidies, child care, and early education programs (Devaney, Ellwood, & Love, 1997).
Some families have long historical roots in poverty that extend generation after genera-
tion, living in neighborhoods characterized by economic distress and hopelessness, lack

of education or opportunities to advance, and lack of access to the systems and services
to pull themselves up. Other children and families have been thrust into poverty sud-
denly by a parent’s loss of employment or reduction in earning, the loss of a parent,
and/or a change in family structure. For some families, helping members to earn
more and receive supplements to earned income (e.g., child support payments/contribu-
tions from absent parents) can reduce poverty (Plotnick, 1997). But for many, the com-
plexity of their life circumstances requires radical shifts to change their economic fate.
At times, it is overwhelming to contemplate where to begin to support children
and families who face the effects of poverty every hour of every day. What, for instance,
can education, health care, and social service personnel do as professionals and as indi-
viduals to assist these children and families as they face their economic hardships?
Although there are no simple solutions, avenues of hope and intervention are available
through activating and supporting families and informal support networks, and through
relationship-based professional commitments of the helping services.
Characteristics of interventions that are likely to be supportive for families who live
in poverty include helping parents and other family members to feel more efficacious in
their abilities to nurture and care for their children, develop self-esteem, become more
responsive caregivers, respond with warmth and affection to their children, provide
stimulating learning opportunities and activities in the home, acquire appropriate devel-
opmental and behavioral expectations for their children, and foster harmonious fam-
ily relationships. These interventions likely will facilitate secure attachments between
parents/caregivers and children, build self-esteem for both, and enhance adult–child
relationships and interactions. McLoyd (1997) noted that emotional support for families
and policies that help families to overcome concrete problems will often go a long way
toward alleviating the stresses associated with poverty and the resulting mental health
issues of depression, punitive parenting style, and psychological distress.
A re-examination of the circumstances faced by the six families introduced at the
beginning of this chapter illustrates some types of support for families living in poverty.
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

Mary Anne, the mother of 4-year-old Cecilee, for example, feels fortunate to live near
her family members, who give her emotional and physical support in caring for her
daughter. Her spiritual faith and the friendship and support of people at her church
are important to her. Mary Anne and Cecilee also benefit from the more formal sup-
ports found in the Head Start program, the local special education system, and medical
specialists with whom they work. Mary Anne is also seeking child care so that she can
return to work to earn a living.
For the Hernandez family, formal supports are pivotal. The members of this fam-
ily have a strong emotional bond with one another. However, they need assistance to
procure safe housing and provide their family with secure living conditions. Ge’s family
members also rely on each other and on the emotional and financial support of close
family, their farm community, and the community of Laotians that live nearby to help
them through their hard times. They are able to survive on their limited economic
resources due to these supports.
The story of Lamont and his mother, Jonalene, elucidates the importance of health
care and early intervention community services. The availability of these services liter-
ally saved Lamont’s life when he was ill and provided the needed education and health
services to address his developmental and health needs. This family also depends on
formal supports such as shelter, health care, and food to help them exist until Jonalene
can find a job and gain economic independence for her family.
The support of close family and community is evident in the other families as well.
Arely relies on her sister’s family and her church, and Floyd and Nancy look to their
neighbors and family for loans and work opportunities. Each family also benefits from
the resources offered through local schools, social services, and health care facilities.
Service providers cannot give families the monetary support and resources that they
need to move beyond life in impoverished conditions. But service practitioners can sup-
port these families by acknowledging and encouraging families to use their informal
resources and sources of support, such as kinship, friendship, cultural/linguistic, and
faith-based communities.
Acknowledging the competence that families bring to addressing their own needs
only facilitates their abilities to care for themselves. When more formal interventions or
services are needed, professionals can assist families to obtain information about what
is available and how to gain access to the services. Once these resources are identified,
professionals can help families navigate the service maze in order to receive the services
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

they need. Providing referrals and assistance in obtaining housing, food stamps/nutrition
supplements, job programs, quality child care, mental health services, housing, legal
services, and services in the family’s primary language can be invaluable to these fami-
lies. Although poverty presents daily challenges and remains a heavy burden for most of
these families, supportive service providers can help to lighten that load.

SUMMARY
Family income level can exert a profound and substantial influence on the develop-
ment and well-being of children and families. Indeed, the landscape of opportunity for
children and families is transformed by economic hardship. Evidence suggests that fam-
ily income may be one of the most powerful influences on children early in their lives
(Duncan, Yeung, Brooks- Gunn, & Smith, 1998). The impact of poverty is not universal
or evenly distributed demographically, although it does touch all races, ethnicities, ages,

and geographical regions. Rather, the effects of poverty are disproportionately experi-
enced by certain groups such as young children, children living in single-parent families,
and children who are African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, and Hispanic/
Latino. In his book The Souls of Black Folk (1903), author W.E.B. Du Bois underscored
the disparity experienced by these families in a land of plenty: “To be a poor man is
hard, but to be a poor race in a land of dollars is the very bottom of hardships” (as cited
by Tripp, 1970, p. 712).
The ways in which poverty exacts its toll are becoming better understood. Poverty
is linked more clearly with some adverse consequences than with others, particularly
with children’s cognitive and achievement outcomes. The duration of poverty also is
significant. Living in persistent, long-term poverty likely has more devastating conse-
quences than experiencing poverty for shorter periods of time. The degree or severity
of economic hardship also is a factor: The more adverse the conditions, the more nega-
tive are the consequences that an individual experiences. Timing, too, may play a role,
with the experience of poverty in the earliest years having a greater impact than during
adolescence or later years. Children experiencing poverty early on and living in extreme
poverty for a long period of time are likely to suffer the worst outcomes. Children
who are born at risk or with disabilities and who also are born into families living in
poverty are considered to be at “double jeopardy.” The interaction of biologic factors
with the myriad of environmental factors associated with living in impoverished condi-
tions multiplies the risk for adverse outcomes.
Access to health care, social services, quality affordable child care, quality educa-
tional programs, and disability services as needed are of critical importance to families
living in conditions of economic distress. Typically, the complexities of the risks these
children and families’ life situations pose necessitate these services even more. Interven-
tions must also center on fostering conditions that offer families the opportunity to live
in neighborhoods that are safe from violence and crime and that are free from racial/
ethnic/religious discrimination. These goals are more likely to be achieved by strength-
ening neighborhood infrastructures and encouraging the participation and input of
those that live there (Brooks- Gunn, Duncan, & Aber, 1997a, 1997b).
Prevention and reduction in poverty are critical investments for this nation. The
reduction in childhood poverty could result in profound advantages in almost every area
of life: Children’s success in school and increased ability to learn, better child health, less
child hunger and malnutrition, and social-emotional well-being.
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

Although it is one of the richest nations in the world, the United States has a higher
rate of poverty than most industrialized nations (Rainwater & Smeeding, 1995). The
potential for pervasive and devastating consequences for children and families living in
persistent poverty is great in our country. Service providers should renew their commit-
ment to designing programs and policies to alleviate conditions that lead to poverty and
to support families in sustaining themselves under troubling circumstances.
Inscribed at the base of the Statue of Liberty in New York is the following poem:

Give me your tired, your poor,

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me:
I lift my lamp beside the golden door.
—Emma Lazarus (1883)

This poem pays tribute to the United States as the haven of the oppressed and gateway
to opportunity. May we continue to work to make it so.

ACTIVITIES TO EXTEND THE DISCUSSION

1. Put yourself in their place. Imagine that you live in a family of three and that your
family’s total annual income is less than $14,000. What adaptations would
your family have to make? What priorities would you choose? How would you
make these choices? What types of support and services would you seek? To truly
identify how hard this is, do the math and make an actual budget for your imagi-
nary family.
2. Think of the impact. Think of one of the families with whom you work that you
know to be struggling with poverty. How has their economic hardship had an
impact on their family? When you discuss the family’s issues, be sure to change the
family members’ names and identifying characteristics to ensure confidentiality.
3. Draw an “ecological map.” For the family you described in Activity 2, draw an
ecological map. What specific elements of their lives are affected by their eco-
nomic struggles at each level of the ecological framework? In your picture, put
the family in the center circle. Place circles listing all their family tasks and func-
tions all around the family. Highlight those that are affected by impoverished
circumstances. At the outer edges of the map, indicate what sources of support or
resources could be brought to bear to assist and support the family to meet their
tasks and functions. Connect these supports and resources to the needs using a
solid line for those that exist and a dotted line for those that are needed but not
available.
4. Dare to dream. Consider again the family that you described in Activity 2. If you
could activate any possible services and resources for them, what would those
services and supports be? As a service provider, how could you help them find
those resources?

TO LEARN MORE: SUGGESTED WEB SITES

http://www.childrensdefense.org/child-research-data-publications/

National Center for Children in Poverty

http://www.nccp.org/

REFERENCES
Bank, L., Forgatch, M.S., Patterson, G.R., & among children. Mental Retardation, 40,
Fetrow, R.A. (1993). Parenting practices of 212–218.
single mothers: Mediators of negative con- Booth, A., & Dunn, J. (1994). Stepfamilies:
textual factors. Journal of Marriage and Fam- Who benefits? Who does not? Mahwah, NJ:
ily, 55, 371–384. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Belle, D. (1990). Poverty and women’s mental Bradley, R.H. (1995). Environment and par-
health. American Psychologist, 45(3), 385–389. enting. In M. Bornstein (Ed.), Handbook of
Birenbaum, A. (2002). Poverty, welfare reform, parenting (pp. 235–261). Mahwah, NJ: Law-
and disproportionate rates of disability rence Erlbaum.

Bradley, R.H., Whiteside, L., Mundfrom, D.J., deprivation, home environment, and mater-
Casey, P.H., Kelleher, K.J., & Pope, S.K. nal characteristics. Child Development, 67,
(1994). Early indications of resilience and 396– 408.
their relation to experiences in the home Brooks- Gunn, J., Klebanov, P., Liaw, F., &
environments of low birthweight, prema- Duncan, G.J. (1995). Toward an understand-
ture children living in poverty. Child Devel- ing of the effects of poverty upon children.
opment, 65, 346–360. In H.E. Fitzgerald, B.M. Lester, & B. Zuck-
Brody, G.H., Stoneman, Z., Flor, D., McCrary, erman (Eds.), Children of poverty: Research,
C., Hastings, L., & Conyers, O. (1994). Finan- health, and policy issues. New York, NY: Gar-
cial resources, parent psychological function- land Publishing.
ing, parent co-caregiving, and early adoles- Brooks- Gunn, J., Rouse, C., & McLanahan, S.
cent competence in rural two-parent African- (2007). Racial and ethnic gaps in school read-
American families. Child Development, 65, iness. In R. Pianta, M. Cox, & K. Snow (Eds.),
590–605. School readiness and the transition to kindergarten
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human in the era of accountability (pp. 283–306). Balti-
development: Experiments by nature and design. more, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Brown, L., & Pollitt, E. (1996). Malnutrition,
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1999). Environments in poverty and intellectual development. Scien-
developmental perspective: Theoretical and tific American, 274(2), 38– 43.
operational models. In S.L. Friedman & Burchinal, M., Lee, M., & Ramey, C. (1989).
T.D. Wachs (Eds.). Measuring environment Type of day care and preschool intellectual
across the life span: Emerging methods and con- development in disadvantaged children.
cepts (pp. 3–28). Washington, DC: Ameri- Child Development, 60 (1), 128–137.
can Psychological Association Press. Caldwell, B., & Bradley, R.H. (1984). Home
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P.A. (2006). observation for measurement of the environ-
The bioecological model of human devel- ment. Little Rock, AR: University of Arkan-
opment (pp. 793–828). In R. Lerner (Ed.), sas, Center for Research on Teaching and
Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1, Theo- Learning.
retical models of human development (6th ed.). Chase-Lansdale, P.L. & Gordon, R. (1996).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Economic hardship and the development of
Brooks- Gunn, J., Rouse, C., & McLanahan, S. five- and six-year olds: Neighborhood and
(2007). Racial and ethnic gaps in school read- regional perspectives. Child Development, 67,
iness. In R. Pianta, M. Cox, & K. Snow (Eds.), 3338–3367.
School readiness and the transition to kindergar- Chase-Lansdale, P.L., Gordon, R.A., Brooks-
ten in the era of accountability (pp. 283–306). Gunn, J., & Klebanov, P.K. (1997). Neigh-
Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing borhood and family influences on the
Co. intellectual and behavioral competence of
Brooks- Gunn, J., & Duncan, G.J. (1997). The preschool and early school-age children. In
effects of poverty on children. The Future of J. Brooks- Gunn, G.J. Duncan, & J.L. Aber
Children: Children and Poverty, 7(2), 55–71. (Eds.), Neighborhood poverty: Vol. I. Context
Brooks- Gunn, J., Duncan, G.J., & Aber, J.L. and consequences for children (pp. 79–118).
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

(Eds.). (1997a). Neighborhood poverty: Vol. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
I. Context and consequences for children. New Chau, M., Thampi, K., & Wight, V. (2010a).
York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Basic facts about low- income children, 2009:
Brooks- Gunn, J., Duncan, G.J., & Aber, J.L. Children under age 3. Retrieved July 10, 2012,
(Eds.). (1997b). Neighborhood poverty: Vol. II. from http://www.nccp.org/publications/
Policy implications in studying neighborhoods. pdf/download_377.pdf
New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Chau, M., Thampi, K., & Wight, V. (2010b). Basic
Brooks- Gunn, J., Duncan, G.J., & Maritato, facts about low- income children, 2009: Children
N. (1997). Poor families, poor outcomes: under age 6. Retrieved July 10, 2012, from
The well-being of children and youth. In http://w w w.nccp.org/publications/pdf/
G.J. Duncan & J. Brooks- Gunn (Eds.), Con- download_378.pdf
sequences of growing up poor (pp. 1–17). New Chau, M., Thampi, K., & Wight, V. (2010c). Basic
York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. facts about low- income children, 2009: Chil-
Brooks- Gunn, J., Klebanov, P., & Duncan, G. dren under age 18. Retrieved July 10, 2012,
(1996). Ethnic differences in children’s from http://www.nccp.org/publications/
intelligence test scores: Role of economic pub_975.html

Citro, C., & Michael, R. (Eds.) (1995). Mea- Fisher, G.M. (1997). The development of the
suring poverty: A new approach. Washington, Orshansky poverty thresholds and their sub-
DC: National Academies Press. sequent history as the official U.S. poverty
Conger, R.D., Ge, X., Elder, G.H., Lorenz, F.O., measure. Retrieved August 12, 2012, from
& Simons, R.L. (1994). Economic stress, http://w w w.census.gov/hhes/povmeas/
coercive family process, and developmental publications/orshansky.html
problems of adolescents. Child Development, Fujiura, G.T., & Yamaki, K. (2000). Trends in
65, 541–561. demography of childhood poverty and dis-
Cost, Quality and Child Outcomes Study ability. Exceptional Children, 66(2), 187–199.
Team. (1995). Cost, quality, and child outcomes Goldstein, N. (1990). Explaining socioeconomic
in child care centers. Denver, CO: Univer- difference in children’s cognitive test scores. Cam-
sity of Colorado at Denver, Department of bridge, MA: Malcolm Wiener Center for
Economics. Social Policy.
Dalaker, J. (2001). Poverty in the United States: Hernandez, D.J. (1997). Poverty trends. In G.J.
2000. Current population reports: Consumer Duncan & J. Brooks- Gunn (Eds.), Conse-
income. Washington, DC: U.S. Census quences of growing up poor (pp. 18–34). New
Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce. York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
DeNavas-Walt, C, Proctor, B., & Smith, J. Huston, A.C. (1991). Children in poverty: Child
(2011). Income, poverty, and health insurance development and public policy. New York:
coverage in the United States: 2010. Washing- Cambridge University Press.
ton, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Huston, A.C., McLoyd, V.C., & Garcia Coll,
Devaney, B.L., Ellwood, M.R., & Love, J.M. C. (1994). Children and poverty: Issues in
(1997). The future of children: Children and contemporary research. Child Development,
poverty, 7(2), 88–112. 65, 275–282.
Dodge, K.A., Pettit, G.S., & Bates, J.E. (1994). Kennedy, J.F. ( January 20, 1961). Inaugural
Socialization mediators of the relation address. Retrieved July 10, 2012, from http://
between socioeconomic status and child w w w.a mer ica nrhetor ic.com /speeches /
conduct problems. Child Development, 65, jfkinaugural.htm
649– 665. Krutsinger, A., & Tarr, N. (2011). Poverty fact
Duncan, G.J., & Brooks- Gunn, J. (Eds.). sheet: Implications for infants and toddlers.
(1997). Consequences of growing up poor. New Retrieved June 30, 2011, from http://www
York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation. .zerotothree.org/public-policy/pdf/poverty
Duncan, G.J., Brooks- Gunn, J., & Klebanov, -fact-sheet-5-10-11-final.pdf
P.K. (1994). Economic deprivation and early Lazarus, E. (1883). “The new colossus.” Statue
childhood development. Child Development, of Liberty. New York.
65, 296–318. Lee, S., Sills, M., & Oh, G.T. (2002). Disabili-
Duncan, G. J., & Magnuson, K. (2011, Win- ties among children and mothers in low- income
ter). The long reach of early childhood pov- families. Retrieved July 10, 2012, from
erty, Pathways. Retrieved July 10, 2012, from http://www.iwpr.org/publications/pubs/
http://w w w.stanford.edu /group /scspi / disabilities-among-children-and-mothers-in
_ m e d i a /p d f /p a t h w a y s /w i nt e r _ 2 011 / -low-income-families
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

PathwaysWinter11_Duncan.pdf Leventhal, T., & Brooks- Gunn, J. (2000).

Duncan, G.J., Yeung, W.J., Brooks- Gunn, J., Neighborhoods they live in: The effects of
& Smith, J. (1998). American Sociological neighborhood residence on child and ado-
Review, 63(3), 406– 423. lescent outcomes. Psychological Bulletin, 126,
Dunn, L.M., & Dunn, L.M. (1981). Peabody 309–337.
Picture Vocabulary Test- Revised. Circle Pines, Leventhal, T., & Brooks- Gunn, J. (2003). Chil-
MN: American Guidance Service. dren and youth in neighborhood contexts.
Escalona, S.K. (1982). Babies at double haz- Current Directions in Psychological Science, 12,
ard: Early development of infants at bio- 27–31.
logic and social risk. Pediatrics, 70, 670– Loprest, P., & Acs, G. (1996). Profile of disability
676. among families on AFDC. Washington, DC:
Emerson, R.W. (1860). The conduct of life. Cam- The Urban Institute.
bridge, MA: The Riverside Press. Mayes, L. (1996, June). Early experience and the
Fass, S. (2009). Measuring poverty in the United developing brain: The model of prenatal cocaine
States. New York, NY: National Center for exposure. Paper presented at the invitational
Children in Poverty. conference, Brain Development in Young

Children: New Frontiers for Research, Pol- from http://www.nccp.org/publications/pdf/

icy, and Practice, Chicago, IL. text_398.pdf
McLanahan, S.S. (1997). Parent absence or Parker, S., Greer, S., & Zuckerman, B. (1988).
poverty: Which matters more? In G.J. Dun- Double jeopardy: The impact of poverty on
can & J. Brooks- Gunn (Eds.), Consequences of early childhood development. Pediatric Clin-
growing up poor (pp. 35– 48). New York, NY: ics of North America, 35, 1127–1241.
Russell Sage Foundation. Pinderhughes, E., Nix R., Foster, E., Jones, D.,
McLeod, J.D., & Shanahan, M.J. (1993). Pov- & the Conduct Problems Prevention
erty, parenting and children’s mental health. Research Group (2001). Parenting in context:
American Sociological Review, 58, 351–366. Impact of neighborhood poverty, residential
McLoyd, V.C. (1990). The impact of economic stability, public services, social networks, and
hardship on black families and children: danger on parental behaviors. Journal of Mar-
Psychological distress, parenting, and socio- riage and the Family, 63, 941–953.
emotional development. Child Development, Plotnick, R.D. (1997). Child poverty can be
61, 311–346. reduced. Children and Poverty, 7(2), 72–87.
McLoyd, V.C. (1997). The impact of poverty Rainwater, L., & Smeeding, T. (1995, August).
and low socioeconomic status on the socio- Doing poorly: The real income of American chil-
emotional functioning of African-American dren in a comparative perspective. Luxembourg
children and adolescents: Mediating effects. Income Study Working Paper No. 127. Syra-
In R. Taylor & M. Wang (Eds.), Social and cuse, NY: Maxwell School of Citizenship
emotional adjustment and family relations in and Public Affairs, Syracuse University.
ethnic minorities (pp. 7–34). Mahwah, NJ: Rosman, E.A., & Knitzer, J. (2001). Welfare
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. reform: The special case of young children
McLoyd, V.C. (1998a). Children in poverty: with disabilities and their families. Infants
Development, public policy, and practice. and Young Children, 13(3), 25–35.
In I.E. Sigel & K.A. Renninger (Eds.), Hand- Rowling, J.K. (2008, June 5). The fringe benefits
book of child psychology: Vol. 4. Child psychol- of failure, and the importance of imagination.
ogy in practice (5th ed., pp. 135–208). New Harvard Commencement Address, Cam-
York, NY: Wiley. bridge, MA.
McLoyd, V.C. (1998b). Socioeconomic disad- Sameroff, A. (1983). Developmental systems:
vantage and child development. American Context and evolution. In P.H. Mussen
Psychologist, 53, 185–204. (Series Ed.) & W. Kessen (Vol. Ed.), Handbook
McLoyd, V., Jayaratne, T.E., Ceballo, R., & of child psychology: Vol. 1. History, theory and
Borquez, J. (1994). Unemployment and methods (pp. 238–294). New York, NY: Wiley.
work interruption among African Ameri- Sameroff, A. (Ed.) (2009). The transactional
can single mothers: Effects on parenting model of development: How children and con-
and adolescent socioemotional functioning. texts shape each other. Washington, DC:
Child Development, 65, 562–589. American Psychological Association.
Meyers, M.K., Lukemeyer, A., & Smeeding, Sameroff, A., Seifer, R., Barocas, R., Zax, M.,
T.M. (1996). Work, welfare, and the burden & Greenspan, S. (1987). Intelligence quo-
of disability: Caring for special needs of chil- tient scores of 4-year-old children: Social-
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

dren in poor families, Income Security Policy environmental risk factors. Pediatrics, 79,
Series, Paper No. 12. Syracuse, NY: Center 343–350.
for Policy Research, Maxwell School of Sampson, R.J., & Laub, J.H. (1994). Urban pov-
Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse erty and the family context of delinquency:
University. A new look at structure and process in a clas-
Mistry, R.S., Vandewater, E.A., Huston, A.C., sic study. Child Development, 65, 523–540.
& McLoyd, V.C. (2002). Economic well- Schorr, L. (1988). Within our reach: Breaking the
being and children’s social adjustment: cycle of disadvantage. New York, NY: Anchor
The role of family process in an ethnically Books.
diverse low-income sample. Child Develop- Seith, D., & Isakson, E. (2011). Who are Amer-
ment, 73, 935–951. ica’s poor? Examining health disparities among
More kids living with no parent. (2002, July children in the United States. New York, NY:
29). San Jose Mercury News, p. A4. Columbia University, National Center for
National Center for Children in Poverty (1999, Children in Poverty. Retrieved August 12,
June). Poverty and brain development in early 2012, from http://www.nccp.org/publica
childhood. Retrieved on August 12, 2012, tions/pub_995.html

Seith, D., & Kalof, C. (2011). Who are Ameri- Retrieved July 10, 2012, from http://www
ca’s poor? Examining health disparities by race .census.gov/prod/2011pubs/p60-241.pdf
and ethnicity. New York, NY: Columbia Smith, J.R., Brooks- Gunn, J., & Klebanov, P.
University, National Center for Children (1997). Consequences of living in poverty
in Poverty. Retrieved August 12, 2012, for young children’s cognitive and verbal
from http://www.nccp.org/publications/ ability and early school achievement. In G.J.
pub_1032.html Duncan & J. Brooks- Gunn (Eds.), Conse-
Shonkoff, J.P., & Phillips, D.A. (Eds.). (2000). quences of growing up poor (pp. 132–189). New
From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
early childhood development. Washington, Tripp, R.T. (1970). The international thesaurus
DC: National Academies Press. of quotations. New York, NY: Thomas Y.
Shore, R. (1997). Rethinking the brain: New Crowell.
insights into early development. New York, NY: Wight, V.R., Chau, M., & Aratani, Y. (2011).
Families and Work Institute. Who are America’s poor children? The official
Short, K. (2011). The Research Supplemental story. New York, NY: National Center for
Poverty Measure: 2010. Population reports. Children in Poverty.
Copyright © 2013. Brookes Publishing. All rights reserved.

Hanson, M., & Lynch, E. (2013). Understanding families : Supportive approaches to diversity, disability, and risk, second edition. Brookes Publishing.
Created from nsc on 2023-11-19 21:21:51.

Enwefa
No ratings yet
Enwefa
27 pages
Book Item 17259
No ratings yet
Book Item 17259
23 pages
Student Poverty and Trauma Mental Health Online Distance Learning Spring 2020
No ratings yet
Student Poverty and Trauma Mental Health Online Distance Learning Spring 2020
19 pages
Family Poverty in Diverse Contexts 1st Edition C. Anne Broussard Instant Access 2025
No ratings yet
Family Poverty in Diverse Contexts 1st Edition C. Anne Broussard Instant Access 2025
84 pages
McLoyd, Vonnie C.. (1998) - Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Child Development.. American Psychologist, 53
No ratings yet
McLoyd, Vonnie C.. (1998) - Socioeconomic Disadvantage and Child Development.. American Psychologist, 53
20 pages
Socioeconomic Disadvanteges and Child Development
100% (1)
Socioeconomic Disadvanteges and Child Development
20 pages
Children in Poverty
No ratings yet
Children in Poverty
6 pages
Project On Poverty
No ratings yet
Project On Poverty
7 pages
JamesGarbarino 2017 3SocioculturalRiskand ChildrenandFamiliesin
No ratings yet
JamesGarbarino 2017 3SocioculturalRiskand ChildrenandFamiliesin
36 pages
Ulman 1996
No ratings yet
Ulman 1996
19 pages
The Heterogeneity of Cities
No ratings yet
The Heterogeneity of Cities
5 pages
Causes and Effects of Poverty
No ratings yet
Causes and Effects of Poverty
6 pages
Orshansky, Mollie 1963
No ratings yet
Orshansky, Mollie 1963
11 pages
Group 2 Research Stem
No ratings yet
Group 2 Research Stem
57 pages
Child Poverty's Lasting Impact in US
No ratings yet
Child Poverty's Lasting Impact in US
9 pages
Research
No ratings yet
Research
5 pages
Poverty Single Parents Porject
No ratings yet
Poverty Single Parents Porject
11 pages
Test Bank For Social Policy For Children and Families A Risk and Resilience Perspective 3rd Edition Jenson and Fraser 148334455X 9781483344553
100% (59)
Test Bank For Social Policy For Children and Families A Risk and Resilience Perspective 3rd Edition Jenson and Fraser 148334455X 9781483344553
12 pages
Impact of Poverty on Children
No ratings yet
Impact of Poverty on Children
1 page
Research Paper
No ratings yet
Research Paper
12 pages
Family Poverty in Diverse Contexts 1st Edition C. Anne Broussard Online Version
No ratings yet
Family Poverty in Diverse Contexts 1st Edition C. Anne Broussard Online Version
88 pages
Poverty's Impact on Public Education
100% (1)
Poverty's Impact on Public Education
9 pages
Poverty's Impact on Society
100% (1)
Poverty's Impact on Society
4 pages
Family Poverty in Diverse Contexts 1st Edition C. Anne Broussard Full Access
100% (1)
Family Poverty in Diverse Contexts 1st Edition C. Anne Broussard Full Access
123 pages
The Behavioral Aspects of Poverty
No ratings yet
The Behavioral Aspects of Poverty
14 pages
University of Management and Technology
No ratings yet
University of Management and Technology
5 pages
Document
No ratings yet
Document
15 pages
Poverty Levels and Trends in Comparative Perspective: Focus Vol. 26, No. 2, Fall 2009
No ratings yet
Poverty Levels and Trends in Comparative Perspective: Focus Vol. 26, No. 2, Fall 2009
7 pages
Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences - 2008 - Engle - The Effect of Poverty On Child Development and Educational
No ratings yet
Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences - 2008 - Engle - The Effect of Poverty On Child Development and Educational
14 pages
Duncan Et Al.
No ratings yet
Duncan Et Al.
19 pages
Prince-Howard2002 Article ChildrenAndTheirBasicNeeds
No ratings yet
Prince-Howard2002 Article ChildrenAndTheirBasicNeeds
5 pages
Struggles
No ratings yet
Struggles
8 pages
Distinguishing Poverty
No ratings yet
Distinguishing Poverty
9 pages
S - Understanding Families Poverty-Week 10
No ratings yet
S - Understanding Families Poverty-Week 10
33 pages
Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences - 2008 - Engle - The Effect of Poverty On Child Development and Educational
No ratings yet
Annals of The New York Academy of Sciences - 2008 - Engle - The Effect of Poverty On Child Development and Educational
14 pages
Environment Around Children Influences The Way They Act
No ratings yet
Environment Around Children Influences The Way They Act
3 pages
Povertydraftwithpictures
No ratings yet
Povertydraftwithpictures
9 pages
Chapter01 XHTML
No ratings yet
Chapter01 XHTML
20 pages
The Effects of Poverty On Child Development
100% (1)
The Effects of Poverty On Child Development
6 pages
Understanding Poverty
No ratings yet
Understanding Poverty
3 pages
E Portfolio - Jose, Sydney C.
No ratings yet
E Portfolio - Jose, Sydney C.
10 pages
Struggle Paragraph
No ratings yet
Struggle Paragraph
8 pages
The Effects of Poverty On Students Mental Well-Being
No ratings yet
The Effects of Poverty On Students Mental Well-Being
62 pages
E Portfolio - Jose, Sydney C.
No ratings yet
E Portfolio - Jose, Sydney C.
9 pages
Social Policy For Children and Families A Risk and Resilience Perspective 3rd Edition Jenson and Fraser 148334455X Test Bank
100% (63)
Social Policy For Children and Families A Risk and Resilience Perspective 3rd Edition Jenson and Fraser 148334455X Test Bank
11 pages
AP Seminar - Shared Presentation Outline
No ratings yet
AP Seminar - Shared Presentation Outline
5 pages
ALBALATE Vincentian
No ratings yet
ALBALATE Vincentian
3 pages
Research Essay 1
No ratings yet
Research Essay 1
7 pages
Poverty Vs Economy
No ratings yet
Poverty Vs Economy
4 pages
November 16-December 4 Powerpoint On Social Stratification: Lesson Plan On Poverty
No ratings yet
November 16-December 4 Powerpoint On Social Stratification: Lesson Plan On Poverty
6 pages
Impacts of Poverty On Children and Young People PDF
No ratings yet
Impacts of Poverty On Children and Young People PDF
6 pages
EDUC 776 - Difficult - Dialogues - About - Race - and Poverty - in Teacher - Preparation
No ratings yet
EDUC 776 - Difficult - Dialogues - About - Race - and Poverty - in Teacher - Preparation
20 pages
Psychosocial Adjustment Among Children Experiencing Persistent and Intermittent Family Economic Hardship
No ratings yet
Psychosocial Adjustment Among Children Experiencing Persistent and Intermittent Family Economic Hardship
24 pages
Understanding Social Reality and Poverty
No ratings yet
Understanding Social Reality and Poverty
2 pages
Document
No ratings yet
Document
18 pages
The Impact of Being Born Into A Poor Family
No ratings yet
The Impact of Being Born Into A Poor Family
6 pages
Poverty in Schools1 2
No ratings yet
Poverty in Schools1 2
10 pages
PH Bahasa Inggris Unit 6
No ratings yet
PH Bahasa Inggris Unit 6
3 pages
Form XIV 4th QTR - Gr. 10
No ratings yet
Form XIV 4th QTR - Gr. 10
9 pages
The Boys and The Brothers
100% (5)
The Boys and The Brothers
273 pages
Asha Modern School: Record of Academic Performance Session: 2021-22
No ratings yet
Asha Modern School: Record of Academic Performance Session: 2021-22
1 page
Sense and Sensibility PDF
No ratings yet
Sense and Sensibility PDF
459 pages
Batangas I Electric Cooperative, Inc
No ratings yet
Batangas I Electric Cooperative, Inc
13 pages
Report On Saradha Scam
No ratings yet
Report On Saradha Scam
2 pages
Space Opera
No ratings yet
Space Opera
2 pages
Cattle Clinical Exam Guide
No ratings yet
Cattle Clinical Exam Guide
10 pages
MHI - 102 Assignment
No ratings yet
MHI - 102 Assignment
4 pages
Nicole's Court Verdict Unveiled
No ratings yet
Nicole's Court Verdict Unveiled
3 pages
Japan'S Religion: Richard U. Cayabyab (Ph. D. - Math, Presentor)
No ratings yet
Japan'S Religion: Richard U. Cayabyab (Ph. D. - Math, Presentor)
9 pages
Friction in Orthodontics
No ratings yet
Friction in Orthodontics
21 pages
Scion XB Base Manual
No ratings yet
Scion XB Base Manual
40 pages
Assignment-1-3 Merged PADI DANYI 210104065
No ratings yet
Assignment-1-3 Merged PADI DANYI 210104065
95 pages
Coraline: by Neil Gaiman
No ratings yet
Coraline: by Neil Gaiman
5 pages
Ebook File Document 8595
No ratings yet
Ebook File Document 8595
70 pages
PRISTINE - Shanta Holdings LTD
No ratings yet
PRISTINE - Shanta Holdings LTD
20 pages
Measuring Shrinkage From Mold Dimensions of Thermoplastics: Standard Test Method of
No ratings yet
Measuring Shrinkage From Mold Dimensions of Thermoplastics: Standard Test Method of
8 pages
00 Quarterly Sample
0% (1)
00 Quarterly Sample
6 pages
P A D A S: Akshiraa Coaching Centre - Poly TRB 2021-English Answer Key
No ratings yet
P A D A S: Akshiraa Coaching Centre - Poly TRB 2021-English Answer Key
43 pages
Book Wipo TM JKT 16 3
No ratings yet
Book Wipo TM JKT 16 3
32 pages
SL 334 2023 00-1
No ratings yet
SL 334 2023 00-1
3 pages
British Council TODO
No ratings yet
British Council TODO
139 pages
Day 1 - Quiet Speech
No ratings yet
Day 1 - Quiet Speech
3 pages
Invisible Knapsack Answers
No ratings yet
Invisible Knapsack Answers
5 pages
UKSC Submissions File 1july 2021redacted
No ratings yet
UKSC Submissions File 1july 2021redacted
288 pages
Final
No ratings yet
Final
13 pages
New Interpretation of Theto Be or Not To BeSolil
No ratings yet
New Interpretation of Theto Be or Not To BeSolil
7 pages
Practice Note: Competence and Compellability of Witnesses
100% (1)
Practice Note: Competence and Compellability of Witnesses
3 pages