|
(last updated January 2001)
|
Introduction and Overview
The United States has no explicit national, comprehensive
family or child policy, nor has there been any such policy
or cluster of policies in the past. Nonetheless, over the
past century, even as European welfare states were being shaped,
the US too developed many of the institutional supports and
commitments to what in Europe would be called a welfare state.
Among these, from time to time, were measures directed at
children or families with children, which might be said to
constitute implicit child and family policies. These enactments
were in considerable part concentrated in several 'bursts'
during periods of reform: the Progressive Era (approximately
1895-1920), the New Deal and its aftermaths (1932-54), the
War on Poverty and the Great Society (1960-74). A hundred
years after the Progressive Era, at the beginning of the Clinton
Administration, there were new child and family initiatives,
but by the middle of his term a wave of conservative reaction
had begun to dismantle a sixty-year history of increasing
social entitlements. It is not clear what the future holds
for US social policy broadly defined, or US child and family
policies, more specifically.
To the extent that the US has implicit child/family policies,
they can be identified and assessed only in the context of
social policy more broadly defined; and they can be understood
only with reference to a tradition that has included several
major elements:
- A strong value placed on individualism.
- The separation of Church and State in order to be receptive
to diverse religions and ensure their freedom;
- Protection of the family as a private unit and a stress
on avoiding government interference with family matters;
- Puritanism and related Protestant religious streams that
stressed that one could legislate to prevent evil but that
'goodness' had to be voluntary. As a result, voluntarism
as opposed to statutory enactment was favored for social
welfare.
- Social Darwinism, a mid-nineteenth-century scientific
belief that emphasized that survival of the fittest was
the 'natural' order and that societal intervention into
the process was counter-productive.
- A history of slavery followed by 'emancipation' after
the Civil War (1865) followed a century later by landmark
legislation during the civil rights movement of the 1960s;
but strong strains of racism remain.
- A strict work ethic as central to the value system ;
- A relatively open immigration policy which created population
growth while reducing, perhaps eliminating, any case for
pro-natalist policies.
- A limited role for the federal government, until late
in the nineteenth century, was not believed to have responsibilities
in the social sector, which was considered to be the province
of the states.
- Laissez-faire economic and social policy ('liberalism'
in the European sense) and an emphasis on the market as
the dominant ideology that would bring a society growth
and prosperity.
- The late development of a civil service and government
bureaucracy, which limited the national government's capacity
for social policy and raised doubts about the quality of
states' efforts.
- An ambivalence after World War II regarding women's roles,
in particular whether public policy should take a position
of encouraging women with young children to remain at home,
providing care for their children, or to enter the work-force,
helping to sustain family income.
Historically, these themes have played out in various ways
as economic, social, and political contexts changed with the
settlement of the continent and the evolution of the economy
through the industrial revolution to a post-industrial society,
and as demographic and social change led to major shifts in
the family. The point of departure was poor law following
the British tradition and experience, tempered by a strong
and important voluntary middle-class charitable movement that
first emerged in the nineteenth century, compensating for
the limitations of poor law and aiding those considered more
'helpable' and 'deserving'.
Within this context, social policies affecting children and
their families focused first on the unfortunate, the handicapped,
and the most severely deprived; and second, on the poor. Except
for free and compulsory public education, a development in
which the US was among the leaders internationally, the US
was late in its development of social policy for children
generally. Overall, it has placed a heavy emphasis on services
and other in-kind benefits for the vulnerable and poor. As
for improving the economic situation of families with children,
the policy has been largely one of ending almost all taxation
of the poor except for social security payroll taxes, offering
modest and inconsistent cash benefits to some low-income families
and tax benefits to the middle and upper classes.
Family benefits and services (TANF, EITC, federal child care
subsidies) constituted .64 % of GDP in 1995.
Return to Top
|
Highlights
Click here to view or print country
highlights in pdf format.
|
Government Agencies
The US child and family-related policies are divided across
federal, state, and local government lines and fragmented
across functional policy domains. The major federal departments
with responsibilities for the various component policies are:
Department of Health and Human Services (for health, welfare,
early childhood care services, child welfare services); Department
of Education (for certain aspects of education); Department
of Labor (for the Family and Medial Leave policy); the Department
of Agriculture (for food stamps); the Department of Housing
(for housing vouchers); the Department of Justice (for juvenile
delinquency); the Department of the Treasury (for tax benefits);
and the Social Security Administration (for survivor's benefits,
benefits for disabled children, etc). The major state level
agencies vary in name across state lines but include, for
the most part: a department of welfare or social services
(that includes welfare and personal social services), or employment
and social services (including child care); a department of
education; a department of health; and in some states, a department
of child and family services.
Return to Top
|
Demographic and Other Social Trends
The US has a population of about 270 million, the largest
country in the OECD and three-quarters the population of the
EU. It is significantly younger that the European countries
, with 12 percent of its population made up of the elderly
in contrast to 16 percent for the EU average, and 22 percent
children under 15, in contrast to 17 percent for the EU. As
is well known, it is a country that continues to admit a large
number of immigrants each year. About 800,000 legal immigrants
have entered the country each year for the past two decades,
largely from Latin America and Asia. It is a very heterogeneous
country racially and ethnically, with a large portion of its
population made up of Blacks (13 percent), Hispanics (11 percent),
and Asians (3.7 percent) and is diverse with regard to religion
as well. Within the child population, almost 80 percent are
white, 15 percent are black, 12 percent Hispanic (of either
race), and 5 percent Asian. The US has a higher marriage rate
than the EU countries -- and a much higher divorce rate. Its
rate of out-of-wedlock births is high but not as high as the
Nordic countries, France and UK. However, it has a higher
teen out-of-wedlock birth rate than any of the other EU or
OECD countries. Its cohabitation rate is not as high as the
northern European countries but is increasing rapidly. As
a result of a lower level of cohabitation, in contrast to
the Nordic countries, its lone parent rate, at 27 percent.
percent is the highest of the EU and OECD countries. Twenty-eight
percent of children lived with one parent in 1996. (However,
there are some estimates that suggest that the US rate of
cohabitation is such as to halve the rate of lone parents.)
At 2.1, its fertility is about at the replacement rate, significantly
higher than the EU or OECD averages, equaled only by Iceland
in the OECD, and exceeded only by Mexico and Turkey. Female
labor force participation is about 71 percent well above both
EU and OECD averages, a rate equaled only by Finland, and
exceeded only by Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. Almost half
of all families with children are two-parent, two-earner families.
More than two-thirds of all married women with children are
in the labor force and 71 percent of lone mothers. Sixty-one
percent of wives with children under age 6 are in the labor
force and the same proportion of those with children under
age 3.
Return to Top
|
Social Protection
The US was a laggard in the development of national social
policies, following the European countries in the development
of federal social insurance schemes by about 30 - 50 years.
The enactment of the Social Security Act in 1935 marked the
beginning of a social role for the federal government. In
many senses, US national social policy can be described and
understood in the context of that legislation and its subsequent
amendments. The law provides for all the basic social protection
regimes except for family allowances and national health insurance.
The elderly are well protected as are the disabled, while
in contrast, children and families with children have no universal
social insurance entitlement, no national minimum income,
and no universal health care. Only a means-tested federal-state,
cash-benefit program is available to some poor families with
children and a means-tested voucher for purchasing food, and
a national means-tested program for poor families with a disabled
or handicapped child. With a GDP that is the highest in the
OECD group ($8.2 trillion) and a per capita GDP that is second
highest, after Luxembourg, the US investment in social protection
is significantly lower than that of the other EU countries
(about 16 percent of GDP excluding education, as in the EU
statistics). However, when private expenditures are added
to public, the US total investment is more like that of the
EU countries. Unemployment rates are significantly below the
OECD average and less that half that of the EU average. Using
the U.S. measure of absolute poverty, the child poverty rate
in 1998 was 19 percent, significantly higher than throughout
the 1970s. Using the standard relative poverty rate applied
internationally (below 50 percent of median income), the rate
was 22 percent in the mid-1990s, at the bottom or next to
the bottom of the rankings in other countries, just above
Mexico in a group of 23 countries.
For more information on the social security systems, labour
market regulations, collective bargaining, social and family
policies, see the International
Reform Monitor.
Return to Top
|
Child, Youth and Family Policy Regimes
Maternity, Paternity, Parental,
and Family Leaves
The U.S. has no national maternity, paternity, or parental
leave policy. It does have an unpaid family leave and five
states (California, Hawaii, New Jersey, New York, and Rhode
Island) have a paid temporary or short term disability benefit
that covers pregnancy and maternity as well, typically for
about 10 -12 weeks. The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
was enacted in 1993 and requires that businesses with 50 or
more employees provide 12 weeks a year of job-protected but
unpaid leave to qualified employees (those who have worked
at least 1250 hours in the prior year), for birth, adoption,
foster care, or personal or family illness. Employers must
also continue to provide health insurance (if provided before).
In 2000, the President recommended that states use unemployment
insurance to provide a cash benefit that would partially replace
wages forgone while on leave. The Department of Labor has
issued regulations permitting the states to implement such
a policy. President Clinton recommended expanding the FMLA
to cover firms with 25 or more employees and to permit parents
to take up to 24 hours of leave a year to visit a child's
school or take a child to a doctor.
Return to Top
|
Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC)
The U.S. has no national system of ECEC nor does any state
have a statewide coherent policy or program. Most children
begin primary school at age 6 but compulsory school begins
at various ages across the states from 5-8. Almost all children
attend kindergarten at age 5, the year before they enter primary
school, largely under public auspices. ECEC policy includes
the whole range of government actions designed to influence
the supply of and/or demand for ECEC and the quality of services
provided. These government activities include direct delivery
of ECEC services; direct and indirect financial subsidies
to private providers, such as grants, contracts, and tax incentives;
financial subsidies to parents both direct and indirect, such
as cash benefits and vouchers to pay for the services, or
tax benefits to offset the costs, and the establishment and
enforcement of regulations. ECEC programs that serve children
under age 5 may be classified in several different ways. They
include a wide range of part-day and full-day programs under
education and social welfare auspices, funded and delivered
in a variety of ways in both the public and private (for-profit
and non-profit sectors). They include pre- or pre-primary
schools (pre-kindergartens, compensatory education programs,
and nursery schools), child care or day care centers, family-type
day care homes (both regulated and unregulated), before- and
after-school programs, and family support programs (child-centered,
family-focused, neighborhood-based programs offering a cluster
of services to families with very young children). Federal
funding is largely targeted on low-income children and children
with disabilities. The major sources of federal funds include
funds to subsidize child care for families leaving welfare
for work, compensatory education funds (Head Start and Early
Head Start), a tax credit to offset some ECEC costs, and funds
transferred from TANF (see below). Parent fees cover about
75 percent of costs. In 1996, 61 percent of children aged
3-5 were enrolled in some form of center-based or pre-primary
school program and about 31 percent of the under 3s.
Return to Top
|
Family Allowances
No child or family allowance is provided in the U.S. There
are, however, tax benefits contingent on the presence of child
(see below).
|
Child and Family Tax Benefits
Apart from tax allowances for dependents (a deduction of
$2,650 from income for each child claimed as a dependent),
there are three important child-conditioned tax benefits(1).
The Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) is a refundable tax credit.
Working families with children under 19 are eligible for the
tax credit which varies with income and is phased out when
income reaches $30,000 a year(2). A child
tax credit in the amount of $500 per child is available to
families with income above the tax threshold(3).
A child care tax credit (the Dependent Care Tax Credit) of
between 20 and 30 percent of child care costs, up to a maximum
of $2,400 per child per year for the costs for one child and
$4,800 for two or more. The credit is a maximum of $480 a
year ($720 for those with lower incomes) for families with
one child and $960 ($1,440 for those with lower incomes) for
those with two or more(4). There is also
a tax credit available to employers who set up a special plan
to pay for child care for their employees, and a tax benefit
available to workers who contribute to a plan at their workplace
whereby they set aside pre-income tax dollars to pay for ECEC.
|
Child Support
The US policy is one of stressing the enforcement of the
child support obligation of the non-custodial/non-resident
parent. Court-ordered support awards may be carried out through
automatic withholding of payment from the parent's wages.
There is also a growing trend toward the use of a formula
in setting child support awards, for example, 17 percent of
income for one child, 25 percent for two, 29 percent for 3.
|
Other Child Conditioned
Income Transfers
The most important income transfers for families with children
are: the tax benefits described above; means-tested cash and
in-kind benefits, and Survivor's benefits under social security.
Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) is a means-tested
cash benefit funded by the federal government with contributions
by the states as well, through grants to the states permitting
states great flexibility in providing cash assistance to poor
families with children (or if the mother is pregnant). . TANF
has a 5-year lifetime limit on receipt, requires poor women
with children aged 3 months and older to participate in work
after a maximum of two years, stresses marriage and the reduction
of out-of-wedlock pregnancy and childbearing, and has a series
of other requirements some of which vary across the states.
A second important income transfer program of importance
to poor children is Food Stamps, the in-kind benefit (a voucher)
designed to increase the food purchasing power of eligible
low-income families. Families are eligible if at least one
member is seeking work or employed, and have gross monthly
income under 130 percent of the poverty threshold.
A third important benefit is Supplemental Security Income
(SSI), a means-tested cash benefit provided by the federal
government to poor and disabled children as well as other
poor, blind or disabled adults and aged. As in other countries,
children in the US are also entitled to Survivor's benefits
under social security.
Return to Top
|
Child and Adolescent Health
Although there is no national health insurance program in
the U.S. nor a universal child health program, there is a
federal/state health assistance program for low-income children
and their families (Medicaid) and a recently established federal/state
special funding stream for health care for low-income children
not otherwise covered by health insurance. All poor children
under 19 are to be covered by Medicaid by the year 2003, unless
already covered under some other health insurance program.
Housing The Federal government provides housing aid indirectly
to lower income households in the form of housing block grants
to state and local government which may use the funds for
various housing assistance activities including rent subsidies.
Coverage does not begin to include all those who are eligible.
In addition, extensive tax benefits are available for house
or apartment owners.
|
Youth
Youth unemployment rates for males and females under age
25 are similar, slightly under 11 percent for females and
slightly over for males. There is particular concern regarding
non-marital teen pregnancy and parenting and a major policy
emphasis on encouraging sexual abstinence.
The United States was one of the fourteen countries participating
in the OECD thematic review, From Initial
Education to Working Life - Making Transitions Work .
For more detail on the transition to working life in the U.S.,
see OECD's background
report on the United States.
Return to Top
|
Reconciliation of Work and Family
Life
Reconciliation of work and family life is an important issue
in public discussion but not in public policy. The stress
is on employer responsiveness to a changing workforce, and
the provision of flexible benefits, and child care -related
benefits and services, but none of this is a matter of statutory
provision. The discussions concerning the FMLA and ECEC are
often premised on the importance of the issue, but the continued
ambivalence regarding women's roles contributes to the lack
of policy attention directed to this issue.
Return to Top
|
References
Sheila B. Kamerman and Alfred J. Kahn,.
"Family Change and Family Policies in the United States,"
in Sheila B. Kamerman and Alfred J. Kahn,. Family Change and
Family Policies in Great Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and
the United States, Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University Press,
1997.
Sheila B. Kamerman and Alfred J. Kahn,
Starting Right, New York: Oxford University Press, 1995.
OECD, Thematic Review on Early Childhood
Education and Care. Background Paper on United States.
OECD, Initial
Education to Working Life - Making Transitions Work.
Paris: OECD Publications, 2000.
U.S. House of Representatives, Committee
on Ways and Means, The Green Book. Washington, D.C.: GPO,
2000.
Robert Zemsky, D. Shapiro, M. Iannozzi, P. Cappelli, T. Bailey,
Thematic
Review of the Transition from Initial Education to Working
Life in the United States of America (Commissioned
by OECD of the Office of Educational Research and Improvement,
U.S. Department of Education,Washington, D.C.: 1998).
|
Notes
1.This profile is drawn largely from Sheila B. Kamerman and
Alfred J. Kahn,. Family Change and Family Policies in the
United States, in Sheila B. Kamerman and Alfred J. Kahn,.
Family Change and Family Policies in Great Britain, Canada,
New Zealand, and the United States, Oxford, Eng.: Oxford University
Press, 1997. And, to a lesser extent, OECD, Thematic Review
on Early Childhood Education and Care. Background Paper on
United States. Forthcoming.
2. Unicef, Innocenti Center, Child Poverty in Rich Nations.
Florecne Italy, 2000.
Return to Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
