Poverty, Hardship and Families:
How Many People Are Poor, and What Does Being Poor in America Really Mean?

A briefing paper prepared for the Council on Contemporary Families

By Philip N. Cohen, Professor of Sociology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

December 5, 2011

This briefing paper describes three common misperceptions about poverty and families, and clarifies new information about recent poverty trends.

CONTACT: Stephanie Coontz, coontzs@msn.com

360 352-8117; 360 556-9223

MASS INCARCERATION AND AMERICA'S FAMILIES

A Best-Practice Briefing Prepared for the Council on Contemporary Families by Carol Shapiro, Institute for Social and Economic Research and Policy, Columbia University, October 12, 2010

October 16 is the 37^th anniversary of congressional approval of the Drug Enforcement Administration, whose purpose, in the words of then-President Richard Nixon, was to coordinate an "all-out war" on drugs. Before the 1970's, drug abuse had been seen by policy makers primarily as a disease that could be addressed by treatment. During the 1970s, however, drug abuse - even in the absence of any violent or other criminal behavior - came to be seen as a law enforcement problem to be solved through aggressive arrest and incarceration policies.

Since then, the United States has increased its rates of imprisonment by nearly 500 percent. We now incarcerate a far higher proportion of our citizens than any other nation -- 2.3 million adults and an additional eight hundred thousand youths.  This is a higher proportion than in either China or Russia, and higher than the top 35 European countries combined, per recent reports. As an absolute number it represents more than the combined populations of Boston, San Francisco, and Washington, DC.

On any given day, at least one in 100 adults is in our nation's jails and prisons, while more than one in 30 adults is under some form of correctional custody, including probation and parole supervision in the community. More than half of all inmates are parents of minor children. Almost 3 million minor children have a parent behind bars-that is one in 28--and about one million juveniles are themselves under some form of correctional supervision, creating complex relationships between parents, schools, probation officers, and other agencies.

Low-income communities are disproportionately affected by America's mass incarceration practices. Residents are more likely to be arrested, prosecuted, and sent to jail for the same offenses that lead to warnings, probation, or treatment programs in more affluent neighborhoods.  Most convictions in low-income communities, contrary to popular impression, are for nonviolent acts, with drug users and the mentally ill heavily overrepresented in the prison population.  Two-thirds of incarcerated parents of minor children are in jail for non-violent acts. Many non-violent offenders cycle in and out of jail simply because of technical violations of probation or parole rules, not because they have committed new crimes.

WHY SHOULD WE CARE?

A Report Prepared for the 13th Annual Conference of the Council on Contemporary Families, Augustana College, April 16-17, 2010

By Valerie Adrian and Stephanie Coontz

The economy is now out of free fall, but the impact of recent economic losses on families will continue for many years to come. An overview of the economic, unemployment and poverty trends suggests why:

• The Congressional Budget Office estimates that thousands more jobs would have disappeared and the growth rate would have been 1.2 to 3.2 points lower in the third quarter of 2009 without the Recovery Act's stimulus package, but even so the official unemployment rate remains around 10 percent. When economists take into account discouraged workers that rises to almost 18 percent, the highest figure since the 1930s.
• As of March 2010, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, more than 44 percent of jobless workers had been out of work for six months or more. This is more than double the number recorded in December 2008.
• A December 2009 survey found that 44 percent of families had experienced the job loss of one or more members, a reduction in hours, or a cut in pay over the past year.

By Richard Williams, Professor of Sociology, University of Notre Dame; Richard.A.Williams.5@ND.Edu; 574.631.6668 (office); 574.289.5227 (home)

Forty-seven years ago, on November 20, 1962, President Kennedy signed Executive Order 11063, prohibiting federally-funded housing agencies from denying mortgages to any person based on their race, color, creed or national origin. Kennedy was fulfilling a campaign promise to make "one stroke of the pen" that would allow millions of black American children "to grow up in decency."

Today, however, there are some who argue that government efforts to promote minority home ownership caused our current economic crisis, forcing banks to lend to unqualified buyers and eventually pulling all homebuyers down. This is a misconception that could hamper future efforts to help families find secure, affordable housing.

June 19, 2008

By Valerie Adrian, Research Intern, Council on Contemporary Families; valadrian@gmail.com; and Stephanie Coontz, Professor of History and Family Studies, The Evergreen State College; coontzs@msn.com; 360.556.9223

In the following paper, we summarize the extent of the unfolding economic crisis in America and then discuss its many effects on families, from the direct impact of economic stress to less obvious effects such as deteriorating schools, changes in eating habits, and even families' ability to take care of their pets.

April 15, 2008
For experts' contact information, see end of release.

Americans tend to think we are better off than families in most other industrial countries because we pay lower income taxes. But when we factor in the higher amount Americans pay for health care, child care, and education, the comparison is not always in our favor. Where do American families' tax dollars go and what family "value" do they get in return?

April 15, 2008

By Betsey Stevenson, Professor of Business and Public Policy, The Warton School of the University of Pennsylvania; betseys@wharton.upenn.edu; and Justin Wolfers, Professor of Business and Public Policy, The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania; jwolfers@wharton.upenn.edu

A new report,"The Taxpayer Costs of Divorce and Unwed Childbearing: First-Ever Estimates for the Nation and all 50 States", raises the question of how much divorce costs taxpayers. This is an intriguing question, but unfortunately this report falls short on providing the answer.

January 23, 2008

By Frank F. Furstenberg, Zellerback Family Professor of Sociology, University of Pennsylvania; fff@sas.upenn.edu; 415.291.4486

A new longitudinal study reveals that teen childbearing is NOT the reason that many Americans have been trapped in poverty over the past three decades.

Media Contact:
Stephanie Coontz, coontzs@msn.com; 360 352-8117; cell: 360 556-9223

Chicago, September 24, 2007

Council on Contemporary Families Study:
New findings on low-income couples and unmarried women with children

Why do so many low-income couples postpone marriage but fail to postpone childbearing? Which couples eventually do marry? Why do the rest of the couples break up? How would knowing the answers to these questions affect public policy?

A new briefing report by the Council on Contemporary Families offers an advance look at the answers to these questions, based on research to be published in a forthcoming book (October, 2007) by Stanford sociologist Paula England and Harvard sociologist Kathryn Edin.

The report, "Unmarried Couples with Children," follows below. Among the questions to which it provides surprising answers:

* Why low-income unmarried couples with children believe they will have a longer-lasting relationship if they postpone marriage, even after they have a child, and even though most say they expect to marry each other;

* Which couples are most likely to use contraception; and why some couples do not;

* How the issues that eventually break most of these couples up differ from the issues that initially cause them to postpone marriage;

* Why liberal and conservative policy proposals for these couples each fail to address half the problem.

Other topics covered in the study:

Couples who do not use birth control consistently are NOT the uncommitted couples we often hear about, who have a short fling, leaving the woman pregnant and the man long gone. It is the committed couples who do not regularly use birth control, and the report explains why;

What issues create conflict for low-income couples with children, and why it is women who usually initiate the breakup;

What predicts good fathering in a relationship when a man has a child from a previous relationship, as so many of the men (and women) in these couples do.

This briefing paper summarizes findings from a new book, entitled Unmarried Couples with Children, edited by Stanford sociologist Paula England and Harvard sociologist Kathryn Edin, published in 2007 by Russell Sage Foundation.  England and Edin conducted in-depth interviews with unmarried couples right after their baby was born, and followed and reinterviewed them until their baby turned 4, whether they married, stayed together unmarried, or broke up.  Parents were interviewed together and apart.

September 4, 2007

By Sanjiv Gupta, Professor of Sociology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; sanjivgupta1@gmail.com; 413.577.1773

What reduces women's housework burden? A new study shows that on average it doesn't have much to do with her husband's help or his earnings, but how much money SHE earns. The more she earns, the less housework she does.

April 26-28, 2002
Prepared for the Fifth Annual CCF Conference

By Stephanie Coontz, Professor of History and Family Studies, The Evergreen State College; coontzs@msn.com; 360.556.9223; and Nancy Folbre, Professor of Economics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst; folbre@econs.umass.edu