Chapter 4 © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Policies and Practices Biased Toward Individual Rights over Family Responsibilities

Chapter 4 Outline U.S. Individualism Permeates Policymaking © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Chapter 4 Outline U.S. Individualism Permeates Policymaking How Policymaking Affects Families Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking Supreme Court Decisions Federal, State, and Local Laws Workplace Policies Organizational Practices and Operating Procedures Professional Training Data and Theories Summary

U.S. Individualism Permeates Policymaking © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 U.S. Individualism Permeates Policymaking The United States is one of the only countries without a specific mention of family in its constitution. No federal agency assumes sole responsibility for families. No federal or state government has charters or declarations that set forth family aims and principles. Piecemeal policies are passed that respond to specific individual needs without a comprehensive vision for families.

How Policymaking Affects Families © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 How Policymaking Affects Families Ecological Family Systems Theory Family functioning is shaped by the larger contexts in which families operate. (Bronfenbrenner, 1986; Minuchin, 1974)

Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking Case studies of how families experience policies within workplaces, schools, and service systems Supreme Court decisions Federal, state, and local laws Workplace policies Organizational practices and operating procedures Professional training practices Data and theories

Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking Supreme Court Decisions Extension of equal protection and constitutional autonomy rights into family decisions such as marriage, child custody, and reproduction Shift in family law toward treating family commitments as private contractual arrangements Federal Laws Policies designed with the individual but not family in mind Policy eligibility varies by family structure, often in unintended ways Lack of policies that recognize and value work in the family in the same ways as work in the formal labor market

Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking State Laws Many family policies are now determined by states (e.g., child welfare, health insurance, family preservation, K-12 education, marriage, divorce, property distribution) State policy decisions privilege some types of families over others, often in unintended ways Local Laws and Service Provision City ordinances; zoning rules; local education boards Community organizations; family service providers

Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking Workplace Policies Are hiring decisions, flexibility, overtime requirements, and health benefits family friendly? Organizational Practices and Operating Procedures Are laws implemented as intended? Are programs administered, financed, and staffed in family-friendly ways? Is program philosophy and practice generally more individualistic or familistic?

Implementation Considerations © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Implementation Considerations Multiple program components shape how policies are implemented and how they affect families Governance Who makes the implementation decisions and how the decisions are made Mission and Goals Statement of philosophy, goals, and objectives Financing Nature and type of funding (e.g., open-ended entitlement, matching grants) Administration Contract, procurement, and personnel systems; accountability and supervisory structure Staffing Qualifications and training of staff; job descriptions; and staff development plans Service Models Assumptions, targets, and models of service delivery Data Collection Planning, monitoring, and accountability; what data are collected, how they are used, and how they coordinate with other related data Program Evaluation Which family members are included, and what family benchmarks and outcome measures are collected

Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking Professional Training Family policy not prioritized by fields and institutions relevant to policy (e.g., economics, political science, law) Lack of attention in secondary and higher education to how families contribute to their members and to society Little training provided to teachers on how to involve parents and serve families with diverse needs Human service professionals mainly trained in individualistic approaches to treatment and service delivery

Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Examples of Family Marginalization in Policymaking Data and Theories Lack of data collected on key aspects of family life Family outcomes neglected or inconsistently measured Family data often collected from only one family member Who is targeted in data collection has not kept pace with the full range of changing family demographics Capturing the dynamic, multifaceted nature of family relationships is challenging; complex analyses needed to represent the reciprocal nature of family interactions Data limitations slow the development and refinement of theoretical frameworks that can inform policy decisions

© Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Summary Policies and practices in the U.S. are approached primarily from an individualistic frame. Families are largely considered a private matter, but are profoundly affected by the public environment in which they operate. Families provide many functions for the good of society, but they perform these valuable functions mostly on their own. Families are more effective in supporting, educating, and caring for their members in the context of family-friendly policies and practices.