Families as a Legitimate Focus of Public Policy: Yesterday and Today Chapter 7 © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Families as a Legitimate Focus of Public Policy: Yesterday and Today

Chapter 7 Outline History of the Family Policy Field © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Chapter 7 Outline History of the Family Policy Field Values and Priorities of the American People Philanthropic Commitments International Conventions Federal Laws State Laws Summary

History of the Family Policy Field © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 History of the Family Policy Field Are families a legitimate issue for public policy? This is a question of values, priorities, and political judgments that can be informed, but not answered, by science. Family policy as a field was formally conceived in 1973 at the U.S. Senate subcommittee hearings on the state of American families. Distinguished scholars called for routine assessments of the impact of public policies and programs on family well-being. The Family Impact Seminar was established in 1976 to study the idea of how to best assess family impact.

History of the Family Policy Field © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 History of the Family Policy Field Over the next decade, family policy issues became politically contentious, and attention returned to single issue and single constituency research and advocacy. Since the late 1980s and early 1990s, the legitimacy of family policy has been demonstrated by the views of the American public, level of philanthropic commitment, and political judgments that are supportive of families.

Values and Priorities of the American People © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Values and Priorities of the American People Americans are most satisfied with their family life compared to other aspects of life; level of satisfaction varies little by income. Americans place high importance on family values when making voting decisions, but “family values” can have different meanings to different people. Americans appear to see a role for government in supporting families, yet views are nuanced. Public opinion data shows varying levels of support for public policies depending on family characteristics and circumstances such as whether families are low income, if they are working, whether they have children, etc.

Philanthropic Commitments © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Philanthropic Commitments Philanthropy can profoundly influence family policies through investing in projects to determine: what issues are legitimate topics for government action, which approaches are best to support children and families, what types of data are most useful for informing policy, and how barriers to child and family well-being can be overcome. Many foundations have invested in systems change by funding efforts to: collect research and data that can guide policy decisions, improve practice, and address barriers to alleviating social, economic, and racial disparities.

Examples of the Influence of Philanthropic Commitments © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Examples of the Influence of Philanthropic Commitments Creating Momentum for Early Learning in Minnesota Highlighting the importance of foundations partnering with government, identifying clear goals and strategies, emphasizing research and evaluation, etc. Focusing on Research and Data Collection Collection of data essential for examining and improving policy and program effectiveness, answering policy relevant questions Focusing on Practice Funding of emerging family policy issues to place them on the public agenda Investments in the academic community, in the policymaking community, and in bridging the gap between the two Addressing Barriers to Social, Economic, and Racial Disparities Shifting the focus from funding direct family services to addressing underlying causes of social, economic, and racial injustice

International Conventions © Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 International Conventions Four of the Hague Conventions deal with family law: Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Intercountry Adoption International Enforcement of Child Support and Other Forms of Family Maintenance Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children. These conventions ensure family preservation and support efforts are upheld across international lines.

© Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Federal Laws Federal investments in children and families grew throughout the 1990s and 2000s, in both number of family policies enacted and federal expenditures on children; spending on children declined in 2011. About 10% of total federal spending is on children, compared to 41% on the elderly and those with disabilities, 20% on defense, and 6% on interest on the debt. Some recent public policies have resulted in remarkable socioeconomic changes for families. e.g., welfare reform; SCHIP; No Child Left Behind

© Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Federal Laws Recent family policy decisions have been shaped by four main trends that represent the the larger context of U.S. policymaking over the last decade: The patchwork nature of family policies has led to disparate spending patterns and impacts on different demographic groups. There is wide variation in how policies are funded, e.g., mandatory programs have built-in spending increases, whereas other programs require annual appropriations. Income support policies have shifted from providing cash assistance to offering work supports. Authority for many family policies has devolved from the federal level to states and local municipalities.

© Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 State Laws Family policies regarding child welfare, marriage, divorce, and property distribution are primarily decided on a state-by-state basis. States now have authority over issues such as children’s health insurance, K–12 education, and welfare reform. Devolution trends have been counterbalanced by trends toward increased uniformity in family law through sources such as the U.S. Supreme Court and the Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws. Two thirds of total spending on children comes from state and local sources. Data suggest that state investments and budget cuts have real consequences for the lives of children.

© Routledge/Taylor & Francis 2014 Summary Families have been shown to be a legitimate target for public policy, demonstrated through high levels of public support, philanthropic commitments, and government investments since the 1990s. The question that remains is whether this support is too little, too much, or just right. Debate continues over how and when government should intervene in family life. Investing in family policy could mean more government and higher costs in the short run, but it might also mean less government and lower costs in the long run.