Respond to two colleagues in one of the following ways:
- Compare your analysis about policy and social work mission and value alignment with your colleague’s.
- If you disagree, be sure to do so respectfully.
- Compare your analysis about the role of society’s perception and its relation to the policy with your colleague’s.
- If you disagree, be sure to do so respectfully.
1-HE,
The “welfare-to-work” initiative of the 1990s, epitomized by The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996, marked a significant shift in the United States’ approach to social welfare policy, transitioning responsibility for poverty from the government to the individual (Popple et al., 2019). This policy serves the population of low-income families, particularly those dependent on government assistance for extended periods, and includes programs such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) which replaced the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program (Popple et al., 2019; O’Connor, 2001). These programs were meant to help families with low incomes, especially those who had been relying on government help for a long time.
Not everyone agrees with this approach. Some people think that social work, which is all about helping people and making sure they’re treated with dignity and respect, should focus more on directly helping those who are struggling the most. They worry that making people rely less on government aid might hurt those who need it most and might not be able to find work easily, which can be at odds with the social work commitment to advocate for and enable the empowerment of marginalized populations (NASW, 2021).
The way society sees people who are struggling financially affects the policies that are made to help them. Some people believe that those who are poor should just work harder to get out of poverty, even though there are often bigger issues that make it hard for them to succeed. This way of thinking challenges social workers who want to change the bigger problems that cause poverty and make sure everyone is treated fairly.
So, there’s a big debate about how best to help people who are struggling financially, and it’s tied up with how we see poverty and who we think should be responsible for fixing it.
2-ER,
The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) of 1996 was implemented as part of the welfare reform efforts in the United States. Its purpose was to completely revamp the welfare system to address concerns about reliance on public assistance and promote self-sufficiency through employment. The policy predominantly caters to economically disadvantaged households, encompassing single parents, children, and individuals facing poverty(Popple & Leighninger, n.d.).
Under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA), various programs including Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG), and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) (previously referred to as food stamps) are encompassed by this policy. PRWORA, although intended to encourage self-reliance and decrease reliance on welfare, has faced criticism for imposing more stringent eligibility criteria, time restrictions, and work obligations. These measures have the potential to worsen poverty and adversity for vulnerable populations. This policy may not completely coincide with the principles of social work, which aim to advance social justice, fairness, and empowerment. It has the potential to disproportionately affect marginalized individuals and families. The creation of PRWORA and comparable policies demonstrate societal views on poverty and welfare recipients, which are frequently shaped by stereotypes and stigmas associated with low-income individuals and families. These perceptions can result in policies that prioritize individual accountability and employment over ensuring sufficient assistance and resources to address structural obstacles to economic security for marginalized communities.
