Welfare reform seeks to:

1. reduce out-of-wedlock pregnancies (under what assumption(s)?), control reproductive behavior
2. federal funds are used to support 'abstinence-only' education (none has been found to be effective in reducing pregnancy)-'sex is only appropriate in the context of heterosexual, monogamous, marital relationships', says the material. Yes, written by our members of Congress, veritable beacons of monogamy and marital fidelity.
3. What does this say about reproductive freedom, and who gets it?
4. Do welfare mothers understand and follow rules and make fertility decisions based on welfare benefits available to them?? That would seem to be one of the assumptions underlying this part of the rule structure.
5. Crack down on 'predatory men,' statutory rape
6. Institute the 'family cap'-children born to mothers on welfare aren't covered, 'don't count'
7. The Illegitimacy, anti-abortion bonus sweepstakes--five states with the greatest reductions in out-of-wedlock births get bonus money from the federal government, if they do it without raising the abortion rate
   1. But there's a catch--no extra money for disseminating information on birth control.
8. promote marriage as a route off of welfare
   1. We've discussed this previously and will do so again
9. allow children to be 'cared for at home.' Let's look at some of the childcare rules:
10. Childcare subsidy-it is much more expensive to put them in care than to care for them at home-maybe twice, three times as much. So why does welfare reform do it?
11. Most women receive no childcare subsidies (on TANF)-there are waiting lists, lack of providers that qualify/or are certified
12. Onerous application process for childcare: letter from employer, certification of eligibility and compliance from caseworker, physical exams and immunizations, medical records of kids, reporting requirements-failure to comply ends any subsidy
13. Poor mothers are less likely to have friends/relatives that are certified-certification is expensive (can you think of any policy issues here?)
14. What happens? Why are only half of eligible mothers receiving child care benefits in many states?
    1. Mothers are unaware
    2. Many never complete the initial application process
    3. They can't keep up with reporting requirements
    4. It's too difficult to manage childcare slots as required
15. What about caseworkers? What do their jobs end up looking like?
16. As in many instances with welfare reform, the rules themselves may not be overly burdensome, but it is their rigidity--THERE ARE NO EXCEPTIONS (e.g., the abused and traumatized child that needed time at home with her mother. The mother quit her job, which cost her sanctions)
17. Issues:
    1. Poor quality childcare, few certification requirements in some areas-too many in others
    2. Graveyard shifts?? Swing shifts?
    3. deadbeat dads: collecting child support is difficult, expensive
       1. the problems? Poor dads, domestic violence, paternity, difficulties identifying and locating fathers--it is a humiliating process for women.
       2. the program costs more to enforce than is collected from these men, who are generally underemployed, incarcerated, difficult to find, poor.
       3. So, are fathers being held accountable, or are mothers accountable for making enforcement system work?
       4. In addition, most of the money goes to the state to cover the costs of enforcing the program. Even though the enforcement work depends on the participation of the mothers, they get only a small percentage because they're already getting welfare benefits.
       5. This makes it difficult for mothers to maintain family ties-In essence, it WORKS AGAINST FAMILY FUNCTIONING IN MANY CASES, can bring violent men back into women's lives.
       6. Family values, or cost recovery?

Social control of mothers
If much of this sounds extremely burdensome, then you're likely paying attention. According to Hays, it's a model designed to control mothers' behavior. Remember back to the Elizabethan poor laws, the idea of an 'undeserving' population. Want Public assistance? Be prepared for privacy invasion.

Can rules and bureaucratic procedures produce respect for and adherence to family values? Or for that matter instill a sense of self-sufficiency and a work ethic? Are the people who are the targets of these reforms lacking in work ethic and family values? And whose family values, by the way?