Transcript Document

Presentation made by Helen Wilkinson, Director,
Genderquake Limited to QMW Seminars, 29 January 2003
-
What Are Key Issues Which Policy Must Address
For Lone Parent mothers, non-resident fathers in the context
of family policy and the work-life agenda
‘Fragile families’
• In general, healthy families are those in which the
father and mother are actively involved in the
nurturing of their children;
•
• Lone parenthood in which the father is non
resident re by definition ‘fragile families’ –
vulnerable to child poverty, low income and low
employability;
• Policies to address the needs of lone parent
mothers are critical for strengthening fragile
families;
Fragile families ctd…
• More needs to be done to facilitate and maintain
the connection between the non resident father and
their children, and provide child support in the
widest sense;
• Adult relationships may no longer be for life but
parenthood is - children require the love and
nurturance from both parents regardless of
whether or not the connection between the two
adults is frayed
Core proposition
• If we are to succeed in achieving the outcomes of
Government objectives in relation to lone
parenthood we have to systematically tackle and
address policies for non-resident fathers;
• This is a particular issue for low income groups;
• Policies such as they exist are not joined up;
Government strategies
• New Deal for Lone Parents supports registered
childcare costs for part-time working for one year
and New Deal for Lone Parent advisors help lone
parents to look for a job, get training and find
suitable childcare.
• Jobcentre Plus ensures that jobseekers with
children and their personal advisors have better
access to information on childcare provision in
their area, from April 2003 there will be a
dedicated Childcare Partnership Manager in
every Jobcentre Plus district.
Key policy interventions for
lone parents
• Work as a route out of child poverty - New Deal
for Lone parents – getting lone parents back into
work;
• Work-Life balance – as route to balancing work
and parenting – new initiatives, new rights for
better work-life balance – e.g. flexible working,
extended maternity leave etc etc;
• Child care solutions - developing and delivering
reliable high quality affordable childcare and
focussing the NCS to deliver child care solutions
for lone parents;
Non-resident fatherhood strengthening the ties that bind
• Government needs to develop strategies for
promoting the involvement of non resident
fathers in the lives of their children and
linking this to agenda for lone parent
mothers;
• USA is an interesting model of practice and
innovation;
Lone Parents – policy challenges
• eradicating child poverty by 2020 and halving it
by 2010; and
• getting 70 per cent of lone parents into paid
employment by 2010;
• Policies for non resident fatherhood a missing link
and needs joining up to this agenda;
Child care gap and lone parents
• Childcare is a commonly reported barriers to work among nonworking lone parents;
• 52% of non-working lone parents on Income Support in the New Deal
for Lone Parents (NDLP) Survey 2000/2001 mention the lack of
suitable childcare as a barrier to work;
• nearly one half of non-working lone parents with children under five
have concerns about the cost and availability of childcare; and
• lone parents who say they expect to look for work sometime in the
future also recognise the childcare barrier, with 28 per cent having
concerns about costs and 19 per cent reporting that no childcare is
available.
Lone parents’ concerns
• nearly one half of non-working lone parents with
children under five have concerns about the cost
and availability of childcare; and
• lone parents who say they expect to look for work
sometime in the future also recognise the childcare
barrier, with 28 per cent having concerns about
costs and 19 per cent reporting that no childcare is
available.
Child care condundrum
• Many lone parents have only one income to
to pay for childcare and no option other
than to use informal, unregistered childcare
that consequently excludes them from
receiving any Government contribution
towards their childcare costs.
Problems with child care tax credit
• Impact of CCT is limited – particularly for lone
parents;
• Typical cost of childcare services for a child
under two of £120 a week means that despite a
childcare tax contribution towards the cost of
childcare, the lone parent is still left with a share
of the cost that is simply unaffordable (they get on
average just less than £60);
Problems with CCT ctd..
• Restriction of CCT to registered formal childcare
is problematic, particularly for lone parents of
whom a significant proportion (42%) only use
informal childcare, not eligible for CCT;
• Lone parents express a strong preference for
informal care as they want someone to care for
their child who can give them the quality of care
comparable to their own and whom they can trust;
• Only 15 per cent of lone parents exclusively use
formal child care
Government strategy re child care &
lone parents
• Development of Children’s Centres targetted
investment in the 20 per cent most disadvantaged
wards. Will go some way to addressing the
childcare needs of lone parents who live in those
wards but the market is being left to deliver
childcare in the remaining 80 per cent of
neighbourhoods;
• Evidence presented at a recent Education Select
Committee suggested that extending this
programme to the 30 per cent most disadvantaged
wards would extend access to 70 per cent of
disadvantaged children.
Child care challenge for Lone Parents
Key headlines from recent NCS review process:
1. Concerted action is needed to encourage informal child
careers to train and qualify as registered childminders;
2. Need to consider whether some form of benefit can be
extended to lone parents and informal carers through
reform/modification of child care tax credit;
3. Policy priorities and investment beyond geographic
confines to reach lone parents in affluent areas;
Fatherhood as a public good
• Research evidence – chronicles benefits of
active, nurturant fatherhood for children and
a growing literature on the
psychological,emotional and physical
benefits for fathers;
• Scope for more research in this area,
especially vis a vis non-resident fathers
Trends in fatherhood
• New Dad? - research evidence shows that
fathers today are more involved with the
care and nurturance of their children
(custodial fathers are a rapidly rising
demographic group).
• Disconnected Dad? - research evidence also
shows growing minority of children are
growing up in fatherless households
The cycle from connection to
disconnection
• The research suggests that many nonresident fathers have a positive connection
with their child at the beginning. Over time,
this connection becomes more tenuous
(there are also significant differences
between divorced and never married
fathers)
Generational shifts in nonresident fatherhood
• Over the last three decades, unprecedented
trends to father absence - precipitated by
divorce epidemic
• A new generation of non-resident fathers
are coming to light - more and more make
up the ‘never marrieds’, and often the
connection between the two adults is
tenuous
Low income non-resident fathers
• Special barriers factor them out of equation
in society’s eyes (and thus their own) society’s definition of ‘responsible father’
frequently specifies economic provision
• Low income non resident fathers frequently
want to pay but cannot pay - the system
forces them underground and over time,
they lose contact
Contradictory trends?
• Trends in fatherlessness need some
qualification - evidence of the rise of
single parent households does not in
itself prove fatherlessness - qualitative
research amongst a new generation of
never married, low income households
points to the phenomenon of the
‘underground father’
Time for a new paradigm?
• The deficit model of fatherhood has held sway for
too long
• We need a new set of expectations for today’s
fathers - changing public and political cultures
(e.g. public awareness campaigns to shift political
consciousness and shifts in public policy to
encourage and facilitate involved fatherhood (e.g.
custody reform, facilitating team parenting,
welfare reform)
Key Conclusions
• Fatherhood moving to the top of agenda - its future not yet
secured
• The message about child well-being and about the key to
promoting healthy families need to be made more explicit
and integrated into outcome indicators
• Communities need to be involved and heard - no one size
fits all
• Fatherhood cannot be seen in isolation - the best policies
are those which recognise the interrelationship between
welfare to work and family preservation issues
US Political context
• An unprecedented level of community
mobilisation around the issue
• Foundations have played a strategic role in
putting the issue on to the agenda
• Federal interest in the issue risen since mid
90s and accelerating - Administration
support and legislative interest in Congress
Political context
• State activity rising - NGA sub-committee,
states setting up taskforces, commissions,
policy initiatives
• Key charismatic individuals - Governors,
community activists, state bureaucrats etc
have been central
• The importance of women’s voices as well
as men’s
The downside
• The funding base for many fatherhood initiatives
is still tenuous (all too often dependent on other
drivers such as welfare reform which has different
goals)
• Few of the innovative states have factored in
outcome indicators and ways of evaluating the
effectiveness of their programs with fatherhood in
mind - this leaves them vulnerable in the long
term
The downside
• The interests of fatherhood activists are sometimes in
tension or do not always coincide with state/federal policy
goals (eg. child support, welfare reform)
• Demand for technical based assistance is beginning to
outstrip supply - the fatherhood field still needs active
development
• The case for fatherhood per se needs to be articulated by
community based activists and mainstreamed into the
mindset of state and federal policy makers for programs to
be secured, let alone flourish
The downside
• Foundations’ frequently change policy
direction once they have raised issues - this
leaves fatherhood programs vulnerable
• Key charismatic individuals have been
critical at all levels - federal and state but
especially within foundations and
community based organisations - without
their energy the potency of the issue could
wane
State upsum
• Diversity is key - no one size fits all
• Different political context in each states
frames the issues
• But also, common themes - federal welfare
to work and child support are key drivers not least in releasing new funding streams
• Child well-being is jostling to make itself
on to the agenda of policy makers - but it is
finance that is driving most states
Policy Implications for UK
• Focus on engendering healthy parenting
• Need to prioritise low income fragile
families
• Need new fatherhood paradigm - away from
deficit model
• Shared parenting should become the norm custody reform, access & visitation,
mediation services to never married as well
as married
Key findings from US
• Concept of fatherlessness needs qualification
• Process of disconnection is complex with significant
differences between divorced parents and never marrieds
• Low income non-resident fathers face specific barriers economic barriers to involvement – on a par with barriers
lone parent mother face;
• Clear, measurable, tangible benefits of involved fatherhood
- for child, father and mother – and therefore strategies for
tackling non resident fatherhood have the potential to also
improve the lives of lone parent mothers;
Policy Implications
• Child support reform – benefits lone parent mums
and reduces child poverty
• Welfare to work – if to succeed in above, need to
develop strategies for enhancing economic
potential of low skilled low income fathers;
• Means securing funding base for fatherhood
programs in their own right
• Prevention is the cure
• Holistic government
• Build child well-being and father involvement into
key program evaluations
Lessons for Britain?
• Direct link to current debates about welfare reform
- in terms of welfare to work, and child support
• Ideally, this should be linked to a more all
encompassing campaign to promote responsible
fatherhood as a whole reaching all fathers and all
income groups
• Policies to promote responsible fatherhood should
be primarily justified in terms of child well-being
• Policies for non-resident fatherhood also need to
be linked to lone parent policies
Joining up policies for fragile
families
• Arg for promoting greater contact between
non-resident father and the child
increasingly based not just on well-being of
the child and father but also indirectly the
mother (in reduced stress, enhancing family
income, sharing the parenting load, etc) and
thus tackling and achieving potential policy
outcomes vis a vis lone parents
For more information on any aspect of this presentation
contact: [email protected].
Please also visit: www.genderquake.com