Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Creating The Context For The Analysis of Social Policies - Understanding The Historical Context - Richard Spano

    Uploaded by

    Barath Mani
    11 views15 pages

    Original Title

    Creating the Context for the Analysis of Social Policies_Understanding the Historical Context_Richard Spano

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    11 views15 pages

    Creating The Context For The Analysis of Social Policies - Understanding The Historical Context - Richard Spano

    Uploaded by

    Barath Mani

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 15
    CHAPTER Creating the Context for the Analysis of Social Policies Understanding the Historical Context BY RICHARD SPANO ‘Chapter 2 is used with permission of the author, Richard Spano. Professor Spano was asked to write this chapter because ofthe unique approach he offers to help understand the réladonship between history and socal problems and social policy. Not only is this pproich unique it translates esily into x method that yields practical zesults fr those to whom itis important to understand why policy and programs are what they have become today. Introduction, ‘This chapter is concerned with the contribution history makes to our understanding of how social problems are defined and social policies developed, it presents history, and ‘more specifically historical context, as a critical factor in shaping specific thinking and attitudes in all elements of society. The intent here is not to educate historians, bat rather to sensitize social workers to a view of social policy as shaped by prior as well as current efforts to resolve socal issues. ‘The Idea of Historical Context “Tp begin with, itis important to be clear about what is meant by bistorical context as itre~ lates to social policy analysis In most social work programs, undergraduate students take introductory courses in “Social Welfare as an Institution” and “Social Work as a Profes- sion,” eacls of which hes some small portion ofits emphasis on history. Sometimes these 31 PART ONE / Cresting the Context for Social Poliey Analysis, ‘courses consist ofa recitation of dates, people, movements, and structures that represent benchmarks in the development of social welfare and social work: the Elizabethan poor laws, the Social Security Act, the Civil Rights ct, Jane Addams, Mary Richmond, Flo- rence Kelley, the Charity Organization Society, and the settlement house movement, for cxample. Assuming retention of only these facts, do they help a social worker understand social poliay? Probably not. Although this focus on facts and dates represents the dominant view of history in ‘most social work curricula, at the other end of the continuum are those historians who suggest that the only way to understand history is to know everything about a society during a given era: its music, art, economics, politics, religion, and intellectual climate. Although this is important for historians, the assumption underlying this book is that readers want to prepare for a career in socal work. ‘Tims, there isthe need for something less than comprehensive preparation in history. The way to do that is to leaen to be sen~ sitive to some of the more important historical aspects of social policy development ‘without having to relinguish the viewpoint of a practicing social worker. ‘Toward that goal, some ways will be suggested here for you to enrich your understanding of the com- plex issues associated with social policy analysis For our purposes, we are not so much concerned with history as history but with the historical context of social policies and programs; historical context is the soil in which social policy grows and takes root. If social policy is viewed as a plant, historical context consists of the ai, water, and ground in the immediate area that will shape the ‘growth of the plant. So itis that the particular interaction of political, economic, reli- ‘ious, and social welfare systems becomes the ground that shapes our analysis of social policy: For example, two conflicting struggles in the 1960s—the domestic War on Poverty and the Vietnam War—illustrate the struggle that can occur when the political and so~ cial welfare systems make conflicting demands on the economic systern. ‘One major dimension of historical context refers to the people and/or organizations that bold a stake in developing socal poliy ina particular direction. An example of how po- tent this aspect can be in shaping social policy is illustrated in the field of mental retar- dation. Rose Kennedy, President John F Kennedy’ mother, and Hubert Humphrey, a leader in the U.S. Senate, both had a personal stake in seeing to it that developmentally disabled (DD) children received social services. In both instances, their concern came as a result of both having DD members in their immediate families: Mts. Kennedy had such a daughter and Senator Humphrey such a grandchild. Both Mrs. Kennedy and Senator Humphrey worked tirelessly to improve the treatment and promote theit cause. ‘Sometimes small groups of experts band together and organize to effet a social policy. An example of this is the work of Isaac Rubinow, a statistician and one of the founders, in 1996, of the American Association for Labor Legislation. Rubinow worked as 4 member of this group for nearly three decades to promote @ conception of social in- surance that was incorporated in the Social Security Act in 1935. Other examples ofthese constituent groups include such diverse organizations as the American Medical Associa~ tion, the American Bar Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the Chil- dren's Defense Fund, the American Association of Manufacturers, and the AFL-CIO. CHAPTER 2 / Creating the Context for the Analysis of Socal Policies 33 ‘What they share in common is that they seek to shape the process by which policy is de- veloped to fit their own view of the most desired outcome. From the foregoing, itshould be clear how imporcanc iti to establish a historical context asa precondition to undetstanding social policy development. ‘To do that, the practical policy analyst needs to know how current conceptions ofa social problem and ‘current actors connect with prior conceptions and actors ina policy area. Having set out ‘what we mean by the idea of historical context, let us now consider some more detailed ‘examples. irs, let think about how historical context affects viewpoints on social prob- Jems. Then, let think about how historical context affects social policy development. Using Historical Context to Understand Social Problem Viewpoints In sixteenth- and seventeenth-century England, the social problem of concern was pau- perism. Most learned people then writing social commentary about poor people were cither churchmen or were educated within theologically dominated institutions. They saw pauperism as an individual moral deficit related to some lack of “moral fiber”: pan perism was the product of individual failure or laziness. In general, people were viewed 2s evil by nature and headed for serious trouble if nat kept busy ("the idle mind is the devil's playground”). These attitudes taward the poor reflected the prevailing theology of that era and led to efforts to control paupers rather than poverty. George Herbert's The Country Parson illustrates this view. In his chepter “The Parson Surveys,” he sug- ‘gests that itis necessary for the parson to survey his patish to determine the “faults” therein, and that included the sin of “idlenesse.” ‘The great and nationall sin of this Land {the Parson ... should]... esteein to be Idle- nesse.... For men [who} have nothing to do... fall to drink, to steal, to whore, to scofie, 10 revile to all sorts of gamings, ... Idlenesse is ewofold, the one of having no calling, the other in walking carelessly in our calling... Given this social problem viewpoint, ensuring that everyone had some form of ern- ployment should serve to alleviate the problem. Furthermore, once the parson had sur- veyed his patish and determined the needs, he was to extract fonds from the rich members of the parish and carry out his charitable works with the following admonition: But he gives no set pension to any. for then they will eckon upon it, asa debt; and if it be taken avay, though justly, they will murat... Bur the Parson, having ¢ double aime, and making 2 hook of his Charity he wins them to praise God more, to live more religiously, and take more paines in their vocation ... [because they cannot foresee). when they shall be relieved? ‘Much if not most of this view can be found in the English poor laws ofthis era: the notion of the need to exert influence end/or control over the poor so that they would 34 PART ONE / Creating the Context for Social Policy Analysis mend their ways end thereby take their rightful place in the kingdom of God, and the theological assumptions about the nature of man as essentially lazy and prone toward evil. These concepts legitimated the notion of social control as. function ofebariy In the Ypres Plan developed by Juan Vives for che Consuls and Senate of Bruges (Belgium) in the sixteenth century, the blending of church and secular views with an eye toward social control is clearly illuscrated, We have decreed by an open commandment that none of our citizens presume to let any house to a stranger without our knowledge and consent for else by the daily increase of por folks greater charge might grow unto us than we were able to bear. Now for allthis no man is (hindered from doing] good deeds but every man ifhe will nay give ams privately to who he lsteth. ... Let them not send only broken meats but let thems rather send 2 mess or two of meat even purposely appointed for them so that citizen’ chiléren may lesen to visit and love the poor men’ litle coxages. This view takes note of the economic problems associated with caring for poor people, but draws heavily on the prevailing theology as the basis for explaining the na~ ture of poverty and the relationship of paupers to the rest of society. Infact, this view of poverty was very nearly the only available explanation of the conditions of the poor. Even those few who advocated relie for poor people focused, for example, on the lame, blind, and sick (the individual characteristics of the poor), rather than on social or eco- nomic structures, a5 nineteenth- or twentieth-century commentators might. ‘Were the seventeenth-century inhabitants of England unconcerned about their fellow citizens? Were they significantly less intelligent than we are? Were they malevo- lent? The answer to each of these questions is “Probably nor.” They were probably not significantly different from their twentieth-century descendants on any of these dimen sions, However, they were different in that they were products of their history and cur- rent social content, just as we are products of ours. Remember, in that period, there was zo social science, which meant that there were few explanations to rival individualistic and theological perspectives, Approximately three hundted years later, in the early 1900s, the American Pro- gressives John Spargo and Robert Hunter studied the problem of poverty in America, ‘They used newly developed techniques such as social survey research methods, statisti- cal and economic analysis, and political ideology to frame the issues surrounding the causes, consequences, and cures for poverty. ‘Spargo was a radical arnong the progressives. When he wrote The Bitter Cry ofthe Children, he was active in the Socialist patty, although he was identified with that patty’s moderate wing, In the preface to Bitter Cry, Spargo clearly expressed his intent: “The purpose of this volume is to state the problem of poverty and its effects on child- hood. Years of careful study and investigation have convinced me that the evils in- ficted upon children by poverty are responsible for many ofthe worst futures of that hideous phantasmagoria of hunger, disease, vice, crime, and despair which we call the Social Problem? of God, and the d prone toward sfcbarity. enate of Bruges ews with an eye ¢ presume to et Ise by the daily ableto bear... ‘y man if he will foken meats but for them so that ae ‘ning for poor Iaining the na- iets view of ofthe poor: em the lame, CHAPTER 2 / Creating the Context for the Analysis of Social Policies 35 ‘To achieve his puzpose, Spargo compiled an impressive array of statistical infor. mation about family income, occupation, number of children, and education and their impact on child nutztion, He took a view of “charity” and the poor that was quite dif. ferent from George Herbert’ (see p. 33), Spargo emphasized the inadequacy of charity as a tool to sustain poor people. But it is only too true that charity—that damnably cold thing called chatity—falls usterly to meet the problem of poverty in general and childhood's poverty in particule. ‘Nothing could be more pathetic than the method employed by so many charitable per- sons and societies of attempting to solve the later problem by finding employment for ‘the mother, as if that were the worst phase ofall from any sane view ofthe chil’ inter~ est. Chatty degrades and demoralizes and there is litle or no compensating effecting hielp. In the vast majority of cases [this kind of charity] falls to reach the suffering in time +0 save them from becoming chronic dependents.’ Robert Hunter was a contemporary of Spargo, but he was more closely identified with social work. Hunter analyzed poverty, paying special attention to quantifying it and then identifying the factors that contribute to it. Hunter analysis vacillstes between careful study—teflecting the social science perspective—and polemic sermonizing — emphasizing a socialist perspective on the causes for poverty. One of the most inter~ esting aspects of Hunters analysis is that he takes great pains to separate poor people into different categories: paupers, vagrants, the sick, poor children, and newly arrived immigrants. ‘These distinctions play an important part in his analysis because they suggest dif- ferent approaches to the probleras of different groups. Hunter's view of the pauper is different in substance from that of George Herbert three hundred yeats earlier, even ‘though it has familiar ring. According to Hunter: In nearly all cases, he who continuously asks aid becomes a craven, abject creature with « lust for gratuitous maintenance, And he who becomes an habitaal pauper undergoes & kind of degeneration, ... In some eases he becomes almost incapable of self support; he loses all capacity for sustained effort... . Avoiding any useful effort, he becomes skilled in those activities which enable him to more perfectly retain his state ‘of dependence.* ‘The significant shift in his view is that he uses a medical rather than a theological ‘metaphor to view the pauper. He “diagnoses” the problem asa “disease of character” and suggest that it affects the actual physical condition of the pauper, using the Jukes studies ‘to support his assertion.” The focus of concer is the body, not the soul, and itis to be un- derstood “scientifically,” not theologically. Hunter expresses a good deal more sympathy for the working poor, who he be- lieved made up about 20 percent of the total number of poor. In his conclusion, he ad~ monishes the reader not to believe that all those in poverty are “effortess beings” who make no fight and waitin misery for someone to help them. He concludes the analysis 36 PART ONE / Cresting the Context for Social Policy Analysis ‘with a plea for social justice for the working poor that he translates into recommenda~ tions for our basic economic system, ‘Tf we placed these perspectives on poverty side by sie, it would be difficult vo find many similarities. Were these progressives antireligious? Were they unaware of the spiritual aspects of theit fellowman, aspects so prized by George Herbert? Were they ‘amoral? Probably not. Possibly they were quite similar to their English forebears on these dimensions. They were, however, part of the first generation of social scientists ‘who were developing a rival set of ideas to explain poverty, They chose a “scientific” rather than a theological framework, which led them to very different conclusions about poverty its causes, and its consequences. Note that this does not suggest that social sct- ‘ence is ¢ better or a mote valid explanation, but simply thet it leads to different formu Iations in a social problem analysis. Hunter’ and Spargo’ social science perspectives were early examples ina long line of sciontific explanations of poverty. Hlunter and Spargo used economic and political sc fence concepts as useful tools, whereas others used newly emerging concepts from public health and “industrial sociology” to explain poverty. In the 1960s, there was another popular conception of poverty, “the culture of poverty,” as advocated by Oscar Lewis, a widely read anthropologist who studied intergenerational poverty eross-culturally. In part, Lewis’ anthropological notion of the culture of poverty was intended to bridge the gap between large-scale economic and political explanations and the individually oriented explanations of theology and psychology. Por Lewis, the poor family and its adaptations to the dominent culeure were used to explain how this subculture of the poor developed as a response to poverty. Some of the traits embodied in the culture of poverty included a lack of effective participation and integration of the poor into ma- jor social institutions, a lack of productivity and marginal consumption, an espousal of middle-class values without the commitment to live by them, and a minimum ammount of organization beyond the level of the nuclear family, At the family level, che traits in- cluded the absence of a prolonged childhood, early initiation into sex, free unions, arel- atively high incidence of abandoned wives, a trend toward mother-centered families, a strong disposition toward authoritarianism, and a lack of privacy. On the individual level, the culture of poverty included a strong feeling of marginality, of helplessness, of depen- dence, and of inferiorty.® “The Wer-on-Poverty programs were consistent with notions embedded in the culture-of poverty ides. At an institutional level, Legal Aid and storefront lawyers at- tempted to make structural policy changes through case law that would help the poor access goods and services and expand civil rights? At the neighborhood level, the Mobi- lization for Youth program vias designed to intensify participation and a sense of control over one'senvironment. At the individual and family level, community mental health ser- vices were provided to retard the “disorganization” within the family and the indivi ‘ual.}® Clearly, the Wat-on-Poverty programs represented a multifaceted approach that Lewis’ conception suggested as the appropriate means to alleviate the problems result- ing from poverty. (Note that Lewis himself would not always have agreed with this inter- pretation of his work.) 4 A seas ee | rsutontbinon saimopinsetincd CHAPTER 2 / Creating the Context for the Analysis of Socal Policies 37 Questions to Guide the Search for the Historical Context of a Social Problem Viewpoint ‘These brief descriptions of socal problem analyses of poverty illustrate the interplay of historical context with social problem analysis. Here are some questions that might guide your search to establish the historical context surrounding a modern social prob- Jem analysis 1. Why is this concern being raised as a problem at this moment in history? For instance, in the prior examples, tis appropriate to ask: “Were there no poor people prior to 1601?" The answer is that there were, but poverty was seen as a condition, « simple fact of existence rather than a social problem. A condition does not eal fora rea. olution unless the condition is connected to a value commitment to which existence of the condition is a contradiction. Examples of the forces that shape the problem are com. plex and often related to events in specific time periods. The 1930s was a period curing which economic depression was sufficiently widespread to capture the attention of nearly all groups in America, when urgent economic problems were of such magnitude that they had to be addressed in order for American society to continue. At nother time, in the affluent 1960s, concern about the oppression of blacks ceptured the public’ atten. tion. In that instance, blacks raised discrimination asa moral issue and gethered sufficient Support from other minority groups and from segments of white society so that long {erm changes in our social system resulted. Why were the 1960s tipe for such a change? Why not the 1950s or 1970s? 2, Is this a “new” problem? As we saw earlicr in this chapter, our society has wres- tled with the problem of poverty for centuties, employed numerous explanations, and developed a multitude of policies and programs. Each time a new formulation of the problem is put forward, we alter the service-delivery structure to account for the change, 4nd sometimes we create a whole new structure. However in every era, new “problems? ‘xe put forward that may have ltele precedent; for exemple, the policies and programs regarding nursing-home care are a post-World War Il problem that called for novel so. {utions. Never before had so many people lived so long or families been so loosely knit—— both atttudinally and geographically. Those facts provided the historical context for the definition of totally new social problems. 3. What are the precedents for the ideas and values (ideology) being used to define the problem? Sometimes, the current conception of a situation is just a narrow revision of an eatiet conception. Note, for eximple, that there is a contemporary view that poverty is a condition perpetuated by mental mechanisms that develop to adjust to

    You might also like