Saturday, March 5, 2011
Blog #2 BC Fails on Child Poverty Report Card
According to First Call's 2009 Child Poverty Report Card the province of British Columbia's living conditions are below the poverty line for almost 19% of our children. While I know poverty exists in B.C., I find myself disheartened by the facts that clearly state B.C. is failing to protect children from the risks associated with living below the poverty line. Looking around my children's schools and our surrounding neighbourhood I can not see outward signs of poverty; however,I know poverty exists here. Perhaps the state of poverty on the North Shore is not on the same scale as some areas of the city but wealth in North Vancouver is by no means evenly distributed. I wonder how much pride plays into the unseen poverty of our community as people hide behind the image of success in today's materialistic world. However, we can't pretend that overwhelmed assistance programs such as the Salvation Army Soup Kitchen,the Harvest Project (with services including food bank,clothing distribution and counselling services) and the Lookout Shelter (short and long-term homeless shelter and area of refuge) are located less than 10 minutes from our front doors.
I find myself wondering what is wrong in our province (one of Canada's wealthiest) that is causing poverty rates to be increasing when in most of Canada the child poverty rates are dropping. Does the fact that our society no longer values the neighbourhood support network contribute to increased financial stress and feelings of isolation?
As we have discussed in class, has a desire for privacy from government led individuals to stop feeling an ethical responsiblity to help each other (particularly when we have more than we need to live comfortably)? If we are truly ethical beings,how can those of us who have plenty distance ourselves so easily from the other when considering the inequity of wealth? How does Levinas' concept of sitting in ignorance in the comfort of not having to take action or responsibility relate to society's lack of empathy towards the needs of others? I wonder if it is even reasonable to consider how I can try to challenge this inequity. Or am I making an assumption thinking that others want or need my help?
Do community support programs work to eradicate poverty or does government(and other power groups)use these programs to make themselves feel that something is being done about poverty in B.C.? Though well-intentioned, do the many programs such as Strong Start,Nobody's Perfect, Mother Goose and well baby clinics really help those in need? Do the parents who are considered "needy" even want to attend these programs or do they feel a negative stigma attached to attending them? Are parents afraid they will be labelled "needy" if they attend these programs; does attendance equal admitting one can't provide for their child"? As stated in Ethics and Politics in Early Childhood Education, are these programs merely "neo-liberal diversionary techniques to focus attention on parents and children whilst distracting attention from the power relations that create poverty and inequality in the first place?" (Dahlberg and Moss, 2005)
When I last worked in the area of Community Child Care Support, I truly believed I was doing good by meeting my program mandate of "providing programs and materials to support families with young children at risk of readiness issues due to barriers relating to poverty issues", a program termed "reaching the difficult to reach" made possible by the cooperation of many powerful and well-known funders. When I consider what I now understand about ethics and relationship with "the other" I question the integrity and value of that program. While well-intentioned, did those involved in evaluating the needs and outcomes of the program properly consider how that program effected those it served? A major part of my learning from that position was around the fact that there are people who do not want help and that they have the right to refuse help. People are "difficult to reach" for many reasons, one reason may be that they do not want to be helped. Those in leadership need to recognize that they can not assume anyone needs help because they appear to fit someone else's predetermined concept of need. Any family can be made to fit the definition of "in need" or "at risk" in some way so we must be ever careful to be ethical in our offers of assistance. Being available to offer my support to a family is very different than assuming someone needs my support. I am grateful for the maturity in understanding and viewpoint I now have when I consider how I will effect others in my relationship with them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Poverty is very much all around us, even though it may not be apparent to many of us. You have begun to highlight various issues surrounding it and I want to add that the negative impact on poverty is definitely made greater through government policies and responses. The ones who seem to get punished are the children and families who are living in poverty. I would like to look at ‘support’ in a more positive light. I would like to ask where is the support for these families through our current government policies? Who are we supporting when children are taken away and put in foster care, even though in some situations all that is needed are some extra provisions for the family (ex; food, health education program). Sometimes, it is important to intervene and provide this assistance, even though it may look like we are making assumptions.
ReplyDeleteBooks (as cited in Cannella & Kincheloe 2002, p.35) points out that ”We need a politically significant pro-child and truly pro-family movement that does not disempower either as human beings through actions or words and that holds leaders accountable for the consequences of their actions and inactions”. We as educators need to ensure we play a role in enabling this to happen. We should think about how we can support families dealing with poverty and how we can begin to educate those in power on the question of who should really be paying for the price of poverty. It might seem like a huge and unattainable task but we can start with small actions.
When I think of small actions, what comes to mind are the times I have been faced with situations which children could potentially be removed from their family. Over the years, I have come to the realization that my actions can impact and even influence such a decision. I now proactively work with the family, school and ministry to provide supports for the family rather than aiding in judgement calls that result in harsh consequences for the child. I am fortunate to work in an organization that can provide families with food and clothing assistance, educational and skill building workshops and a place to network and meet others. This has enabled open communication between all parties, and in my experience the days in which children were quickly taken away from their families and then placed in foster care, (ironically enough which government pays for) have diminished significantly. As Books (as cited in Cannella & Kincheloe, 2002, p.35) says “We need to work to broaden the public discourse on child and family welfare to encompass ways of thinking about children that do not reduce them and their families to the terms of the market’.
Cannella, G. S., & Kincheloe, J. L. (2002). Kidworld: Childhood studies, global
perspectives, and education. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.