Social Services Filter: Could someone please explain to me the rationale behind utility assistance?
January 19, 2012 6:53 PM Subscribe
Social Services Filter: Could someone please explain to me the rationale behind utility assistance?
Today I had to sit through a webinar for my job where it was suggested the keys to housing stability for low income households (mostly those on either disability or another sort of entitlement payment) are utility assistance and rental assistance. My job is supposed to be that of financial stability counselor, but I feel like people who at far higher paygrades than me have long ago given up on the idea of a certain subset of low income households ever paying for things that are important to their ongoing housing stability.
So... is this really it? Is this what social service is? Openly fostering dependence on the system? What will children in these families learn?
To divorce actions from consequences for a certain subset of low income households seems to be giving up on people. It seems to me that we might be creating a permanent underclass of incompetent people.
Is it really wrong to think that a household which makes enough to pay for its electricity bill should be expected to do so? Why are low income households who consume social services allowed to not have their utilities disconnected when they make incredibly poor decisions that would lead a middle income household to have its utilities disconnected?
How do I shake this feeling? Does my feeling this way mean that I can't be a good social worker? Why do accountability and personal responsibility seem to be such dirty words in this arena?
Most importantly--is there a solid, evidence based rationale behind this sort of assistance?
My apologies for this being semi-discombobulated. Today has been a very personally and professionally challenging day.
Thank you in advance for your thoughts on this matter. Thoughts from persons working in the field are particularly appreciated.
Today I had to sit through a webinar for my job where it was suggested the keys to housing stability for low income households (mostly those on either disability or another sort of entitlement payment) are utility assistance and rental assistance. My job is supposed to be that of financial stability counselor, but I feel like people who at far higher paygrades than me have long ago given up on the idea of a certain subset of low income households ever paying for things that are important to their ongoing housing stability.
So... is this really it? Is this what social service is? Openly fostering dependence on the system? What will children in these families learn?
To divorce actions from consequences for a certain subset of low income households seems to be giving up on people. It seems to me that we might be creating a permanent underclass of incompetent people.
Is it really wrong to think that a household which makes enough to pay for its electricity bill should be expected to do so? Why are low income households who consume social services allowed to not have their utilities disconnected when they make incredibly poor decisions that would lead a middle income household to have its utilities disconnected?
How do I shake this feeling? Does my feeling this way mean that I can't be a good social worker? Why do accountability and personal responsibility seem to be such dirty words in this arena?
Most importantly--is there a solid, evidence based rationale behind this sort of assistance?
My apologies for this being semi-discombobulated. Today has been a very personally and professionally challenging day.
Thank you in advance for your thoughts on this matter. Thoughts from persons working in the field are particularly appreciated.
This post was deleted for the following reason: At posters request -- mathowie
Living in a household receiving the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program is associated with less anthropometric evidence of undernutrition, no evidence of increased overweight, and lower odds of acute hospitalization from an emergency department visit among young children in low-income renter households compared with children in comparable households not receiving the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program.
posted by Wordwoman at 7:07 PM on January 19, 2012 [9 favorites]
posted by Wordwoman at 7:07 PM on January 19, 2012 [9 favorites]
Utility bills can be difficult to predict month-to-month. Here in the northeast, I pay $30 for gas in the summer and up to $300 in the winter. On a tight income, that can be difficult to plan for.
Growing up poor can lead to a very different mind set about spending and saving money. I would highly recommend reading the FPP earlier today on The 5 Stupidest Habits You Develop Growing Up Poor.
posted by maryr at 7:07 PM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Growing up poor can lead to a very different mind set about spending and saving money. I would highly recommend reading the FPP earlier today on The 5 Stupidest Habits You Develop Growing Up Poor.
posted by maryr at 7:07 PM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Well, for one thing, part of the rationale has to do with the children you mentioned- it is not in the state's interest to have those children go without heat or hot water in the winter. It's a, cheaper, and b, better for long-term family stability for those children to remain with their family guardians while the guardians receive financial assistance than it is for the state to remove the children, place them in foster care, and then proceed through all the parenting classes, home visits, etc, needed to either reunite the family or terminate the guardians' rights and then take permanent legal custody of the parents.
For another, basically (and this is still a live debate in various ways, but it's basically where we are), as a society, we have decided that being poor or disabled should not disqualify you from being a parent. This idea is under attack in a lot of ways, but that's the basic jist of the thing. Subsidized utility payments are part of that.
The state is also in a better position to bargain with utility companies for reduced rates than they are with, say, clothing stores. If you have 5,000 people are getting heat for Local Electric, you can pretty easily say, "All those people will pay on time, but they're only paying 70% of their bill," because economies of scale come into play. You can't really do that with, say, the fifty dollars someone spends on clothes and groceries at Target each month.
Also keep in mind that many disabilities are permanent. It's cheaper for the state to provide a subsidy that is large enough to cover rent and some other essentials like food, clothing and basic furniture, plus a subsidy for the months when heating or cooling costs are extreme, than it is for the state to put disabled people in nursing homes (not that they don't try!).
I am not saying that you won't get very frustrated by some of your clients. Some of them will do very silly things with their money; some will earn your undying respect with their determination to live within their means and better themselves. That's a pretty common thing for front-line social workers to find. One thing that can help is to try to work on your imagination muscle to try to flex your point of view until you understand the logic behind why people and programs are the way they are. I hope that you find your work rewarding and that you continue to question your assumptions about what does and doesn't work for lower-income and disabled people and keep an open mind about programs that seem, at first glance, to not make much sense to you.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 7:12 PM on January 19, 2012 [7 favorites]
For another, basically (and this is still a live debate in various ways, but it's basically where we are), as a society, we have decided that being poor or disabled should not disqualify you from being a parent. This idea is under attack in a lot of ways, but that's the basic jist of the thing. Subsidized utility payments are part of that.
The state is also in a better position to bargain with utility companies for reduced rates than they are with, say, clothing stores. If you have 5,000 people are getting heat for Local Electric, you can pretty easily say, "All those people will pay on time, but they're only paying 70% of their bill," because economies of scale come into play. You can't really do that with, say, the fifty dollars someone spends on clothes and groceries at Target each month.
Also keep in mind that many disabilities are permanent. It's cheaper for the state to provide a subsidy that is large enough to cover rent and some other essentials like food, clothing and basic furniture, plus a subsidy for the months when heating or cooling costs are extreme, than it is for the state to put disabled people in nursing homes (not that they don't try!).
I am not saying that you won't get very frustrated by some of your clients. Some of them will do very silly things with their money; some will earn your undying respect with their determination to live within their means and better themselves. That's a pretty common thing for front-line social workers to find. One thing that can help is to try to work on your imagination muscle to try to flex your point of view until you understand the logic behind why people and programs are the way they are. I hope that you find your work rewarding and that you continue to question your assumptions about what does and doesn't work for lower-income and disabled people and keep an open mind about programs that seem, at first glance, to not make much sense to you.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 7:12 PM on January 19, 2012 [7 favorites]
Best answer: mostly those on either disability or another sort of entitlement payment.
Let's consider the disability case, as I'm not sure what you mean by "another sort of entitlement payment" other than to express a general negative judgement about the recipient.
Qualifying for disability payments in the United States means that the U.S. government and its agents have determined that you are unable to work to support yourself. Because of this, you are dependent on the U.S. government. The government entitlement programs do not foster this dependency. The dependency is caused by the disability.
Last I checked, disability payments for someone who does not have a work history ran about $625 a month. I live in Boston. $625 is barely enough to get a room in a 3 bedroom apartment that you share with friends. That would leave $0 to pay for your share of utilities, food, telephone, clothes, transportation, and healthcare.
The fact that you have absolutely no money to kick into the kitty probably means that a roommate situation is out of the question. So you get in line for a Section 8 or a similar housing voucher, and you do your best to find couches to sleep on or you go through the shelter system while you wait a year or two or three to get to the front of the line for a Section 8.
Keep in mind, now, you're disabled. Maybe that means you have cognitive disabilities or physical disabilities. But hopefully with the help of understanding social workers you are managing to keep it together while you wait.
Eventually your Section 8 comes through. This will allow you to get a market-rate rental unit. You will need to pay 30% of your income towards rent, the government will kick in the rest. You won't be in a Project, you'll be in normal market housing, paying rent to a private landlord. Yay, let's all get down with the private market. (Landlords often like section 8 tenants because they know the rent will get paid.)
Oh, wait. 30%. That means you now have $400/month for everything else. Utilities. Food. Transportation. Clothes.
Transportation can't cost too much, right? It's just bus or train fare. And the MBTA is about to raise fares by about 40 cents a trip. What's 40 cents? A lot of people wouldn't bother to pick it up on the sidewalk. But for you, 40 cents twice a day five days a week would be a substantial portion of your "disposable" income. And that's just the fare increase.
So cutting to the chase, utilities subsidies can make that $400 a month go a little farther and make it a little more realistic that you, the disabled person, will be able to maintain your housing.
Now, this is addressing your question about fostering dependence. From another perspective, programs like this are just a matter of a community acting in its own self interest. It is much less expensive and less disruptive to the community to have people in housing than it is to have them on the street and in shelters. Not to mention the effects on any kids involved.
Stepping back a little, I think maybe you just need a little more experience with the populations you'll be working with. People who end up in shelters, people who qualify for rental and utility assistance are really struggling. These aren't slackers.
A couple of years ago I got to hear the Monday-morning voice mail of a service provider in this area. There were forty messages from people looking for help because they were about to lose their apartments. These were people with young kids, pregnant women, veterans of recent wars. These were people at the ends of their ropes. The worst part was that there was no money for any of them; the program had run its course. And there were so many of them.
So give it some time, and get to know the people you're working with. Help them figure out how to make their $400 last a whole month. Eventually you'll be able to decide for yourself whether the rental and utility assistance is a good or bad thing and based on that you can decide whether to continue working at a social service agency.
posted by alms at 7:59 PM on January 19, 2012 [6 favorites]
Let's consider the disability case, as I'm not sure what you mean by "another sort of entitlement payment" other than to express a general negative judgement about the recipient.
Qualifying for disability payments in the United States means that the U.S. government and its agents have determined that you are unable to work to support yourself. Because of this, you are dependent on the U.S. government. The government entitlement programs do not foster this dependency. The dependency is caused by the disability.
Last I checked, disability payments for someone who does not have a work history ran about $625 a month. I live in Boston. $625 is barely enough to get a room in a 3 bedroom apartment that you share with friends. That would leave $0 to pay for your share of utilities, food, telephone, clothes, transportation, and healthcare.
The fact that you have absolutely no money to kick into the kitty probably means that a roommate situation is out of the question. So you get in line for a Section 8 or a similar housing voucher, and you do your best to find couches to sleep on or you go through the shelter system while you wait a year or two or three to get to the front of the line for a Section 8.
Keep in mind, now, you're disabled. Maybe that means you have cognitive disabilities or physical disabilities. But hopefully with the help of understanding social workers you are managing to keep it together while you wait.
Eventually your Section 8 comes through. This will allow you to get a market-rate rental unit. You will need to pay 30% of your income towards rent, the government will kick in the rest. You won't be in a Project, you'll be in normal market housing, paying rent to a private landlord. Yay, let's all get down with the private market. (Landlords often like section 8 tenants because they know the rent will get paid.)
Oh, wait. 30%. That means you now have $400/month for everything else. Utilities. Food. Transportation. Clothes.
Transportation can't cost too much, right? It's just bus or train fare. And the MBTA is about to raise fares by about 40 cents a trip. What's 40 cents? A lot of people wouldn't bother to pick it up on the sidewalk. But for you, 40 cents twice a day five days a week would be a substantial portion of your "disposable" income. And that's just the fare increase.
So cutting to the chase, utilities subsidies can make that $400 a month go a little farther and make it a little more realistic that you, the disabled person, will be able to maintain your housing.
Now, this is addressing your question about fostering dependence. From another perspective, programs like this are just a matter of a community acting in its own self interest. It is much less expensive and less disruptive to the community to have people in housing than it is to have them on the street and in shelters. Not to mention the effects on any kids involved.
Stepping back a little, I think maybe you just need a little more experience with the populations you'll be working with. People who end up in shelters, people who qualify for rental and utility assistance are really struggling. These aren't slackers.
A couple of years ago I got to hear the Monday-morning voice mail of a service provider in this area. There were forty messages from people looking for help because they were about to lose their apartments. These were people with young kids, pregnant women, veterans of recent wars. These were people at the ends of their ropes. The worst part was that there was no money for any of them; the program had run its course. And there were so many of them.
So give it some time, and get to know the people you're working with. Help them figure out how to make their $400 last a whole month. Eventually you'll be able to decide for yourself whether the rental and utility assistance is a good or bad thing and based on that you can decide whether to continue working at a social service agency.
posted by alms at 7:59 PM on January 19, 2012 [6 favorites]
Best answer: I'm not sure if this will be super helpful, but I'm going to say it anyway since you asked: I don't think you have the midset for this type of work.
I work for a non-profit agency which serves extremely low income and homeless youth and their families. Everyone in our agency has a strong sense of empathy, along with a desire for our clients to succeed and to become independent. If any of us had the elitist think of the children anti-social safety net attitude that you've displayed in this post, we would all: 1) be terrible at our jobs, 2) hate our work, and 3) may face serious repercussions for having such a bad attitude about the clients we are paid to help.
You don't have to love all of your clients, or think that they're making the worlds best decisions at every moment, but if you let any of what you've expressed here come across in your interactions with them, you won't be able to build rapport with them, and they won't trust you.
It doesn't sound like you know very much about what's it's like to actually need the social services your clients are relying on. You're very lucky! I've worked with hundreds of kids whose parents rely on food stamps, utility assistance, rental assistance. You know what those kids are learning at 15, 16, 17? They're learning that they need to have jobs to help their parents pay rent. They're learning that they need to sell their bodies on the streets to creepy men just to make sure that their little brothers and sisters will have food. They're learning that they'll never be able to escape their parents lifestyle unless they work hard and go to school. They're learning that living on the streets in the middle of winter is terrifying, and that having even a crappy apartment is better than freezing to death while sleeping under a bush.
I hope that I don't sound hyperbolic. Every single one of those is an example from an actual teenager living in my town.
I hope that you think seriously about the field you are in and whether it is right for you. I don't know if there are tools to make you more empathic, but for your sake, I hope that you think about adjusting your attitude. I don't know a single good social worker who doesn't have that quality, and hating the people you're supposed to serve is a fast pass to burnout.
posted by nerdcore at 8:01 PM on January 19, 2012 [10 favorites]
I work for a non-profit agency which serves extremely low income and homeless youth and their families. Everyone in our agency has a strong sense of empathy, along with a desire for our clients to succeed and to become independent. If any of us had the elitist think of the children anti-social safety net attitude that you've displayed in this post, we would all: 1) be terrible at our jobs, 2) hate our work, and 3) may face serious repercussions for having such a bad attitude about the clients we are paid to help.
You don't have to love all of your clients, or think that they're making the worlds best decisions at every moment, but if you let any of what you've expressed here come across in your interactions with them, you won't be able to build rapport with them, and they won't trust you.
It doesn't sound like you know very much about what's it's like to actually need the social services your clients are relying on. You're very lucky! I've worked with hundreds of kids whose parents rely on food stamps, utility assistance, rental assistance. You know what those kids are learning at 15, 16, 17? They're learning that they need to have jobs to help their parents pay rent. They're learning that they need to sell their bodies on the streets to creepy men just to make sure that their little brothers and sisters will have food. They're learning that they'll never be able to escape their parents lifestyle unless they work hard and go to school. They're learning that living on the streets in the middle of winter is terrifying, and that having even a crappy apartment is better than freezing to death while sleeping under a bush.
I hope that I don't sound hyperbolic. Every single one of those is an example from an actual teenager living in my town.
I hope that you think seriously about the field you are in and whether it is right for you. I don't know if there are tools to make you more empathic, but for your sake, I hope that you think about adjusting your attitude. I don't know a single good social worker who doesn't have that quality, and hating the people you're supposed to serve is a fast pass to burnout.
posted by nerdcore at 8:01 PM on January 19, 2012 [10 favorites]
As for the effect of poverty and housing instability on kids:
This month, the American Academy of Pediatrics is issuing a landmark warning that this toxic stress can harm children for life... Even many years later, as adults, they are more likely to suffer heart disease, obesity, diabetes and other physical ailments. They are also more likely to struggle in school, have short tempers and tangle with the law.posted by alms at 8:03 PM on January 19, 2012
Response by poster: I appreciate the replies, everyone.
While I do sometimes have issues with the people I work with (today, as you might guess, was a bad day), what I was more concerned with when I made this post was the proclamation from on high that receiving utility assistance and rental assistance in perpetuity constitutes "stability" for an individual or family. To my more cynical side, this seems like protection of job security for service providers rather than promotion of self sufficiency for consumers.
I strongly believe in the need for a social safety net, but sometimes, working on the frontlines, it seems as if much financial assistance has all sorts of unintended consequences that we really need to be honest about and try to at understand if not eliminate.
Thanks again, all. What you have said so far has given me a lot to think about, but I am still confident this is the field I want to be in.
posted by plungerjoke at 8:22 PM on January 19, 2012
While I do sometimes have issues with the people I work with (today, as you might guess, was a bad day), what I was more concerned with when I made this post was the proclamation from on high that receiving utility assistance and rental assistance in perpetuity constitutes "stability" for an individual or family. To my more cynical side, this seems like protection of job security for service providers rather than promotion of self sufficiency for consumers.
I strongly believe in the need for a social safety net, but sometimes, working on the frontlines, it seems as if much financial assistance has all sorts of unintended consequences that we really need to be honest about and try to at understand if not eliminate.
Thanks again, all. What you have said so far has given me a lot to think about, but I am still confident this is the field I want to be in.
posted by plungerjoke at 8:22 PM on January 19, 2012
Best answer: This, and This
Working on the assumption you are just having a bad day, if you feel like this everyday please, the good of the helpless people you are supposed to help, find another job.
posted by wwax at 8:23 PM on January 19, 2012
Working on the assumption you are just having a bad day, if you feel like this everyday please, the good of the helpless people you are supposed to help, find another job.
posted by wwax at 8:23 PM on January 19, 2012
Simple kindness, really. Every child deserves to be warm. Even the child of people who may be unintelligent, irresponsible, unemployed, too sick or broken to work, or even just plain lazy or bad. Indeed, I'd go so far as to say that everyone deserves to be warm, even those who are not without fault in how they conduct their lives.
posted by Corvid at 8:29 PM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
posted by Corvid at 8:29 PM on January 19, 2012 [2 favorites]
Is it really wrong to think that a household which makes enough to pay for its electricity bill should be expected to do so? Why are low income households who consume social services allowed to not have their utilities disconnected when they make incredibly poor decisions that would lead a middle income household to have its utilities disconnected?
One reason why is that this system is preventative. It prevents outcomes that are worse and more costly, and so it's a good investment.
Though I'm not going to do the search for you, I know that low income and insecure households are at risk of homelessness. A major cause of homelessness is a confluence of crises. The crises could be things like one or more of the following coming within quick succession: loss of a job. Health emergency that prevents going to work. Health emergency that creates sudden large unpredicted bills. Loss of transportation, such as car breaking down (and concomitant bills) or bus route changing. Departure of a provider when a household member with income dies or leaves the household.
Because the poor, working or not, generally have no savings to cushion against these unforeseen financial crises, they typically have to enter a triage situation when the crises happens. Which bills get paid? Often, pressure from creditors, needs for medications or car repairs, or simply not enough to go around means that there is not enough left over to make utility payments.
When utility payments are not made, there are terrible outcomes. Electricity being shut off, rending all communication devices in the household useless and limiting the ability of the family to cook and care for itself as well as preventing other problem-solving, job hunting and resource-getting that could be done by phone or internet. Heat being shut off, compromising health and making sleep difficult, which results in poor educational and work outcomes at the least.
By providing utility assistance, you are strengthening the ability of a family to weather crises which would be crippling. Not only do you relieve the budget to free up cash for food and other needs, but you also ensure that the basic functions of their home are maintained.
If you didn't provide this assistance, and these crises occur as they can easily do in the difficult lives of the poor, these accounts for heating and electricity would build to at least several months' arrears and eventually go into collections. The debt would mount, and as the family attempted to meet the debt - while relying on less infrastructure - they would begin to slide down the slippery slope that eventually means there is no longer money to pay even the rent or mortgage.
This is the story of many, many families who fall into homelessness. Heating and electricity are part of our basic standard of living in this country, which we agree even the poorest people should be able to have. By assisting with these payments, we increase the overall level of financial security and, in the end, save overall on the amount it would cost to allow these families to slide into homelessnesses.
Ironically, homelessness is hugely expensive for our society, as it often creates in each case months of uncollected rent/mortgage which is a direct loss to banks or property owners, damage to physical property (such as pipes freezing or fires from space heaters), difficulty in locating and delivering healthcare and education services to families and children, higher risk of communicable disease, higher risk of crime, abuse, and substance use, and the cost of rehousing, which will typically include a larger initial investment in the form of a security deposit or down payment than staying in the same household would have meant.
So overall, this is a win-win. It helps stabilize financially challenged homes, maintain health and stability, provide a basic standard of living, assists people in maintaining a home they might otherwise have to lose, prevents suffering, and prevents more costly social ills later down the road.
AS a past recipient of heat assistance, I personally am certainly grateful it allowed my family to maintain our home and stay focused on our work and education, rather than making sacrifices that could have caused further challenges which might have derailed our progress.
Honestly, I'm kind of surprised you're employed in the social services without ever having confronted these questions before. What is your training? With all due respect, you might need more, and might want to request it.
posted by Miko at 8:34 PM on January 19, 2012 [8 favorites]
One reason why is that this system is preventative. It prevents outcomes that are worse and more costly, and so it's a good investment.
Though I'm not going to do the search for you, I know that low income and insecure households are at risk of homelessness. A major cause of homelessness is a confluence of crises. The crises could be things like one or more of the following coming within quick succession: loss of a job. Health emergency that prevents going to work. Health emergency that creates sudden large unpredicted bills. Loss of transportation, such as car breaking down (and concomitant bills) or bus route changing. Departure of a provider when a household member with income dies or leaves the household.
Because the poor, working or not, generally have no savings to cushion against these unforeseen financial crises, they typically have to enter a triage situation when the crises happens. Which bills get paid? Often, pressure from creditors, needs for medications or car repairs, or simply not enough to go around means that there is not enough left over to make utility payments.
When utility payments are not made, there are terrible outcomes. Electricity being shut off, rending all communication devices in the household useless and limiting the ability of the family to cook and care for itself as well as preventing other problem-solving, job hunting and resource-getting that could be done by phone or internet. Heat being shut off, compromising health and making sleep difficult, which results in poor educational and work outcomes at the least.
By providing utility assistance, you are strengthening the ability of a family to weather crises which would be crippling. Not only do you relieve the budget to free up cash for food and other needs, but you also ensure that the basic functions of their home are maintained.
If you didn't provide this assistance, and these crises occur as they can easily do in the difficult lives of the poor, these accounts for heating and electricity would build to at least several months' arrears and eventually go into collections. The debt would mount, and as the family attempted to meet the debt - while relying on less infrastructure - they would begin to slide down the slippery slope that eventually means there is no longer money to pay even the rent or mortgage.
This is the story of many, many families who fall into homelessness. Heating and electricity are part of our basic standard of living in this country, which we agree even the poorest people should be able to have. By assisting with these payments, we increase the overall level of financial security and, in the end, save overall on the amount it would cost to allow these families to slide into homelessnesses.
Ironically, homelessness is hugely expensive for our society, as it often creates in each case months of uncollected rent/mortgage which is a direct loss to banks or property owners, damage to physical property (such as pipes freezing or fires from space heaters), difficulty in locating and delivering healthcare and education services to families and children, higher risk of communicable disease, higher risk of crime, abuse, and substance use, and the cost of rehousing, which will typically include a larger initial investment in the form of a security deposit or down payment than staying in the same household would have meant.
So overall, this is a win-win. It helps stabilize financially challenged homes, maintain health and stability, provide a basic standard of living, assists people in maintaining a home they might otherwise have to lose, prevents suffering, and prevents more costly social ills later down the road.
AS a past recipient of heat assistance, I personally am certainly grateful it allowed my family to maintain our home and stay focused on our work and education, rather than making sacrifices that could have caused further challenges which might have derailed our progress.
Honestly, I'm kind of surprised you're employed in the social services without ever having confronted these questions before. What is your training? With all due respect, you might need more, and might want to request it.
posted by Miko at 8:34 PM on January 19, 2012 [8 favorites]
I probably shouldn’t respond right now because the way this post reads made me pretty angry. I have no academic studies (though I’m sure I could dig some up), just the experience of being one of those children in one of those families that got utility assistance. You know what I learned? That sometimes, no matter how hard you’re trying, you might just need a little help. I learned that it was really hard for my mom to ask for that help. The assistance probably amounted to less than $300 a year—what some people would count as pocket change or be able to spend in a moment without a second thought.
Our thermostat was set to 62 while we were in the house and awake. It was 60 or a little lower at night and when we were gone. Any room we weren’t using regularly had the door and register shut so we didn’t spend money to heat we weren’t using. We weren’t on food stamps (though we probably would have qualified). Mom always knew down to the penny how much money was in the checkbook. She was working 2 jobs, doing everything to live within her means. We collected pop cans, wore hand-me-downs from church people, ate fast food maybe once a month as a treat, sometimes less.
You know what I learned? That one reason we were poor was because of my mom’s lack of education. She worked to put my dad through school instead, and when he turned out to be abusive, etc., she was left without that education our family was sort of counting on from a financial perspective. I learned that school was a way out. Now I have a PhD and I’m a damn good teacher at an open enrollment university that gives every kid a shot, many of them first generation college students. I learned that it’s best not to look down on people for their situations, whatever they are, because there’s *no way* I really understand what’s going on or why they’re making the decisions they’re making or how they got in the bad spot in the first place. Of course, some of them have made bad decisions, will continue to make bad decisions, but there’s not much of a way to separate those from people like my mom who was working her ass off for 60 hours a week and budgeting down to the penny and still needed just a bit of help to make sure it was (barely) warm enough in the house for us to do our homework.
Just reading your post, I was reminded of all those old feelings of being judged for being poor. It was bad enough when it came from people who didn’t really have much to do with us, who didn’t understand how hard it was to get by on one minimum wage income. The last person these folks need to be judged by is the person who’s supposed to be there helping them. If you see the kids who benefit from this assistance and see them as part of a “permanent underclass of incompetent people,” then you are suffering from a failure of imagination as to why people are in a position to need assistance and a failure to recognize the potential that could result from helping these families. That, frankly, makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution.
posted by BlooPen at 8:36 PM on January 19, 2012 [8 favorites]
Our thermostat was set to 62 while we were in the house and awake. It was 60 or a little lower at night and when we were gone. Any room we weren’t using regularly had the door and register shut so we didn’t spend money to heat we weren’t using. We weren’t on food stamps (though we probably would have qualified). Mom always knew down to the penny how much money was in the checkbook. She was working 2 jobs, doing everything to live within her means. We collected pop cans, wore hand-me-downs from church people, ate fast food maybe once a month as a treat, sometimes less.
You know what I learned? That one reason we were poor was because of my mom’s lack of education. She worked to put my dad through school instead, and when he turned out to be abusive, etc., she was left without that education our family was sort of counting on from a financial perspective. I learned that school was a way out. Now I have a PhD and I’m a damn good teacher at an open enrollment university that gives every kid a shot, many of them first generation college students. I learned that it’s best not to look down on people for their situations, whatever they are, because there’s *no way* I really understand what’s going on or why they’re making the decisions they’re making or how they got in the bad spot in the first place. Of course, some of them have made bad decisions, will continue to make bad decisions, but there’s not much of a way to separate those from people like my mom who was working her ass off for 60 hours a week and budgeting down to the penny and still needed just a bit of help to make sure it was (barely) warm enough in the house for us to do our homework.
Just reading your post, I was reminded of all those old feelings of being judged for being poor. It was bad enough when it came from people who didn’t really have much to do with us, who didn’t understand how hard it was to get by on one minimum wage income. The last person these folks need to be judged by is the person who’s supposed to be there helping them. If you see the kids who benefit from this assistance and see them as part of a “permanent underclass of incompetent people,” then you are suffering from a failure of imagination as to why people are in a position to need assistance and a failure to recognize the potential that could result from helping these families. That, frankly, makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution.
posted by BlooPen at 8:36 PM on January 19, 2012 [8 favorites]
What I'm trying to figure out is what utility (no pun intended) you think shutting off people's power or heat has, in a larger societal sense. We're having a large cold snap in the Pacific Northwest right now due to weather, and it's causing power outages all over the region. There are notices everywhere not to bring in generators or use charcoal grills or kerosene heaters, because you'll die of carbon monoxide poisoning. Now imagine this every winter, in every city. This would greatly increase workload on police and fire departments and social service agencies. Why not not be an asshole and pay the money to keep the heat on in the first place?
I think you're coming from the perspective that poverty is mostly a result of poor personal decisions, as opposed to also circumstance or structural inequities that stack the deck against actually getting out of poverty. I don't know what formal training you've had regarding thinking around poverty and the role of social services in helping the disadvantaged, but I think it would be useful for you to brush up on things like the cycle of poverty and notions of the deserving and undeserving poor.
posted by calistasm at 8:38 PM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
I think you're coming from the perspective that poverty is mostly a result of poor personal decisions, as opposed to also circumstance or structural inequities that stack the deck against actually getting out of poverty. I don't know what formal training you've had regarding thinking around poverty and the role of social services in helping the disadvantaged, but I think it would be useful for you to brush up on things like the cycle of poverty and notions of the deserving and undeserving poor.
posted by calistasm at 8:38 PM on January 19, 2012 [3 favorites]
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by plungerjoke at 6:56 PM on January 19, 2012