Race and Social Problems最新文献

Housing subsidies, including public housing and Section 8 vouchers, are key components of the social safety net, intended to promote family and child welfare. Studies evaluating the impact of housing subsidies on child and adolescent mental health, however, are generally inconclusive. This may reflect variation in the influence by type of subsidies to income, improved physical environment, increased access to resources, and improved perception of neighborhood safety. Further, most prior research focused on housing subsidies failed to simultaneously formally assess child psychopathology. In the present study, we examine, among adolescents (ages 9-17) from a low-income, urban minority area, the association of housing with psychiatric symptoms and disorders, as well as with their social functioning. The data were obtained from the Stress & Justice Study (S&J) baseline survey, an investigation designed to examine impact of parental criminal justice system involvement (CJSI) on their children's mental health. Housing type during the past year was categorized from parental report as public housing, section 8, both, or neither. Child mental health was assessed with the Diagnostic Interview Schedule for Children (DISC). Additionally, family resources and physical quality of the housing environment by housing type was assessed, and we tested whether these dimensions mediated associations of housing type with the adolescent's current mental health outcomes. We found that while internalizing and externalizing disorders and impairment were attenuated by individual characteristics (e.g., SES, CJSI), internalizing and externalizing symptom counts were significantly more prevalent among children in subsidized housing, compared to those in non-subsidized housing, after controlling for individual characteristics. These findings have the potential to inform whether, and through which mechanisms, housing subsidies are associated with adolescent mental health.

More than one-third of US children live in families with three or more children. The contemporary impact of larger family size on children's family resources remains an under-explored point of inequity. Larger family size is not only more common among Black and Hispanic children, but Black and Hispanic children in larger families (Black children, especially so) face higher poverty risks relative to White children in larger families. This analysis uses children's number of siblings and children's race and ethnicity to chart the intersectional aspects of disparity in the risk and incidence of poverty and the anti-poverty effects of large federal cash supports, the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit. It draws upon 2014-2017 Current Population Survey data and the NBER TAXSIM calculator to apply 2018 tax law, inclusive of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017. It reveals well-documented disparities in poverty rates and benefit access and receipt experienced by children of color are further exacerbated by policy structures that discriminate against an under-acknowledged aspect of children's family life: their family size. Racial bias in policy design that sees tax credit access mechanisms and earnings and benefit structures disproportionately exclude that Black and Hispanic children also disproportionately exclude Black and Hispanic children by their family size. Without reforms that tackle both inequities, policy action that closes the poverty gap between larger and smaller families will see the racial gap in child poverty remain.

During the last decade, a number of athletes began engaging in social activism. In the aftermath of George Floyd's death, that wave of protest became a tsunami, energizing collegiate and professional athletes and reverberating across society. But baseball, once in the vanguard of sports activism, remained on the sidelines. As the national pastime, it reflected the country's turn toward social Darwinism and segregation at the turn of the 20th century. After World War II, when Jackie Robinson reintegrated the major leagues, it was a catalyst to change off the field. This essay addresses that politicized past and its more quiescent present.

The racial and ethnic disproportionality and disparity in the child protective system (CPS) has been a concern for decades. Structural factors strongly influence engagement with the child welfare system and families experiencing poverty or financial hardship are at a heightened risk. The economic factors influencing child welfare involvement are further complicated by structural racism which has resulted in a greater prevalence of poverty and financial hardship for families who are Black, Native American or Alaska Native (Indigenous), or and Latino/Hispanic (Latino) and their communities. The multiple decision points within CPS are an opportunity to reify or correct for bias in child welfare outcomes. One major effort to eliminate racial disparities and disproportionalities has been to enact standardized decision-making procedures that aim to control for implicit or explicit bias in CPS. The Structured Decision-Making Model's (SDM) actuarial-based risk assessment (RA) is the gold-standard of these efforts. In this conceptual article, we ask (1) How are structural factors accounted for in assessment of risk within CPS? and (2) What are the consequences when structural factors are left out of risk assessments procedures? We posit that the exclusion of race, ethnicity, and economic factors from the RA has inflated the importance of variables that become proxies for these factors, resulting in inaccurate assessments of risk. The construction of this tool reflects how structural racism has been overlooked as an important cause of disproportionality in CPS, with interventions then focused on individual workers and cases, rather than the system at large. We suggest a new framework for thinking about risk, the structural risk perspective, and call for a revisioning of assessment of risk within child welfare that acknowledges the social determinants of CPS involvement.

North Carolina-as a state in the racially segregated Southeast-offers a unique context to understand access to social services for Hispanic families and children. Theories of administrative burden posit that Hispanic families likely face high learning, compliance, and psychological costs. Hispanic families face challenges that compound these costs: limited English language and literacy proficiency, complex household composition, and citizenship status of family members and other household members. With new survey results and qualitative data on social service administrators and front-line workers, we examine how these costs may affect access to programs for Hispanic families who reside in a state with a history of racial divisions that have shaped local policy implementation. Some workers noted transportation barriers and complex application processes as limiting access. While we expected to find that Hispanic families may be disadvantaged by decentralized service delivery in a manner that is similar to the experiences of African American families, workers instead note significant resources that help facilitate Hispanic families' access to programs. Workers view national anti-immigrant policies and rhetoric, rather than state and local policy rules or resource constraints, as limiting their capacity to serve Hispanic families.