One of my classes this semester is Sociology of Families. It's an upper level course, and has an extra credit (4 instead of the average 3). Thus, there is a LOT of reading. Our participation mark is worth 25% of our final grade, and includes weekly homework assignments. This week, we are reading about families and poverty.
This is an issue near and dear to my own heart - I am poor. I'm not poor in an absolute sense, I have a home and food in my fridge. But I do not make ends meet on a monthly basis, and without my credit card, I might not be able to put gas in my car or feed my son cheese and meat.
Luckily for me, I live in Canada, and not the United States. Thus, I have basic medical. My son also has his basic dental and ophthalmologic care covered by the government (but not mine, I'm expected to pay out of pocket). As well, I'm eligible for numerous redistributive social payments, from lower income taxes for low income families (I get it all back, not that it's much, but I'm sure Americans don't have the same benefits, so I'm lucky in comparison) to social benefits like the Canada Child Tax Benefit and the National Child Benefit Supplement, which, combined, gives me a cheque for about $250 a month. This definetly helps pay the rent. I've also recently recieved a one time tax free payment of $250 to help me "deal with higher energy costs" I was eligible for this because of the above mentioned benefit programs.
Despite these efforts by the Canadian and provincial governments to help out people such as me, the working poor (okay, I'm not working right now, but I was, up until mid-July, when I quit after giving 13 months notice, to focus on my education. Now I'm living on student loans, another government financed program), not much is shifting, demographically. Women and immigrants (especially "visible minorities") are still struggling, even after a sustained period of economic growth and job creation (1994 - 2004). The evidence suggests that it was upper income Canadians who benefitted from that economic growth, and the gap between the highest and lowest quintile is growing.
Single mothers are hit especially hard. Lone parent families comprise about one in five families with children. Yet among families classified by Stats Canada as income poor, over half are single parent families. So, it is children who are increasingly living in poverty, with all the associated negative outcomes. This is despite a 1989 unanimous resolution by the House of Commons to end child poverty by the year 2000. Hey, folks, that was 8 years ago! Child poverty hasn't changed in 25 years!
So, it seems to me that we, as Canadians, are willing to pay lip service to the plight of women and children in our patriarchal world, but when push comes to shove, and it's time to reduce deficits, we're gonna cut social benefits to women and children (UI becomeing EI, and reducing eligibility from 70% of applicants to only 30%). What is my government saying to me? Sounds like, "go get married woman, find a man to take care of you and your kid."
Yikes. The second wave of feminism began in the 70's.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I think the most important, vital thing Canada can do to make life better for single parents and their children is to develop a system like the US has in place to enforce and collect child support payments and to make nonpayment of that support punishable by law/imprisonment. It's disgusting how lax collection is here for this. When a man can't step up to his responsibility, the government owes it to their weakest, most powerless citizens (the children) to collect on their behalf.
The US has VERY cushy tax breaks for the poor, and those very near poverty. Usually every penny comes back and then several pennies that weren't paid into the taxes.
Impoverished children in America are eligible for government-sponsored health insurance.
Also in the states, every state has an income-dependent help program for utilities. Nothing like that in Canada (sadly.)
Seems, though, no matter where you are on the income scales, life is definitely greener (money-wise) if you've got a dangly between your legs. This should not be so.
Thanks for your comment, CannedAm. There IS a system in place to enforce child support payments, but it isn't at the federal level. Thus, I cannot speak to what it's like in ALL provinces, but in British Columbia, Family Maintenance will garnish support payments directly from the non-custodial parent's employer. However, one can avoid this by working "under the table," etc.
And, yes, indeedy, the dangly makes an enormous difference in every country and culture, to my knowledge, both contemporary and historical.
Post a Comment