Determining which topics are Family Policy

Karen Bogenschneider writes in her Policy Institute for Family Impact Seminars:

Family policy, a subfield of social policy, encompasses one of four family functions: (a) family creation (e.g., to marry or divorce, to bear or adopt children, to provide foster care), (b) economic support (e.g., to provide for members’ basic needs, (c) childrearing (e.g., to socialize the next generation), and (d) family caregiving (e.g., to provide assistance for the disabled, ill, frail, and elderly). Family policies address issues such as child care, child support, divorce, family violence, juvenile crime, long-term care, and teenage pregnancy. Tax provisions that create a child care tax credit would be considered family policy. However, a tax reform law that lowers taxes for individuals, many of whom happen to live in families, would not be considered family policy. The State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) would be considered family policy. However a universal health care program would not be considered family policy, because it targets individuals, irrespective of whether or not they live in a family setting.

So many things might be considered family policy, but some are not necessarily considered proper discussions for family policy. Since this field is considered a "sub-topic of social policy," what types of policies have we talked about in class might be considered social policy and what might be considered family policy?  

What are the arguments and current topics that are being discussed in this election season that might be considered family policy?  (Hint: see the four basic functions of families).

Media Paper

I see so many issues that are coming up related to the election that not all of them are associated with Family. However, when we are in an election season, which of the candidates share your views of family?  Family Policy is all about the family values that we share as a country.  Part of the problem with the US is that we all come from so many different cultures sharing so few of the same family values that we have a difficult time translating those values into effective public policy.

How would you determine which policies are about family?  Does the recent issue of the killing in Libya connect with Family Policy?

More to come...hint:  Karen Bogenschneider

Timely Ideas

In class last night we talked about possible projects. UPR (USU's NPR network) had an interesting discussion today about Rachel's idea to think about texting and driving as a possible topic. I was fascinated to listen about the tragedy that occurred in Vernal when a driver who was texting hit a young man from the Jr. High and killed him. What a horrific accident!  Texting seems to be on the rise, and it's a great problem to address.

NPR had a couple of guests talking about the issue. They had a Dr. Strayer who has been doing research on the quality of thinking as we text, or multitasking, etc. and another guest who can talk about the issues of policing people who are texting.  You can read the story or listen to the entire discussion at:  http://upr.org/programs/access-utah.

Pay attention to the upcoming membership drive. I'll match your contribution to UPR if you have decided that it's a valuable resource to you!

All Politics are Local

You've heard the saying: "All politics are local?"  I have often wondered about this issue, but recently, I have been thinking about my taxes burden, my house, where I live, and the laws that are in place here.  We get very focused on the national elections when we choose our president, but what really matters is in our local elections and the choices of judges. The judges are the ones who interpret the constitution.

I have been a bit frustrated about how we learn the competence of the judges. I reviewed one of our voting information books, and the review of the judges was based on lawyers interpretation of whether or not the judge came prepared to court, whether or not they were competent, etc. It's not a discussion at all about their values, their judgments, etc. I want to know how the judges rule on certain cases. Are they likely to view the constitution as a "dead" document where we are to follow it by the letter of the law? Or,  are we more likely to view it "living, breathing" document that is adjustable by circumstance and by the "zeitgeist?"

There's a very informative discussion on yahoo about the electoral college if you are interested:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/obama-romney-could-tie-electoral-college-just-explain-194537108.html#more-id

Democratic National Convention

Once again, I'm into listening to the DNC this week.  It's been a bit harder to catch all of the speeches, but I am able to watch some of the key speakers online. It's amazing how former President Bill Clinton can still inspire so many people. He was quite engaging and an enjoyable speaker. Many pundits were talking about how long his speech was, but it didn't feel that way. I have not been impressed with his sense of self-importance, however.

He did touch on some topics that address the "values" of America. Certainly the issue of whether or not being successful is a shared experience rather than an individual one is an important distinction between Republicans and Democrats. It's a good thing to think about. Do we attribute our success to the fact that America is built on individual's work? Or, do we attribute our success to shared effort?  The fable of the Little Red Hen is an important narrative exposing this "american value." Where does the family fit in to this narrative?

Obama speaks tonight. I am looking forward to hearing his speech.

Republican Convention: part deux

I really enjoyed watching the Republican Convention this past week. I think it's fascinating how the pundits and news reporters discuss what we saw. If you didn't see it, you would have a completely different perspective of the convention depending on who you watch or which station you spend more time listening to. Some of the pundits say that Governor Romney was inspirational and knocked it out of the park. Others say that he didn't get past his "wooden" persona and is out of touch with the regular people.

Some of the people I find caustic and rude. I got to watch a bit of Mrs. Romney's speech and thought she did a lovely job describing her husband as she saw him.  However, I read one reviewer that still believes that the privilege she experienced while going to school, living in a basement apartment, and scraping by isn't the same as others who live in poverty because she always had a back up system of her family. When people don't have family to back you up, or your mother is on drugs and you are raised in foster care, those who haven't lived that life can't relate to those who can.

I wonder if that's true?