Family Support Policies Around the World

Family Support, Family Studies and Community Services

In 2014, Julie Ann Racino described in Family Support, Family Studies and Community Services the status of individual and family support in the US in Public Administration and Disability: Community Services Administration in the US (Racino, 2014) at http://www.crcpress.com/9781466579811.

Family Support represents its colloquial use of being pro-family and and desiring good outcomes and better life quality for family members. Common themes are: family empowerment and family control, family-oriented policies and practices, strengthening families, support for all families, individual and family life quality, and the belief that children are best off in families. A novel approach is self-directed personal assistance services by the child within the family structure.

In particular, she highlighted David Braddock's statistics on individual and family support spending per capita by state (p.121, intellectual and developmental disabilities), the movement toward transcultural from multicultural families, family support typologies (e.g., respite and/or child care, homemaking, house repairs and home maintenance; counseling and cash subsidies), underlying family and human ecology theories (e.g., family systems; quality of life theories; family support theory), family studies and family sciences (e.g., LGBT; diverse families), and federal departmental organization (Administration on Children and Families), among others.

Peter and Helen Mittler's (1994) work on family support (e.g., gendered caring, financial assistance, family-centered support) internationally, including with UNESCO, Inclusion International and the International League of Societies for Persons with Mental Handicaps, was also highlighted.

Two other leading books on Family Policies will be of interest to blogspot readers:

Family Policy: Government and Families in Fourteen Countries  (Kamerman & Kahn, 1978) 

This book explained that the Carter-Mondale administration was the first to use the term "family policy" and argued for the need for a national family policy -"more deliberate expression of society's acknowledgement of the family and of concern with what was happening in and to the family. Testimony was given by Urie Brofenbrenner, Margaret Mead, Andrew Billingsley, and Edward Ziegler. Not surprisingly, reference was made to the dangers of a moralistic and rigid perspective on what a "good" or "bad" family was and on a narrow and inflexible definition of "family" (Kamerman & Kahn, 1978; Racino & O'Connor, 1994).

The authors in this book explored by nation-state (e.g., Poland, Isreal, United Kingdom, USA, Denmark, Austria, Federal Republic of Germany, Canada, Finland, France, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Norway and Sweden) the leading "family policies" of the time.  These include: population policy, housing and employment policy, women and social policy, health and medical/maternity leave, education and transportation, income maintenance (e.g., child or family allowances), childcare and day care programs, tax, pension and insurance policies, and definition of families (or households).

Handbook of Family Policies Across the Globe (Robila, 2014)

This new book is organized around nation-states in Africa (e.g., Kenya, South Africa), Europe (e.g., Spain, Russia, Italy and Turkey), Asia (e.g., Japan, South Korea, China), Australia, North America (e.g., Canada, Mexico) and South America (e.g., Brazil and Ecuador).

Of particular importance in these family policies studies are the references to the Millenium Development Goals of the United Nations (e.g., improve maternal health, combat HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases, environmental sustainability), and new data on the contemporary or modern family (e.g., 22% -26% of Norway couples cohabitating with majority under 30 now cohabitating; close to 50% children born "out of wedlock" with only 7% to single mothers; see, Macklin, 1975). Only Ellie Macklin, researcher and professor of adolescent development, foresaw the need very early on for new family policies reflecting the sexual revolution as opposed to solely family planning (e.g., contraceptives to abortion).

The book highlights family formation and family dissolutions laws (e.g., The Hindu Marriage and Reform Act of 1955,  The Native Converts' Marriage Dissolution Act of 1988; Columbia Law 12 of 1991 as UN Childrens' Rights Convention Columbia Political Constitution of 1999, Article 42, family definition)  in both India and Columbia. Canadian laws were reviewed by family formation, family maintenance (younger and older families), family dissolution and family succession, including Section 43 of the Criminal Code (called the "spanking" law). Sampling of US laws ranged from administration on aging to housing discrimination, and from financial aid to poor families (or reduction) to embryo adoption; in addition, criminal code included child kidnapping.

The framework for family policies vary with new policies on family-work balance (e.g., dual earners) which effect child care arrangements, parental leave policies (e.g., sick children, paternity and maternity), domestic violence, sexual equality, benefits (e.g., cash, child, taxes, pensions) and allowances (e.g., birth allowances), family counseling and marriages, single parenting and families-at-risk, long term care (e.g., elders and disability; personal care and out-of-home), family education, poverty, protection of women and gender violence, divorce and family court, housing, child rearing including fair share of household tasks, partnerships (e.g., same sex partnerships), employment and the labor force, family income support policies, and child welfare or protection services (e.g., "best interests of child"), among others.

In the family research arena, the book notes that Sweden is second only to Finland in its investment in research among the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development countries at 3.59% of GDP in 2009. In the USA, this book notes that family policy is administered in the US primarily through the Administration for Children and Families, in the US Department of Health and Human Services, and that "some indigenous groups were afforded the right to create family laws/policies distinct from general US policies and laws" (p.376).

Kamerman, B. & Kahn, A.J. (1978). Family Policy: Government and Families in Fourteen Countries. NY, NY: Columbia University.

Macklin, E. (1975). Courses on Adolescent Development. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University, School of Human Ecology.

Mittler, P. & Mittler, H. (1994). Family Support Innovations for Persons with Learning Disabilities. Lancashire, UK: Lisieux Hall. 

Racino, J. A. & O'Connor, S. (1994). "A home of our own": Homes, neighborhoods and personal connections. In: M Hayden & B. Abery (Eds.), Challenge for a Service System in Transition: Ensuring Quality Community Experiences for Persons with Developmental Disabilities. (pp. 381-403). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Racino, J. (2014). Public Administration and Disability: Community Services Administration in the US.  NY, NY and London, UK: CRC Press.

Robila, M. (2014). Handbook on Family Policies Across the Globe. NY, NY and Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.

See, wikipedia, Family Support, Supportive Living, Supported Employment, Supported Housing, and Community Integration.


For More Information, Contact: Community and Policy Studies, 208 Henry Street, Rome, New York 13440-6506 USA.