2.5 Environmental Contexts for Development
The Interplay of Environment and Development
Development is influenced by a "many-layered set of influences" from the surrounding environment.
These environmental influences can either "help or hinder physical and psychological well-being."
The Family as a Core Context for Development
The family is identified as the "first and longest-lasting context for development." This emphasizes its profound and enduring role.
Personal reflections often highlight family experiences as significant developmental influences, a common observation among students.
Broader Environmental Influences
Beyond the family, other key influences on development include:
Friends
Neighbors
School
Workplace
Community and religious organizations
Ecological Systems Theory: Understanding Environmental Layers
Learning Objective 2.5: Describe family functioning from the perspective of ecological systems theory, along with aspects of the environment that support family well-being and development.
Concept Introduction: Urie Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory emphasizes that human development is influenced by a complex system of intertwined environmental contexts, extending beyond immediate settings.
Microsystem:
Definition: Refers to the immediate settings where an individual has direct interactions and activities.
Examples: As mentioned in the lesson, these include "immediate settings just mentioned" such as family, friends, neighbors, school, and the workplace.
Macrosystem:
Definition: The broadest level of the ecological system, representing the "broad social climate of society —its values and programs that support and protect human development." Its influence is so pervasive that it's often overlooked in daily life.
Aspects of the environment that support family well-being and development (Addressing Learning Objective 2.5): The macrosystem plays a crucial role by providing societal support structures critical for development at every life stage:
Affordable housing
Accessible health care services
Safe neighborhoods
High-quality schools
Well-equipped recreational facilities
High-quality child care
Services that help individuals balance work and family responsibilities
These macrosystem elements are essential because "all people need help with the demands of each period of the lifespan."
Individuals facing "poverty or special tragedies" often require "considerably more help" from these comprehensive societal supports.
Heredity and Environment: A Combined Impact
Both "environments, as well as heredity, can enhance or create risks for development," indicating a complex interaction between genetic predispositions and external influences.
The Family: A Dynamic System
The family creates unique bonds among people and is unparalleled in its power and breadth of influence as a microsystem context.
6.1 Its Central Role and Characteristics
Lifelong Bonds: Attachments to parents and siblings are typically lifelong and serve as foundational models for future relationships.
Cultural Transmission: Within the family, children acquire essential cultural elements such as language, skills, and social and moral values.
Support System: Individuals of all ages rely on family members for information, assistance, and pleasurable interaction.
Predictor of Health: Warm, gratifying family ties are a strong predictor of physical and psychological health throughout development (Khaleque & Rohner, 2012).
Developmental Risks: Conversely, isolation or alienation from the family, particularly from parents, is generally linked to various developmental problems.
Network of Interdependent Relationships: Contemporary researchers view the family as a complex network where behaviors of each member bidirectionally influence others, forming a system where responses are interconnected (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006; Russell, 2014).
6.2 Direct Influences within the Family
Bidirectional Exchanges: Interactions between any two family members directly affect each other, creating a chain of responses.
Examples of Interaction Chains:
Kind, patient communication often leads to cooperative and harmonious responses, which then fosters positive subsequent interactions.
Harshness and impatience tend to elicit angry or resistive behavior, leading to negative or avoidant interactions.
Research Findings (Diverse Ethnicities):
Positive Cycle: When parents are firm yet warm, children tend to comply with requests. Child cooperation encourages parents to remain warm and gentle in the future.
Negative Cycle: Parents who discipline harshly and impatiently often face refusal and rebellion from their children. This child misbehavior can stress parents, leading to increased punishment, which in turn escalates child unruliness (Lorber & Egeland, 2011; Shaw et al., 2012).
Broader Applicability: This principle of direct influence extends to other two-person family relationships, including siblings, marital partners, and parent-adult child dynamics, either promoting or undermining psychological well-being.
6.3 Indirect Influences: The Effect of Third Parties
Definition: Interactions between any two family members are influenced by the presence and behavior of other family members or "third parties" (Bronfenbrenner, Chapter 1).
Third Parties as Supports:
Effective Coparenting: A warm and considerate marital relationship often leads to effective coparenting, where mothers and fathers mutually support each other's parenting efforts. These parents are warmer, more praising, more stimulating, and less critical of their children. Effective coparenting also reinforces a positive marital relationship (Morrill et al., 2010).
Grandparents: Grandparents can directly support development by being warm to children and indirectly by advising parents on child-rearing, providing models, or offering financial help.
Third Parties as Barriers:
Inept Coparenting: Tense and hostile marital relationships can result in inept coparenting, where parents interfere with each other, are less responsive to children's needs, and are more prone to criticism, anger, and punishment (Palkovitz, Fagan, & Hull, 2013; Pruett & Donsky, 2011).
Impact of Parental Conflict: Children chronically exposed to angry, unresolved parental conflict can develop serious behavior problems due to disrupted emotional security (Cummings & Miller-Graff, 2015).
Internalizing Difficulties: Anxiety, fearfulness, and attempts to repair parental relationships.
Externalizing Difficulties: Anger and aggression (Cummings, Goeke-Morey, & Papp, 2004; Goeke-Morey, Papp, & Cummings, 2013).
Negative Grandparent Influence: If relations between grandparents and parents are quarrelsome, parent-child communication may suffer.
6.4 Adapting to Change: The Chronosystem in Action
Dynamic System: The interplay of forces within the family is dynamic and constantly evolving, as described by Bronfenbrenner's chronosystem (Chapter 1, page 26).
Impact of Life Events: Important events can create challenges that modify existing relationships. The effect depends on the support from other family members and each participant's developmental status.
Examples: Birth of a baby (different reactions from a toddler vs. a school-age child), change of jobs, or an aging parent joining the household (more stressful for middle-aged adults still raising children).
Influence of Historical Time Period:
Recent Decades' Trends: Declining birth rate, high divorce rate, expansion of women's roles, increased acceptance of homosexuality, and delayed parenthood have led to significant structural changes.
Resulting Family Structures: Smaller family sizes, more single parents, remarried parents, gay and lesbian parents, employed mothers, and dual-earner families.
"Top-Heavy" Structure: Combined with longer lifespans, more generations are alive with fewer members in younger generations. This means young people are more likely to have older relatives than ever before, which can be both enriching and a source of tension.
Continuous Revision: Relationships within this complex intergenerational system are constantly revised as members adjust to their own and others' development, as well as to external pressures.
Socioeconomic Status (SES) and Family Functioning
Definition of SES: A family's standing on a continuum combining three variables:
Years of education: Measures social status.
Prestige of job and skill required: Also measures social status.
Income: Measures economic status.
Impact of SES on Family Circumstances: Changes in SES profoundly affect family functioning.
SES and Family Structure:
People in skilled and semiskilled manual occupations (lower-SES) tend to:
Marry and have children earlier.
Give birth to more children.
People in professional and technical occupations (higher-SES) show different trends (e.g., marry and have children later, have fewer children).
Differences in Child-Rearing Values and Expectations:
Lower-SES Parents: Emphasize external characteristics for their children, such as obedience, politeness, neatness, and cleanliness (Duncan & Magnuson, 2003; Hoff, Laursen, & Tardif, 2002).
Higher-SES Parents: Emphasize psychological traits, such as curiosity, happiness, self-direction, and cognitive and social maturity (Duncan & Magnuson, 2003; Hoff, Laursen, & Tardif, 2002).
Differences in Family Interaction:
Higher-SES Parents:
Talk to, read to, and otherwise stimulate infants and preschoolers more.
Grant greater freedom to explore.
With older children: use more warmth, explanations, and verbal praise; set higher academic and developmental goals; allow more decision-making.
Lower-SES Households:
Commands ("You do that because I told you to"), criticism, and physical punishment occur more often (Bush & Peterson, 2008; Mandara et al., 2009).
Explanations for Child-Rearing Differences:
Education: Higher-SES parents' interest in verbal stimulation, nurturing inner traits, and promoting academic achievement is supported by years of schooling, which fostered abstract thinking and investment in cognitive/social development (Mistry et al., 2008).
Economic Security: Greater financial stability enables higher-SES parents to devote more time, energy, and material resources to fostering children's psychological characteristics (Duncan, Magnuson, & Votruba-Drzal, 2015).
Sense of Power/Powerlessness:
Lower-SES Parents: Often feel powerless in relationships outside the home (e.g., obedient to authority at work). This experience can be duplicated in parent-child interaction at home, where they are in authority. High stress from economic insecurity contributes to less stimulating interaction and more coercive discipline (Belsky, Schlomer, & Ellis, 2012; Conger & Donnellan, 2007).
Higher-SES Parents: Typically have more control over their own lives. At work, they are used to making independent decisions and convincing others. They are more likely to teach these skills to their children at home.
Poverty and Its Impact on Development
Threat to Development: When families fall into poverty, development is seriously threatened, impacting physical and psychological well-being.
Personal Account Example (Kaylie): A 10-year-old named Kaylie, featured in a documentary, described living in poverty as not getting three meals a day, experiencing hunger, and fearing starvation. Her family, including a depressed mother and brother, struggled to pay bills, leading to frequent moves, relinquishing a pet, and limited social interaction or developmental activities for the children. Kaylie's outlook on her future was bleak, envisioning homelessness and theft.
Poverty Rates in the United States:
Declined slightly in the 1990s but rose over the first decade of the twenty-first century and then stabilized around 15% (46 million Americans).
Most Affected Groups: Parents under age 25 with young children, older adults living alone, ethnic minorities, and women.
Child Poverty: 21% of U.S. children are poor.
This rate increases significantly for ethnic minorities: 32% for Hispanic children, 36% for Native-American children, and 38% for African-American children (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015d).
Single Mothers/Older Women: Poverty rate is close to 50% for single mothers with preschool children and older women living alone.
Causes of Poverty Statistics: Joblessness, high divorce rates, lower remarriage rates among women, widowhood, and insufficient government programs.
U.S. Child Poverty vs. Other Nations:
The poverty rate is higher among children than any other age group in the U.S.
The United States has the highest percentage of extremely poor children among all Western nations, with nearly 10% living in deep poverty (half the poverty threshold).
In contrast, most northern and central European countries maintain child poverty rates below 10%, and extreme child poverty is rare (UNICEF, 2013).
Devastating Effects on Children's Development: The earlier poverty begins, the deeper it is, and the longer it lasts, the more severe the consequences.
Lifelong Problems: Increased likelihood of lifelong poor physical health, persistent deficits in cognitive development and academic achievement, high school dropout, mental illness, impulsivity, aggression, and antisocial behavior (Duncan, Magnuson, & Votruba-Drzal, 2015; Morgan et al., 2009; Yoshikawa, Aber, & Beardslee, 2012).
Weakening of the Family System: Constant stressors associated with poverty gradually erode family functioning.
Daily Hassles: Loss of welfare/unemployment, utility shut-offs (phone, TV, electricity, hot water), and uncertain access to food.
Family Dynamics: Increased depression, irritability, and distraction among family members, leading to more hostile interactions and suffering child development (Conger & Donnellan, 2007; Kohen et al., 2008).
Exacerbated Risks: Negative outcomes are particularly severe in:
Single-parent families.
Families living in poor housing and dangerous neighborhoods, which intensify daily struggles and reduce social supports (Hart, Atkins, & Matsuba, 2008; Leventhal, Dupéré, & Shuey, 2015).
Rural Communities: Higher poverty rates, greater neighborhood disorganization, and scarcer community services (e.g., Kaylie's family) compared to urban areas, heightening risks for family dysfunction and lifelong adjustment problems (Hicken et al., 2014; Vernon-Feagans & Cox, 2013).
Homelessness:
An estimated 580,000 individuals were homeless on a given night (Henry et al., 2014).
The majority are single adults, many with serious mental illness.
Approximately one-fourth of the homeless are children and youths.
Primary Causes: Insufficient availability of low-cost housing and inadequate support for mentally ill individuals released from institutions.
Homeless Families: Most consist of women with children under age 5.
Impacts on Homeless Children: Suffer from health problems, developmental delays, and chronic emotional stress due to harsh conditions (Kilmer et al., 2012).
An estimated 23% of school-age homeless children do not attend school or attend irregularly.
Achieve less than other poverty-stricken children due to poor attendance, frequent school changes, and health issues (Cutuli et al., 2010; National Coalition for the Homeless, 2012).
Resilience and Interventions:
A considerable number of children from financially stressed families show resilience and fare well.
Various interventions exist to help children overcome poverty risks, targeting family functioning, parenting, and children's academic, emotional, and social skills.
Multifaceted programs are most beneficial for poverty-stricken children facing multiple adversities (Kagan, 2013a).
Affluence and Its Impact on Development
Parenting Challenges in Affluent Families: Despite advanced education and material wealth, affluent parents often fail to engage in family interaction and parenting that promotes favorable development.
Youth Adjustment Problems (Wealthy Suburbs): Studies tracking youths in wealthy suburbs revealed serious problems by seventh grade that worsened in high school (Luthar & Barkin, 2012; Racz, McMahon, & Luthar, 2011).
These problems included:
Poor school grades.
Higher likelihood of alcohol and drug use.
Increased engagement in delinquent acts.
High levels of anxiety and depression.
Reasons for Troubled Affluent Youths: Compared to better-adjusted peers, poorly adjusted affluent young people reported:
Less emotional closeness with parents.
Less supervision from parents.
Fewer serious consequences for misbehaviors.
Parents often lead professionally and socially demanding lives, making them physically and emotionally unavailable, similar to parents facing serious financial strain.
Parents frequently make excessive demands for achievement and are critical of less-than-perfect performance (Luthar, Barkin, & Crossman, 2013).
Impact of Parental Values: Adolescents whose parents prioritize accomplishments more than character are more prone to academic and emotional problems.
Protective Factors - The Family Dinner: For both affluent and low-SES youths, a simple routine like eating dinner with parents is associated with a reduction in adjustment difficulties, even when other parenting aspects are controlled (Luthar & Latendresse, 2005).
Needed Interventions: Interventions are required to make affluent parents aware of the high costs associated with:
A competitive lifestyle.
Weak involvement in their children’s lives.
Unrealistically high expectations for their children.
Beyond the Family: Neighborhoods and Schools
Connections between family and community are vital for psychological well-being, as highlighted by the mesosystem and exosystem concepts within ecological systems theory.
In poverty-stricken areas, community life is often disrupted, leading to increased family violence, child abuse and neglect, child and youth internalizing and externalizing difficulties, adult criminal behavior, and declines in cognitive functioning in older adults (Chen, Howard, & Brooks-Gunn, 2011; Dunn, Schaefer-McDaniel, & Ramsay, 2010; Ingoldsby et al., 2012; Lang et al., 2008).
Strong family ties to the social context (e.g., frequent contact with relatives and friends, regular religious attendance) reduce stress and enhance adjustment.
9.1 Neighborhoods
Neighborhoods offer crucial resources and social ties for children's development.
Impact of Neighborhood Mobility:
An experimental study showed that low-SES families who moved from public housing to low-poverty neighborhoods had children and youths with substantially better physical and mental health and school achievement compared to those who remained in impoverished areas (Goering, 2003; Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2003; Leventhal & Dupéré, 2011).
The ability of low-income families to integrate into the social life of new neighborhoods was key to these positive outcomes.
Differential Impact of Neighborhood Resources:
Neighborhood resources have a greater impact on economically disadvantaged young people, as higher-SES families have the means to seek social support, education, and leisure pursuits beyond their immediate surroundings (e.g., transporting children to lessons, better schools).
Importance of Programs in Low-Income Neighborhoods:
In-school and after-school programs offering art, music, sports, and other enrichment activities are associated with improved academic performance and reduced emotional and behavior problems in elementary and middle school (Durlak, Weissberg, & Pachan, 2010; Kataoka & Vandell, 2013; Vandell, Reisner, & Pierce, 2007).
Neighborhood organizations (religious youth groups, special interest clubs) contribute to favorable development in adolescence, including increased self-confidence, school achievement, and educational aspirations (Barnes et al., 2007).
However, in dangerous, disorganized neighborhoods, such high-quality activities are scarce, and access is limited by crime/social disorder, with overwhelmed parents less likely to encourage participation (Dearing et al., 2009).
The Better Beginnings, Better Futures Project (Ontario, Canada):
A government-sponsored pilot program to prevent the consequences of neighborhood poverty, centered in elementary schools.
Services provided: In-class, before and after-school, and summer enrichment activities for children aged 4 to 8.
Project staff regularly visited parents, informed them about community resources, and encouraged involvement in school and neighborhood life.
Community-wide component focused on neighborhood improvement through leadership training, adult education, safety initiatives, and special events.
Longitudinal Follow-ups: Revealed wide-ranging benefits compared to control groups in impoverished neighborhoods, including gains in children's academic achievement, social adjustment, reduced adolescent delinquency, and improved family functioning, child-rearing practices, and sense of community connection (Peters, 2005; Peters, Petrunka, & Arnold, 2003; Peters et al., 2010; Worton et al., 2014).
Neighborhood Importance in Late Adulthood:
Neighborhoods become increasingly important as people spend more time at home.
Approximately 90% of older adults remain in their regular housing, often in the same neighborhood where they lived during their working lives (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015d).
Proximity to relatives and friends is a significant factor in deciding whether to move or stay.
In the absence of nearby family, neighbors and friends are crucial resources for physical and social support.
9.2 Schools
Schools are formal institutions designed to transmit knowledge and skills necessary for productive societal membership.
Children and youths in developed countries spend approximately hours in school by high school graduation, with the impact starting earlier due to child-care centers and preschools.
Schools as Complex Social Systems: Affect various aspects of development and differ in:
Physical environments: Student body size, class size, available space for work and play.
Educational philosophies: Teachers' views on students as passive learners, active explorers, or collaborative partners.
Social life: Degree of cooperation/competition, integration of diverse abilities/SES/ethnic backgrounds, and safety (e.g., peer harassment, violence) (Evans, 2006).
Importance of Education for Life Chances:
Achieving well in school is crucial for college admission and success. Since the 1960s, a college degree has been the main route to highly skilled, well-paying jobs.
Benefits of Higher Education: In addition to elevated job status and lifetime earnings, it contributes to life satisfaction, longevity, larger social networks (more social support), and enhanced knowledge/decision-making skills (e.g., in health behavior and family functioning).
Increased education is linked to reduced likelihood of smoking, heavy drinking, unsafe driving, and overweight/obesity (Cutler & Lleras-Muney, 2010).
College graduates are less likely to have children out of wedlock and more likely to have stable marriages (Cancian & Haskins, 2013; Pew Research Center, 2010a).
Interrelation with Other Contextual Factors:
Children in low-income and poverty-stricken neighborhoods are more likely to attend underfunded schools and receive poorer quality education.
Educational interventions are most effective when begun in the early years for economically disadvantaged children (Crosnoe & Benner, 2015), but later interventions (e.g., vocational education) for specific problems are also helpful.
Parental Involvement in Schools:
Students whose parents are involved in school activities and parent-teacher conferences show better academic achievement.
Higher-SES parents are more likely to have regular school contact due to similar backgrounds and values as teachers.
Low-SES and ethnic minority parents often feel uncomfortable engaging with schools, and daily stressors reduce their energy for involvement (Grant & Ray, 2010).
Teachers and administrators must take extra steps to build supportive family-school ties with low-SES and ethnic minority families.
When excellent education becomes a team effort involving teachers, administrators, and community members, its effects on learning are stronger and reach more students (Darling & Steinberg, 1997; Hauser-Cram et al., 2006).
The Cultural Context
Human development is best understood within its larger cultural context.
This section elaborates on the macrosystem's role in development, focusing on:
How cultural values and practices shape environmental contexts.
How healthy development relies on laws and government programs that protect well-being.
10.1 Cultural Values and Practices
Culture profoundly influences family interaction and community settings, affecting all aspects of daily life.
U.S. Cultural Values:
Emphasizes independence, self-reliance, and the privacy of family life, with the belief that child care and its costs are solely the parents' responsibility (Dodge & Haskins, 2015; Halfon & McLearn, 2002).
This perspective contributes to slow public endorsement of government-supported benefits (e.g., high-quality child care, paid family leave) and a high number of working poor families in the U.S. (Gruendel & Aber, 2007; UNICEF, 2013).
Subcultures and Ethnic Minority Groups:
Many ethnic minority groups possess cooperative family structures that safeguard members from poverty's adverse effects.
African-American Tradition:
Extended-family households (parents and children living with adult relatives) are a key feature, promoting resilience despite historical prejudice and economic hardship.
Can be traced to African heritage, where newly married couples often live with large extended families for daily life assistance.
This tradition provided a protective shield against poverty and racial prejudice during and after slavery in North America.
Contemporary characteristics:
More black than white adults have relatives other than their own children living in the same household (Boyd-Franklin, 2006; McAdoo & Younge, 2009).
African-American parents often live closer to kin, establish family-like relationships with friends and neighbors, see more relatives, and perceive them as more important.
Role in reducing stress:
Provides emotional support and shares essential resources, reducing the stress of poverty and single parenthood.
Extended-family members frequently help with child rearing.
Adolescent mothers in extended families are more likely to complete high school and get a job, benefiting children's well-being (Gordon, Chase-Lansdale, & Brooks-Gunn, 2004).
Impact on parenting:
For single mothers, extended-family living is associated with more positive mother-child interaction.
Even after establishing their own home, single mothers often invite family members or close friends to live with them, increasing effective parenting.
Effective parenting, supported by kinship, is related to gains in children's academic performance and social skills, and reduced antisocial behavior (Taylor, 2010; Washington, Gleeson, & Rulison, 2013).
Cultural transmission:
Plays an important role in transmitting African-American culture.
Extended-family arrangements emphasize cooperation and moral and religious values more than nuclear-family households.
Older black adults actively educate children about their African heritage (Mosely-Howard & Evans, 2000; Taylor, 2000).
These influences strengthen family bonds, enhance children's development, and increase the likelihood of the extended-family lifestyle continuing across generations.
Other Minorities (Asian, Native-American, Hispanic): Also characterized by active, involved extended families where:
Grandparents play significant roles in guiding younger generations.
Adults facing employment, marital, or child-rearing challenges receive assistance and emotional support.
Caregiving for children and older adults is enhanced (Jones & Lindahl, 2011; Mutchler, Baker, & Lee, 2007).
Hispanic Extended Families: Grandparents are even more likely to share in child-rearing than African-American grandparents, offering physical and emotional health benefits to all involved (Goodman & Silverstein, 2006).
This collaborative parenting is consistent with familism, a Hispanic cultural ideal that prioritizes close, harmonious family bonds and meeting family needs.
Collectivism vs. Individualism:
Collectivism: Cultures stress group goals, valuing interdependent qualities such as social harmony, obligations to others, and collaborative efforts.
Individualism: Cultures focus on personal needs, valuing independence, personal exploration, discovery, achievement, and choice in relationships.
While both values exist in most cultures, the U.S. is generally more individualistic than many Western European countries, which lean more towards collectivism (Triandis & Gelfand, 2012; Taras et al., 2014).
These cultural values significantly influence a nation's approach to protecting the well-being of its citizens.
10.2 Public Policies and Lifespan Development
Public Policies: Laws and government programs designed to address widespread social problems (e.g., poverty, homelessness, hunger, disease) and improve societal conditions.
Examples include building low-cost housing, raising minimum wage, increasing welfare benefits, funding schools, strengthening teacher preparation, and increasing social security benefits.
U.S. Policies for Children, Youths, and Families:
Have historically lagged behind policies for older adults and other industrialized nations.
The U.S. ranks poorly on key measures of children's health and well-being (referenced Table 2.4).
Health Care: The Affordable Care Act (2010) extended government-supported health insurance to low-income children, but expanded coverage for low-income adults (including parents) is not mandatory for states, leaving 13% of adults uninsured.
Approximately 11% of children eligible for the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) (over 5 million) do not receive coverage because uninsured parents lack enrollment knowledge (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2015).
Child Care: The U.S. has been slow to establish national standards and funding for child care, leading to a shortage of affordable, high-quality options (Burchinal et al., 2015; Phillips & Lowenstein, 2011).
Family Support: Weak enforcement of child support payments exacerbates poverty in mother-headed households.
Education: 7% of 16- to 24-year-olds who dropped out of high school have not earned a diploma (U.S. Department of Education, 2015).
Reasons for Lagging Policies:
Cultural values emphasizing self-reliance and privacy make government hesitant to intervene in family matters.
Social programs are expensive and compete for limited economic resources.
Children, unable to vote or speak out, must rely on the goodwill of adults to gain government priority (Ripple & Zigler, 2003).
U.S. Policies for Older Adults:
Policies emerged slowly; Social Security benefits were not awarded until the late 1930s, a decade or more after most Western nations (Karger & Stoesz, 2014).
Rapid expansion in the 1960s included Medicare, a national health insurance program covering partial health-care costs for older people (~1/3 of costs still need to be covered by other means) (Davis, Schoen, & Bandeali, 2015).
Social Security and Medicare consume 97% of the U.S. federal budget for older adults, leading to criticism for neglecting social services.
Area Agencies on Aging exist (approx. 655) to provide social services (e.g., meals, education, elder abuse prevention), but limited funding restricts their reach.
Many older adults (especially women, ethnic minorities, and those living alone) remain in economic hardship if they have interrupted employment histories, jobs without benefits, or lifelong poverty, as they may not qualify for sufficient Social Security.
The guaranteed minimum income for Americans aged 65+ is below the federal poverty line, often leaving recipients among the "near poor" if Social Security is their sole income source (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2015e).
Despite these issues, the U.S. aging population is financially better off than in the past, with the number of aging poor declining significantly (from 1 in 3 in 1960 to under 1 in 10 today) (U.S. Census Bureau, 2015d).
Older adults are a powerful, well-organized political constituency, making them more likely to attract political support compared to children or low-income families.
Compared to many other Western nations, the U.S. aging population is still less well-off, receiving less generous government-funded income supplements (referenced Figure 2.7).
10.3 Looking Toward the Future
Ongoing efforts are being made to improve the well-being of children, families, and aging citizens.
Successful programs exist and could be expanded nationwide.
Experts in developmental science and concerned citizens are advocating for more effective public policies, leading to the formation of influential interest groups:
Children's Defense Fund (CDF): A non-profit organization promoting public education and partnerships to improve policies for children (www.childrensdefense.org).
National Center for Children in Poverty (NCCP): Dedicated to advancing the economic security, health, and welfare of low-income U.S. children by informing policymakers with research (www.nccp.org).
AARP (American Association of Retired Persons): Represents about half of Americans over 50, actively lobbies for increased government benefits for older adults, and mobilizes older voters (www.aarp.org).
Effective public policies require:
Research to document needs and evaluate programs for continuous improvement.
Researchers collaborating with community and government agencies to enhance the social relevance of their work.
Disseminating findings in understandable and compelling ways through reports, websites, and media collaborations to foster public understanding and a sense of urgency (Shonkoff & Bales, 2011).