The family is the most fundamental institution in any country. Harmonious relationships in the family and income security provide work-life balance, economic and emotional stability. Thus, the economic and emotional health of adults and children in a family is an important contributory factor to socioeconomic order and prosperity in the larger society and the country. What we notice now is that low-income and poor families, and to some extent middle-income families, are suffering from economic hardships and emotional trauma. Those who are ardent supporters of only free market-based solutions may place the blame on those poor and low-income families for their plight. The problem, however, is that markets have not solved economic hardships and social turmoil faced by a significant proportion of American families. Changes in family structure, poverty, health care insecurity, opioid use, family violence, mental health disorders and homelessness are some of the contributory factors to their hardships. Markets have not solved these problems of family life and society.

Divorce rate is increasing nationally and in Utah. A growing proportion of families with children are headed by women and many are poor. Unmarried mothers have higher rates of poverty than married mothers. The National Women Law Center estimates that poverty rate in female-headed families with children was 32.1% in 2021, more than two times the official poverty rate in the population; poverty rate in female-headed white families, Black families and Latinas in Utah was 9.3%, 23.6% and 12.2%, respectively, in 2021 (NWLC). Children in low-income and poor families face income, food and health insecurity, and mental health problems. Therefore, their educational achievement and job prospects as adults suffer. Using Earned Income Tax Credit data, the study by Gordon Dahl and Lance Lochner (American Economic Review, August 2012), found that changes in current family income significantly affect reading and math performance of children. The improvement is larger for children in disadvantaged families. The decrease in child tax credit in 2022 will have adverse economic consequences for poor and low-income families.

David Brooks opines (The New York Times, Oct. 27, 2022) that there is increasing negativity, anger, sadness, drug abuses, hate crimes and disgust in the culture and in real life around the globe, including the U.S. Hence, family violence is a common occurrence in the U.S. The National Library of Medicine (Sept. 9, 2022) reports an inverse relationship between education and family violence. Lack of education also spells financial troubles, causing violent outbreaks in families. Women who lack education and job skills suffer the most since they are dependent on a husband’s income. Even children who witness violence in the family suffer emotional trauma and low educational performance, and sometimes opioid use. Children’s future economic status as adults suffers (NLM).

An Urban Institute study (November 2020) reports that, “8.7 million children ages 17 and younger live in households with at least one parent with substance use disorder, and an estimated 623,000 parents with opioid use disorder live with children.”

Mortality rate among young adults due to opioid use is highest among young people ages 25-34, followed by ages 35-44. No wonder that an increasing proportion of families are under stress; it is not a healthy economic status for families, as well as the country.

Marginal tinkering to improve family economic health is not an efficient government policy. Government policies must use an encompassing approach and provide enough resources to deal with the multifaceted problems families face. Policy implementation should be administered by local governments who are close to the people and are more accountable for their actions. Resources should be shared by federal, state and local governments with the involvement of local nonprofit organizations. Subsidies for child care and early childhood education should be part of the monthly funding to low income and poor families. That will encourage women who drop out of the labor market to seek jobs and/or educational opportunities to benefit them and the economy.

Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah, with some Senate colleagues, has proposed the Family Securities Act 2.0 in which families will be given a monthly stipend for each child in the family which they can use as they deem fit. I like the idea, but I am not in favor of an open-ended grant scheme that gives grants to families at all income levels. I do support when Sen. Romney says, “America cannot continue to lead the family of nations around the world if we suffer the collapse of the family here at home.”

Vijay Mathur is former chair and professor in the Economics Department and now emeritus professor at Cleveland State University, Cleveland, Ohio. He resides in Ogden.

Newsletter