A new “culture of poverty”: recent research from sociology

An article in this past week’s New York Times explores the scholarly refashioning of America’s “culture of poverty,” a concept popularized by Daniel Patrick Moynihan in his infamous 1965 report, “The Negro Family: The Case For National Action.”  As detailed elsewhere, Moynihan noted some disturbing trends among poor black Americans: fewer sustained marriages, a related increase in births to single mothers, and then additional increases in welfare reliance among black families. “At the heart of the deterioration of the fabric of Negro society,” Moynihan wrote, “is the deterioration of the Negro family.”

A strong statement, certainly, and one that most of us would shy away from. But what is less memorable, and less certainly repeated, is the rest of Moynihan’s argument, one that is slowly gaining credence today. Black America is hurting, the then-assistant secretary of labor noted, because of centuries of slavery and discrimination, a legacy of oppression whose impact would not be easily alleviated by legal integration. The solution, Moynihan postulated, could lie in an infusion of new jobs for black men (and what would eventually become affirmative action).

Unfortunately, Moynihan’s “culture of poverty” appeared static and unchanging (and was thoroughly criticized by contemporaries for its underlying misogyny and racism). Today’s social scientists define cultural influences more broadly–mainly, how our values and beliefs, shaped in part by the communities that surround us, influence on our emotional and physical health. Here the NYT cites Robert Sampson’s interesting study of neighborhoods, wherein he and fellow researchers dropped sealed envelopes, already addressed and stamped, around various Chicago neighborhoods to see which residents/communities would take the time (and care) to mail them.

“Today,” the New York Times article notes, “social scientists are rejecting the notion of a monolithic and unchanging culture of poverty [and] attribute destructive attitudes and behavior not to inherent moral character but to sustained racism and isolation. ” (emphasis mine). To address poverty, then, will mean addressing the underlying social, economic, and political conditions that create and sustain it within diverse cultures.

For more on the link between poverty and culture, see a recent issue of Annals, available here:
http://ann.sagepub.com/content/629/1/6.full.pdf+html

For an NPR interview with Patricia Cohen, author of the NYT article, click here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130701401&sc=tw&cc=share

And for some criticism, courtesy of Salon, click here:
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/10/22/culture_poverty_battistoni/index.html

Health care reform: a quick video from the Kaiser Family Foundation

A highly entertaining, highly informative (and, at 9 minutes, relatively short) video on the new health care bill:

Teen moms: the new celebreality?

Over the past few weeks, the stars of “Teen Mom,” an MTV (ahem) “reality” show, have been in the news quite a bit.  For those of you unfamiliar with the series, now in its second season, here’s a synopsis: MTV producers follow four pregnant teens through their difficult decision to raise a child — or give the baby up for adoption, in the case of one teen mom — while simultaneously attending school, working, and negotiating relationships with their parents and (frequently) the baby’s father. Averaging 3.3 million viewers per episode, even the show’s producer, Morgan J. Freeman, admits to surprise at the show’s popularity, noting that its audience appears drawn to the show’s main characters, Amber, Catelynn, Maci, and Farrah, rather than the subject matter.

Critics of the show — and there are many, spanning the political gamut — claim it glamorizes teen pregnancy. As part of the season 2 publicity rounds,  air-brushed photos of the shows’ teen moms have graced the covers of US Weekly, People, and Ok Magazine, with headlines like “Maci — back with Ryan!,” “Second Chance at Love,” and “We Miss our Baby.”

But before we roll our eyes and turn off TV (not bad advice, in any case), let’s consider the facts. Even a cursory glance at the “Teen Mom” message boards indicates that the show has teens talking about the risks of unprotected sex.  All four of the moms featured have dealt with some difficult issues as a result of their pregnancy: money problems, break-ups, fights with mom and dad. The Kaiser Family Foundation, in fact, has partnered with MTV to offer “Teen Mom” videos as part of their ongoing sex education campaign,“It’s Your Sex Life.”

The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy, meanwhile, has just released the results of a report that explores the relationship between media and teen pregnancy discussions (full disclosure: the National Campaign works with MTV on these shows and produces discussion guides that go along with MTV’s 16 and Pregnant). Nearly 50 percent of teenagers surveyed (N=1,008) said they “discussed sex, love, or relationships with an adult because of something they saw in the media about teen pregnancy.”

This blogger wonders, however, how MTV’s audience will react to the show’s recent focus on intimate partner violence.  After months of verbal abuse, the relationship between one teen mom and the father of her child deteriorated into physical violence — which MTV filmed (and showed) in its entirety. Note to producers: a couple of PSAs just don’t cut it.