Concepts of Childhood and Public Policy

While it is true to a certain degree that it may be necessary for adults to intervene to ensure safety of children who may not have control over certain living conditions, policies created by adults may not always be beneficial to children.⁷ The policies are created based on what adults feel is in the best interest of children. In essence, the perspectives of children are marginalized when their perspectives would shed light on what is important to them and whether or not they perceive policies to be helping them.⁸

Source: http://upstreamzine.wordpress.com/2008/03/25/child-protective-services-needs-reform/

For example, public policies allow child welfare programs to remove children from "dangerous" and "impoverished" homes to supposedly protect them. These policies disproportionately affect the structures of African-American families, who are considered to be most at-risk because of limited social and economic resources.⁹ In removing children from their homes and placing them in foster care, there is an increased likelihood that those children will end up in prison.¹⁰ These types of policies punish poor parents who, for reasons of systematic discrimination and lack of access to economic opportunity, may have difficulty providing materially for their children. Because of being unable to provide for their children materially, these parents may also be seen as "flawed parents.”¹¹ So, while public policies are created for the purpose of "protecting" children, they actually end up causing particular children potential harm.

Another example where public policies may cause more harm than good is the development of residential mobility programs, where some families living in poverty are given housing vouchers allowing them to move to low-poverty areas. While it is theorized that this opportunity should be advantageous for children, helping improve academic performance and engagement, this does not appear to be the case. Psychological studies have found that children and adolescents who moved from high-poverty areas to low-poverty areas actually performed worse academically than peers who remained in high-poverty areas. This is likely related to stresses of moving, such as the social stress of moving to a new school and continuing to be disadvantaged in a new school.¹²

Source: http://www.themovingplanner.com/2008/01

While moving to low-poverty neighborhoods may yield positive academic outcomes for some children initially, this effect appears to diminish over time. Perhaps addressing issues of poverty and lower-quality schools within neighborhoods would be more effective than only helping individuals move to different neighborhoods, as studies have shown that community-centered programs tend to have more positive outcomes.¹³