Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This article identifies four problems with the way American society deals with children's needs: the discussion of children's problems seldom results in effective legislation or social action; child advocates are unable to achieve sufficient consensus on policy recommendations to provide direction to legislators; services needed by all children are provided only to special groups and even in these cases the help is not sustained; and much of the aid provided is directed toward adults and does not necessarily have the desired impact on children. Some possible explanations for these problems are offered: the cultural belief in parents' rights, the devaluing of children as recipients of economic investment, the cultural tendency to respond only to crises, and the political inexperience of child advocates are all identified as forces that contribute to the inadequacies in the way children's needs are met.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

1. M. W. Edelman , “Expanding Roots,” Childhood Education, 55(1): 14-21 (Oct. 1978).

2. “National Day Care Campaign Platform” (Draft statement, Kansas City, Kansas, Jan. 1980).

3. V. Kerr , “One Step Forward—Two Steps Back: Child Care's Long American History,” in Child Care: Who Cares? ed. P. Roby New York: Basic Books, 1973), pp. 157-171.

4. Marilyn M. Smith , “How Could Early Childhood Education Affect Families?” Young Children, 33(6):6-14 (Sept. 1978).

5. B. Greenblatt , Responsibility for Child Care (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977), pp. 2-10.

6. D. B. Sponseller and J. S. Fink , “Early Childhood Education: A National Profile of Early Childhood Educators' Views,” Education and Urban Society, 12(2):163-173 (Feb. 1980).

7. B. Caldwell , “Child Development and Social Policy,” in Current Issues in Child Development, eds. Scott and Grimmett (Washington, DC: National Association for Education of Young Children, 1977), pp. 61-88.

8. R. Ruopp et al. , Children at the Center: Summary Findings and Their Implications, vol. 1, Final Report of the National Day Care Study (Mar. 1979), pp. 54-56, 160-161.

9. M. A. Larson , “Federal Policy for Preschool Services: Assumptions and Evidence” (S.R.I. Project 2158, Report EPRCO2158-24, Stanford Research Institute, Educational Policy Research Center, Menlo Park, CA, May 1975).

10.

10. K. H. Dunlop , “Child Care and Parent Education: Reformist Rationales for Government Intervention,” Education and Urban Society, 12(2):175-191 (Feb. 1980).

11.

11. I. Lazar , “Social Research and Social Policy—Reflections on Relationships,” in Care and Education of Young Children in America, eds. R. Haskins and J. Gallagher (Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1980), pp. 59-71.

12.

12. J. S. Fink and D. B. Sponseller , “Practicing for Child Advocacy,” Young Children, Mar. 1977, pp. 49-54.

13.

13. M. W. Edelman , “Develop a National Agenda for Children” (Position paper commissioned by the Association for Childhood Education International, the National Association for the Education of Young Children, and the U.S. National Committee for Early Childhood Education, for International Year of the Child, 1979. Reprinted from Young Children, 34:2-3 [Nov. 1978]).

Public Policy Toward Children: Identifying the Problems

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References