There are two main reasons that American children are poor: Their parents don't work much, and fathers are absent from the home. In good economic times or bad, the typical poor family with children is supported by only 800 hours of work during a year: That amounts to 16 hours of work per week. If work in each family were raised to 2,000 hours per year the equivalent of one adult working 40 hours per week throughout the year nearly 75 percent of poor children would be lifted out of official poverty. Father absence is another major cause of child poverty. Nearly twothirds of poor children reside in singleparent homes; each year, an additional 1.3 million children are born out of wedlock.
Another explanation of poverty is the poverty cycle. The poverty cycle means that poverty is passed on through generations. In the poverty cycle, children who are born into poverty have a deprived childhood - they experience material and cultural deprivation, and as a result of this they are less likely to do well at school, gain qualifications and stay in education beyond the minimum school leaving age. This means that their future opportunities are limited because their lack of qualifications means that the jobs available to them are mostly unskilled and low-paid. Consequently, they are likely to live in poverty as adults.
For example, in 2012 more than 40% were not in education, employment or training. 68% of homelessness organisations said there was not enough youth-specific emergency accommodation, while 43% of local authorities reported placing young people in unsuitable B&B accommodation, as well as 6 in 10 homelessness organisations being unable to support a young person due to limited capacity. Homelessness is not only a housing problem. There are lots of reasons why a young person could become homeless. More than half of young people become homeless because of a relationship breakdown, mainly with their parents.
In New Orleans, poverty among young children was high, partly because many parents were out of work or in low-wage jobs; also, a high percentage of families were headed by a single parent. Parents’ poor education, health limitations, and disability probably also contributed (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 2004). The sketchy information available on the health and development of New Orleans’ young children suggests that many were not doing well. This is not surprising: a wide range of studies consistently shows that poverty and low incomes correlate with worse outcomes for children (Golden 2005). Before the hurricane, Louisiana’s capacity to meet the needs of these young children was limited.
The schools are generally over crowded with few good teachers. When there's a great public school there is not enough space for every child in the neighborhood. Children are stuck in low achieving schools because of how the school districts are divided. A lot of children end up in poor public schools because their parents do not possess the income that it takes to send them to a private school. Since 1971 education cost has increased from $4,300 to more than $9,000 per student.
If one parent or neither parent’s are working, a family can still be in a low income bracket. One parent families often live in poverty as there is only one person in the household earning and they may need to pay for childcare in order to work. Children are more likely to live in poverty if: -Child is in care. -One or both parents are unemployed. -Parents are disabled, have mental health problems or additional needs.
Funding from local tax revenues and community resources to generate additional income from poor families is smaller than that of affluent neighborhoods. Second, parental participation is lower due time constraints and lack of information which is often interpreted as disinterest. Third, parents often feel powerless to create change which often influenced by the fourth factor, lack of “individual and collective efficacy” (p. 85). Educational success is further impacted by student arriving with additional needs. Unlike their affluent counterparts, students with in the Oakland system arrived to school with unprepared: academically, often lacked dental and health insurance, came to school hungry, moved frequently or were affected by domestic violence.
For example, 14,000 kids have been positively affected by the Michigan Earned Income tax credit, but because it has been cut by 14%, low-income youth are unable to receive the benefits (kidscount). Youth in families that are receiving unemployment are affected because unemployment was cut from 26 weeks to 20 weeks and cash assistance has become more difficult to receive (kidscount). Poverty affects the youth in many ways, such as their family life and education. Many children are neglected in cases of low-income families. 32,500 children have been neglected in 2010, and in Ingham County 42 percent of children have been abused or neglected (milhs.org).
Low income parents are in a culture of poverty. According to the Culture of Poverty theory, the conditions of poverty create its own subculture with its own attitudes, behaviors, and socialization. This culture then passes on across generations, which accounts for most of the poor kids to remain poor. Low income neighborhoods usually lead to bad schools. Why?
Child Poverty Many children and young people in Norfolk face a variety of disadvantages that mean they are less likely to have positive outcomes for their lives. A new child poverty report has revealed that parts of Norfolk have almost half of its children living in financial hardship. The latest report from The Campaign to End Child Poverty, named Norwich as the local authority worst affected in the region, with more than a quarter (30%) of children affected. One area in particular Nelson in Great Yarmouth is just 1% away of half of its children living in poverty.