IB_Mattingly_SouthernChildPoverty.pdf

7/27/2019 IB_Mattingly_SouthernChildPoverty.pdf

1/6

C

Issue BrIef No. 21

S 2010

nderstanding Very High ates of oung ChildPoverty in the outh

M b H J . M C H C b

More children live in poverty in the rural outh thanin any other region of the country. n 2008, 17

percent of families with children under age 18 inthe outh lived in poverty, according to the merican Com-munity urvey (C) (see ale 1).1 n contrast, an estimated13 percent of families in the ortheast and 14 percent inthe Midwest and West were living elow the poverty line.

Key Findings Poverty rates are signicantly higher in the South

for all families (11 percent), and for families with

children under 18 (17 percent).

In the South, 28 percent of families with children

under age 18 are headed by single mothers. Thir-

ty-eight percent of these families are in poverty.

Black and Hispanic families make up 34 percent

of the population in the South, and they are sig-

nicantly more likely to be in poverty than their

white counterparts.2

In Arkansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, and ississippi,

poverty rates for black, single-mother house-

holds exceed 40 percent.

In Kentucky, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas,

poverty rates for Hispanic female-headed house-

holds are estimated at 40 percent or higher. When states in the upper South (Delaware, ary-

land, and Virginia) are removed from calculations,

the poverty rate for children under 18 jumps from

26 to 28 percent in rural areas and from 15 to 18

percent in suburban areas.

Children under age 6 in the South are more likely

to be in poverty if they reside in rural or urban

areas. Suburban southern children are the least

likely to be poor.

n 2008, the federal poverty threshold for a couple with twochildren in the nited tates was $21,834.3

Te very youngest children are particularly vulnerale.ationally, the poverty rate for children under age 6 has eenincreasing slowly ut steadily from 19 percent in 2000 to 21percent in 2008.4 n the outh, where young child povertyrates are consistently the highest, the percentage of childrenunder age 6 in poverty stood at almost 24 percent in 2008.Poverty is alarmingly high in rural areas and central citiesin the outh, where nearly one in three children under age6 now lives in poverty.5 ome southern states experience farhigher rates. n this rief, we outline some of the demograph-ic patterns associated with high poverty rates among childrenin the outh.6

oung children are most vulnerale to the negative eects

of eing poor. pecically, physical and emotional health,quality of education, and ehavioral issues are all more fre-quent and severe among those who have experienced povertyas young children.7 Many poor preschool-age children do nothave access to the variety of educational, nutritional, and so-cial resources oen provided through pulic school systems.Moreover, the deleterious eects of poverty oen extend intoolder childhood and adulthood.8

Te outhern egion has Moreisk Factors for PovertyTe southern nited tates diers from other regions of thecountry in poverty risk factors, such as family structure andeducation levels. Te outh, for example, has a higher shareof minorities than other regions coupled with a legacy ofslavery and racial discrimination that continues to adverselyaect minority families and children, which contriutes toits higher poverty rates. frican mericans and Hispanicstypically experience higher rates of poverty compared withwhites. frican mericans make up almost 19 percent ofthe population in the outh, the highest of any region. n theortheast, y contrast, only 10.9 percent of the population is


2/6

Allfamilies Marriedcouples Femaleheaded

Percent in Margin of Percent in Margin of Percent in Margin ofpoverty error (+/-) poverty error (+/-) poverty error (+/-)

ll families 8.3% 0.1 3.6% 0.1 24.8% 0.5Northeast With related children 13.1% 0.2 4.8% 0.2 33.8% 0.7

under 18 years

ll families 8.8% 0.1 3.7% 0.1 29.6% 0.4Midwest With related children 14.2% 0.2 5.1% 0.1 37.9% 0.6

under 18 years

ll families 11.0% 0.1 5.4% 0.1 30.1% 0.3South With related children 16.9% 0.2 7.5% 0.2 38.2% 0.4

under 18 years

ll families 9.3% 0.1 5.2% 0.1 25.1% 0.5West With related children 14.1% 0.2 7.5% 0.2 32.8% 0.6

under 18 years

. P ,

Data: based on 2008 merican Community urvey estimates.

frican merican. because of a rapid inux of immigrants,Hispanics now make up almost 15 percent of the totalpopulation in the outh. n rkansas, eorgia, and orthand outh Carolina, for example, the Hispanic populationincreased approximately 80 percent etween 2000 and 2008.9Comined, lacks and Hispanics make up more than one-third of ouths population.

ow educational attainment also contriutes to high rates ofpoverty. Te outh has the highest percentage of individuals(age 25 and older) who have less than a high school education,

at almost 17 percent. Tis compares with aout 13 percent inthe ortheast, 12 percent in the Midwest, and 16 percent inthe West. n the outh, the percentage of the population thathas nished college is also the lowest in the country.

Te children of highly educated parents are less likelyto e poor than children whose parents are less educated.n fact, more than one-quarter of individuals in the outhwithout a high school diploma live in poverty, comparedwith 13 percent of people with a high school diploma and8.5 percent of individuals with a achelors degree. Femaleswithout a high school diploma in the outh also have thelowest median earnings of any region, at $14,082.

High child poverty rates in the outh are also exacer-ated y divorce and out-of-wedlock childearing. ndeed,southern families are more likely than families in otherregions to e headed y a female.10 mong all female-headedhouseholds in that region, an estimated 38 percent resides inpoverty, compared with only 7.5 percent of married-couplefamilies with children, as shown in ale 1. verall, mar-ried-couple families experience much lower rates of povertyacross all races, and among white, married couples, povertyrates are less than 7 percent in all ut two southern states.

tate-y-tate ContrastsTe outh is not one monolithic region. n most southernstates, as well as the istrict of Columia, and for all racialgroups, poverty rates among female-headed households aresignicantly higher than those of married-couple house-holds. black and Hispanic families of all types have higherpoverty rates than their white counterparts, although mar-riage appears to act as a protective factor against povertyamong all three races. Te poverty rates among lack single

mothers in rkansas, Kentucky, ouisiana, and Mississippiare 40 percent or higher. Poverty rates for all Hispanics inKentucky are similarly high. mong whites, eight states havefemale-headed poverty rates greater than 25 percent. ike-wise, poverty rates for young children vary widely:

oung child poverty is very high in rkansas,ouisiana, Mississippi, and West Virginia.

n Florida, young child poverty is highest in rural places. n an additional eight states (laama, eorgia,

Kentucky, ouisiana, orth Carolina, klahoma,ennessee, and exas), rural young child poverty issimilar to uran child poverty yet signicantly higherthan in the suurs.

Poverty rates for young children in states that orderthe orth (such as Maryland, elaware, and Virginia)are consideraly lower (and even less than thenational average of 21.3 percent) than rates found inremaining southern states.

2 C


3/6

ConclusionMuch has een written aout at risk children. Te povertygap etween children living in female-headed householdsand other high-poverty groups has widened in recentyears, as rates of poverty for other groups have declinedwhile rates among single mothers have remained steady.12ccupational sex segregation, high rates of divorce, andmore signicantly, out-of-wedlock irths have contriutedto the feminization of poverty. Policy makers are sharplydivided as to how to address the issue.

High rates of child poverty in the outh are rooted inmany factors. Historically, the region was home to destruc-tive racial segregation and discrimination against fricanmericans. oday this segregation still exists in many forms,with many lacks in the eep outh living in segregatedareas of concentrated poverty.13 n addition, with the recent

economic recession, many of the jos that drew immigrantshave disappeared.14 Manufacturing work, once availale tomany in the outh, has declined precipitously, replaced yservice jos that are less likely to provide staility, sucientpay, and enets. Further, unionization rates, oen an indi-cation of the presence of steady, well-paying jos, are lowestin the outh. n fact, the ve states with the lowest unionmemership are all located in that region.15

C data also reveal a link etween family structure andpoverty. n all regions of the country, families with childrenheaded y single women are more likely to e in povertythan married-couple families. ationally, 28.7 percent ofhouseholds headed y single women are poor, compared

with 5.5 percent of married-couple families.16 n the outh, anumer of states report poverty rates among female-headedhouseholds that are higher than the national average, withmany of the highest rates found among lack and Hispanicsingle mothers and their children.

iven that non-whites, female-headed households, and theless educated are more likely to e in poverty, these groupsare important to target when addressing child poverty. Teintersection of education and household status, for example,means that children living in these families are at even higherrisk. Female heads of households with children under 18 aremore likely to e in the laor force in the outh than in any ofthe other regions of the country, ut they are less likely to have

completed high school.17 Coupled with the diculty manyparents face in nding safe, aordale, and consistent childcare, access to reliale transportation, and skills or trainingopportunities necessary to otain dependale employment,providing income to meet asic needs and live aove the pov-erty line oen ecomes an insurmountale task.

Poverty policy targeting families with young childrenshould e a priority, with a focus on female-headed andminority families. lthough the recent economic crisis hasaected all regions of the country, children in the outh

appear to e at increased risk for poverty. iven that manyof the long-term adverse eects of poverty in children areknown, more must e done in the outh and elsewhere toreduce the incidence of poverty among these youngest citi-

zens through improved educational, health, childcare, andnutrition programs and family friendly employment policies.uch policies may e most eectively developed and imple-mented initially at the community or county level throughlocally developed programs well tailored to suit the needs ofthe poor in that area. tate and federal programs, althoughlarger in scope and funding, oen do not eciently addressthe need for collective community action and the potentialpower emedded in local programs.

Finally, it is worth noting that this rief focused exclu-sively on those elow the federal poverty threshold. n 2008,the federal poverty threshold for a couple with two childrenin the nited tates was $21,834.18 everal studies, however,

show that families oen require much higher incomes thanthose set y federal poverty guidelines in order to provideadequate food, clothing, shelter, and care, as housing, trans-portation, and child care costs can easily exceed this gure.19basic needs vary y location and family structure, as costs

vary widely from place to place and among dierent familytypes. n fact, the numer of merican families not meet-ing this asic needs threshold is much higher than federalpoverty levels indicate.20 n apides Parish, ouisiana, forexample, where the poverty rate stands at 48 percent forfemale-headed households with children under 18, the asicneeds udget calculated y the ational Center for Childrenin Poverty estimates that a single-parent family with two

young children would need an annual income of $30,816 toaord asic necessities.21 Tese gures translate to an hourlywage of $15, or more than doule the federal minimumwage.22 Te ocial poverty threshold for this family size isonly $17,600.23 Tus, enets of policy eorts to alleviatepoverty may well assist many more families who are strug-gling to make ends meet and who may e one crisis awayfrom slipping into poverty.

C 3


4/6

ataWe used data released in 2009, reecting patterns for 2008.Tis analysis is ased on .. Census bureau estimates fromthe 2008 merican Community urvey released in fall

2009. Te .. Census bureau divides the nited tates intofour major geographic regions: ortheast, Midwest, outh,and West. t releases demographic and poverty data via themerican Community urvey (C) annually for theseregions, as well as for individual states. Te southern regionconsists of sixteen states and the istrict of Columia. Formore details or information, please refer to the C.24 aleswere produced y aggregating information from detailedtales availale on merican FactFinder (http://factnder.census.gov/home/sa/main.html?_lang=en). Tese estimatesare meant to give perspective on child poverty, ut ecausethey are ased on survey data, caution must e used incomparing across years or places, as the margin of error maye high.25 ierences highlighted in this rief are statisticallysignicant (p


5/6

bureau, 2010), availale at http://it.ly/c1dfp5. therregions are also availale.

12. ee teven Pressman, Feminist xplanations for theFeminization of Poverty, Journal of conomic ssues, 37 (2)

(2003): 353-361; and Karen Christopher et al., Te enderap in Poverty in Modern ations: ingle Motherhood,the Market and the tate, ociological Perspectives, 45 (3)(2002): 219242.

13. William Hare, Te Forgotten Fih: Child Povertyin ural merica, Carsey nstitute eport on uralmerica (urham, H: Carsey nstitute, niversity of ewHampshire, 2009).

14. Julia Preston, atino mmigrants Hit y Jos hortage,ew ork imes, June 5, 2008; Marc acey, Money ricklesorth as Mexicans Help elatives ew ork imes,ovemer 15, 2009.

15. bureau of aor tatistics, ews elease: nionMemers 2009, (Washington, C: bureau of aortatistics, .. epartment of aor, January 2009), availaleat http://www.ls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf.

16. Poverty in the nited tates: Frequently skedQuestions, (nn ror, M: ational Poverty Center, 2008),availale at http://www.npc.umich.edu/poverty/.

17. ee 2008 merican Community urvey ata Proles,selected conomic Characteristics for the outhernregion (detailing rates of employment), availale at http://it.ly/9rFsu; and selected social characteristics for thesouthern region (detailing educational attainment), availale

at http://it.ly/9p8ch. ther regions also availale.

18. ee http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/threshld/thresh08.html.

19. basic needs udget methodology, detailing amountsneeded for families to aord asic necessities, can efound at http://www.nccp.org/popup.php?name=udget_methodology.

20. ee http://www.epi.org/pulications/entry/p165/.

21. ee http://www.nccp.org/pulications/pu_858.html.

22. .. epartment of aor.

23. .. epartment of Health and Human ervices 2008Poverty uidelines, availale at http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/08poverty.shtml.

24. .. Census bureau 2008 merican Community urvey,availale at http://factnder.census.gov/.

25. efer to the .. Census bureaus pulished tales fordetailed margins of error, found under ccuracy of theata, availale at http://www.census.gov/acs/www/seata/ccuracy/ccuracy1.htm.

beth Mattingly is director of research on vulnerale familiesat the Carsey nstitute and research assistant professor ofsociology at the niversity of ew Hampshire. Her research

addresses the consequences of family violence; the intersec-tions of gender, work and family; child poverty; and familywell-eing ([email protected] ).

Catherine urcotte-eaury is a doctoral candidate in o-ciology at the niversity of ew Hampshire and a researchassistant at the Carsey nstitute. Her work focuses on pov-erty, as well as employment and susistence patterns amongindigenous groups ([email protected]).

We are grateful for assistance and feedack in preparing thisrief from Mil uncan, erri ippett, my terndale, and

Michelle transky, at the Carsey nstitute; aniel . ichter,Ferris Family Professor, epartments of Policy nalysis andManagement and ociology, at Cornell niversity; and bobeaulieu, outhern ural evelopment Center director andprofessor in the epartment of griculture conomics, atMississippi tate niversity.

C 5
http://bit.ly/9rFsRuhttp://bit.ly/9rFsRuhttp://bit.ly/9p8chAmailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://bit.ly/9p8chAhttp://bit.ly/9rFsRuhttp://bit.ly/9rFsRu


6/6

building knowledge for families and communities

Te Carsey nstitute conducts policy research on vulneralechildren, youth, and families and on sustainale communitydevelopment. We give policy makers and practitioners timely,independent resources to eect change in their communities.

Tis research was supported y the nnie . Casey Founda-tion, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation, and an anonymous donor.

Huddleston Hall73 Main treeturham, H 03824

(603) 862-2821

www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu

6 C

Documents

IB_Mattingly_SouthernChildPoverty.pdf