Report: Times Not So Good for American Children

A just released report from the Foundation for Child Development is predicting that children will have a tougher time all around as a result of the recession.

Here are a few stats and projections from the report:

• The percentage of children living below the poverty line is expected to peak at 21 percent in 2010, the highest rate of child poverty in 20 years. The foundation estimates that approximately 15.6 million children will be living in poverty in 2010.
• The percentage of children living in families with no secure parental employment — defined as not having at least one parent employed full-time, year-round — will increase from 22 percent in 2006 to 26 percent in 2010. This represents about 20 million children.
• Food insecurity occurs when all family members do not at all times have access to sufficient, safe, and nutritious food to maintain an active and healthy life. The foundation projects the percent of children living in food-insecure households to climb from 16.9 percent in 2007 to 17.7 percent in 2010, which is an increase of 750,000 additional children at risk over this time period.
• For all families with children, it is expected that median annual income will decline from $61,500 in 2007 to almost $57,800 in 2010.
• For children in female-headed single-parent families, median annual income is expected to decline from just over $25,900 in 2007 to about $24,250 in 2010.

So while economic indicators are pointing up, it looks like it may take families a little longer to recover lost resources.

Here are a couple of links if you want to read more about the report.

USA Today: More than one in five kids live in poverty

The Hechinger Report: Tough times ahead for children of the Great Recession, report finds

The Foundation for Child Development: Child and Youth Well-Being Index Page

Subscribe to the comments for this post

To Spank or Not to Spank?

Research that spanking increases the likelihood that children will be aggressive has been discounted in the past because of the way the research has been designed. A recent study about spanking has drawn some praise for its design because the study takes into account risk factors, demographics and other factors.

Here’s information about the study from the American Academy of Pediatrics:

Children who are spanked frequently at age 3 are more likely to be aggressive when they’re 5, even when you account for possible confounding factors and the child’s level of aggression at age 3.

The study, “Mothers’ Spanking of 3-Year-Old Children and Subsequent Risk of Children’s Aggressive Behavior,” in the May issue of Pediatrics (published online April 12), asked nearly 2,500 mothers how often they had spanked their 3-year-old child in the past month, as well as questions about their child’s level of aggression, demographic features such as child gender, and eight maternal parenting risk factors, such as parenting stress, depression, alcohol use, and the presence of other types of aggression within the family.

Almost half (45.6 percent) of the mothers reported no spanking in the previous month, while 27.9 percent reported spanking one or two times, and 26.5 percent reported spanking more than twice. Mothers with more parenting risk factors were more likely to spank frequently. However, even after accounting for these potential confounding factors, frequent spanking at age 3 increased the odds of higher levels of aggression at age 5.

Despite recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics against spanking, most parents in the U.S. approve of and have used corporal punishment as a form of child discipline. Researchers state that this study suggests that even minor forms of corporal punishment increase the risk for child aggressive behavior.

So what do experts recommend people do instead of spanking? Using praise, rewards or time-out and directing activity to something else that gets the child away from the behavior at issue, among other things.

Many parents raising kids these days were spanked as children, and most of them turned out fine, they would tell you. And many, when they first have a child, don’t necessarily plan to spank, but then real life happens, and discipline becomes trial and error based on the child, the situation, the family dynamics, family beliefs, etc.

As I work with my husband to raise a healthy, curious, responsible, loving and active boy, I think what’s important when talking about discipline is figuring out what motivates each specific child. Is it a punishment (like time-out or sitting in the corner)? Is it a reward (like the sticker chart, extra time outside, or an extra book at bedtime)? A combination of both?

The other important thing I’m learning as my son blows through his second year, is to watch out for what precedes temper tantrums and discipline debacles — both in myself and in him. Is he hungry? Is he tired? Does he feel ignored? left out? out of control? like he has no choices? How do I react as his anger or bad behavior starts, continues, finishes? What are the successful ways we’ve gotten through bad situations?

I’ve found if you stay in control yourself rather than becoming frustrated and really pay attention to what is happening, then spanking isn’t necessary. You can make things happen for you and your child through other, more effective, tactics.

Subscribe to the comments for this post

Decreasing Prematurity

Prematurity is a global problem, and one with dire consequences. Preterm births account for a large percentage of newborn deaths. There is a whole organization, March of Dimes, dedicated to identifying the causes and stopping prematurity. Part of the problem is that its cause can be elusive.

But in some cases, doctors know exactly what causes prematurity, leading to breathing problems, stays in the Newborn Intensive Care Unit, or worse. Part of the problem is mothers and doctors scheduling labor early, before 39 weeks. Many are being induced at 37 weeks.

You may think, what’s two weeks? But as quickly as babies grow, that might well be the difference between fully developed lungs and lungs that will need help breathing.

Granted, most of these late-induced preemies wouldn’t have lasting problems because they were born early, but waiting a couple of weeks saves money (for everyone — the hospital, family and insurance company) and can save the family stress of having a baby in the NBICU.

Having had a baby who wouldn’t wait to come out (he was born at 33 weeks for reasons unknown), I can tell you that it is stressful seeing your little one inside a plastic isolette hooked up to IVs and feeding tubes. And I’m one of the lucky moms. My son was only in the hospital for a few weeks, and the only sign of prematurity that we brought home with us (besides a small baby) was a machine that monitored his heart rate so we could be warned if it slowed too much. Having the kind of stress that comes with an early baby just because it’s convenient, and without a medical justification for an early birth, just doesn’t seem worth the risk.

Read more about the issue and the rules resulting from recent research.

Subscribe to the comments for this post