Routes out of poverty: education and social mobility

Morag Treanor, lecturer in Social Policy, University of Edinburgh

Education and social mobility can alleviate child poverty, but not in the way the government supposes, i.e. by improving future educational outcomes of poor children in order that they do not become poor adults. Rather, child poverty in the here and now can be alleviated if we allow low-income parents free access to further and higher education.

The UK Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017, released for consultation by the Coalition Government last February, is focused on ‘breaking the cycle of disadvantage’ and on ensuring that ‘where you start in life should not determine where you end up’. Two of its three routes to achieving this are: Supporting families into work and increasing their earnings; and preventing poor children becoming poor adults through raising their educational attainment[1].

To address the first route their principal means of supporting families into work and increasing their earnings is through the Work Programme and other employment-related activities such as raising the minimum wage and the personal tax allowance. A secondary means is through ‘improving qualifications’. Further investigation reveals that this translates into improving basic literacy and numeracy.

To address the second route, their principle means of preventing poor children becoming poor adults through raising their educational attainment, is to focus on compulsory schooling with the responsibility and accountability for this lying with schools, teachers and parents. As the government notes, they want to ‘ensure that the parents of tomorrow will have better qualifications’[2] -presumably better than the parents of today.

Now, this raises many areas of concern, from the lack of consideration for the lives of children as lived in childhood[3], to the ability of employment to lift families out of poverty[4], given the fact that there are more poor children in households with a wage-earner than without; however, I would like to focus on an issue that I have come across with my current research with the Child Poverty Action Group, and that is the further and higher education of parents living in poverty as a route into work and, hopefully, out of poverty.

In my longitudinal, qualitative study of twenty families living in poverty, ten in England and ten in Scotland, four of my Scottish ten were able to access further or higher education during the course of the research. None in England were. Two of this four completed further education and obtained their first job since becoming a parent: one is the mother of three boys aged 6, 10 and 13 and the other the mother of two boys aged 10 and 12. The remaining two went on to study degree programmes: these two mothers have one son each. The antecedent to accessing education for these women was gaining confidence and skills through volunteering.

These women gained in wellbeing, confidence, skills and self-esteem. They made friends and widened their social networks. The lives of their children demonstrably improved. Of her new job, Jennifer says: ‘I totally love it. I’m really, really happy. So, last year was a great year for me. I passed my driving test, got my wee car, which I saved up and paid for myself, and I took my kids on holiday. I love it, totally love it’.

Jennifer says that the knowledge that she has completed a college course and succeeded in getting a job she loves has had a positive impact on her children, particularly her eldest son (aged 13), who has told her that he is proud of her. She says: ‘my oldest one, he’s often saying to me: “It’s good the way you are now, you’re really happy now. Remember when it was like this?” So he feels a positive change. So that’s really good’.

This is only a brief glimpse into this research but I want to highlight that in Scotland, education is a viable route into employment and out of poverty for parents who are unemployed, due to the system of no fees in Scotland (this is not entirely straightforward as becoming a student when you’re a parent can raise issues with the benefits system, and I will write about those another time). In England, there has been a 40% decline in applications to universities from part-time students, amounting to 105,000 fewer applicants, 9/10 of whom are mature[5]. For full-time students, there has been a 14% reduction from 2010 to 2013, amounting to 18,500 fewer applicants[6]. Among this potential mature student community will be parents and lone parents. By increasing the fees in other parts of the UK to £9,000 per year, the government has effectively removed access to further and higher education for many poorer parents and prevented a route out of poverty for them and their children.

[1] The UK Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017, pg 11.
[2] The UK Child Poverty Strategy 2014-2017, pg 25.
[3] Ridge, Tess (2002) Childhood poverty and social exclusion: from a child’s perspective, Bristol: Policy Press.
[4] Shildrick, Tracy, MacDonald, Robert, Webster, Colin and Garthwaite, Kayleigh (2012) Poverty and Insecurity: Life in Low-Pay, No-Pay Britain, Bristol: Policy Press.
[5] http://www.universitiesuk.ac.uk/highereducation/Documents/2013/PowerOfPartTime.pdf
[6] http://www.suttontrust.com/newsarchive/18000-fewer-mature-students-apply-university-since-fees-increase/

What does the evidence say about childcare in Scotland?

The budget brings promises from the UK Govt for childcare subsidies to help couples with joint incomes who are "working hard, who are feeling the squeeze" and to "assist women back into the workforce". Similarly, the SNP have pledged to increase state-paid childcare for all three and four- year olds, again to "help people, especially women, to move into the workforce", if it was elected within an independent Scotland.

Those with an interest in research on families and relationships may question whether these announcements skim over some of the tough issues facing families, particularly those families struggling to get into work. The recent launch of the Scotland's Outlook campaign to raise awareness of the extent of poverty across Scotland, followed by the Scottish Government's publication of a new poverty strategy does help to widen the lens to look at the many contributing factors affecting many parents ability to enter the paid workforce.

CRFR reflects on what the evidence says about childcare and working families:

• Most families in Scotland use childcare in the early years[1]. This tends to be a mixture of informal (typically grandparent) and formal providers for their childcare arrangements[2]. The support provided by grandparents should not be underestimated, with many grandparents involved in childcare or babysitting on a regular basis. We know that work is important to women and families. Evidence from GUS shows that most mothers of young children who are in paid work, work part-time[3]. Mothers value work highly, not only for its economic contribution, but also for personal identity, social contact and as an important message for their children[4]. Most working parents with children under 5 believe that their employment is not detrimental to their enjoyment of family life nor to their ability to raise their child(ren).[5][6] 
• The focus on childcare costs is not misplaced - accessing available, affordable and quality childcare remains a key concern for parents combining caring and working[7][8]. But all is not equal. Factors associated with poverty can add up to make it tougher for families. Lone parent families and re-partnered families are more likely to have no parent in employment than couple families[9]. Lone mothers[10], families living on low incomes[11] and families affected by disability[12] are particularly affected by lack of affordable and suitable childcare.
• Work, does not in itself, protect families from poverty, particularly when there is only one worker in the household. Families in deprived areas often require quite complex childcare arrangements to make work a possibility[13].
• Parents from low-income areas tend to have low levels of social support and are least likely to access formal services[14].
• People living in rural areas and areas of higher deprivation are less likely to be able to access childcare services than those in urban areas[15]. 
• Living in child friendly communities and having a reasonable level of resources, such as access to outdoor play, are also very important to outcomes for children[16].
• Flexibility in childcare provision needs also to be matched by flexibility in workplace practices and employment opportunity: 
• Parents working full-time and those in lower supervisory or technical occupations were more likely to say that their employment had a negative impact on family life[17].
• Parents face competing demands on their time relating to their responsibilities as parents and employees. This is experienced through the difficulties of balancing work and family life and results in a sense of harriedness, of feeling constantly busy, tired and stressed.[18]
• Lone mothers of children of all ages are more likely to experience employment barriers. Low qualifications, lack of confidence, family health issues, lack of training and transport are other barriers they face[19].
• Parents of disabled children face particular barriers around employment, including inflexible employers, and especially a lack of affordable and appropriate childcare[20], which are not addressed in the consultation document.
• The debate on childcare should also consider the behavioural and cognitive benefits for children. Attending nursery or pre-school is important for our young children. Evidence from GUS shows that non-parental childcare in the early years is beneficial to a child’s cognitive development, in small effect[21]. However, universal policies which seek to improve children’s cognitive ability and school readiness in the pre-school period will not benefit all children equally.
• The level of parents’ education qualification is a driver in a child’s cognitive ability at ages 3 and 5. Any strategies aimed at improving school readiness via a pre-school setting need to include, for disadvantaged children, strategies which seek to influence the child’s home environment and parenting experiences at the same time[22].
• Similarly, lone parents, younger mothers, parents with lower educational qualifications and parents from more deprived socio-economic communities had lower levels of participation in their children’s school activities – both in terms of homework once they had started school and in the number of activities they attended at the school. This has been shown to be associated with lower educational achievement for children[23]
• Lastly, there is very little known about children’s views and experiences of their parent’s work. Qualitative research carried out in Scotland found that there are clear challenges in negotiating how work and family life balance out[18].
• Work is typically justified by the financial gains, rather than any of the social or personal benefits for parents, when helping children to understand why work is part of everyday life.
• ‘Home’ is an important space for children, and was described as a more natural space where they have greater freedom to be themselves. This was contrasted with the more collective and organised nature of after-school clubs.
• This brings challenges in keeping clear boundaries between home and work, and importantly how available they are to their children when at home – particularly for parents who also work from home.
• Parents expressed feelings of guilt and anxiety about not being able to give 100% to either work or family, and are constantly trying to meet the demands of both sides.
• Children are aware of the impact of work on their parents’ emotional and physical state, and do support their parents by complying with routines, helping with chores, looking after themselves and young siblings.
• However, families were creative in realising some of their aspirations, with holidays and weekend highlighted as times when children’s wishes could be better met, opportunities to reap some of the financial rewards of employment and overall family well-being achieved.

Are you involved in research that can contribute to this debate? We are interested to hear from others invovled in research on families and relationships. Please leave a comment below, tweet us at @CRFRtweets or email us at kirsten.thomlinson@ed.ac.uk.

 

 

[1] Bradshaw P. and Wasoff F. (2009) Growing Up in Scotland: Multiple Childcare Provision and Its Effect on Child Outcomes. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

[2] Jamieson, L., Warner, P. and Bradshaw, P. (2012) The involvement of grandparents in children’s lives. Growing Up in Scotland Topic Research Findings no.1/2012. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

[3] Bradshaw P, Cunningham-Burley S, Dobbie F, McGregor A, Marryat L, Ormston, R. and Wasoff F. (2008) Growing Up in Scotland: Sweep 2 Overview Report, Edinburgh: The Scottish Government.

[4] Backet-Milburn K, Cunningham-Burley S, and Kemmer D (2001) Caing and providing: Lone and partnered working mothers in Scotland. London: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

[5] Bradshaw P, Cunningham-Burley S, Dobbie F, McGregor A, Marryat L, Ormston, R. and Wasoff F. (2008) Growing Up in Scotland: Sweep 2 Overview Report, Edinburgh: The Scottish Government

[6] Backett-Milburn, K., Harden, J., Maclean, A., Cunningham-Burley, S. and Jamieson, L (2011) Work and family live: the changing experiences of ‘young families’. Timescapes final report, project 5. 

[7] Bradshaw P, Cunningham-Burley S, Dobbie F, McGregor A, Marryat L, Ormston, R. and Wasoff F. (2008) Growing Up in Scotland: Sweep 2 Overview Report, Edinburgh: The Scottish Government

[8] McKie, L., Gregory, S. and Bowlby, S. (2004) Caringscapes: the experiences of caring and working. CRFR research briefing No.13. Edinburgh: Centre for Research on Families and Relationships.

[9] Growing Up in Scotland (2009) Non-resident parent summary report. Growing Up in Scotland Topic Research Findings no. 1/2009. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

[10] Backet-Milburn K, Cunningham-Burley S, and Kemmer D (2001) Caring and providing: Lone and partnered working mothers in Scotland. London: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

[11] McKendrick J, Cunningham-Burley S and Backett-Milburn K (2003) Life in low income families in Scotland: Research report. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive 

[12] About Families (2012) Parenting on a low income. Edinburgh: Centre for Research on Families and Relationships.

[13] Barnes, M., Chanfreau, J. and Tomaszewski, W. (2010) The circumstances of persistently poor children summary report. Growing Up in Scotland topic research findings no.1/2010. Edinburgh: Scottish Government. 

[14] About Families (2012) Parenting on a low income. Edinburgh: Centre for Research on Families and Relationships. 

[15] Growing Up in Scotland (2009) Parenting and the neighbourhood context summary report, Growing Up in Scotland Topic Research Findings no. 3/2009. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

[16] Growing Up in Scotland (2009) Parenting and the neighbourhood context summary report, Growing Up in Scotland Topic Research Findings no. 3/2009. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

[17] Bradshaw P, Cunningham-Burley S, Dobbie F, McGregor A, Marryat L, Ormston, R. and Wasoff F. (2008) Growing Up in Scotland: Sweep 2 Overview Report, Edinburgh: The Scottish Government 

[18] Harden, J., Backett-Milburn, K., MacLean, A., Cunningham-Burley, S. and Jamieson, L. (2013) Home and away: constructing family and childhood in the context of working parenthood. Children’s Geographies, 11(3):298-310. 

[19] About Families (2012) Parenting on a low income. Edinburgh: Centre for Research on Families and Relationships.

[20] About Families (2012) Parenting on a low income. Edinburgh: Centre for Research on Families and Relationships.

[21] Growing Up In Scotland (2009) Multiple Childcare Provision and its Effect on Child Outcomes Summary Report. Growing Up in Scotland Topic Research Findings no.4/2009. Edinburgh: Scottish Government. 

[22] Bradshaw, P. (2011) Changes in child cognitive ability in the pre-school years, Growing Up in Scotland Topic Research Findings no.2/2011. Edinburgh: Scottish Government.

[23] Bradshaw, P., Hall, J., Hill, T., Mabelis, J. and Philo, D. (2012) Early experiences of primary school – parental involvement in school activities. Growing Up in Scotland Topic Research Findings no.3/2012. Edinburgh: Scottish Government. 

 

 

Children's diet unaffected by fall in household income

CRFR Associate Researchers, Dr Valeria Skafida and Dr Morag Treanor, gained media coverage earlier in the month when they published their article exploring whether a change in family income is a good predictor of children's diet.

The research found that changes in a family’s income do not affect the healthiness of their children’s diet, and that a drop in family income does not trigger a decrease in the amount of fruit and vegetables their children eat. The finding challenges the idea that the healthiness of a diet is directly linked to income levels.

Changes in how parents felt about money were more strongly linked to their children’s diets than their actual incomes. This could be because income is not evenly distributed within the home, or because it is perception of poverty rather than measured poverty that determines food choices.

 The study, which used data from the Growing Up In Scotland survey, compared the diet of about 3000 children at the age of two and then again at age five. It also tracked the income of their parents over the same period.

The diets of young children in Scotland deteriorated between the ages of two and five for all, regardless of a family’s income level. By the age of five all children are likely to eat fewer vegetables and to have more sweets and sugary drinks than at the age of two, and this may be because children become better able to demand and reject foods as they grow.

When the children were two, less than 8.1% soft drinks more than once a day. By the age of five, this increased to 28.7%. Similarly, aged two, 6.4% of the children never ate vegetables, but this rate increased nearly five times (27.9%) by the time they turned five.

Children’s diets deteriorated when parents believed that they were going through financial hardships. For parents whose financial situation changed from ‘feeling comfortable’ to ‘finding it difficult ’to cope as their offspring grew from age two to age five, children ate fewer varieties of fruit and vegetables, and ate crisps and sweets more often.

Among families whose income did not change, children from families with a low income were more likely to have poorer diets to begin with. This group also had diets improve the most from age 2 to age 5. Two in ten (20.5 per cent) of these children lowered their sweet consumption compared with only one in 10 (11.2 per cent) in high-income homes.

These findings are published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. http://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2014/01/17/jech-2013-203308.short?q=w_jech

 

Valeria is a Research Fellow at the Centre for Population Health Studies. Morag is a Research Fellow with the Scottish Collaboration for Public Health Research and Policy. Both Valeria and Morag completed their PhDs at CRFR.

 

 

 

Two-thirds of families worse off compared with last year

Coinciding with this year’s budget announcement, research suggests nearly two-thirds of families find paying their bills is harder now than it was a year ago.

A third of households with children said they had suffered a significant downturn in their finances over the last 12 months, a sharper decline in fortune than homes with no children.

The survey was commissioned by Parenting Across Scotland, who are working with the University’s Centre for Research on Families and Relationships and Capability Scotland as part of the About Families partnership.

More than a thousand individuals in Scotland were asked if their household found it more or less difficult to pay bills such as mortgage, rent, council tax, TV licence or landline telephones compared to this time last year. The survey discovered that 61 per cent of households with children find it harder.

One third (32 per cent) of households with children found it a lot more difficult, significantly more than households without children (24 per cent), said the survey by TNS-BMRB.

The About Families partnership has produced a new report, Parenting On A Low Income. It found that specific family types, such as single parents and large families, are at most risk of sliding into poverty.

The report found that two-thirds of families affected by disability (64 per cent) said that the additional costs related to living with a disability impacted family life and increased stress.

Researchers found that cutting back harms parenting, there is little evidence that low income families mismanage their money, and most people living below the poverty line do not live in deprived areas.

The report calls for more affordable childcare to be made available.

Sarah Morton, Co-Director of the Centre for Research on Families and Relationships, said:

“We know that the experience of living in poverty is overwhelmingly negative and has a range of impacts on families, including damage to health and well-being and restricted opportunities.  Current and future changes to welfare are forecast to increase child poverty, as well as poverty amongst families affected by disability. By gathering research evidence on this topic we hope that those delivering services will be better able to reflect on how living on low incomes affects family life and well-being, and develop effective ways to support parents to manage the many stresses it brings.”

Alison Clancy, Project Officer for Parenting Across Scotland, said: 

“Undoubtedly the economic downturn and welfare changes are having an adverse affect on family finances.  This survey finds that the scale of the challenge faced by families in Scotland is great.  Financial difficulties have an impact on the emotional well-being of families and can lead to family breakdown and stress.  We should and must continue to invest in families and children, we need to ensure that all Scotland's children are assured of an equal chance of health, well-being and economic prosperity.”

For more information about the project and to download the research reports please visit www.aboutfamilies.org.uk

Making work-life balance work for all

It is inspiring and entertaining to hear men like Nigel Marsh address the issues of work-life balance as he does in his TED talk " How to make work-life balance work" broadcast this February. He points to the importance of day to day relationships and making small changes in how we spend our time with loved ones as the key to changing work-life balance. But the research evidence reminds us that not everybody’s lives allow the degree of power and control he can take for granted. CRFR's work on work-life balance for people on low incomes paints a picture of rather different, probably more difficult and certainly more restricted choices.
I welcome Nigel Marsh’s assertion that commercial companies should not be in charge of addressing work-life balance because they are designed to “get as much out of you as they can”. International comparisons suggests that the statutory requirements set by the state can make significant differences to the likelihood of people taking leave to spend time with their family. In our study of low-waged mothers working in the food retail sector (Working and Caring), work-life balance was achieved through choosing to work part time, accepting the struggle of reduced income, and through mutual support amongst women workers who helped each other out by swapping shifts in times of crisis, like a child being ill. Those with somewhat better paid albeit still low income jobs with supervisory responsibility found these kinds of crises much harder to deal with – they were the ones relying on the company’s work-life balance policies for support.

Nigel emphasises his role as a father but Lynn Jamieson reflected that work-life balance and making time for friends and family is an issue for all workers not just for those with children. In a briefing (Work-Life Balance Across the Lifecourse RB21 2005) based on our 2004 international conference on this topic, she also concluded that inequalities of gender, class, and ethnicity affect ways in which work-life issues will be experienced, and the ability to balance the demands of work with other needs. It is great to hear well-paid men like Nigel Marsh tackle the issues, but his experiences and recommendations may not translate to people in different circumstances.

In the end how we experience work-life balance is dependent on a mixture of state polices, individual circumstances and cultural factors. Our individual place in relation to these will be defined by how we relate to these norms and assumptions particularly in relation to gender roles and how men and women play their part in household, family and friendship responsibilities.

Written by Sarah Morton and Lynn Jamieson based on CRFR research:

Work Life Balance in Scottish Food Retail Companies full report (pdf)

Working and Caring Summary (pdf)

Work Life Balance Across the Lifecourse Research Briefing 21 2005 (pdf)

Caringscapes Research Briefing 13 2004 (pdf)

Image (c) iwishiwillican.com