Policy Brief, Design and Evaluation of A Public Policy: Child Welfare in the Changing Family Unit
Introduction
Children need a conducive environment where they can grow in peace and develop in all other areas that relate to their welfare. The conventional family unit consisted of a nuclear set up comprising of a man, woman and the children they sired together. Such formed the foundation through which children could draw strength and some kind of inspiration due to the availability of both gender parents (Conger and Donnellan, 2007, p175). According to Hobson and Fahlén, (2009) it was also an opportunity where the man and woman would bring up their children together and give them love as well as some form of moral and financial support. It also created the spirit of togetherness and harmony. The European government, hence played a role in the protection of the family unit for the benefit of the children brought up in the wings of their children. Therefore, the changing family unit necessitated the need to review the policies and procedures that existed so that they can offer more protection to the children.
The protection, in this case, is the ability to reach their highest level of maximum performance that will give them the best chance in life. The demographic changes in the family setting have brought many changes distracting the social welfare of the children. For instance, women get children outside the marriage security, and may choose to raise them single-handedly as single parents; others may remarry later in life, and there is a change as the man who marries them needs to adopt their child and bring them up as their own. Other changes include divorce cases, childless marriages or differences in the age at which a woman gets her first child. There is also a reduction in the number of children that a woman bears meaning that there are only-children family units who are comfortable with that one child. All the changes in the family unit have diversified and changed the natural set up of the environment within which children grow (Neyer, 2013, p23).
The nature of the problem
In the diverse family forms, there is an underlying problem for the children and the environment within which they grow (Sobotka, 2008, p189). There is a direct relationship between the family set up and the lifetime chances that the children have later as they advance in their ages. It also means that the parents play a significant role in shaping up the choices and activities that their children take once they leave their parents’ nest and need to fend on their own. Hence, the problem, in this case, is how to boost the confidence and chances of the children, despite the background in their family setting and unit. Each child deserves a chance to excel in life and has the best opportunities that can give them the best environment to grow and advance in other stakeholders in their lives.
How the problem has been addressed in the past, and why it was discussed in this way
In the past, due to the close knit family unit, the government entrusted the parents to bring up the children in the right way. They had little or no interference with the way the parents brought their children as long as they gave them an enabling environment through which they could read, gave them the best health care services they could afford and availed their necessities (Lewis, 2008, p90). It meant that the children had a chance to develop in each and every area of their lives without any form of limitation of shortcoming. Past reforms and policies addressed the problem at hand regarding the welfare and boosting the chances that the children had involved minor court cases which were solved amicably and within the shortest time possible. Despite the differences that existed between the parents, the marriage institution provided a foundation for the children. It meant that parents stuck and worked together as they raised their family so that they could protect their psychological welfare, which affected their academic performance in the long run.
Parents were willing to work together as a team so that their children could have the best opportunity at excelling in each of their activities outside the classroom. A valid explanation on why the courts and the society as a whole encouraged that children be born in the family set up and those adults should honor their marriage vows is because such children grew up well. They also had a better chance at excelling in school or other areas of their lives because their parents were together (Kvist, 2015, p 131). It also helped in the social development of the children as they advocated for male and female relationships as they grew up and married in life. Policy developers tend to favor children brought up in the nuclear setup and in cases that one of the parents died; the government was quick to rush in helping the bereaved spouse and children. It was also a chance for the European government through the stakeholders to compare the effect and changes that happen to the child once they lost one of the parents. It gave them a chance to strongly advocate for the need to have children grow under the watch of their parents if possible and give them the love they deserve and desire.
The constraints surrounding the policy
One of the biggest problems is the decision makers, which are their inability to understand the complexity of the family unit. Some are accustomed to the fact that a family needs to have a man and a woman so that they can form a family and have a child or children, so it becomes complete. They make and formulate most of their policies based on that general idea of a family ignoring the many upcoming trends in the 21st Century family. There is a high need to accommodate the changes in the family and the need to have children benefit from the policies, both in the long run and in the short term (Jappens and Vanl, 2012, p85). The goal of the government is to protect the children that grow within their borders, and they have the mandate to offer an environment of which they can have a chance to develop in every area. They work through the parents and the society so that they can protect their children from undue pressure or unsolicited challenges that would push them to miss a step in their lives. Despite the commitment by the government, there exist some problems that affect the policy making and practice. One of the constraints is the unwillingness of the citizens to cooperate and work together with a focus on the children and their wellbeing.
There is a high rise of divorce cases in the recent two decades, which has seen children grow in a different environment than the one the government would wish. It means that they have to make adjustments and in most cases, the parents and other adults in the lives of the children ignore the psychological effects on the minds and lives of the children. Parents are willing and able to separate due to the women empowerment and their ability to earn income where they do not depend on their husbands for financial stability. Other indirect factors that contribute to the divorce rates in the country is the unity in women as the fight for their rights and offer some form of moral support to their fellow women once they divorce. People are not willing to work together and solve marital issues that would contribute to a low rate of separation and divorce. Hence, children are forced to live with adults other than their biological parents as their fathers or mothers remarry and live with other partners.
Another constraint is the increase in the number of births from women who do not want to settle down in marriage and would prefer that they bring up their children single-handed. Economic factors that force the parents to live separately and one of the parents forced to undertake the parental duties on their won. Hence the policies passed by the government in a bid to protect the children may be contradictory, for example, one of the systems advocates that parents should spend time with their children and interact with them as they grow up so that they can influence their lives on the same level. The changes in the family unit have seen the single parents who may outsource the other parent as they stand in the gap for their children. For instance, a single mother may have a son and outsource one of the male members in her life that can mentor their child on how to grow up like a man. Such case scenarios have necessitated the need to have reforms in the demographic data and welfare of the children (Hobson and Fahlén, 2009, p214). Another change on the policy changes includes the accessibility of educational assistance of children from single parents as before this, the finances of the government were a reserve for the children whose parents died. With more children being in dire need of funds, then the government made the changes so that they can accommodate the growing need of the people who approached the financial lending institutions with genuine needs. It was a chance to give all children the opportunity to excel despite their family background and set up. Such also contributed positively to the lifetime opportunities that the children would have in the future despite the stability or brokenness of their families.
Recommended policy option
The study suggests that despite the changes in the family set up and forms and a significant reduction in the number of children who have the chance to live with both their parents, there is a high need to protect the interest of the children. Each parent should be on the forefront to protect their children and give them a chance in life. Policies that relate to the childhood welfare and wellbeing need to support the economic strength of the individuals so that children can get the best benefit albeit indirectly (Taylor et al., 2009, p182). Children should also have the chance to access love from their biological parents, whether they live together or not as that will allow them to experience the love from both sets of parents. Both men and women should strive to earn and provide for their children and in case a family break, the children should get a form of support that gives the assurance they will lead a comfortable life despite the separation of their parents. It is also a chance to reassure them that they had no role in the separation of their parents and that they still have the right to receive some love from each parent. It also means that the economic well-being of the children needs to have no effect whether the parents live together or not. They should get their basic needs and have better chances in life as if their parents lived together. The counselling sessions allow the children to have some form of reconciliation with their parent’s separation and the fact that they can still continue with life irrespective of the changes. The wellness of the parents has a direct impact on the children and the way they relate to others in school or other social capacities.
Evaluation of the policy
One of the best steps by the government is absorbing the growing needs of the students despite their background. Hence, personal assessment of the chosen system is an indication that it is on the right track. Many changes happen to the family unit, and the blame does not fall on the parents, hence the need to have children given the same chance in accessing education and other relevant changes that will affect their lives positively. The world needs to accept the changes happening in the family set up and there is the need to adjust so that they can accommodate them for the benefit of the children.
Europe is on the first line to protect their children and shield them where possible from the adverse effects of the changes that come with the families. Children need parents who understand them and are in a position to give them an upper hand in every stage of life which will allow them a chance to make changes in their lives. In families where only one parent is available due to a choice of the parent, they should be in a position to provide all that the child needs and when they have no means, then they can approach the relevant government office and ask for assistance. The government can step in and ask for the other parent to step in and help in bringing up the child and if not in a position to do so, they can contribute to enroll the child in educational institutions that will benefit them in the long run. It also gives the student the chance to excel in their studies and is in a position to invest in the right tools that will enable them to make changes in their lives.
Another evaluation of the policy is the government stepping in and suggesting the need to have a population through a control in the number of children that each woman should have in their lifetime. It will help in reducing the burden on the government and other relevant demographic changes in the country affected as well in a positive aspect (Sektnan et al., 2010, p477). Families will thrive despite their composition regarding same-sex marriages or different sex marriages as long as the children have access to the education, health and other capacities that relate to their welfare.
Policy options
One of the options that could address the underlying issue in the welfare of the children related to the family form is highlighting the different formats in the family composition. Once the policy makers understand that the wellbeing of the children is the priority, then they will be in a position to take care of their needs and ignore their background. They will also help the parents economically by equipping them with skills that can help them take care of their children’s financial needs without the intervention of the government. The other step that the policymakers could adopt is the changing phase in the families and accepts that children have no role to play in the environment which they grow up. They can teach the children on how to take their background and make the best out of it. It will help them and reduce the possibility of bullying in school from other children who may come from the working families. Bullying of children based on their family set up may have an adverse impact on their performance and psychological wellness.
Other surrounding countries have reformed their policies that protect the welfare of the children and come to accept the settings are different for some reasons. For instance, the United States have adopted and advocated that children brought up in the family environment where the same-sex parents live with them. The ability of the government to give the citizens the freedom of association and to marry whoever they please is the first step to protecting the welfare of the children. They give them the chance to bring up their children with love and providing them with an environment where they can thrive and have all their needs met like in the other set up. Hence, Europe can learn from the other countries and have them accommodate the changing needs of people about marriage and families. They will be in a position to protect the children and ensure that they grow up in an environment that gives them love and protection.
The changes in the global perspective and view to a family is also a strong indication that each country needs to adjust and make changes that can match the way the world sees families. It will be an opportunity to review the policies that exist that protect the children and their parents as well as they have a chance to bring up their children in the right way (Obradović et al., 2009, p 497). The International Human Rights recognize that children should have access to the basic needs. The parents have the responsibility to ensure that their children access the basic needs and want. It is a chance to make policies that relate and intertwine amongst different countries in the world which will allow the states relate well and have a harmonized environment within which they can grow and achieve their goals in life. The purpose of such a move would be increasing the chance for children to excel in their lives.
Bibliography
Conger, R.D. and Donnellan, M.B., 2007. An interactionist perspective on the socioeconomic context of human development. Annu. Rev. Psychol., 58, pp.175-199.
Jappens, M. and Van Bavel, J., 2012. Regional family norms and child care by grandparents in Europe. Demographic research, 27, p.85.
Hobson, B. and Fahlén, S., 2009. Competing scenarios for European fathers: Applying Sen's capabilities and agency framework to work—family balance. The annals of the American academy of political and social science, 624(1), pp.214-233.
Kvist, J., 2015. A framework for social investment strategies: Integrating generational, life course and gender perspectives in the EU social investment strategy. Comparative European Politics, 13(1), pp.131-149.
Lewis, J. ed., 2008. Children, changing families and welfare states. Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 66-90.
Neyer, G., 2013. Welfare states, family policies, and fertility in Europe. In The demography of Europe (pp. 29-53). Springer Netherlands, pp.23-78.
Obradović, J., Long, J.D., Cutuli, J.J., Chan, C.K., Hinz, E., Heistad, D. and Masten, A.S., 2009. Academic achievement of homeless and highly mobile children in an urban school district: Longitudinal evidence on risk, growth, and resilience. Development and psychopathology, 21(02), pp.493-518.
Sektnan, M., McClelland, M.M., Acock, A. and Morrison, F.J., 2010. Relations between early family risk, children's behavioral regulation, and academic achievement. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(4), pp.464-479.
Sobotka, T., 2008. Overview chapter 6: The diverse faces of the second demographic transition in Europe. Demographic research, 19(8), pp.171-224.
Taylor, C.A., Guterman, N.B., Lee, S.J. and Rathouz, P.J., 2009. Intimate partner violence, maternal stress, nativity, and risk for maternal maltreatment of young children. American Journal of Public Health, 99(1), pp.175-183.
