州TANF计划中的同居和婚姻规则

R. Moffitt, R. Reville, A. Winkler, Jane McClure Burstain
{"title":"州TANF计划中的同居和婚姻规则","authors":"R. Moffitt, R. Reville, A. Winkler, Jane McClure Burstain","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1146708","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, there has been continued interest in marriage, cohabitation, and the welfare system. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 provided $150 million annually in funds for initiatives to promote healthy marriages based on the perception that married couples are more stable, among other potential benefits for families and children. This working paper examines whether the recent push for marriage initiatives and the discretion afforded to states under welfare reform has translated into rules or regulations that favor marriage and discourage cohabitation. The researchers found that, despite some states adopting express policies to encourage and favor marriage, the welfare eligibility and work-rule structures in these states appear to work against such policies. Further, those structures may discourage marriage the most in the situations where the state would most want to encourage it, namely, where the male has financial resources. In addition, the most favored living arrangement is not to remain single but to cohabit with a male who is not the father of any of the children.An earlier version of this paper included several formatting and typographic errors. If you downloaded this paper prior to 8/22/08, this version supersedes the earlier version. Please download the current version.","PeriodicalId":340671,"journal":{"name":"RAND Corporation Law","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cohabitation and Marriage Rules in State TANF Programs\",\"authors\":\"R. Moffitt, R. Reville, A. Winkler, Jane McClure Burstain\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/SSRN.1146708\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In recent years, there has been continued interest in marriage, cohabitation, and the welfare system. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 provided $150 million annually in funds for initiatives to promote healthy marriages based on the perception that married couples are more stable, among other potential benefits for families and children. This working paper examines whether the recent push for marriage initiatives and the discretion afforded to states under welfare reform has translated into rules or regulations that favor marriage and discourage cohabitation. The researchers found that, despite some states adopting express policies to encourage and favor marriage, the welfare eligibility and work-rule structures in these states appear to work against such policies. Further, those structures may discourage marriage the most in the situations where the state would most want to encourage it, namely, where the male has financial resources. In addition, the most favored living arrangement is not to remain single but to cohabit with a male who is not the father of any of the children.An earlier version of this paper included several formatting and typographic errors. If you downloaded this paper prior to 8/22/08, this version supersedes the earlier version. Please download the current version.\",\"PeriodicalId\":340671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"RAND Corporation Law\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"RAND Corporation Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1146708\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"RAND Corporation Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1146708","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

近年来,人们一直对婚姻、同居和福利制度感兴趣。2005年的《赤字削减法》每年提供1.5亿美元的资金,用于促进健康婚姻的倡议,这些倡议基于已婚夫妇更稳定的观念,以及对家庭和儿童的其他潜在好处。这篇工作论文考察了最近对婚姻倡议的推动以及在福利改革下给予各州的自由裁量权是否已经转化为有利于婚姻和不鼓励同居的规则或法规。研究人员发现,尽管一些州采取了明确的政策来鼓励和支持婚姻,但这些州的福利资格和工作规则结构似乎与这些政策背道而驰。此外,在国家最希望鼓励婚姻的情况下,即男性拥有经济资源的情况下,这些结构可能最不利于婚姻。此外,最受欢迎的生活安排是不要保持单身,而是与一个不是任何孩子父亲的男性同居。这篇论文的早期版本包括几个格式和排版错误。如果您在8/22/08之前下载了本文,此版本将取代先前的版本。请下载当前版本。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Cohabitation and Marriage Rules in State TANF Programs
In recent years, there has been continued interest in marriage, cohabitation, and the welfare system. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 provided $150 million annually in funds for initiatives to promote healthy marriages based on the perception that married couples are more stable, among other potential benefits for families and children. This working paper examines whether the recent push for marriage initiatives and the discretion afforded to states under welfare reform has translated into rules or regulations that favor marriage and discourage cohabitation. The researchers found that, despite some states adopting express policies to encourage and favor marriage, the welfare eligibility and work-rule structures in these states appear to work against such policies. Further, those structures may discourage marriage the most in the situations where the state would most want to encourage it, namely, where the male has financial resources. In addition, the most favored living arrangement is not to remain single but to cohabit with a male who is not the father of any of the children.An earlier version of this paper included several formatting and typographic errors. If you downloaded this paper prior to 8/22/08, this version supersedes the earlier version. Please download the current version.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信