essay on poor childhood

Poverty Essay for Students and Children

500+ words essay on poverty essay.

“Poverty is the worst form of violence”. – Mahatma Gandhi.

How Poverty is Measured?

For measuring poverty United nations have devised two measures of poverty – Absolute & relative poverty.  Absolute poverty is used to measure poverty in developing countries like India. Relative poverty is used to measure poverty in developed countries like the USA. In absolute poverty, a line based on the minimum level of income has been created & is called a poverty line.  If per day income of a family is below this level, then it is poor or below the poverty line. If per day income of a family is above this level, then it is non-poor or above the poverty line. In India, the new poverty line is  Rs 32 in rural areas and Rs 47 in urban areas.

Get the huge list of more than 500 Essay Topics and Ideas

Causes of Poverty

According to the Noble prize winner South African leader, Nelson Mandela – “Poverty is not natural, it is manmade”. The above statement is true as the causes of poverty are generally man-made. There are various causes of poverty but the most important is population. Rising population is putting the burden on the resources & budget of countries. Governments are finding difficult to provide food, shelter & employment to the rising population.

The other causes are- lack of education, war, natural disaster, lack of employment, lack of infrastructure, political instability, etc. For instance- lack of employment opportunities makes a person jobless & he is not able to earn enough to fulfill the basic necessities of his family & becomes poor. Lack of education compels a person for less paying jobs & it makes him poorer. Lack of infrastructure means there are no industries, banks, etc. in a country resulting in lack of employment opportunities. Natural disasters like flood, earthquake also contribute to poverty.

In some countries, especially African countries like Somalia, a long period of civil war has made poverty widespread. This is because all the resources & money is being spent in war instead of public welfare. Countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, etc. are prone to natural disasters like cyclone, etc. These disasters occur every year causing poverty to rise.

Ill Effects of Poverty

Poverty affects the life of a poor family. A poor person is not able to take proper food & nutrition &his capacity to work reduces. Reduced capacity to work further reduces his income, making him poorer. Children from poor family never get proper schooling & proper nutrition. They have to work to support their family & this destroys their childhood. Some of them may also involve in crimes like theft, murder, robbery, etc. A poor person remains uneducated & is forced to live under unhygienic conditions in slums. There are no proper sanitation & drinking water facility in slums & he falls ill often &  his health deteriorates. A poor person generally dies an early death. So, all social evils are related to poverty.

Government Schemes to Remove Poverty

The government of India also took several measures to eradicate poverty from India. Some of them are – creating employment opportunities , controlling population, etc. In India, about 60% of the population is still dependent on agriculture for its livelihood. Government has taken certain measures to promote agriculture in India. The government constructed certain dams & canals in our country to provide easy availability of water for irrigation. Government has also taken steps for the cheap availability of seeds & farming equipment to promote agriculture. Government is also promoting farming of cash crops like cotton, instead of food crops. In cities, the government is promoting industrialization to create more jobs. Government has also opened  ‘Ration shops’. Other measures include providing free & compulsory education for children up to 14 years of age, scholarship to deserving students from a poor background, providing subsidized houses to poor people, etc.

Poverty is a social evil, we can also contribute to control it. For example- we can simply donate old clothes to poor people, we can also sponsor the education of a poor child or we can utilize our free time by teaching poor students. Remember before wasting food, somebody is still sleeping hungry.

Customize your course in 30 seconds

Which class are you in.

• Travelling Essay
• Picnic Essay
• Our Country Essay
• My Parents Essay
• Essay on Favourite Personality
• Essay on Memorable Day of My Life
• Essay on Knowledge is Power
• Essay on Gurpurab
• Essay on My Favourite Season
• Essay on Types of Sports

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Download the App

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• HHS Author Manuscripts

Child Poverty in the United States: A Tale of Devastation and the Promise of Hope

Alyn t. mccarty.

University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center for Women’s Health and Health Disparities Research

The child poverty rate in the United States is higher than in most similarly developed countries, making child poverty one of America’s most pressing social problems. This article provides an introduction of child poverty in the US, beginning with a short description of how poverty is measured and how child poverty is patterned across social groups and geographic space. I then examine the consequences of child poverty with a focus educational outcomes and child health, and three pathways through which poverty exerts its influence: resources, culture, and stress. After a brief review of the anti-poverty policy and programmatic landscape, I argue that moving forward we must enrich the communities in which poor families live in addition to boosting incomes and directly supporting children’s skill development. I conclude with emerging research questions.

SECTION I: Introduction

In 2014, 15.5 million children—or 21.1% of children under age 18—lived in families with incomes below the federal poverty line, making children the largest group of poor people in the United States ( DeNavas-Walt & Proctor 2015 ). Rates are even higher for the youngest children: 25% of children under age 3 are poor ( Jiang et al. 2015 ). These figures position the US second only to Romania in rankings of child poverty rates among 35 industrialized countries ( Adamson 2012 ).

Poor children in the US face a widening economic chasm between themselves and their more affluent peers ( Autor 2014 ). Income inequality has grown substantially in the last forty years; after decades of decline, income inequality now harkens back to levels similar to those during the Great Depression ( Piketty & Saez 2014 ). What’s more, children from impoverished backgrounds in the US have a tougher time getting out of poverty than children in other similarly developed countries. Rates of social mobility are lower in the United States than most continental European countries ( Bjorklund & Jantti 2009 ; Duncan & Murnane 2011 , pg. 5–6; Hertz et al. 2008 ) and have remained unchanged since 1979 ( Lee & Solon 2009 ).

High rates of child poverty, income inequality, and social immobility motivate a sense of urgency and importance in research and policy focused on poor children and their families. In this article, I review the latest research on child poverty across multiple social and behavioral science disciplines. Together, this work tells two stories: One narrative warns of the long-term negative impacts associated with child poverty, but the other offers hope of resilience through policies and programs designed to reduce child poverty and mitigate its damages.

In Section II, I begin by describing how researchers define and measure poverty. Section III offers a descriptive portrait of what child poverty looks like in America today. In Section IV, I review literature on the impact of child poverty educational outcomes and child health. I discuss new types of data and approaches to the study of child poverty that have uncovered nuance in the impact of child poverty. In Section V, I describe three pathways through which poverty exerts its effects on children: resources, culture, and stress. Section VI briefly reviews anti-poverty policies that aim to reduce the rate of child poverty and early childhood interventions that aim to limit its effects. In Section VII, I argue that providing economic benefits to poor families and investing early on in children’s human capital may be more effective if paired with investments in the communities in which poor families live. Finally, in Section VII, I conclude with emerging research questions.

SECTION II: Definition of Poverty & Measurement

Approximately 46.7 million people in the United States live below the poverty line, a rate of 14.8 percent ( DeNavas-Walt & Proctor 2015 ). Of these, 15.5 million—about a third—are children. Children account for about 23 percent of the overall US population, which means that children are overrepresented among the poor ( US Census Bureau 2015 ). Figure 1 shows 2014 poverty rates for children across multiple age groups using data from the American Community Survey. 1 Overall, 21.7% of children are poor. Poverty rates are higher among younger children and lower among older children: approximately 24% of children ages 5 or younger are poor compared to about 18% of youth ages 16 or 17.

Source: Author’s calculations using American Community Survey (ACS) data, 2014.

Accurately measuring child poverty and how it varies over time and place gives us…

Accurately measuring child poverty and how it varies over time and place gives us insight into how rates of child poverty are shaped by economic, demographic, and public policy change ( Cancian & Danziger 2009 ). On its face, measuring poverty should be quite simple. Yet, there is some debate about how best to categorize a family’s poverty status ( Haveman et al. 2015 ). Since the early 1960s, poverty status has been determined by comparing a household’s pre-tax cash income (e.g., wages and salaries) to a threshold that accounts for inflation using the Consumer Price Index. The child poverty rate is the proportion of families with children who have incomes below the threshold. The threshold is anchored at three times the cost of a subsistence food budget. 2 The threshold is adjusted for family size, composition, and age of householder, but it is the same no matter where a person lives in the US.

The official poverty measure is intended to reflect the proportion of the population for whom the resources they share with others in their household are not enough to meet their basic needs ( Haveman et al. 2015 ). However, a number of criticisms of the measure have been raised, revealing the significant shortcomings of the way poverty is officially determined ( Citro & Michael 1995 ). In response to these criticisms, the Census Bureau now reports a supplemental poverty measure (SPM) each year, which (1) takes into account necessary expenses (e.g., taxes and childcare) and cash and in-kind government benefits (e.g., cash welfare, housing subsidies, WIC and SNAP benefits); (2) broadens the definition of household to include foster children and unmarried partners; (3) updates the poverty threshold annually rather than “anchoring” it to a set poverty line; and (4) reflects housing costs reported in the American Community Survey, thus varies by place of residence ( Haveman et al. 2015 ).

For most groups, the SPM rates are higher than official measures; however, for some groups—including children—the SPM rates are lower ( Short 2015 ). The lower SPM child poverty rate largely reflects the impact of government anti-poverty policies, many of which explicitly target families with children such as the Child Tax Credit, school lunch subsidies, and WIC benefits ( Fox et al. 2015 ). According to Short (2015) , the official poverty rate for children under 18 in 2014 was 21.5 percent, which exceeds the 2014 SPM rate of 16.7 percent by about 4.8 percentage points. 3

SECTION III: A PORTRAIT OF CHILD POVERTY IN AMERICA

The burden of child poverty is unequally distributed across population subgroups in the US. In this section, I describe patterns of child poverty in our society, drawing on research that explores the social and economic factors that generate and maintain poverty for some groups more than others, over time, and across geographic space.

The Color of Child Poverty

There are dramatic disparities in child poverty rates by race/ethnicity: in 2014, child poverty rates were highest for children who are non-Hispanic Black or African American (38%), American Indian (36%), or Hispanic or Latino (32%), while rates were lowest for children who are non-Hispanic White (13%) or Asian and Pacific Islander (13%) ( Kids Count 2015 ).

Though rates help us understand the disproportionate burden of child poverty for some racial/ethnic minorities, it is also revealing to examine the total population of children in poverty by race/ethnicity (see Figure 2 ). First, poverty affects all children, regardless of racial/ethnic background. Second, contrary to racialized stereotypes about who is poor in America, there are more non-Hispanic white children in poverty (4.9 million) than non-Hispanic Black or African American children (3.9 million). Third, the majority of children in poverty are of Hispanic origin (5.7 million). Fourth, for each racial/ethnic group, most children in poverty are between 0 and 5 years of age.

High levels of child poverty among Back, American Indian, and Hispanic children…

High levels of child poverty among Black, American Indian, and Hispanic children reflect changes over time in the economy, public policy, and institutional practices that disproportionately affect people of color, such as declining relative wages of less educated men, declining availability of full-time jobs, and rising incarceration rates ( Wilson 1996 ). The disproportionality of poverty by race/ethnicity also reflects past and current discrimination in schooling, housing markets, and labor markets ( Cancian & Danziger 2009 ; Desmond 2016 ; Stokes et al. 2001 ).

Immigration and Child Poverty in the US: A Growing Concern

Immigrant status is also closely associated with poverty. Children of recent immigrants are a rapidly growing share of the child population in the United States: from 2006 to 2011, the number of children with at least one immigrant parent grew by 1.5 million, from 15.7 to 17.2 million ( Hanson & Simms 2014 ). Thus, children of immigrants account for nearly a fourth of all children in the United States. The majority of children of immigrants are Hispanic, and more than 40% have parents from Mexico.

Similar to many racial/ethnic minority groups, immigrant children are disproportionately likely to experience poverty relative to children whose parents were born in the US. In 2009, 18.2% of children with native-born parents were poor compared to 27.2% of children with “established immigrant” parents (i.e., those who have been in the US for more than ten years), and 38.5% of children with parents who recently immigrated to the US (Wight et al. 2011).

Since immigrants represent an increasing share of the US population and poverty rates among the foreign born tend to be high, immigration directly affects the overall child poverty rate ( Raphael & Smolensky 2009 ). Theoretically, immigration could also affect child poverty rates by driving down the wages and employment of native-born workers, though there is little evidence to support this claim ( Raphael & Smolensky 2009 ).

Declining Rates of Marriage and the Growing Burden of Child Poverty

Child poverty rates are substantially higher for children in single-mother families than for those in married-couple families, in part because single-mother families have fewer potential earners, and many have difficulty collecting child support payments from fathers ( Mather 2010 ). In 2014, 30.6% of single mother families were poor, compared with only 6.2% of married families with children ( DeNavas-Walt & Proctor 2015 ).

During the 1970s and 1980s, there was a rapid increase in single-mother families in the US, and rates have remained high since the 1990s; nearly one-fourth of children under 18 live in single-mother families ( Mather 2010 ). 4 Cancian & Reed (2009) note that though women are now less likely to be married than previously, women also tend to have fewer children, are more educated, and are more likely to be working than in the past. The researchers argue that these trends have countervailing influences on the child poverty rate: increased maternal employment has offset the poverty increasing effects of single motherhood. Still, recent changes in family structure have increased the child poverty rate, all else being equal.

Poverty of Place: How Child Poverty is Spatially Distributed in the US

In addition to their race/ethnic identification, immigrant status, and their parents’ marital status, where children live can also put them at a greater risk of growing up poor. Though many conceive of poverty as an urban problem, 95 of the 100 counties in the US with the highest child poverty rates are located in rural areas, whereas most counties with the lowest child poverty rates tend to be in wealthy suburbs of large metropolitan areas ( O’Hare & Mather 2008 ). Poverty disproportionately affects children living in rural areas as a result of recent economic changes in rural communities where key industries have disappeared (e.g., family farms) or moved overseas (e.g., textiles manufacturing) ( O’Hare 2009 ; Vernon-Feagans et al. 2012 ). The service sector jobs that have replaced these industries contribute to higher rates of poverty because they are less stable and lower paying, and rural areas have not benefitted from the rise of technology-related companies in the same way as have urban and suburban areas ( O’Hare 2009 ).

Child poverty is also a highly clustered regional phenomenon. The South has a regional poverty rate of over 16%, and there are hotspot clusters of high rates of child poverty in the Mississippi Delta region, the Black Belt, Appalachia, southwest Texas and New Mexico, southern South Dakota, and northern Nebraska ( Voss et al. 2006 ). Regional variation in child poverty can in part be explained by their social and economic contexts. Structural factors such as racial/ethnic composition and industry combine to influence the social processes that generate levels of child poverty in different areas. For example, racial/ethnic composition is more strongly associated with child poverty in farming dependent areas, which in part explains the higher levels of child poverty that are observed in the South ( Curtis et al. 2012 ).

The supplemental child poverty rate varies widely across states, which in large part reflects variation in state anti-poverty policies ( The Anne E Casey Foundation 2015 ). In an analysis of the US Census Bureau Supplementary Poverty Measure Public Use Research files in 2012–2014, The Anne E Casey Foundation (2015) found that federal benefits, which generally do not adjust for differences in costs of living, have a smaller impact on reducing child poverty rates in states where cost of living is high. In addition, though most government benefits are funded at the federal level, states vary with respect to the ins-and-outs of policy implementation, particularly for welfare: income eligibility limits, benefit levels, financial incentives to work, time limits, eligibility requirements for two-parent families, and the stringency of rules that reduce or terminate benefits for families that are non-compliant ( McKernan & Ratcliffe 2006 ; Soss et al. 2001 ). Many of these welfare policy variations are associated with variation in poverty levels by state, making the state that children are raised in particularly consequential for their economic well-being ( McKernan & Ratcliffe 2006 ).

SECTION IV: Consequences of Poverty

The literature on the consequences of child poverty is enormous, and the latest scholarship is increasingly methodologically sophisticated (see recent review by Duncan et al., 2012 ). Recent research has moved away from cross-sectional analyses, which capture a snapshot of children’s lives at one point in time, toward longitudinal analyses, which allow the linking of trajectories of poverty exposures during infancy and early childhood to outcomes across the life course. As such, it is increasingly common for studies to address the dynamics of exposure to poverty, including intensity, timing, and duration (e.g., short term vs. long term poverty). Furthermore, studies are paying increasing attention to the context of children’s lives beyond their families’ own socioeconomic status by explicitly modeling the impact of economic resources of others around them, for example in their schools and neighborhoods.

These new ways of studying the effects of child poverty have revealed that: 1) most differences in outcomes between poor and non-poor children remain after adjusting for potentially confounding factors (i.e., factors other than income that are associated with both poverty and child outcomes); 2) poverty exposure may be especially harmful during early childhood, a period of rapid brain growth and development; 3) the longer a child is exposed to poverty, the greater the risk of negative outcomes; 4) the effects of poverty can accumulate over time or lie dormant for years, only to be revealed in adulthood; and 5) the socioeconomic context of neighborhoods and schools matter for children’s outcomes net of their own family’s resources ( Brooks-Gunn et al. 1993 ; Duncan & Magnuson 2011a ; Duncan et al. 1998 ; Duncan et al. 2010 ; Elder 1985 ; Entwisle et al. 2005 ; Foster & Furstenberg 1999 ; Harding 2003 ; Hertzman 1999 ; Kuh & Shlomo 2004 ; McLeod & Shanahan 1996 ; Ratcliffe & McKernan 2010 ; Sastry & Pebley 2010 ; Turley 2003 ).

In the next few pages, I review literature on two domains of child well-being: academic achievement and child health. Due to lack of space, I do not focus on other outcomes, though they remain the focus of much of the current academic research on the consequences of child poverty across the life course, including learning and developmental delays, criminal activity, teenage childbearing, marriage, and adult health and socioeconomic outcomes ( Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 1997b ; Duncan & Brooks-Gunn 1997 ; Duncan et al. 2010 ; Duncan et al. 2012 ).

A Growing Academic Achievement Gap Between Rich and Poor

One of the most widely studied outcomes of childhood poverty is success in school. The focus on schooling is rooted in the widespread belief that children who do well in school have a better chance of escaping poverty when they are adults. Indeed, education is increasingly necessary for economic wellbeing in the US, in part due to a growing earnings gap between those who are college-educated and those who are not ( Goldin & Katz 2008 ). Success in school also strongly predicts a wide variety of other desired outcomes, such as civic participation, adult health, and life expectancy ( Attewell & Levin 2007 ; Hout 2012 ; van Kippersluis et al. 2011 ). Yet, the challenge of succeeding academically for children living in poverty is a difficult one. Poverty has large and consistent associations with academic outcomes, including achievement on standardized tests, years of completed schooling, and degree attainment ( Bailey & Dynarski 2011 ; Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 1997a ; Duncan & Magnuson 2011b ; Entwisle et al. 2005 ). Differences between poor and non-poor children are observable early on and persist across the school years: gaps in academic achievement are evident in kindergarten, and by age 14, students from the bottom income quintile are a full academic year behind their peers in the top income quintile ( Duncan & Magnuson 2011b ; Duncan & Murnane 2011 ). What’s more, income inequality in academic achievement is getting worse rather than improving over time: the achievement gap between the 90th and 10th percentiles of the income distribution among children born in 2001 is 30–40 percent larger than among children born twenty-five years earlier and is now larger than racial gaps ( Reardon 2011 ). The growing income-achievement gap is driven by a strengthening of the association between family income and children’s academic achievement for families above the median income level, which reflects increasing parental investment in children’s cognitive development among the more economically advantaged ( Reardon 2011 ). 5

Impact of Poverty on the Physical and Mental Health of Children

Poverty is also key social determinant of infant and child health, which can have lasting effects on educational attainment, earnings, and adult health ( Aber et al. 1997 ; Duncan & Brooks-Gunn 1997b ; Wagmiller et al. 2006 ). The central role of poverty in shaping child health is increasingly clear. Recently, the American Academy of Pediatrics released a policy statement and technical report that recognizes this centrality, drawing on research demonstrating a causal relation between early childhood poverty and child health ( Council on Community Pediatrics 2016 ).

For infants, poverty increases the risk of a number of birth outcomes including low birth weight, which is a general indictor of a baby’s in utero environment and development and a precursor to subsequent physical health and cognitive and emotion problems ( Bennett 1997 ; Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 1997b ; Starfield et al. 1991 ). Poverty increases the risk of infant mortality, another widely accepted indicator of the health and well-being of children ( Brooks-Gunn & Duncan 1997b ; Corman & Grossman 1985 ). With an infant mortality rate of 6.1 in 2009, the US lags far behind European countries, ranking last in a comparison of 26 OECD countries ( MacDorman et al. 2014 ). The excess infant mortality rate in the US is largely driven by post-neonatal deaths (those that occur between one month and a year after the birth) among low-income mothers ( Chen et al. forthcoming ).

For children, poverty is associated with a number of physical health insults: increased risk of injuries resulting from accidents or physical abuse/neglect; more frequent and severe chronic conditions (e.g., asthma, diabetes, and problems with hearing, vision, and speech); more frequent acute illnesses; poorer nutrition and growth; lower immunization rates or delayed immunization; and increased risk of obesity and its complications ( Aber et al. 1997 ; Starfield 1991 ; Currie & Lin 2007 ; Case et al. 2002 ).

In addition to physical health problems, the disadvantages associated with poverty and economic insecurity can trigger significant mental health problems for children, including ADHD, oppositional defiant disorder, conduct disorder, and mood and anxiety disorders (Costello et al. 2004; Cuellar 2015 ; Perou et al. 2013 ). Mental health problems are more common than physical health problems, and their effects can be more pervasive ( Currie & Stabile 2006 ; Currie 2009 ). Approximately one fourth of youth experience a mental disorder during the past year and about a third across their lifetimes ( Merikangas et al. 2009 ). These problems, which are the dominant cause of childhood disability, can restrict children’s social competence and opportunities to learn ( Delaney & Smith 2012 ; Halfon et al. 2012 ).

Estimates across poverty status for mental disorders combined are not available. But, according to a recent summary of mental health surveillance among children in the US between 2005–2011 by the Center for Disease Control, prevalence rates are higher for children living in poverty compared with non-poor children for ADHD, behavior or conduct disorders, and mood/anxiety disorders ( Perou et al. 2013 ). The only exception to the pattern is among children who have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders, who are more likely to come from more economically advantaged families.

Beyond The Individual: How Neighborhood Poverty Affects Children

A rising share of US children live in high-poverty neighborhoods, defined as a neighborhood with poverty rates of 30 percent or more: more than 10 percent of US children lived in a high poverty neighborhood in 2010, up from 8.7 percent in 2000, a 25% increase ( Mather & Dupuis 2012 ). There are small but clear negative effects for children of growing up in a poor neighborhood that are beyond the effects of growing up in a poor family (see Sastry 2012 for a summary of this literature). Children growing up in high-poverty neighborhoods are at a higher risk of health problems, teen pregnancy, and dropping out of school ( Shonkoff & Phillips 2000 ; Brooks-Gunn et al. 1993 ). What’s more, the effects of neighborhoods may linger across generations. Many caregivers themselves grew up in the neighborhoods in which they are raising their children ( Sharkey 2008 ), and neighborhood environments experienced over multiple generations of a family influence children’s cognitive ability: exposure to neighborhood poverty over two consecutive generations can reduce a child’s cognitive ability by more than half a standard deviation ( Sharkey & Elwert 2011 ).

Section V: MechanismS of Influence

There are several pathways through which poverty affects children’s outcomes, which have been linked to three main theoretical frameworks: resources, culture, and family and environmental stress ( Duncan et al. 2014 ). This section reviews these frameworks, emphasizing the particular mechanisms that link poverty to child outcomes that each bring to light.

Material and Social Resources

Parents who struggle to make ends meet do not have enough income to fulfill basic material needs for their children, such as food, clothing, adequate and stable housing, and quality educational environments ( Becker 1991 ). Families who are poor also tend to be less socially connected to others, are less emotionally supported, and have more frequent negative social interactions ( Lin 2000 ; Mickelson & Kubzansky 2003 ). Inequality in access to resourceful social networks contributes to—and even reproduces—social inequality (for a review and discussion, see Lin 2000 ; DiMaggio & Garip 2012 ). In some ways, material and social resources work in tandem to disadvantage families in poverty. For example, high rates of mobility in areas of concentrated economic disadvantage erode the social fabric of neighborhoods, a process which has negative consequences for families who are able to stay put ( Jacobs 1961 ). As Desmond (2016) emphasizes in his ethnography Evicted , housing instability and evictions operate as mechanisms that degrade the social connectivity upon which resourceful neighborhoods are built. Evictions are not rare—one in eight families face involuntary moves each year nationwide—and evictions disproportionately affect low-income families with children. Many poor families that are in need of stable social environments to raise their children struggle to maintain stable housing, and are forced to move from place to place when a combination of their good will and financial supports give way to a rental market that profits from tenants’ financial instability ( Desmond 2016 ). Facing eviction, these families are not motivated to invest in their neighborhoods, emotionally or otherwise, and the ties that are formed between those crippled by the weight of their housing situations are often “disposable,” made for the short-term benefits they provide but easily discarded ( Desmond 2012 ). Disposable ties can add stress rather than reduce it, making them ill-suited to rebuff the negative consequences of poverty on child outcomes.

A Renewed Focus on the Culture of Poverty

After a considerable absence from the research agenda of social scientists, the study of culture within poverty scholarship has been reinvigorated. A culture perspective asks questions about how and why people cope with poverty and how they escape it, focusing on individuals’ beliefs, preferences, orientations, and strategies in response to poverty as well as anti-poverty policies and programs ( Small et al. 2010 ). Unlike much of what proceeded it, current culture of poverty scholarship avoids blaming the victim for their problems, rather focusing on why poor people adopt certain frames, values, and repertoires, and how people make meaning of their social status in relation to others ( Small et al. 2010 ).

Central to literature that addresses child poverty from a cultural perspective are studies of how parenting practices operate as a mechanism through which poverty affects children. For example, Lareau (2003) observes families from different class backgrounds with school-aged children in order to understand how social class differences in child-rearing strategies might contribute to stratification processes. She argues that social class position shapes parents’ cultural logics of child-rearing. Middle and upper class families practice “concerted cultivation,” wherein parents actively foster and assess their child’s talents, opinions, and skills. In contrast, working class and poor families are more likely to see the development of their children as an “accomplishment of natural growth,” allowing for unstructured free time socializing with family and community members and teaching children to be deferential and quiet. As a result of these different approaches, Lareau argues that middle-class children exhibit a sense of entitlement that puts them at a distinct advantage within schools and other institutions, while working-class children develop a sense of constraint in relation to schooling and the wider social world and are less adept at responding to school demands and practices. While Lareau’s theory is intuitively appealing, the small scope of her study leaves many questions unanswered. Nonetheless, her study is a primary example of the culture of poverty approach, which highlights parenting practices as key to understanding the mechanism through which poverty impacts children.

The Stress of Poverty

In contrast to the material, social, or cultural pathways that highlight social, cultural and economic factors and how they affect children, the stress pathway turns our focus inside the body. Living in poverty is a stressful, often chaotic experience ( Thompson 2014 ; Vernon-Feagans et al. 2012 ; Evans and Wachs 2010 ). The term “toxic stress” is often used to describe the potential impact on body systems of living in the disorganized, unstable, and unpredictable environments of impoverished families ( Garner & Shonkoff 2012 ). Toxic stress refers to strong, frequent, or prolonged activation of the body’s stress response system ( Thompson 2014 ). In contrast to positive or tolerable stress responses, which refer to more mild and adaptive changes in the body’s stress response system or stronger changes over a short period of time, a toxic stress response can undermine the organization of the brain. In some cases, toxic stress can challenge the body’s ability to respond to subsequent stressors, even those of the positive or tolerable variety ( Ladd et al. 2000 ). This lowered threshold makes some poor children less capable of coping effectively with stress as they age, influences genomic function and brain development, and increases the risk of stress-related physical and mental health problems later in life ( Blair et al. 2011 ; Danese & McEwen 2012 ).

SECTION VI: Anti-Poverty Policy and Interventions

It is clear that the consequences of growing up poor are substantial, particularly when children are exposed to conditions associated with poverty early on and for long stretches of time ( Duncan & Magnuson 2011a ). Government policies and early childhood interventions represent society’s response to the burden of child poverty. A comprehensive review of anti-poverty policies is beyond the scope of this review (see Cancian & Danziger 2009 and Haveman et al. 2015 for excellent analyses of anti-poverty efforts over the past 60 years), but the consensus is that anti-poverty policies successfully lift many people out of poverty, especially people with children ( Danziger and Wimer 2014 ; Haveman et al. 2015 ). In particular, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which is an income-based monthly benefit that can be used to purchase food at authorized stores, has become one of the most effective anti-poverty policies, particularly for households with children living in deep poverty ( Bartfeld et al. 2015 ). Yet, economic benefits of current policies constitute proportionately less of their income for poor families now than in prior decades ( Danziger & Danziger 2009 ). The public benefits that remain available to low-income families are mostly concentrated among families with earnings, such as the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC), mostly come in the form of in-kind benefits—like SNAP—rather than cash assistance ( Shaefer et al 2015 ), and often fall very short of full coverage for those in need. For example, Section 8 housing choice vouchers, which guarantee that a family will pay no more than 30 percent of its income for housing, are available only to a third of poor renting families ( Desmond 2016 ).

In addition to anti-poverty policies that supplement income or increase employment for families with children, there are also programs and interventions that help redress the negative effects of poverty on children’s life chances. Rigorous evaluations of a number of famous early childhood programs (e.g., the Perry Preschool program, The Incredible Years, and the Abecedarian project) are often cited as evidence that such programs can at least partially compensate for the disadvantages associated with growing up poor, promoting cognitive skills and non-cognitive traits such as motivation (Cuhna et al. 2006). The positive effects appear to be long-lasting, and early interventions produce larger effects than programs focused on older children. Ultimately, though expensive at the outset, the returns on early investments come in the form of a more productive workforce, a reduction in expensive treatment for mental and physical problems, reduced reliance on public assistance, and less involvement in the criminal justice system ( Heckman et al. 2010 ).

In contrast to small-scale early childhood interventions, Head Start, which is administered by the Administration for Children and Families within the Department of Health and Human Services, serves over 1 million low-income children ages birth to 5 ( Administration for Children and Families 2014 ). Head Start services generally focus on early learning, health and developmental screenings, and strengthening parent-child relationships. Though children who attend Head Start score below norms across developmental areas including language, literacy, and mathematics, at both Head Start entry and exit ( Aikens et al. 2013 ), Head Start is associated with modest improvements in children’s preschool experiences and school readiness in certain areas compared to similarly disadvantaged children who did not attend Head Start ( Puma et al. 2012 ). However, the benefits appear to wane over time.

Another large scale program designed to address the needs of low-income families with children is the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program (MIECHV) ( Michalopoulos et al. 2015 ). MEICHV began as a pilot initiative in the Bush administration and a full fledged program in 2010 as an expansion to the Affordable Care Act. Between 2010 and 2014, it provided $1.5 billion to states for home visiting. For the most part, states used the MIECHV funds to expand the use of four evidence-based home visiting models: Early Head Start – Home Based Program Option; Healthy Families America; Nurse-Family Partnership; and Parents as Teachers. Home visiting programs vary quite a bit, but generally consist of visits from social workers, parent educators, and/or registered nurses to low-income pregnant women and new parents. Participants receive health check-ups and referrals, parenting advice, and guidance with navigating other programs. The duration and frequency of the visits vary depending on the program and age of the child. Some continue until the baby is two years old, others support families until children complete kindergarten. A recent review of 19 home visiting models suggests that home visiting programs have favorable impacts on a number of child outcomes including child health, child development, and school readiness ( Avellar et al. 2015 ). Many of the programs have sustained impacts at least one year after program enrollment.

SECTION VII: A Community approach to combating child poverty

Anti-poverty policy and early childhood interventions are successful, but both typically focus on individual families and children. This focus draws away from the ecological underpinnings of the poverty experience. Multiple ecologies of children’s lives—the variety of institutions with which families interact, the relations among these institutions, and the social networks of families—contribute developmental and educational inequalities among children (e.g., Bronfenbrenner & Morris 1997 ; Coleman 1988 ; Durlauf & Young 2001 ; Gamoran 1992 ; Turley 2003 ; Vandell & Pierce 2002 ). Given evidence of the increasing spatial concentration of poverty and the impact of living in areas of concentrated economic deprivation ( Jargowsky 2013 ; Sastry 2012 ), I argue that child and/or family-centered approaches may be more effective and longer lasting if paired with approaches that directly and purposefully target the communities in which low-income families live, thus in the ecological contexts of poor children.

A community approach should involve both indirect investments through institutions such as stable and affordable housing, schools, and labor markets, and direct investments through programs explicitly designed to strengthen social connectivity among parents. Indeed, a crucial aspect of breaking the cycle of poverty must directly build resourceful social connections among the caregivers of poor children. Resourceful social connections are those that are rich in social resources, like social support (e.g., listening to problems or plans for the future), social control (e.g., maintaining consistent expectations among parents and others within the social network), advice and information (e.g., regarding program eligibility, effectiveness of teachers and other institutional agents), and commonplace reciprocal exchanges (e.g., car pooling, child care) ( Domina 2005 ; Thoits 2011 ; Small 2009 ). As many low-income families know all too well, it takes a lot of effort, energy, and human capital to take advantage of the benefits the state provides ( Edin & Lein 1997 ). Building resourceful social connections within high-poverty neighborhoods can make these tasks less daunting by spreading information about how to determine eligibility, sharing in child care responsibilities, and providing transportation to government agencies, doctors’ offices, school, and other institutions designed to help poor families. Additionally, perhaps by investing in the social resources of communities devastated by high rates of poverty, we can empower residents to fight for policy changes they identify for themselves as immediately warranted.

Sociological research is not unequivocal about the benefits of tight social networks. Similar to the depiction of “disposable ties” describe above, Portes and Landolt (1996) argue that we are remiss when failing to consider the pitfalls of close relationships in areas of concentrated disadvantage. Thus, merely connecting parents to each other may not be enough to benefit children. The quality of those connections is tantamount as well. One example of a community-based program that targets parental social resources for low-income families is Families and Schools Together (FAST). FAST is a multi-family group intervention developed using family stress theory, family systems theory, social ecological theory, and community development strategies ( McDonald and Frey 1999 ). Four randomized controlled trials of the program show that, compared to control groups, FAST participants exhibit reduced aggressive and withdrawal behaviors, increased academic competence, and more developed social skills ( Abt Associates 2001 ; Kratochwill et al. 2004 ; McDonald et al. 2006 ; Gamoran et al. 2012 ). The effect of FAST on child outcomes is mediated in part through its effect on parent social networks ( Turley et al. 2012 ). Parents who participate in FAST are more likely to know other parents in their child’s school, to report that other parents share their expectations for their children, and to participate in reciprocal exchanges with other parents ( Turley et al. 2012 ).

The FAST program and others like it take direct aim at the quantity and quality of parents’ social connections. Social resource interventions may break down insidious hurdles that may be difficult for children from low-income families to overcome than by intervening through income supplementation or skill acquisition alone. Of course, the success of these types of programs will be undercut by the high rates of residential mobility currently experienced in low-income neighborhoods. Thus, indirect investments in social resources, for example through expanding housing vouchers to enable more poor families to pay their rent and avoid eviction ( Desmond 2016 ), should be considered a requisite for a truly enriched community approach to combating child poverty.

SECTION VIII: Emerging research questions

Poverty is a persistent problem for over 20% of the children in the United States ( DeNavas-Walt & Proctor 2015 ). Child development is shaped by children’s interactions within and across social contexts ( Bronfenbrenner 2002 ). The social contexts in which children from impoverished backgrounds live can be devastatingly harmful: growing up in poverty exposes children to more stress or abuse in the home, neighborhood crime, and school violence ( Duncan and Brooks-Gunn 1997 ). Exposure to environmental conditions associated with poverty profoundly shapes their development, and the effects become more pronounced the longer the exposure to poverty ( Duncan et al., 1998 ; Foster & Furstenberg 1999 ). Empirical studies from multiple social science disciplines including sociology, psychology, economics, have consistently documented crippling disadvantages across a number of developmental domains, showing that the disadvantages associated with poverty are entrenched, wide-reaching, and constitute an immediate and pressing policy challenge.

Moving the field forward are emerging questions about who sets the anti-poverty policy and programmatic agendas (e.g., Bradshaw 2007 ; O’Connor 2001 ), what cultural and behavioral assumptions are made by specific policy and program components (e.g., Edin & Kefalas 2005 ; Steensland 2006 ), and how policies and programs interact with the ways in which poor people engage various institutions, each other, and those who profit from their disadvantaged status (e.g., Desmond 2016 ). Furthermore, as argued here, an examination of the ways that neighborhood institutions support or erode the social connectivity of low-income neighborhoods is key. Researchers should continue to centrally locate the analysis of the impact of policy and programs not only on individual children but also on the social ecological environments in which they live and learn. Investing in the communities in which poor parents and caregivers live may enhance the positive effects of anti-poverty policy and early childhood interventions. Poverty scholars should examine how institutional features shape the social networks of families in financial trouble, and how children fare under different organizational arrangements. In Unanticipated Gains , his study of day care centers in New York City, Mario Small (2005) offers a theoretical framework to think about how organizational features of institutions can promote the kinds of stable ties that benefit families with young children. Small documents the social network benefits of certain centers that, by virtue of the particular institutional conditions in place, connect families to each other and provide families, particularly single mothers with young children, relationships that support their health and well being. Rather than the “unanticipated gains” like those that were observed in Small’s study, we may find we can anticipate these gains as we invest in the social and economic opportunities for the poor.

These emerging research questions will bring us closer to an understanding what policies will work best for addressing the high rates of overall child poverty, the disproportionality of child poverty, and the most cost-effective mechanisms for buffering children from the negative effects of poverty and its associated conditions.

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by a National Institutes of Health T32 award (5T32HD049302-08) from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD).

1 These estimates are from American Community Survey data, whereas official estimates come from the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey Annual Social and Economic Supplement. The numbers are slightly different for overall poverty (21.7% vs 21.1%). These differences reflect the different samples included in the poverty universe: The ACS includes the civilian and military household population and excludes group quarters (e.g., nursing homes and college dormitories), whereas the CPS includes the civilian non-institutionalized population ( US Census Bureau 2014 ).

2 The logic behind defining the threshold this way reflects research in the 1950s that showed families spent a third of their annual budget on food ( Haveman et al. 2015 ).

3 The official child poverty rate reported in Short (2015) is 21.5%, which differs from the official rate of 21.1% reported by DeNavas-Walt and Proctor (2015) . This is because Short includes unrelated individuals under the age of 15 in her calculation of the official rate among families with children.

4 Though single father families and cohabiting partners have increased in recent years, the overwhelming majority of children in single-parent homes live with their mothers ( Mather 2010 ).

5 During the 1970s, middle class families on average spent about $3,700 per year on investments in their children, compared to today’s average of $9,300 per year. Poor parents have not been able to keep pace with these increases in investments, so that contemporary poor children lag further behind their affluent counterparts of fifty years prior. The current average annual spending of $1,400 on investments in children among poor families is not even twice the 1970s average of $880 per year ( Duncan and Murnane 2011 )

• Abt Associates. National Evaluation of Family Support Programs. Vol. B: Research Studies: Final Report. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aber JL, Bennett NG, Conley DC, Li J. The Effects of Poverty on Child Health and Development. Annual Review of Public Health. 1997; 18 (1):463–483. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Adamson P. Measuring Child Poverty: New League Tables Of Child Poverty In The World’s Richest Countries. Florence, Italy: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Administration for Children and Families. [8 February 2016]; Head Start Program Facts: Fiscal Year 2014. 2014 Retrieved from: http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/data/factsheets/2014-hs-program-factsheet.html .
• Aikens N, Kopack Klein A, Tarullo L, West J. Getting Ready for Kindergarten: Children’s Progress During Head Start. Faces 2009 Report. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S., Department of Health and Human Services; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Attewell PA, Levin DE. Passing the Torch: Does Higher Education for the Disadvantaged Pay Off Across the Generations? New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Autor D. Skills, Education, and the Rise of Earnings Inequality Among the Other 99 Percent. Science. 2014; 344 (6186):843–351. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Avellar S, Paulsell D, Sama-Miller E, Del Grosso P, Akers L, Kleinman R. Home Visiting Evidence of Effectiveness Review: Executive Summary. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bailey MJ, Dynarski SM. Inequality in Postsecondary Education. In: Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ, editors. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. pp. 117–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bartfield J, Gundersen C, Smeeding TM, Ziliak JP, editors. Snap Matters: How Food Stamps Affect Health and Well-Being. Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Becker G. A Treatise on the Family. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 1991. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bennett F. The LBW, premature infant. In: Gross R, Spiker D, Haynes C, editors. Helping Low Birth Weight, Premature Babies: The Infant Health and Development Program. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press; 1997. pp. 3–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bjorklund A, Jantti M. Intergenerational Income Mobility and the Role of Family Background. In: Salvedra W, Nolan B, Smeeding TM, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Income Inequality. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 2009. pp. 491–521. [ Google Scholar ]
• Blair C, Raver CC, Granger D, Mills-Koonce R, Hibel L, Family LPKI. Allostasis and Allostatic Load in the Context of Poverty in Early Childhood. Development & Psychopathology. 2011; 23 (3):845–857. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bradshaw T. Theories of Poverty and Anti-Poverty Programs in Community Development. Community Development. 2007; 38 (1):7–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. Preparing a World for the Infant in the 21st Century: The Research Challenge. In: Gomes-Pedro J, Nugent K, Young JG, Brazelton TB, editors. The Infant and the Family in the 21st Century. New York, NY: Brunner-Routledge; 2002. pp. 45–52. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U, Morris PA. The Ecology of Developmental Processes. In: Damon W, Eisenberg N, editors. Handbook of Child Psychology. New York: Wiley: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 1997. pp. 993–1028. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks-Gunn J, Duncan GJ. Income Effects Across the Life Span: Integration and Interpretation. In: Duncan GJ, Brooks-Gunn J, editors. Consequences of Growing Up Poor. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1997a. pp. 596–610. [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks-Gunn J, Duncan GJ. The Effects of Poverty on Children. The Future of Children. 1997b; 7 (2):55–71. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Brooks-Gunn J, Duncan GJ, Klebanov PK, Sealand N. Do Neighborhoods Influence Child and Adolescent Development. American Journal of Sociology. 1993; 99 (2):353–395. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cancian M, Danziger S. Changing Poverty and Changing Anti-Poverty Policies. FOCUS. 2009; 26 (2):2–5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cancian M, Reed D. Family structure, childbearing, and parental employment: Implications for the level and trend in poverty. In: Cancian M, Danziger S, editors. Changing Poverty, Changing Policies. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2009. pp. 92–121. [ Google Scholar ]
• Case A, Lubotsky D, Paxson C. Economic Status and Health in Childhood: The Origins of the Gradient. American Economic Review. 2002; 95 (2):1308–1334. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen A, Oster E, Williams H. Why is Infant Mortality Higher in the Us Than in Europe? [21 Mar 2016]; American Economic Journal: Policy. Forthcoming. Retrieved From: https://www.brown.edu/research/projects/oster/sites/brown.edu.research.projects.oster/files/uploads/Why_is_Infant_Mortality_Higher_In_US.pdf . [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ]
• Citro C, Michael R. Measuring Poverty: A New Approach. Washington, DC: National Academy Press; 1995. [ Google Scholar ]
• Coleman JS. Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology. 1988; 94 (S):S95–S120. [ Google Scholar ]
• Corman H, Grossman M. Determinants of Neonatal Mortality Rates in the Us: A Reduced Form Model. Journal of Health Economics. 1985; 4 (3):213–236. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Costello EJ, Compton SN, Keeler G, Angold A. Relationships Between Poverty and Psychopathology: A Natural Experiment. JAMA. 2003; 290 (15):2023–2029. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Council on Community Pediatrics. Poverty and Child Health in the United States. [9 Mar 2016]; Pediatrics. 2016 Retrieved From: http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2016/03/07/peds.2016-0339 . [ PubMed ]
• Cuellar A. Preventing and Treating Child Mental Health Problems. Future of Children. 2015; 25 (1):111–134. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cunha F, Heckman JJ, Lochner L, Masterov DV. Interpreting the Evidence on Life Cycle Skill Formation. In: Hanushek EA, Welch F, editors. Handbook of the Economics of Education. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier B. V; 2006. [ Google Scholar ]
• Currie J. Healthy, Wealthy, and Wise: Socioeconomic Status, Poor Health in Childhood, and Human Capital Development. Journal of Economic Literature. 2009; 47 (1):87–122. [ Google Scholar ]
• Currie J, Lin W. Chipping Away At Health: More on the Relationship Between Income and Child Health. Health Affairs. 2007; 26 (2):331–344. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Currie J, Stabile M. Child Mental Health and Human Capital Accumulation: The Case of ADHD. Journal of Health Economics. 2006; 25 (6):1094–1118. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Curtis K. Spatial Variation in Poverty-Generating Processes: Child Poverty in the United States. Social Science Research. 2012; 41 (1):146–159. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Danese A, McEwen BS. Adverse Childhood Experiences, Allostasis, Allostatic Load, and Age-Related Disease. Physiology & Behavior. 2012; 106 (1):29–39. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Danziger S, Danziger SK. The Us Social Safety Net and Poverty. In: Bane MJ, Zenteno R, editors. Poverty and Poverty Alleviation Strategies in North America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; 2009. pp. 233–261. [ Google Scholar ]
• Danziger S, Wimer C. The State of the Union: Poverty and Inequality Report. Stanford, CA: Stanford Center for Poverty and Inequality; 2014. Poverty; pp. 15–20. [ Google Scholar ]
• Delaney L, Smith JP. Childhood Health: Trends and Consequences Over the Life Course. The Future of Children. 2012; 22 (1):43–63. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• DeNavas-Walt C, Proctor B. Income and Poverty in the United States: 2014. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, Washington DC; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Desmond M. Disposable Ties and the Urban Poor. American Journal of Sociology. 2012; 117 (5):1295–1335. [ Google Scholar ]
• Desmond M. Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City. New York, NY: Crown Publishers; 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• DiMaggio P, Garip F. Network Effects and Social Inequality. Annual Review of Sociology. 2012; 38 (1):93–118. [ Google Scholar ]
• DiPrete T, Eirich G. Cumulative Advantage as a Mechanism for Inequality: A Review of Theoretical and Empirical Developments. Annual Review of Sociology. 2006; 32 :271–297. [ Google Scholar ]
• Domina T. Leveling the Home Advantage: Assessing the Effectiveness of Parental Involvement in Elementary School. Sociology of Education. 2005; 78 (3):233–249. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Brooks-Gunn J. Consequences of Growing Up Poor. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1997. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Brooks Gunn J, Klebanov PK. Economic Deprivation and Early Childhood Development. Child Development. 1994; 65 (2):296–318. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Magnuson K. Pathways. 2011a. Winter. The Long Reach of Early Childhood Poverty; pp. 22–27. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Magnuson K. The Nature and Impact of Early Achievement Skills, Attention Skills, and Behavioral Problems. In: Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ, editors. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011b. pp. 47–69. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Magnuson K, Kalil A, Ziol-Guest K. The Importance of Early Childhood Poverty. Social Indicators Research. 2012; 108 (1):87–98. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Magnuson K, Votruba-Drzal E. Boosting Family Income to Promote Child Development. Future of Children. 2014; 24 (1):99–120. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ. Introduction: The American Dream, Then and Now. In: Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ, editors. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. pp. 3–23. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Yeung WJ, Brooks-Gunn J, Smith JR. How Much Does Childhood Poverty Affect the Life Chances of Children? American Sociological Review. 1998; 63 (3):406–423. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duncan GJ, Ziol Guest KM, Kalil A. Early Childhood Poverty and Adult Attainment, Behavior, and Health. Child Development. 2010; 81 (1):306–325. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Durlauf S, Young HP, editors. Social Dynamics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• Edin K, Kefalas M. Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2005. [ Google Scholar ]
• Edin K, Lein L. Making Ends Meet. New York: NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 1997. [ Google Scholar ]
• Elder G. Life Course Dynamics: Trajectories and Transitions. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press; 1985. [ Google Scholar ]
• Entwisle DR, Alexander KL, Olson LS. First Grade and Educational Attainment By Age 22: A New Story. American Journal of Sociology. 2005; 110 (5):1458–1502. [ Google Scholar ]
• Evans GW, Wachs TD. Chaos and Its Influence on Children’s Development: An Ecological Perspective. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 2010. [ Google Scholar ]
• Foster EM, Furstenberg FF. The Most Disadvantaged Children: Trends over Time. Social Service Review. 1999; 73 (4):560–578. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fox L, Wimer C, Garfinkel I, Kaushal N, Waldfogel J. Waging War on Poverty: Poverty Trends Using a Historical Supplemental Poverty Measure. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 2015; 34 (3):567–592. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gamoran A. Social Factors in Education. In: Alkin M, editor. Encyclopedia of Educational Research. New York, NY: Macmillan; 1992. pp. 1222–1229. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gamoran A, Turley RNL, Turner A, Fish R. Differences Between Hispanic and Non-Hispanic Families in Social Capital and Child Development: First-Year Findings From an Experimental Study. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility. 2012; 30 (1):97–112. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Garner AS, Shonkoff JP. Early Childhood Adversity, Toxic Stress, and the Role of the Pediatrician: Translating Developmental Science Into Lifelong Health. Pediatrics. 2012; 129 (1):e224–31. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Goldin CD, Katz LF. The Race Between Education and Technology. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2008. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halfon N, Houtrow A, Larson K, Newacheck PW. The Changing Landscape of Disability in Childhood. The Future of Children. 2012; 22 (1):13–42. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hanson D, Simms M. Children of Immigrants: 2011 State Trends Update. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2014. [1 December 2015]. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/413113-Children-of-Immigrants--State-Trends-Update.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Harding DJ. Counterfactual Models of Neighborhood Effects: The Effect of Neighborhood Poverty on Dropping Out and Teenage Pregnancy. American Journal of Sociology. 2003; 109 (3):676–719. [ Google Scholar ]
• Haveman R, Blank R, Moffitt R, Smeeding T, Wallace G. The War on Poverty: Measurement, Trends, and Policy. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management. 2015; 34 (3):593–638. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Haveman R, Smeeding T. The Role of Higher Education in Social Mobility. The Future of Children. 2006; 16 (2):125–150. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Heckman JJ, Moon SH, Pinto R, Savelyev PA, Yavitz A. The Rate of Return to the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program. Journal of Public Economics. 2010; 94 (1):114–128. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hertz T, Jayasundera T, Piraino P, Selcuk S, Smith N, Verashchagina A. The Inheritance of Educational Inequality: International Comparisons and Fifty-Year Trends. BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy. 2008; 7 (2):1–47. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hertzman C. The Biological Embedding of Early Experience and its Effects on Health in Adulthood. In: Adler NE, Marmot M, McEwen BS, Stewart J, editors. Socioeconomic Status and Health in Industrial Nations. New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences; 1999. pp. 85–95. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hout M. Social and Economic Returns to College Education in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology. 2012; 38 :379–400. [ Google Scholar ]
• Institute of Medicine. How Far Have We Come In Reducing Health Disparities?: Progress Since 2000: Workshop Summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2012. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jacobs J. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York, NY: Random House; 1961. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jargowsky P. Concentration of Poverty in the New Millennium: Changes in the Prevalence, Composition, and Location of High Poverty Neighborhoods. New York: NY: The Century Foundation; 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiang Y, Ekono M, Skinner C. Basic Facts About Low-Income Children: Children Under 18 Years, 2013. New York, NY: National Center for Children in Poverty; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kids Count. [19 October 2015]; Children in Poverty by Race and Ethnicity. 2015 Retrieved from: http://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/44-children-in-poverty-by-race-and-ethnicity#detailed/1/any/false/869,36,868,867,133/10,11,9,12,1,185,13/324,323 .
• Kratochwill TR, McDonald L, Levin JR, Young BT. Families and Schools Together: An Experimental Analysis of a Parent-Mediated Multi-Family Group Program for American Indian Children. Journal of School Psychology. 2004; 42 (5):359–383. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kuh D, Shlomo B. A Life Course Approach to Chronic Disease Epidemiology. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ladd CO, Hout RL, Thivikrama KV, Neneroff CB, Meaney MJ, Plotsky PM. Long-Term Behavioral and Neuroendocrine Adaptation to Adverse Early Experience. In: Mayer EA, Saper CB, editors. Progress in Brain Research: The Biological Basis for Mind Body Interactions. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science; 2000. pp. 81–102. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lareau A. Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press; 2003. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee CM, Solon G. Trends in Intergenerational Income Mobility. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2009; 91 (4):766–772. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin N. Inequality in Social Capital. Contemporary Sociology. 2000; 29 (6):785–795. [ Google Scholar ]
• MacDorman M, Mathews TJ, Mohangoo AD, Zeitlin J. International Comparisons of Infant Mortality and Related Factors: United States and Europe, 2010. National Vital Statistics Reports. 2014; 65 (5):1–6. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mather M. US Children in Single-mother Families. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau; 2010. [1 December 2015]. Retrieved from: http://www.prb.org/pdf10/single-motherfamilies.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Mather M, Dupuis G. Rising Share of U.S. Children Living in High-Poverty Neighborhoods. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau; 2012. [5 June 2014]. Retrieved from: http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2012/us-high-poverty-neighborhoods.aspx . [ Google Scholar ]
• McDonald L, Frey HE. Families and Schools Together: Building Relationships. Washington, DC: Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention; 1999. [ Google Scholar ]
• McDonald L, Moberg DP, Brown RB, Rodriguez-Espiricueta I, Flores NI, Burke MP, Coover G. After School Multifamily Groups: A Randomized Controlled Trial Involving Low-Income, Urban, Latino Children. Children & Schools. 2006; 28 (1):25–34. [ Google Scholar ]
• McKernan S, Ratcliffe CE. The effect of specific welfare policies on poverty. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute; 2006. [21 Mar 2016]. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/411334-The-Effect-of-Specific-Welfare-Policies-on-Poverty.PDF . [ Google Scholar ]
• McLeod JD, Shanahan MJ. Trajectories of Poverty and Children’s Mental Health. Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 1996; 37 (3):207–220. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Merikangas KR, Nakamura EF, Kessler RC. Epidemiology of Mental Disorders in Children and Adolescents. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience. 2009; 11 (1):7–20. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mickelson KD, Kubzansky LD. Social Distribution of Social Support: The Mediating Role of Life Events. American Journal of Community Psychology. 2003; 32 (3–4):265–281. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Michalopoulos C, Lee H, Duggan A, Lundquist E, Tso A, Crowne SS, Burrell L, Somers J, Filene JH, Knox V. A Mother and Infant Home Visiting Program Evaluation: Early Findings on the Maternal, Infant, and Early Childhood Home Visiting Program. A Report to Congress. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Connor A. Poverty Knowledge: Social Science, Social Policy, And The Poor In Twentieth Century U.S. History. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Hare WP. The Forgotten Fifth: Child Poverty in Rural America. Manchester, NH: Carsey Institute; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Hare W, Mather M. Child poverty is Highest in Rural Counties in US. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau; 2008. [1 December 2015]. Retrieved from: http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2008/childpoverty.aspx . [ Google Scholar ]
• Perou R, Bitsko RH, Blumberg SJ, Pastor P, Ghandour RM, Gfroerer JC, Hedden SL, Crosby AE, Visser SN, Schieve LA. Mental Health Surveillance Among Children—United States, 2005–2011. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2013; 62 (Suppl 2):1–35. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Piketty T, Saez E. Inequality in the Long Run. Science. 2014; 344 (6186):838–843. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Portes A, Landolt P. The Downside of Social Capital. The American Prospect. 1996; 26 (94):18–21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Puma M, Bell S, Cook R, Heid C, Broene FJ, Mashburn A, Downer J. Third Grade Follow-Up to the Head Start Impact Study: Final Report. Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• Raphael S, Smolensky E. Immigration and Poverty in the United States. FOCUS. 2009; 26 (2):27–31. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ratcliffe C, McKernan S. Childhood poverty persistence: Facts and consequences. Washington, DC: Urban Institute; 2010. [21 Mar 2016]. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/alfresco/publication-pdfs/412126-Childhood-Poverty-Persistence-Facts-and-Consequences.PDF . [ Google Scholar ]
• Reardon S. The Widening Academic Achievement Gap Between the Rich and the Poor: New Evidence and Possible Explanations. In: Duncan GJ, Murnane RJ, editors. Whither Opportunity? Rising Inequality, Schools, and Children’s Life Chances. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. pp. 91–115. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sastry N. Neighborhood Effects on Children’s Achievement: A Review of Recent Research. In: Maholmes V, King R, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Poverty and Child Development. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 423–447. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sastry N, Pebley AR. Family and Neighborhood Sources of Socioeconomic Inequality in Children’s Achievement. Demography. 2010; 47 (3):777–800. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shaefer HL, Edin K, Talbert E. Understanding the Dynamics of $2-a-day Poverty in the United States. RSF: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences. 2015; 1 (1):120–138. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharkey P. The Intergenerational Transmission of Context. American Journal of Sociology. 2008; 113 (4):931–969. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sharkey P, Elwert F. The Legacy of Disadvantage: Multigenerational Neighborhood Effects on Cognitive Ability. American Journal of Sociology. 2011; 116 (6):1934–1981. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shonkoff JP, Phillips DA, editors. From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press; 2000. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Short K. The Research Supplemental Poverty Measure: 2014. Washington, DC: US Census Bureau; 2015. [ Google Scholar ]
• Small ML. Unanticipated Gains: Origins of Network Inequality in Everyday Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2009. [ Google Scholar ]
• Small ML, Harding DJ, Lamont M. Reconsidering Culture and Poverty. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2010; 629 (1):6–27. [ Google Scholar ]
• Soss J, Schram SF, Vartanian TP, O’Brien E. Setting the Terms of Relief: Explaining State Policy Choices in the Devolution Revolution. American Journal of Political Science. 2001; 45 (2):378–395. [ Google Scholar ]
• Starfield B. Childhood Morbidity: Comparisons, Clusters, and Trends. Pediatrics. 1991; 88 (3):519–526. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Steensland B. Cultural Categories And The American Welfare State: The Case Of Guaranteed Income Policy. American Journal of Sociology. 2006; 111 (5):1273–1326. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stokes C, Melendez T, Rhodes-Reed G, editors. Race in 21st Century America. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press; 2001. [ Google Scholar ]
• The Anne E Casey Foundation. Measuring Access to Opportunity. Baltimore, MD: Anne E. Casey Foundation; 2015. [21 Mar 2016]. Retrieved from: http://www.aecf.org/m/resourcedoc/aecf-MeasuringAccesstoOpportunityKC2-2015.pdf . [ Google Scholar ]
• Thoits PA. Perceived Social Support and the Voluntary, Mixed, or Pressured Use of Mental Health Services. Society and Mental Health. 2011; 1 (1):4–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thompson RA. Stress and Child Development. The Future of Children. 2014; 24 (1):41–59. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Turley RNL. When Do Neighborhoods Matter? The Role of Race and Neighborhood Peers. Social Science Research. 2003; 32 (1):61–79. [ Google Scholar ]
• Turley RNL, Gamoran A, Turner A, Fish RM. Causal Effects of Social Capital on Child Outcomes. Presentation. Research Committee on Social Stratification (RC28) of the International Sociological Association; Hong Kong. May 2012.2012. [ Google Scholar ]
• US Census Bureau. [7 Nov 2015]; Fact Sheet: Differences Between CPS ASEC and ACS. 2014 Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/datasources/factsheet.html .
• US Census Bureau. [15 Jan 2016]; State and County Quick Facts. 2015 Retrieved from: http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html .
• Van Kippersluis H, O’Donnell O, van Doorslaer E. Long-Run Returns to Education. Journal of Human Resources. 2011; 46 (4):695–721. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vandell DL, Pierce KM. After-School Programs and Structured Activities That Support Children’s Development. In: Garner R, editor. Hanging Out: Community-Based After-School Programs for Children. Westport, CT: Greenwood; 2002. pp. 167–178. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vernon-Feagans L, Garrett-Peters P, DeMarco A, Bratsch M. Children Living in Rural Poverty: The Role of Chaos in Early Development. In: Maholmes V, King R, editors. The Oxford Handbook of Poverty and Child Development. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press; 2012. pp. 448–446. [ Google Scholar ]
• Voss PR, Long DD, Hammer RB, Friedman S. County Child Poverty Rates in the Us: A Spatial Regression Approach. Population Research and Policy Review. 2006; 25 (4):369–391. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wagmiller RL, Lennon MC, Kuang L, Alberti PM, Aber JL. The Dynamics of Economic Disadvantage and Children’s Life Chances. American Sociological Review. 2006; 71 (5):847–866. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wight VR, Thampi K, Chau M. Poor Children by Nativity. New York, NY: National Center for Children in Poverty; 2014. [7 Nov 2015]. Retrieved from: http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_1006.html . [ Google Scholar ]
• Wilson WJ. When Work Disappears: The World of the New Urban Poor. New York, NY: Knopf; 1996. [ Google Scholar ]

Featured Topics

Featured series.

A series of random questions answered by Harvard experts.

Explore the Gazette

Read the latest.

Up next for Supreme Court on abortion: Idaho

Historian sees a warning for today in post-Civil War U.S.

McCarthy says immigration, abortion, economy to top election issues

Robert Sampson, Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences, is one of the researchers studying the link between poverty and social mobility.

Rose Lincoln/Harvard file photo

Unpacking the power of poverty

Peter Reuell

Harvard Staff Writer

Study picks out key indicators like lead exposure, violence, and incarceration that impact children’s later success

Social scientists have long understood that a child’s environment — in particular growing up in poverty — can have long-lasting effects on their success later in life. What’s less well understood is exactly how.

A new Harvard study is beginning to pry open that black box.

Conducted by Robert Sampson, the Henry Ford II Professor of the Social Sciences, and Robert Manduca, a doctoral student in sociology and social policy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, the study points to a handful of key indicators, including exposure to high levels of lead, violence, and incarceration as key predictors of children’s later success. The study is described in an April paper published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“What this paper is trying to do, in a sense, is move beyond the traditional neighborhood indicators people use, like poverty,” Sampson said. “For decades, people have shown poverty to be important … but it doesn’t necessarily tell us what the mechanisms are, and how growing up in poor neighborhoods affects children’s outcomes.”

To explore potential pathways, Manduca and Sampson turned to the income tax records of parents and approximately 230,000 children who lived in Chicago in the 1980s and 1990s, compiled by Harvard’s Opportunity Atlas project. They integrated these records with survey data collected by the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods, measures of violence and incarceration, census indicators, and blood-lead levels for the city’s neighborhoods in the 1990s.

They found that the greater the extent to which poor black male children were exposed to harsh environments, the higher their chances of being incarcerated in adulthood and the lower their adult incomes, measured in their 30s. A similar income pattern also emerged for whites.

Among both black and white girls, the data showed that increased exposure to harsh environments predicted higher rates of teen pregnancy.

Despite the similarity of results along racial lines, Chicago’s segregation means that far more black children were exposed to harsh environments — in terms of toxicity, violence, and incarceration — harmful to their mental and physical health.

“The least-exposed majority-black neighborhoods still had levels of harshness and toxicity greater than the most-exposed majority-white neighborhoods, which plausibly accounts for a substantial portion of the racial disparities in outcomes,” Manduca said.

“It’s really about trying to understand some of the earlier findings, the lived experience of growing up in a poor and racially segregated environment, and how that gets into the minds and bodies of children.” Robert Sampson

“What this paper shows … is the independent predictive power of harsh environments on top of standard variables,” Sampson said. “It’s really about trying to understand some of the earlier findings, the lived experience of growing up in a poor and racially segregated environment, and how that gets into the minds and bodies of children.”

More like this

Cities’ wealth gap is growing, too

Racial and economic disparities intertwined, study finds

The study isn’t solely focused on the mechanisms of how poverty impacts children; it also challenges traditional notions of what remedies might be available.

“This has [various] policy implications,” Sampson said. “Because when you talk about the effects of poverty, that leads to a particular kind of thinking, which has to do with blocked opportunities and the lack of resources in a neighborhood.

“That doesn’t mean resources are unimportant,” he continued, “but what this study suggests is that environmental policy and criminal justice reform can be thought of as social mobility policy. I think that’s provocative, because that’s different than saying it’s just about poverty itself and childhood education and human capital investment, which has traditionally been the conversation.”

The study did suggest that some factors — like community cohesion, social ties, and friendship networks — could act as bulwarks against harsh environments. Many researchers, including Sampson himself, have shown that community cohesion and local organizations can help reduce violence. But Sampson said their ability to do so is limited.

“One of the positive ways to interpret this is that violence is falling in society,” he said. “Research has shown that community organizations are responsible for a good chunk of the drop. But when it comes to what’s affecting the kids themselves, it’s the homicide that happens on the corner, it’s the lead in their environment, it’s the incarceration of their parents that’s having the more proximate, direct influence.”

Going forward, Sampson said he hopes the study will spur similar research in other cities and expand to include other environmental contamination, including so-called brownfield sites.

Ultimately, Sampson said he hopes the study can reveal the myriad ways in which poverty shapes not only the resources that are available for children, but the very world in which they find themselves growing up.

“Poverty is sort of a catchall term,” he said. “The idea here is to peel things back and ask, What does it mean to grow up in a poor white neighborhood? What does it mean to grow up in a poor black neighborhood? What do kids actually experience?

“What it means for a black child on the south side of Chicago is much higher rates of exposure to violence and lead and incarceration, and this has intergenerational consequences,” he continued. “This is particularly important because it provides a way to think about potentially intervening in the intergenerational reproduction of inequality. We don’t typically think about criminal justice reform or environmental policy as social mobility policy. But maybe we should.”

This research was supported with funding from the Project on Race, Class & Cumulative Adversity at Harvard University, the Ford Foundation, and the Hutchins Family Foundation.

Share this article

You might like.

Justices to hear case on near-complete ban amid shifting legal landscape after overturn of Roe

Past is present at Warren Center symposium featuring scholars from Harvard, Emory, UConn, and University of Cambridge

Former House speaker also says Trump would likely win if election were held today in wide-ranging talk

Harvard announces return to required testing

Leading researchers cite strong evidence that testing expands opportunity

For all the other Willie Jacks

‘Reservation Dogs’ star Paulina Alexis offers behind-the-scenes glimpse of hit show, details value of Native representation

When will patients see personalized cancer vaccines?

Sooner than you may think, says researcher who recently won Sjöberg Prize for pioneering work in field

7 Essays About Poverty: Example Essays and Prompts

Essays about poverty give valuable insight into the economic situation that we share globally. Read our guide with poverty essay examples and prompts for your paper.

In the US, the official poverty rate in 2022 was 11.5 percent, with 37.9 million people living below the poverty line. With a global pandemic, cost of living crisis, and climate change on the rise, we’ve seen poverty increase due to various factors. As many of us face adversity daily, we can look to essays about poverty from some of the world’s greatest speakers for inspiration and guidance.

There is nothing but a lack of social vision to prevent us from paying an adequate wage to every American citizen whether he be a hospital worker, laundry worker, maid or day laborer. There is nothing except shortsightedness to prevent us from guaranteeing an annual minimum—and livable—income for every American family. Martin Luther King Jr., Where Do We Go from Here: Chaos or Community?

Writing a poverty essay can be challenging due to the many factors contributing to poverty and the knock-on effects of living below the poverty line . For example, homelessness among low-income individuals stems from many different causes.

It’s important to note that poverty exists beyond the US, with many developing countries living in extreme poverty without access to essentials like clean water and housing. For help with your essays, check out our round-up of the best essay checkers .

Essays About Poverty: Top Examples

1. pensioner poverty: fear of rise over decades as uk under-40s wealth falls, 2. the surprising poverty levels across the u.s., 3. why poverty persists in america, 4. post-pandemic poverty is rising in america’s suburbs.

• 5. The Basic Facts About Children in Poverty
• 6. The State of America’s Children 
• 7. COVID-19: This is how many Americans now live below the poverty line

10 Poverty Essay Topics

1. the causes of poverty, 2. the negative effects of poverty, 3. how countries can reduce poverty rates, 4. the basic necessities and poverty, 5. how disabilities can lead to poverty, 6. how the cycle of poverty unfolds , 7. universal basic income and its relationship to poverty, 8. interview someone who has experience living in poverty, 9. the impact of the criminal justice system on poverty, 10. the different ways to create affordable housing.

There is growing concern about increasing pensioner poverty in the UK in the coming decades. Due to financial challenges like the cost of living crisis, rent increases, and the COVID-19 pandemic, under 40s have seen their finances shrink.

Osborne discusses the housing wealth gap in this article, where many under the 40s currently pay less in a pension due to rent prices. While this means they will have less pension available, they will also retire without owning a home, resulting in less personal wealth than previous generations. Osborne delves into the causes and gaps in wealth between generations in this in-depth essay.

“Those under-40s have already been identified as  facing the biggest hit from rising mortgage rates , and last week a study by the financial advice firm Hargreaves Lansdown found that almost a third of 18- to 34-year-olds had stopped or cut back on their pension contributions in order to save money.” Hilary Osborne,  The Guardian

In this 2023 essay, Jeremy Ney looks at the poverty levels across the US, stating that poverty has had the largest one-year increase in history. According to the most recent census, child poverty has more than doubled from 2021 to 2022.

Ney states that the expiration of government support and inflation has created new financial challenges for US families. With the increased cost of living and essential items like food and housing sharply increasing, more and more families have fallen below the poverty line. Throughout this essay, Ney displays statistics and data showing the wealth changes across states, ethnic groups, and households.

“Poverty in America reflects the inequality that plagues U.S. households. While certain regions have endured this pain much more than others, this new rising trend may spell ongoing challenges for even more communities.” Jeremy Ney,  TIME

In this New York Times article, a Pulitzer Prize-winning sociologist explores why poverty exists in North America.

The American poor have access to cheap, mass-produced goods, as every American does. But that doesn’t mean they can access what matters most. Matthew Desmond,  The New York Times

The U.S. Census Bureau recently released its annual data on poverty, revealing contrasting trends for 2022. While one set of findings indicated that the overall number of Americans living in poverty remained stable compared to the previous two years, another survey highlighted a concerning increase in child poverty. The rate of child poverty in the U.S. doubled from 2021 to 2022, a spike attributed mainly to the cessation of the expanded child tax credit following the pandemic. These varied outcomes underscore the Census Bureau’s multifaceted methods to measure poverty.

“The nation’s suburbs accounted for the majority of increases in the poor population following the onset of the pandemic” Elizabeth Kneebone and Alan Berube,  Brookings

5.  The Basic Facts About Children in Poverty

Nearly 11 million children are living in poverty in America. This essay explores ow the crisis reached this point—and what steps must be taken to solve it.

“In America, nearly 11 million children are poor. That’s 1 in 7 kids, who make up almost one-third of all people living in poverty in this country.” Areeba Haider,  Center for American Progress

6.  The State of America’s Children  

This essay articles how, despite advancements, children continue to be the most impoverished demographic in the U.S., with particular subgroups — such as children of color, those under five, offspring of single mothers, and children residing in the South — facing the most severe poverty levels.

“Growing up in poverty has wide-ranging, sometimes lifelong, effects on children, putting them at a much higher risk of experiencing behavioral, social, emotional, and health challenges. Childhood poverty also plays an instrumental role in impairing a child’s ability and capacity to learn, build skills, and succeed academically.” Children’s Defense Fund

7.  COVID-19: This is how many Americans now live below the poverty line

This essay explores how the economic repercussions of the coronavirus pandemic 2020 led to a surge in U.S. poverty rates, with unemployment figures reaching unprecedented heights. The writer provides data confirming that individuals at the lowest economic strata bore the brunt of these challenges, indicating that the recession might have exacerbated income disparities, further widening the chasm between the affluent and the underprivileged.

“Poverty in the U.S. increased in 2020 as the coronavirus pandemic hammered the economy and unemployment soared. Those at the bottom of the economic ladder were hit hardest, new figures confirm, suggesting that the recession may have widened the gap between the rich and the poor.” Elena Delavega,  World Econmic Forum

If you’re tasked with writing an essay about poverty, consider using the below topics. They offer pointers for outlining and planning an essay about this challenging topic.

One of the most specific poverty essay topics to address involves the causes of poverty. You can craft an essay to examine the most common causes of extreme poverty. Here are a few topics you might want to include:

• Racial discrimination, particularly among African Americans, has been a common cause of poverty throughout American history. Discrimination and racism can make it hard for people to get the education they need, making it nearly impossible to get a job.
• A lack of access to adequate health care can also lead to poverty. When people do not have access to healthcare, they are more likely to get sick. This could make it hard for them to go to work while also leading to major medical bills.
• Inadequate food and water can lead to poverty as well. If people’s basic needs aren’t met, they focus on finding food and water instead of getting an education they can use to find a better job.

These are just a few of the most common causes of poverty you might want to highlight in your essay. These topics could help people see why some people are more likely to become impoverished than others. You might also be interested in these essays about poverty .

Poverty affects everyone, and the impacts of an impoverished lifestyle are very real. Furthermore, the disparities when comparing adult poverty to child poverty are also significant. This opens the doors to multiple possible essay topics. Here are a few points to include:

• When children live in poverty, their development is stunted. For example, they might not be able to get to school on time due to a lack of transportation, making it hard for them to keep up with their peers. Child poverty also leads to malnutrition, which can stunt their development.
• Poverty can impact familial relationships as well. For example, members of the same family could fight for limited resources, making it hard for family members to bond. In addition, malnutrition can stunt the growth of children.
• As a side effect of poverty, people have difficulty finding a safe place to live. This creates a challenging environment for everyone involved, and it is even harder for children to grow and develop.
• When poverty leads to homelessness, it is hard for someone to get a job. They don’t have an address to use for physical communication, which leads to employment concerns.

These are just a few of the many side effects of poverty. Of course, these impacts are felt by people across the board, but it is not unusual for children to feel the effects of poverty that much more. You might also be interested in these essays about unemployment .

Different countries take different approaches to reduce the number of people living in poverty

The issue of poverty is a major human rights concern, and many countries explore poverty reduction strategies to improve people’s quality of life. You might want to examine different strategies that different countries are taking while also suggesting how some countries can do more. A few ways to write this essay include:

• Explore the poverty level in America, comparing it to the poverty level of a European country. Then, explore why different countries take different strategies.
• Compare the minimum wage in one state, such as New York, to the minimum wage in another state, such as Alabama. Why is it higher in one state? What does raising the minimum wage do to the cost of living?
• Highlight a few advocacy groups and nonprofit organizations actively lobbying their governments to do more for low-income families. Then, talk about why some efforts are more successful than others.

Different countries take different approaches to reduce the number of people living in poverty. Poverty within each country is such a broad topic that you could write a different essay on how poverty could be decreased within the country. For more, check out our list of simple essays topics for intermediate writers .

You could also write an essay on the necessities people need to survive. You could take a look at information published by the United Nations , which focuses on getting people out of the cycle of poverty across the globe. The social problem of poverty can be addressed by giving people the necessities they need to survive, particularly in rural areas. Here are some of the areas you might want to include:

• Affordable housing
• Fresh, healthy food and clean water
• Access to an affordable education
• Access to affordable healthcare

Giving everyone these necessities could significantly improve their well-being and get people out of absolute poverty. You might even want to talk about whether these necessities vary depending on where someone is living.

There are a lot of medical and social issues that contribute to poverty, and you could write about how disabilities contribute to poverty. This is one of the most important essay topics because people could be disabled through no fault of their own. Some of the issues you might want to address in this essay include:

• Talk about the road someone faces if they become disabled while serving overseas. What is it like for people to apply for benefits through the Veterans’ Administration?
• Discuss what happens if someone becomes disabled while at work. What is it like for someone to pursue disability benefits if they are hurt doing a blue-collar job instead of a desk job?
• Research and discuss the experiences of disabled people and how their disability impacts their financial situation.

People who are disabled need to have money to survive for many reasons, such as the inability to work, limitations at home, and medical expenses. A lack of money, in this situation, can lead to a dangerous cycle that can make it hard for someone to be financially stable and live a comfortable lifestyle.

Many people talk about the cycle of poverty, yet many aren’t entirely sure what this means or what it entails. A few key points you should address in this essay include:

• When someone is born into poverty, income inequality can make it hard to get an education.
• A lack of education makes it hard for someone to get into a good school, which gives them the foundation they need to compete for a good job. 
• A lack of money can make it hard for someone to afford college, even if they get into a good school.
• Without attending a good college, it can be hard for someone to get a good job. This makes it hard for someone to support themselves or their families. 
• Without a good paycheck, it is nearly impossible for someone to keep their children out of poverty, limiting upward mobility into the middle class.

The problem of poverty is a positive feedback loop. It can be nearly impossible for those who live this every day to escape. Therefore, you might want to explore a few initiatives that could break the cycle of world poverty and explore other measures that could break this feedback loop.

Many business people and politicians have floated the idea of a universal basic income to give people the basic resources they need to survive. While this hasn’t gotten a lot of serious traction, you could write an essay to shed light on this idea. A few points to hit on include:

• What does a universal basic income mean, and how is it distributed?
• Some people are concerned about the impact this would have on taxes. How would this be paid for?
• What is the minimum amount of money someone would need to stay out of poverty? Is it different in different areas?
• What are a few of the biggest reasons major world governments haven’t passed this?

This is one of the best essay examples because it gives you a lot of room to be creative. However, there hasn’t been a concrete structure for implementing this plan, so you might want to afford one.

Another interesting topic you might want to explore is interviewing someone living in poverty or who has been impoverished. While you can talk about statistics all day, they won’t be as powerful as interviewing someone who has lived that life. A few questions you might want to ask during your interview include:

• What was it like growing up?
• How has living in poverty made it hard for you to get a job?
• What do you feel people misunderstand about those who live in poverty?
• When you need to find a meal, do you have a place you go to? Or is it somewhere different every day?
• What do you think is the main contributor to people living in poverty?

Remember that you can also craft different questions depending on your responses. You might want to let the interviewee read the essay when you are done to ensure all the information is accurate and correct.

The criminal justice system and poverty tend to go hand in hand. People with criminal records are more likely to be impoverished for several reasons. You might want to write an essay that hits on some of these points:

• Discuss the discriminatory practices of the criminal justice system both as they relate to socioeconomic status and as they relate to race.
• Explore just how hard it is for someone to get a job if they have a criminal record. Discuss how this might contribute to a life of poverty.
• Dive into how this creates a positive feedback loop. For example, when someone cannot get a job due to a criminal record, they might have to steal to survive, which worsens the issue.
• Review what the criminal justice system might be like for someone with resources when compared to someone who cannot afford to hire expert witnesses or pay for a good attorney.

You might want to include a few examples of disparate sentences for people in different socioeconomic situations to back up your points. 

Affordable housing can make a major difference when someone is trying to escape poverty

Many poverty-related problems could be reduced if people had access to affordable housing. While the cost of housing has increased dramatically in the United States , some initiatives exist to create affordable housing. Here are a few points to include:

• Talk about public programs that offer affordable housing to people from disadvantaged backgrounds.
• Discuss private programs, such as Habitat for Humanity , doing similar things.
• Review the positive impacts that stable housing has on both adults and children.
• Dive into other measures local and federal governments could take to provide more affordable housing for people.

There are a lot of political and social angles to address with this essay, so you might want to consider spreading this out across multiple papers. Affordable housing can make a major difference when trying to escape poverty. If you want to learn more, check out our essay writing tips !

Meet Rachael, the editor at Become a Writer Today. With years of experience in the field, she is passionate about language and dedicated to producing high-quality content that engages and informs readers. When she's not editing or writing, you can find her exploring the great outdoors, finding inspiration for her next project.

View all posts

The impact of poverty on early childhood

For most parents, bringing a baby into the world and nurturing a young child brings both great joy and intense love, but it also comes with many changes, and sometimes stress, pressure and anxiety. Those pressures and stresses are likely to be much greater for families who are struggling to make ends meet.  In the UK today, more than one in four families with a child under five are living in poverty .  

Experiencing poverty can cause harm at any age, but particularly for the youngest children. This is when the foundations for their physical, emotional and social development are being laid. A substantial body of research shows that family poverty is associated with and can cause poorer academic attainment and social and emotional development. Perhaps not surprisingly, poverty can be highly detrimental if it is persistent, experienced in the first three years of life and combined with other disadvantages. Given this, addressing early childhood poverty is a vital part of the jigsaw of support needed to enable young children to flourish.

The harm that poverty can inflict begins during pregnancy and is shaped by the health and well-being of parents and their socio-economic status. Gaps in development between disadvantaged and advantaged children emerge very early on. Poverty impacts are also not the same for everyone and are further compounded by inequalities in relation to parents’ ethnicity, health and economic status. By the time a child reaches 11 months there are gaps in communication and language skills, and by the age of three inequalities in children’s cognitive and social and emotional skills are evident. A large body of analysis shows how these early disadvantages can go on to affect children’s development in later life.

Importantly, this is not to say that economic disadvantage inevitably leads to poor long-term outcomes; other factors – family circumstances, wider family support, social networks and connections, educational resources and public services - all play a vital role and can mitigate the effects of poverty.

Younger children are more likely to be in poverty than other groups 

Poverty here is defined as not having enough material resources such as money, housing, or food to meet the minimum needs - both material and social – in today’s society. While there have been some key changes over the last two decades, there is one constant – children are markedly more likely to experience poverty than adults or pensioners and it is younger children who are most at risk .

This is the result of a combination of factors including the costs of children and that households with younger children are less likely to have two parents in full-time work parents. The latest figures show that there are some 4.2 million children living in poverty in the UK, a rise of 600,000 over the last decade.

Most worryingly deep poverty has been rising, particularly affecting lone parents, large families, and people living in families with a disabled person. The Runnymede Trust found that Black and minority ethnic people are currently 2.2 times more likely to be in deep poverty than white people, with Bangladeshi people more than three times more likely.  The Joseph Rowntree Foundation’s report on Destitution in the UK 202 3 found that over 1 million children had experienced destitution at some point over 2022.

Poverty affects children’s material, social, educational and emotional well-being

Poverty affects young children’s experiences directly. Parents have less money to meet children’s material and social needs. The sharply rising costs of providing the basic essentials – food, warmth, lighting, housing costs, nappies, baby food, clothing - has created acute pressure for many families. Drawing on a survey of their service users, in 2022 Barnardo’s reported that 30% of parents said their child’s mental health had worsened in the previous four months, 16% said their child/ren had to share a bed with them or a sibling, and 30% were concerned about losing their home/being made homeless.

Recent research (Ruth Patrick et al. 2023 ) looked at the effects of benefit changes on larger families. It shows the many hardships that families are dealing with, the inability to meet their children’s needs and the stress and worry they feel as a result. But it also shows the resilience, strength and skills they employ to give their children the best possible life in the circumstances. Families spoke about the sheer amount of time it takes to manage on a very tight budget and its direct impact on children – from missing bath time to reading a bedtime story. This is affecting children’s educational outcomes. 95% of teachers surveyed by Kindred Squared believe that the cost-of-living crisis is going to impact school readiness next year.

Poverty gets under your skin; it takes a toll on the mental health of mothers, fathers, and wider family. The Family Stress Model, underpinned by research, shows the way in which economic stress - poverty, hardship, debt - creates psychological distress, lack of control and feelings of stigma. Not surprisingly, these stresses affect family relationships, both between parents and with children. Hardship, debt, deprivation and ‘feeling poor’ is linked to poorer maternal mental health and lower life satisfaction and this can make it more difficult to find the mental space to be an attentive and responsive parent. This in turn can affect young children’s social and emotional development and outcomes.

What can we do?

Explaining how poverty affects young children’s well-being and outcomes is important when it comes to developing effective responses: addressing poverty and hardship directly, supporting parents’, especially mothers’, mental health, and providing support for parenting.

The research also helps identify the protective factors that help to reduce the detrimental impact of poverty: wider family and neighbourhood support, good maternal and paternal mental health, access to high quality early education, warm parent-child interaction and financial and housing stability.

Early years professionals, health visitors, family support workers and many others are in the front line of the difficulties that families with young children are facing. They are responding to the legacy of the Covid pandemic and the rise in cost of living, working across service boundaries and in new ways, despite budgetary pressures.

Local services are working to meet the needs of families with young children in the round – including support for maternal mental health, parental conflict, parenting and the home learning environment. There are many voluntary initiatives, such as Save the Children’s Building Blocks, which combines giving grants to reduce the impact of material deprivation with supporting parents to play and learn with their children at home, initiatives to use local authority data to increase the take-up of benefit entitlements, and thebaby bank network, providing essential products and equipment as well as practical support for parents who are struggling.

Tackling early childhood poverty rests both on public policy which takes a holistic and joined up approach, as well as action at local level, whether that’s through local authorities, early years services in health and education, local businesses and community and voluntary initiatives.

In the Nuffield Foundation’s Changing Face of Early Childhood , we set out some core principles to address early childhood poverty including:

A multi-dimensional approach that reflects the range of socioeconomic risks and intersecting needs faced by families with young children.

Money matters - a financial bedrock for families with young children living on a low income, through improved social security benefits and access to employment, which takes account of the care needs of the under-fives.

Greater attention and investment in policies to support parental mental health and parenting from the earliest stage of a child’s life.

A more coherent, joined up and effective approach to early childhood would help to address the inequalities between children by supporting them early on in life and establishing deep roots from which they can grow and flourish.

Disclaimer » Advertising

• HealthyChildren.org

• Previous Article
• Next Article

Setting and Data

Ethics approval, poverty at birth, cohort formation, early childhood outcomes, trajectories of poverty, statistical analysis, household and neighborhood poverty at birth, trajectories into and out of poverty before age 5, conclusions, acknowledgments, poverty and early childhood outcomes.

POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST: The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE: The authors have indicated they have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.

• Split-Screen
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• CME Quiz Close Quiz
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Get Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Leslie L. Roos , Elizabeth Wall-Wieler , Janelle Boram Lee; Poverty and Early Childhood Outcomes. Pediatrics June 2019; 143 (6): e20183426. 10.1542/peds.2018-3426

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Video Abstract

Children born into poverty face many challenges. Exposure to poverty comes in different forms, and children may also transition into or out of poverty. In this study, we examine the relationships among various outcomes and different levels of poverty (household and/or neighborhood poverty) at different points during a child’s first 5 years.

We used linkable administrative databases, following 46 589 children born in Manitoba, Canada, between 2000 and 2009 to age 7. Poverty is defined as those receiving welfare and those living in low-income neighborhoods. Four outcomes are measured in the first 5 years (placement in out-of-home care, externalizing mental health diagnosis, asthma diagnosis, and hospitalization for injury), with school readiness assessed between ages 5 and 7.

Children born into poverty had greater odds of not being ready for school than children not born into poverty (adjusted odds ratio = 1.54, 1.59, 1.26 for children born in household and neighborhood poverty, household poverty only, and neighborhood poverty only, respectively; all significant at P < .05). Similar patterns were seen across outcomes. For those born into neighborhood poverty, the odds of school readiness were higher only if children moved before age 2.

The level of poverty (household or neighborhood) and its duration modify the relationship between early poverty and childhood outcomes. Covariate adjustment generally weakens but does not eliminate these relationships.

Past research revealed children born into poverty are less ready for school and have worse health and social outcomes. It is also known that moving out of poverty in childhood leads to better long-term outcomes.

Household poverty is associated with worse early childhood outcomes than neighborhood poverty. Links between school readiness and moving into or out of neighborhood poverty are only seen if moving happened before the child’s second birthday.

The early life course has been seen as of particular importance; children born into poverty face significant challenges. 1 , 2 Family difficulties are likely to result in poor educational, social, and health outcomes. 3 , 4 Poverty is associated with various factors leading to poor academic achievement, including atypical structural brain development, 5 limited language development, 6 and a greater likelihood of experiencing food insecurity. 7 , 8 Lack of school readiness predicts later cognitive problems and adult psychosocial adjustment. 9 , – 11 Higher household family incomes and neighborhood socioeconomic status have been linked with greater school readiness in vocabulary, communication, numeracy knowledge, and attention. 12 , 13 Furthermore, poverty is associated with placement of children into out-of-home care. 14 Poverty may also lead to important problems, including externalizing mental conditions, asthma, and injuries resulting in hospitalization. Childhood attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and conduct disorder start early and predict disruptive behavior in later childhood and adolescence. 15 , – 17  

The relationships among levels of poverty, timing and duration of poverty, and various types of behavior have been difficult to investigate. 18 , 19 Several American studies have suggested that both household and neighborhood poverty negatively affect longer-term educational achievement and social mobility. Poor neighborhoods can have multigenerational effects on residents’ cognitive development, 20 whereas moving to a higher income neighborhood appears to generate beneficial long-term effects. 21 Population-level information from the Canadian province of Manitoba allows tracking individuals’ poverty experiences from birth to compare children raised under different levels of poverty (household and neighborhood) with those experiencing more advantageous circumstances. By using these data, the following questions were examined: How are household and neighborhood-level poverty associated with early childhood outcomes (school readiness, externalizing mental health, asthma, injuries) differently? To what extent is transitioning out of (neighborhood and/or household) poverty associated with these outcomes? Does the timing of that move matter? Identifying how level of poverty at birth and the duration of poverty are linked to a range of early childhood outcomes can provide insight into who might benefit most from support and when that support should be provided.

Manitoba is reasonably representative of Canada as a whole, generally ranking in the midrange of a series of indicators of health status and health care expenditures. 22 , 23 In 2011, the provincial population was 1.2 million, with more than half ( n = 730 018) living in Winnipeg, Canada’s eighth largest metropolitan area. 24 Located near Canada’s geographic center, Manitoba has a comparatively large aboriginal population (14%). 25 Manitobans score slightly below the national average on standardized educational tests administered internationally (although Canadians do somewhat better than Americans). 26 School readiness testing has shown ∼30% of Manitoba’s 5-year-olds to be vulnerable in at least 1 area of development; this exceeded the Canadian average of 26%. 27  

We used administrative data in the Population Research Data Repository housed at the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy. A scrambled personal health number allowed linking across multiple deidentified data sets; information on linkage methods, confidentiality and privacy, and validity is reviewed elsewhere. 28 , 29 Data from the population registry are combined with individual-level information from hospital discharge abstracts (containing International Classification of Diseases [ICD] diagnosis codes; International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification [ICD-9-CM] codes before April 1, 2004, and International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Canada [ICD-10-CA] codes after April 1, 2004), physician visits (ICD-9-CM codes), the Early Development Instrument, Families First screens (filled in during routine home visits by Public Health Nurses for most births and include information on the mother’s social circumstances), children in out-of-home care and families receiving protection services by Child and Family Services, monthly receipt of Employment and Income Assistance data (basically welfare), and the Canadian Census (neighborhood-level median income).

This study was approved by the University of Manitoba Health Research Ethics Board (H2016:182) and the Health Information Privacy Commission at Manitoba Health, Seniors and Active Living (2016/2017-09). Using deidentified administrative data files did not require participants’ informed consent.

Household poverty at birth is defined as a mother receiving Employment and Income Assistance (analogous to welfare) in the month of birth. Such assistance provides help to Manitobans having no other way to support themselves or their families. 30 Living in a neighborhood with median income in the lowest quintile specifies neighborhood poverty. Neighborhoods have been ranked from 1 (lowest income) to 5 (highest income); created separately for rural and urban Manitoba, quintiles are based on census dissemination areas including ∼400 individuals. 31  

Poverty at birth is described by using 4 categories: (1) both household and neighborhood poverty (receiving welfare and resided in the lowest income quintile neighborhood), (2) just household poverty (receiving welfare but resided in neighborhoods having higher median incomes: quintiles 2 through 5), (3) just neighborhood poverty (resided in the poorest neighborhoods but did not receive welfare), and (4) no poverty (living in neighborhoods having higher median incomes and not receiving welfare).

Because performance on the Early Development Instrument (generally administered biannually) is a primary outcome, cohort selection began with all children enrolled in kindergarten the year each Early Development Instrument was administered: 2005–2006, 2006–2007, 2008–2009, 2010–2011, 2012–2013, and 2014–2015. Of these 84 598 students, 65 895 (77.9%) had completed the Instrument. To ensure the completeness of early childhood information, we excluded children not living in Manitoba from birth to age 5, those missing key variables, and those not completing a Families First screen. The final cohort consisted of 46 589 children, of whom 11 619 (24.9%) were born in poverty ( Supplemental Fig 1 ).

We looked at school readiness and 4 other outcomes before age 5: placed in out-of-home care, externalizing mental conditions diagnosis, asthma diagnosis, and hospitalization for injury. The Early Development Instrument is used to assess each of 5 developmental domains when a child has enrolled in kindergarten: physical health and well-being, social competence, emotional maturity, language and cognitive development, and communication skills and general knowledge. This index has acceptable interrater reliability and high internal consistency. 32 A child is considered not ready for school if scoring in the lowest 10th percentile according to national norms in 1 or more developmental areas. 32 , 33  

Children in care have been removed from their original families because authorities have deemed their family unable or unfit to look after them properly. Placement in care of Child and Family Services for at least 1 day before age 5 indicated “placed in out-of-home care.” Externalizing mental conditions, asthma, and hospitalization for injuries are key childhood conditions defined by using ICD codes (see Supplemental Table 6 ). 15  

Trajectories into and out of different levels of poverty are examined before age 5, with changes classified as occurring before or after age 2. We defined 3 levels of poverty: household poverty, neighborhood poverty (but not household poverty), and no poverty. Four trajectories are examined: (1) born into household poverty and transitioned out of poverty; (2) born into neighborhood poverty and moved out of poverty; (3) not born into poverty and moved into neighborhood poverty; and (4) not born into poverty and transitioned into household poverty. Individuals not falling into 1 of the 4 trajectories were excluded. Supplemental Figure 2 presents these trajectories.

Early childhood outcomes have been associated with both maternal and child characteristics. 34 We examined a series of maternal characteristics during pregnancy: whether she changed residence, received services from Child and Family Services, used drugs or alcohol, smoked, had a mood or anxiety disorder, or received inadequate prenatal care. A change in 6-digit postal code defined change of residence. The attention of Child and Family Services during pregnancy could mean several things: adolescent mothers may access expectant parent services during pregnancy; for older mothers, services could include protection or support intended to resolve family matters, including counseling, guidance, education, and emergency shelter services. 35 , 36 The Families First screen provided information on drug and/or alcohol use and on smoking during pregnancy. The parental care utilization index measures adequacy of care by examining child’s gestational age, trimester of first prenatal care, and total number of prenatal visits during pregnancy. 37  

Several maternal variables before and at the child’s birth were also included: education (did not graduate from high school, graduated from high school), age at first birth (<20, 20–29, 30+), and neighborhood location. Maternal education from the Families First screen is missing for ∼14% of mothers. Location is specified as urban (any neighborhood in Winnipeg or Brandon) or rural (other Manitoba neighborhood). The Families First screen provided information on social isolation and lone parent status. Characteristics of the child at birth include the following: birth order (1, 2, 3+), sex (male or female), and whether the child was of low birth weight (<2500 g) or preterm (<27 weeks). The Supplemental Information present relevant ICD codes.

We first compared characteristics of children born into poverty and those not born into poverty using χ 2 tests. Next, we examined the odds of each outcome for individuals in the 4 groups of poverty (born into household and neighborhood poverty, born into household poverty only, born into neighborhood poverty only, and not born in poverty) using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. The adjusted models include all maternal and child covariates before and at the birth of the child.

Odds of school readiness were first compared between children moving out of different levels of poverty and children remaining in poverty in their first 5 years. We then looked at the odds of school readiness for children transitioning into different levels of poverty and those for children remaining out of poverty. Finally, the relationships between trajectories of poverty and other childhood outcomes between birth and age 5 were examined. Data management, programming, and analyses were performed by using SAS version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc, Cary, NC). 38  

Of the 46 589 children in the cohort, 11 619 (24.9%) were born in poverty. Of those born in poverty, 2951 (25.4%) experienced both types of poverty, 2766 (23.8%) only household poverty, and 5902 (50.8%) only neighborhood poverty. Table 1 highlights the association of poverty with events suggesting family difficulties. The combination of household and neighborhood poverty generated the strongest relationships with residential mobility, receiving services from Child and Family Services, and having inadequate prenatal care. Drug and/or alcohol use, smoking, low maternal education, and social isolation were highest among mothers experiencing household poverty (with or without neighborhood poverty).

Children Born Into Different Levels of Poverty ( n = 46 589)

CFS, Child and Family Services.

Significantly (at P < .05) different from Group 2.

Children born into both household and neighborhood poverty had the highest percentage of placement in out-of-home care ( Table 2 and Supplemental Table 7 ). The “household and neighborhood poverty” and “household poverty only” categories differed only slightly for school readiness and problems with mental and physical health. Children experiencing “neighborhood poverty only” showed frequencies on the indicated measures between their counterparts born into household poverty and those not born into poverty. Children with low family income showed more externalizing behavior. 19  

Early Childhood Outcomes by Different Levels of Poverty at Birth ( n = 46 589)

EDI, early development instrument.

Children born in poverty (household and/or neighborhood) were less likely to be ready for school than those not born poor ( Table 2 ). Two levels of poverty (household and neighborhood) led to the highest rates of placement in out-of-home care (24.2%); rates for household poverty (17.4%) were considerably greater than those for neighborhood poverty (3.1%). Household poverty was associated with higher odds of externalizing mental conditions and asthma, but neighborhood poverty was not. Finally, children born into both household and neighborhood poverty were more likely to be hospitalized for an injury (2.1%) than their more affluent counterparts (0.6%) ( Table 2 ).

In Table 3 , we summarize the odds of each outcome for individuals in the 4 groups of poverty (born into household and neighborhood poverty, born into household poverty only, born into neighborhood poverty only, and not born in poverty) using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression models. Supplemental Tables 8 through 10 present details on school readiness.

Odds Ratios for School Readiness for Children Born Into Poverty, by Trajectories of Type of Poverty

CFS, Child and Family Services; CI, confidence interval; EDI, early development instrument; OR, odds ratio.

Adjusted for maternal covariates during pregnancy (moved, received services from CFS, mood and anxiety disorders, drug and/or alcohol use, smoking, prenatal care use), maternal covariates at the index date (education, social isolation, lone parent, age, neighborhood location), and child covariates at birth (birth order, sex, birth wt, gestational age).

No change in poverty level and/or type before age 5.

Change in poverty level and/or type between birth and age 2.

P < .05.

Change in poverty level and/or type between age 2 and age 5.

The relationship between transitioning into and out of different levels of poverty before age 5 and school readiness builds on a simplified cohort. This cohort included only children who either did not change poverty level or changed poverty once before age 5 ( n = 42 170). Most of those born into household poverty remained in such poverty to age 5 (84.7%). Only 45.2% of children born in neighborhood poverty remained there to this age; over 90.0% of children not born in poverty stayed out of poverty to age 5. Supplemental Tables 11 and 12 provide detailed information.

For children born in household poverty, transitions out of poverty were associated with a lower probability of not being ready for school (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.58 for transitions before age 2; aOR = 0.75 for those after age 2) ( Table 4 ). School readiness was significantly higher only if children left neighborhood poverty before age 2 (aOR = 0.73). Among children born outside of poverty, moving into neighborhood poverty before age 2 was associated with a greater likelihood of not being ready for school (aOR = 1.30); moving into household poverty either before or after age 2 was associated with not being ready (aORs = 1.71 and 1.68, respectively). Overall, household poverty was linked with worse outcomes; changes before age 2 reveal the largest differences. Supplemental Tables 13 and 14 provide additional statistics.

Odds Ratios for Not Being Ready For School, Trajectories by Type of Poverty

Adjusted for maternal covariates during pregnancy (moved, received services from CFS, mood and anxiety disorders, drug and/or alcohol use, smoking, prenatal care use), maternal covariates at the index date (education, social isolation, lone parent, age, neighborhood location), and child covariates at birth (birth order, sex, birth wt, gestational age). These variables are used for adjustment in all tables.

Table 5 presents relationships between type of poverty and outcomes before age 5. Placement in out-of-home care revealed dramatic differences (from 23.9% to 0.2% across these categories). Placement rates were highest among children remaining in household poverty and those living in such poverty before age 2. Asthma diagnoses ranged markedly (from 30.5% to 18.1%). Externalizing mental health conditions varied substantially but rather irregularly, with injury hospitalization rates low among all groups.

Proportion of Population With Childhood Outcomes Before Age 5, by Trajectories and Type of Poverty

We have considered household and neighborhood poverty from several perspectives. Examining the length of exposure among both children transitioning out of poverty and those transitioning into poverty goes beyond most studies. Children growing up in poverty must deal with a home environment less supportive of school readiness and overall health than those leaving poverty early in life. Moreover, mothers transitioning out of poverty when the child was >2 showed fewer risk factors than those leaving when the child was older. The number of years of childhood poverty and the lack of school readiness are clearly linked. The association of different types of poverty with various outcomes (school readiness, placement in out-of-home care, and indicators of physical and mental health) has emphasized the importance of household poverty.

Adjustment for other factors (themselves linked to poverty) weakens the relationships between poverty and the various outcomes. Household poverty remained a statistically significant predictor after controlling for numerous covariates (although odds ratios were typically reduced). After adjustments, neighborhood poverty was generally less predictive of childhood mental health, asthma, and hospitalization for injuries.

Our information provides a baseline for additional research. For example, educational performance (grade 3) and our childhood measures can help assess changes by age 10. More generally, having relevant outcomes at several developmental stages aids in judging the significance of early life conditions and events. Not only poverty but such “shocks” as prenatal and early life maternal stress might well affect adolescent and adult outcomes. 39 Large databases can operationalize such characteristics as social isolation, death of a close relative, domestic violence, and maternal drug and/or alcohol use. Our findings also support Bronfenbrenner’s 40 ecological systems theory postulating mother-child interactions to be strong predictors of child development; constructive mother-child bonds are more difficult for mothers having drug or alcohol problems. Overcoming such factors among the disadvantaged may be more difficult than among the more affluent, and interventions to increase human capital might prove more valuable among the poor. Information on several such programs (nurse visiting, maternal income supplements) are being incorporated into Manitoba analyses. 34  

This article’s limitations include those associated with observational studies. Receipt of welfare was used to define household poverty because access to information on household income is lacking. Our definition may underestimate such poverty. Canada has no official poverty line; however, households having incomes less than half of the median household income (for a family of a given size) are considered low income. 41 Manitoba Employment and Income Assistance (and other benefits) generally pay less than this amount. Manitoba’s average total income of households was below the Canadian national average in 2015 (Manitoba $85 373; Canada $92 764). 42 The Canadian Income Survey data suggested that Manitoba’s median employment income was consistently lower than the Canadian national median from 2012 to 2015. 43 In 2015, Manitoba’s prevalence of low income based on the low-income cutoff after tax was 9.9%, which was slightly higher than the national prevalence (9.2%). 42 Additionally, although children are clustered within neighborhoods, we did not account for this in our analysis (ie, use a multilevel model). This was done because in many cases, children lived in >1 neighborhood between birth and age 5, with the amount of time spent in each neighborhood varying by child, children would often belong in several clusters over time.

Because the poverty variable could not be manipulated in experimental or quasi-experimental fashion, causality cannot be ascertained. Selective movement out of poverty by less challenged families (or into poverty by their more challenged counterparts) might be responsible for the findings. Moreover, the range of our income measures is limited. Transition out of poverty (whether household or neighborhood) is unlikely to be associated with substantial income changes. Movement out of the lowest income quintile (defining neighborhood poverty) is primarily to quintile 2 (43.7%) and quintile 3 (23.4%) neighborhoods.

Finally, the absolute and relative importance of poverty in Canada, compared with in the United States, is intriguing. Neighborhood variation and the role of neighborhood characteristics appear greater in the United States. 44 Canada’s safety net is more extensive than those in the United States and the United Kingdom. 45 , 46 Seven-country comparisons have noted steep American socioeconomic status gradients along several dimensions of well-being (including cognitive and socioemotional). 47 More detailed study of these gradients might draw on our analyses.

Children growing up in poverty must deal with more risk factors for poor outcomes than those never experiencing poverty or experiencing poverty for a short time. Children born into household poverty have much worse early outcomes than those born into neighborhood poverty. Support for children whose families are receiving welfare to transition out of poverty when the child is young could yield the greatest benefit.

Dr Roos conceptualized and designed the study, drafted the initial manuscript, and had full access to all the data in the study; Dr Wall-Wieler designed the study, conducted the data analyses, drafted the initial manuscript, and had full access to all the data in the study; Ms Lee drafted the initial manuscript; and all authors reviewed and revised the manuscript and approved the final manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

FUNDING: This work was supported by a Graduate Enhancement of Tri-Council Stipend from the University of Manitoba. Data used in this study are from the Population Health Research Data Repository housed at the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, University of Manitoba, and were derived from data provided by Manitoba Health, Seniors, and Active Living, Manitoba Families, and Healthy Child Manitoba under project 2013/2014-04. The results and conclusions are those of the authors and no official endorsement by the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy, Manitoba Health, Seniors and Active Living or other data providers is intended or should be inferred.

COMPANION PAPER: A companion to this article can be found online at www.pediatrics.org/cgi/doi/10.1542/peds.2019-0195 .

In recognition of the high proportion of the children in care being of First Nations descent, the larger program of research using Child and Family Services data has been presented to several general and First Nations audiences.

adjusted odds ratio

International Classification of Diseases

International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification

International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Canada

Competing Interests

Supplementary data.

Advertising Disclaimer »

Citing articles via

Email alerts.

Affiliations

• Editorial Board
• Editorial Policies
• Journal Blogs
• Pediatrics On Call
• Online ISSN 1098-4275
• Print ISSN 0031-4005
• Pediatrics Open Science
• Hospital Pediatrics
• Pediatrics in Review
• AAP Grand Rounds
• Latest News
• Pediatric Care Online
• Red Book Online
• Pediatric Patient Education
• AAP Toolkits
• AAP Pediatric Coding Newsletter

First 1,000 Days Knowledge Center

Institutions/librarians, group practices, licensing/permissions, integrations, advertising.

• Privacy Statement | Accessibility Statement | Terms of Use | Support Center | Contact Us
• © Copyright American Academy of Pediatrics

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Children Living in Poverty and Education Essay

Poverty is one of the critical factors that determine children’s possibility for education. Despite the intention to promote knowledge as a primary universal human right, many poor countries do not provide their young populations with the necessary opportunities. A lack of funding, no classrooms, poorly trained teachers, and the shortage of learning materials are the barriers to education (Rueckert). As a result, children remain uneducated, cannot find good jobs, and become beggars, spoiling the image of a healthy and satisfied nation. Like broken and hardly repairable things, children should be re-used in new roles that could bring benefits and profits.

In many developed countries, children have to study and use various simulations to check their knowledge. For example, teachers offer them to take tests, develop improvement plans, and analyze interventions, relying on fictional scenarios. Dignified children should be able to work with “real” subjects, conduct experiments, and check if their practical application of knowledge is correct. There is no need to do harm to animals that become good pets for families or spend millions of dollars to invent a new simulation device. The idea to use children from poor families who live in developing countries as “lab rats” or “experiments” is the best solution that can be beneficial for educators, students, and those children who do not go to school.

In fact, the use of children for educational purposes is characterized by a number of logical advantages. First, becoming a subject of the study is a unique opportunity for a poor child to visit a classroom, observe how other students are educated, and even learn something new. Secondly, there are usually good conditions in schools and colleges, including clean and warm rooms. Thirdly, children as significant research subjects are fed and treated well to promote their functionality and long-term use. Finally, all these services and opportunities remain free for children, and their parents should not spend a dollar from their family budget.

At the same time, some lucky participants may not be satisfied with such education options because of the possibility of dying during a surgery performed by a student or being injured during another management intervention. Therefore, families are interested in the improvements of the government system and discovering new sources of funding. In addition, developed countries could share their personnel and develop altruistic strategies to support poor families. However, during the last several decades, no evident changes have been observed in India, Mexico, and many African countries (Rueckert). It is hard to believe that some decisions can be made quickly and effectively. The number of uneducated children continues increasing, challenging the expected wealth and prosperity of the nation.

In general, when children from low-income families cannot be educated, other ways to promote their contributions must be identified. It is hard to imagine another opportunity for a poor child to get into the classroom and even learn the material except being introduced as a research subject. Many children have to work with expensive equipment to demonstrate how they should apply theories and strategies in real life. Their mistakes are not evaluated properly, and the necessity to move from fictional situations to real tasks is never easy. The presence of real subjects like children is a benefit for the future of the nation and a free education option for poor families to learn something new and even use it if their children are able to survive such practice.

Rueckert, Phineas. “ 10 Barriers to Education That Children Living in Poverty Face. ” Global Citizen . 2019. Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, May 19). Children Living in Poverty and Education. https://ivypanda.com/essays/children-living-in-poverty-and-education/

"Children Living in Poverty and Education." IvyPanda , 19 May 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/children-living-in-poverty-and-education/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Children Living in Poverty and Education'. 19 May.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Children Living in Poverty and Education." May 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/children-living-in-poverty-and-education/.

1. IvyPanda . "Children Living in Poverty and Education." May 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/children-living-in-poverty-and-education/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Children Living in Poverty and Education." May 19, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/children-living-in-poverty-and-education/.

• Wealthy & Educated vs. Poor & Uneducated Americans on Consumerism
• Education: What Role Does It Play in a Person’s Life?
• Is University Education Necessary for Success?
• Disability Simulations and Their Limitations
• Life in School: Interview Report and Analysis
• Epistemic Superiority Over Computer Simulations
• Liberal, Formal, and Natural Education
• The Achievement of Desire
• Fictional Stories for the Curriculum
• Plato’s "Leaving the Cave"
• The Problems English Teachers Face in Riyadh Public Primary Schools
• Education in Non-formal Settings
• Female Sports Education Overview and Analysis
• The Parent-Involvement Research
• Academic Writing for Non-Native Speakers of English

Essay on Poverty for Children and Students

Table of Contents

Essay on Poverty: Poverty is defined as the financial condition of a person, insufficient to sustain the vital needs of his/her own family. Any person of family which is unable to provide a square meal to the members or educate its children for the want of money is termed as poor and suffering from poverty. It is curse to the society and restricts the economical and social growth of a nation. Poverty eradication in a highly populous country as India could be a herculean task; though, it could be achieved through will power of the government and society. In the world scenario, poverty is great concern in the developing, under developed and the third world nations. Poverty also results in several diseases, law and order situations and very low standard of living.

Fill Out the Form for Expert Academic Guidance!

Please indicate your interest Live Classes Books Test Series Self Learning

Verify OTP Code (required)

I agree to the terms and conditions and privacy policy .

Fill complete details

Target Exam ---

Long and Short Essay on Poverty in English

We have provided below various essay on poverty in order to help students.

Now-a-days, essays or paragraphs writing are common strategy followed by the teachers in the schools and colleges in order to enhance the skill and knowledge of students about any topic.

All the poverty essay are written using very simple words under various words limit according to the need and requirement of students.

They can select any of the essays given below according to their need and requirement in the class, any competition or exam.

Poverty Essay 1 (100 words)

Poverty is the state for any person of being extremely poor. It is the extreme situation when a person feels lack of essential items required to continue the life such as shelter, adequate food, clothing, medicines, etc. Some of the common reasons of poverty are like overpopulation, lethal and epidemic diseases, natural disasters, low agricultural output, lack of employment, casteism in country, illiteracy, gender inequality, environmental problems, changing trends of economy in the country, lack of proper education, untouchability, limited or inadequate access of people to their rights, political violence, organized crime, corruption, lack of motivation, idleness, old social beliefs, etc. Poverty in India can be reduced by following effective solutions however needs individual efforts of all the citizens.

Poverty Essay 2 (150 words)

We can define poverty as the lack of food, proper shelter, clothing, medicines, education, and equal human rights. Poverty forces a person to remain hungry, without shelter, without clothes, education and proper rights. There are various causes of poverty in the country however solutions too but because of the lack of proper unity among Indian citizens to follow solutions, poverty is increasing badly day by day. Spread of epidemic diseases in any country is the reason of poverty as poor people cannot take care of their health and hygienic condition.

Poverty makes people unable to go to doctor, to go to school, how to read, to speak properly, to eat three times meal, to wear needed clothes, to purchase own house, to get paid properly for job, etc. Poverty forces a person to go towards illness as they drink unclean water, lives at dirty places, and eat improper meal. Poverty causes powerlessness and lack of freedom.

Poverty Essay 3 (200 words)

Poverty is just like a condition of slave when a person becomes unable to do anything according to his/her wish. It has many faces which changes according to the person, place and time. It can be described in many ways a person feel it or live it. Poverty is a situation which no one wants to live however has to carry it by custom, nature, natural disaster, or lack of proper education. The person lives it, generally wants to escape. Poverty is a call to action to the poor people to earn enough money to eat, have access to education, get adequate shelter, wear needed clothes, and protection from the social and political violence.

It is an invisible problem which affects a person and his/her social life very badly in many ways. Poverty is completely preventable problem however there are many reasons which carry and continue it from the past time. Poverty keeps a person lack of freedom, mental well-being, physical well-being, and security. It is very necessary for everyone to work jointly in order to remove poverty from the country and world to bring proper physical health, mental health, complete literacy, home for everyone, and other needed things to live a simple life.

Poverty Essay 4 (250 words)

Poverty is a human condition which brings despair, grief and pain in the human life. Poverty is the lack of money and all the things required to live a life in proper manner. Poverty makes a child unable to enter to the school in childhood and lives his/her childhood in an unhappy family. Poverty is the lack of few rupees to arrange bread and butter of two times daily, buy text books for kids, grief of parents responsible for the care of children, etc. We can define poverty in many ways. It is very common to see poverty in India because most people here cannot fulfill their basic necessities of the life. A huge percentage of population here is uneducated, hungry and without home and clothe. It is the main reason of the poor Indian economy. Because of the poverty, around half population in India is living a miserable life.

Poverty creates a situation in which people fail to get sufficient income so they cannot purchase necessary things. A poor man lives his/her life without any command over basic needs such as two times food, clean drinking water, clothing, house, proper education, etc. People who fail to maintain the minimum standard of living such as consumption and nutrition required for existence. There are various reasons of poverty in India however mal distribution of national income is also a reason. Low income group people are relatively poorer than the high income group. Children of the poor family never get chance of proper schooling, proper nutrition and happy childhood. The most important reasons of the poverty are illiteracy, corruption, growing population, poor agriculture, gap between poor and rich, etc.

Poverty Essay 5 (300 words)

Poverty represents poor quality of life, illiteracy, malnutrition, lack of basic needs, low human resource development, etc. It is a biggest challenge to the developing country especially in India. It is a phenomenon in which a section of people in the society cannot fulfill their basic necessities of life. It has seen some decline in the poverty level in the last five years (26.1% in 1999-2000 from 35.97% in 1993-94). It has also declined at state level such as in Orissa it has been declined to 47.15% from 48.56%, in Madhya Pradesh 37.43% from 43.52%, in UP 31.15% from 40.85%, and in West Bengal 27.02% from 35.66%. Instead of some decline in the poverty in India it is not the matter of happiness because the Indian BPL is still very large number (26 crore).

Poverty in India can be eradicated by the use of some effective programmes, however need a joint effort by everyone not by the government only. Government of India should make some effective strategies aiming to develop poor social sector through key components like primary education, population control, family welfare, job creation, etc especially in the rural areas.

What are Effects of Poverty

Some of the effects of poverty are like:

• Illiteracy: poverty makes people unable to get proper education because of the lack of money.
• Nutrition and diet: poverty causes insufficient availability of diet and inadequate nutrition which brings lots of lethal diseases and deficiency diseases.
• Child labor: it gives rise to the huge level illiteracy as the future of the country gets involved in the child labor at very low cost in their early age.
• Unemployment: unemployment causes poverty as it creates the lack of money which affects people’s daily life. It forces people to live unfulfilled life against their will.
• Social tensions: it creates social tension due to the income disparity between rich and poor.
• Housing problems: it creates the bad condition for people to live without home on the footpath, roadside, other open places, many members in one room, etc.
• Diseases: it gives rise to the various epidemic diseases as people with lack of money cannot maintain proper hygiene and sanitation. Also they cannot afford a doctor for the proper treatment of any disease.
• Feminization of poverty: poverty affects women’s life to a great extent because of the gender-inequality and keeps them deprived of the proper-diet, nutrition, medicines and treatment facility.

Poverty Essay 6 (400 words)

Introduction

Poverty is a situation in which people remain deprived of basic necessities of life such as inadequacy of food, clothes, and shelter. Most of the people in India cannot get their two times meal properly, sleep at roadside and wear dirty and old clothes. They do not get proper and healthy nutrition, medicines, and other necessary things. Poverty in the urban India is increasing because of the increase in urban population as people from rural areas like to migrate to the cities and towns to get employment or do some financial activity. The income of around 8 crore urban people is below poverty line and 4.5 crore urban people is on borderline of poverty level. A huge number of people live in slum become illiterate. In spite of some initiatives there is no any satisfactory results shown regarding reduction of poverty.

Causes of Poverty

The main causes of poverty in India are growing population, poor agriculture, corruption, old customs, huge gap between poor and rich people, unemployment, illiteracy, epidemic diseases, etc. A huge percentage of people in India depend on agriculture which is poor and cause poverty. Generally people face shortage of food because of poor agriculture and unemployment. Ever growing population is also the reason of poverty in India. More population means more food, money and houses. In the lack of basic facilities, poverty grows more rapidly. Becoming extra rich and extra poor creates a huge widening gap between the rich and the poor people. Rich people are growing richer and poor people are growing poorer which creates an economic gap between the two.

Effects of Poverty

Poverty affects people’s life in many ways. There are various effects of poverty such as illiteracy, poor diet and nutrition, child labor, poor housing, poor life style, unemployment, poor hygiene, feminization of poverty, etc. Poor people cannot arrange a healthy diet, maintain good life style, home, nice clothes, proper education, etc because of the lack of money which creates a huge difference between rich and poor. This difference leads to the undeveloped country. Poverty forces small children to do work at low cost and help their family financially instead of going to the school.

Solutions to Eradicate Poverty

It is very necessary to solve the problem of poverty on urgent basis for the goodness of humanity on this planet. Some of the solutions that can play great role in solving the problem of poverty are:

• Farmers should get proper and required facilities for good agriculture as well as to make it profitable.
• Adult people who are illiterate should be given required training for the betterment of life.
• Family planning should be followed by the people in order to check the ever-rising population and thus poverty.
• Corruption should be ended all over the world to reduce the poverty.
• Each and every child should go to the school and take proper education.
• There should be ways of employment where people of all categories can work together.

Poverty is not only the problem of a person however it is a national problem. It must be solved on urgent basis by implementing some effective solutions. Variety of steps has been taken by the government to reduce poverty however no clear results are seen. Eradication of poverty is necessary for the sustainable and inclusive growth of people, economy, society and country. Eradication of poverty can be done effectively by the unite effort of each and every person.

Related Information:

Slogans on Poverty

Paragraph on Poverty

Essay on Beggars

Essay on Food Waste

Related content

Talk to our academic expert!

Language --- English Hindi Marathi Tamil Telugu Malayalam

Get access to free Mock Test and Master Class

Register to Get Free Mock Test and Study Material

Offer Ends in 5:00

Home — Essay Samples — Social Issues — Poverty in America — Life in Poverty: Defying the Odds

Life in Poverty: Defying The Odds

• Categories: Child Poverty Poverty in America

About this sample

Words: 438 |

Published: Jan 25, 2024

Words: 438 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Table of contents

Defying the odds, works cited.

• ASHBERY, JOHN. "My Philosophy Of Life". Midwest Studies In Philosophy 33.1 (2009): 1-2. Web.
• Kass, Leon. Life, Liberty, And The Defense Of Dignity. 1st ed. San Francisco: Encounter Books, 2002. Print.

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Heisenberg

Verified writer

• Expert in: Social Issues

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 730 words

1 pages / 681 words

1 pages / 477 words

2 pages / 719 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Poverty in America

Dorothy Allison's essay "A Question of Class" delves into the complexities of social class and its impact on individuals' lives. The essay explores the ways in which class influences one's identity, opportunities, and [...]

Michael Patrick MacDonald’s memoir, All Souls, provides a poignant and raw account of growing up in South Boston during the 1970s and 1980s. The book explores themes of poverty, violence, and racism, as well as the impact of [...]

Homelessness is a pressing issue that affects millions of individuals worldwide. It is a complex problem that arises from a variety of factors, including economic hardship, lack of affordable housing, mental illness, substance [...]

Poverty is a complex and pervasive issue that affects millions of individuals worldwide, with far-reaching implications for society at large. From a structural functionalist perspective, poverty is not simply the result of [...]

The specific issue that I am interested in focusing on is low income families and poverty in schools. I chose these topics because I believe that the issue is that only some kids in schools have access to new and up-to-date [...]

At the turn of the 19th century, a Danish immigrant by the name of Jacob Riis set out to change New York City’s slums. Jacob, born in Denmark in the year 1849, emigrated to America when he was 21, carrying little money in his [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free