Social Policy in the Eyes of Social Workers

In one large survey of 500 American adolescent girls (ages 9-16), about 70% believed magazine pictures influenced their idea of what is to be considered an ideal body shape, and 47% said this resulted in them desiring to lose weight (Clay 2005). Even though “thinness sells,” the effects of portraying ultra-thin models on covers, billboards, and every other media source can be damaging. Is America going to realize this and do something about it?

Why Is This Important?

The teenage years are a crucial time in one’s development. Things that happen during this time can have profound effects in the future. There is a “pronounced and progressive drop in girls’ self-esteem from 12 to 17 years of age. In contrast, boys’ self-esteem was much more stable, showing only a slight and short-lived decline from 14 to 16 years. Thus, comparatively, Western teenage girls appear to suffer from falling self-esteem,” (2005). Portraying ultra-thin models across all forms of media and advertisements can be damaging. This issue can affect anyone, but females are the primary victims. This society is oppressive to women in numerous ways, and lowering body image and self-esteem is not going to help girls fight through these oppressive qualities of the culture; instead it will prolong them.

In a study it was found that viewing ultra-thin models led to decreases in both body satisfaction and self-esteem in girls aged 11-16. The changes in their self-esteem were fully mediated by changes in their body satisfaction (2005). This is empirical data proving the negative affects of viewing models that have unattainable bodies. Having low self-esteem and a negative body image can lead to numerous problems, especially for girls at such a vulnerable age. Eating disorders are a common issue resulting from poor body satisfaction, and models are often victims of these disorders since they have to try and maintain incredibly thin figures to continue working. On top of that, just having low self-esteem can keep one from pursuing goals outside of body image related ones. When one is so unsatisfied with her body, she will spend a lot of time worrying about the way she looks and trying to figure out ways to change herself. In a culture so heavily controlled by beauty and attractiveness, what could be done?

What Can and Should Be Done

In 2015, France joined Israel, Spain, and Italy and started to ban excessively skinny models from working in the fashion industry. This bill requires models to have a medical certificate saying that he or she has a healthy BMI. Also, any fashion agency that is found using models with a BMI under 18 could face up to six months in jail and a fine of 75,000 euros (Stampler, 2015). This bill was put in place to discourage unhealthy behaviors by models and also to hopefully spread the idea to audiences, which includes young girls, that ultra-thin is not the ideal, and hopefully get the idea across that there is no standard weight or size that is considered beautiful. By fining the companies breaking this policy, it discourages them to use ultra-thin models on the idea that thinness will sell more.

America should look to these other countries as proof that policies like this can be put in place and realize it will be incredibly beneficial to the public and to the models. By discouraging ultra-thinness, models will no longer feel the need to achieve such unhealthy bodies and the public will not believe that those incredibly thin figures are the ideal bodies.

Conclusion

It has been shown through studies the dangerous effects of seeing ultra thin models in media. America should learn from these other countries’ political moves and see the importance and relevance of these issues. These policies can have a wonderful affect on females of all ages, and especially on teenage girls who are at their most vulnerable time to feel self-conscious.

Using these other countries as examples, people, especially social workers, should advocate for positive body image and make aware to everyone how influential and harmful images in the media of ultra-thin models can be. Spreading awareness can alleviate some of the issues, and then also bring it to the forefront of political action.

Executive Summary

The media has made it very easy for children to take in different messages through the content that they put out. The messages and content may not be what is best for our children and for a prosperous society.

Introduction/ Why is this important?

Children are becoming more influenced by what the media is portraying then what their parents and teachers are trying to teach them. This is known as a concept called kinderculture.  A well-known example is Barbie. Little girls see Barbie and they think that they are supposed to look like her when in reality if Barbie was a real person, she would be sick because her measurements are impossible. Creating a media culture in which children are not being cultivated by the “norms” of society through media that are not so normal is vital. In society one of the main factor that media portrays is appearances. Media tells our little girls that they should be slim with big breasts and our little boys that they have to be muscular to be attractive. It is important that the media becomes more regulated because appearance is just one aspect of the detrimental factors to children and society.

Facts

• 70% believe encouraging the media and advertisers to use more average sized people in their advertising campaigns would reduce or prevent eating disorders.
• The incidence of bulimia in 10-39 year old women TRIPLED between 1988 and 1993
• Over one-half of teenage girls and nearly one-third of teenage boys use unhealthy weight control behaviors such as skipping meals, fasting, smoking cigarettes, vomiting, and taking laxatives

What can be done?

The Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act was passed in 2005. This policy said that “Stations may be penalized $325,000 for airing “patently offensive” content (sexual or excretory words) between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m”. This policy needs to be reformed because there are a couple issues with it. One thing that needs to be changed is the fine amount. The big corporations like google for example will not be fazed by losing that amount of money. They make so much that they will air whatever, they want and pay the fine without a problem. The second thing that needs to done is a part that adds offensive messages. It is one thing to say that commercials can’t talk about the female’s breast, but showing a naked woman on a beer commercial is just as offensive.

You can help!

• Advocate for this policy to be reformed
• Educate your children through media literacy workshops which teach them how to evaluate and analyze media so they won’t become victims of it.

Conclusion

Children are becoming more familiar with social media and how to work the internet. Once they’re on the internet, they can just about find anything by typing it in the search engine. Also, a quick press of a button on the television remote could be the difference between what a child has been taught and what they are beginning to learn. It is apparent that media has a big influence on society as a whole, but the change can start with our children.

Approximately 2.2 million people in our country are currently incarcerated. Of these people, about 100,000 are currently being held in solitary confinement (Wagner, 2016).

Solitary confinement is the isolation of an inmate from human contact that is used as a form of punishment. Solitary confinement has been a controversial method used in prisons around the country due to the damaging affects it can have to prisoners. Spending 23 hours in complete isolation can have devastating effects on people whose crimes that are not worthy of that punishment. People currently serving for petty crimes and even juveniles can also be subjected to solitary confinement. This is a topic that is important because the U.S currently spends $80 billion dollars on keeping people incarcerated (Wagner, 2016). This is money that could be invested in other important areas, such as funding higher education.

Inmates in solitary confinement are not treated as humans and are deprived of the communication skills that they will need to succeed once they are finished serving their sentence. By damaging their mental health and communication skills and forcing them into isolation, they are left more vulnerable to falling back into the system that was never working for them in the first place. This in return keeps people incarcerated and forces the country to waste even more money and resources. Prison is supposed to be a place of correction where people pay their debt to society, not where they should come to leave in worse shape than where they started.

With this, President Obama has recently ordered an executive order which would ban solitary confinement for juveniles as well as inmates who have committed low level infractions. This order will affect 10,000 prisoners all over the country (Wagner, 2016). Solitary confinement is a counter-productive, resource draining strategy. With the spread of awareness as well as the movement of more legislation, solitary confinement could ultimately be banned and would lower the U.S incarceration rate, lower the amount of money being spent on prisons, bring more money back into the economy, and would overall improve the treatment and mental health of those who are currently imprisoned.

            One in every four people will be affected by mental illness at some point in their lives. This issue is especially prevalent among college students in result of the pressures placed upon them such as the transition to adulthood, academics, and career planning. So, what is our country doing to combat this issue?

Why is it important?

Mental health is a huge issue within the United States and affects many people, not just college students. What makes this problem worse, is that these issues are often ignored and treated as insignificant. They often take a backseat to physical health conditions. Because of this, there is a stigma surrounding issues pertaining to mental health causing people to be more reluctant to seek help. In severe cases, this can even lead to suicide when people feel that their situation is hopeless. Not enough is currently being done to address this issue. It is important that the United States improve their mental health system so that more people get the help that they need and the stigma can be eliminated.

The Facts

The Mental Health Act of 2015 has been introduced to Congress in the hopes of improving the mental health system. This act will improve the enforcement of the Mental Health Parity Law, which states that health insurance must not be more restrictive or place more limitations on mental illness than it does on physical illness. This act will also increase mental health funding, increase early intervention, screening, and treatment, create more community-based care systems, and improve coordination among federal agencies working within the mental health field. It also supports anti-discriminatory policies towards individuals with mental illness who are seeking Medicaid services. Future measures will include better integration between the mental health system and the school system, and a policy to lower incarceration rates of people with mental illness.

Conclusion

As mental health issues continue to be a problem within the United States, mental health reform is crucial in helping people to get the help that they need. This act would increase the resources available to people as well as the quality of their care. More funding will be crucial in making these services available, but will be much worth it in the end. The United States must invest in not only the physical, but also in the mental and emotional well-being of its citizens. Passing this act could lead the way to getting more policies passed in the future that would improve the mental health system and create a healthier society. If you are feeling anxious or depressed, or are feeling like you may have another mental illness, do not hesitate to ask for help. Seek out family, friends, teachers, pastors, or counselors. Also, be there for others who may be experiencing these issues and encourage them to get help as well. In order to end the stigma, we have to encourage more open communication about mental health issues.

Here are some resources that may be helpful:

National Suicide Prevention Hotline: 1-800-273-8255

UIUC Counseling Center: http://counselingcenter.illinois.edu/

Find opportunities to volunteer at http://www.volunteermatch.org/search/org76428.jsp

For more information visit http://www.mentalhealth.gov/ or http://www.nami.org/

Being a working mother is difficult; she has to balance her career but and her newborn baby. It seems logical to allow working mothers who just gave birth time to recuperate before coming back to work, but employers and the government seem to believe otherwise.

Introduction

            In a country where there is a strong emphasis on work and making money, women are delaying having children due to the intense work culture. In 1970, the average woman had her first child at 21.4 years old; by 2012, it was about 26. Women seem to be waiting longer to have children because it has become harder to receive paid maternity leave, and in this economy, unpaid maternity leave can be detrimental to women and their families. In 2013, the Bureau of Labor Statistics stated that about 47 percent of women make up the country’s workforce and of that percentage, about 64 percent are mothers with children under the age of six.

Because of unpaid maternity leave, women are going back to work sooner than their bodies might allow. Paid maternity leave is a necessity because taking care of a newborn and oneself is already a full-time job.

Issues that Working Mothers Encounter

The United States is one of four countries that do not mandate paid leave for new mothers. Currently, working mothers who want paid maternity leave can apply for the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). This act states that eligible employees must work for a covered employer, have worked for the employer for at least 12 months, have at least 1,250 hours of service for the employer, and the employer must have at least 50 employees. Working mothers are then granted paid maternity leave if they satisfy all of these requirements, which means mothers who gave birth shortly after working at a new place or working at a small company or part-time will most likely not qualify for FMLA. Since 40 percent of mothers are considered the sole breadwinners in their families, no income on leave would be financially devastating.

In January, 2015, President Obama signed an executive order to mandate employers to allow six weeks of paid family leave, but six weeks is not enough for a women’s body to heal after childbirth. A study by Janis M. Miller and colleagues in 2015 revealed that women still showed tears in the pelvic muscle and fractures in the pubic bone seven months after childbirth. These physical problems can also increase risk for depression in new mothers. Women need more time to heal physically and mentally after childbirth; some doctors and psychologists even recommend that women take a year off to fully recover.

 Conclusion

With society’s pressures for women to work and raise a family, the government and employers should be more considerate of working mothers’ needs. To keep the economy thriving for future generations, women need more resources and accommodations regarding paid leave. President Obama once said that paid leave is a worker’s right, not a privilege, so people should write to the state capitol, advocate, and support working mothers with other resources in the meantime.

 

More on FMLA: http://www.dol.gov/whd/fmla/

Support: https://www.apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-database/2014/07/16/11/05/support-for-paid-sick-leave-and-family-leave-policies

Hear other working mothers’ stories: http://www.momsrising.org/issues_and_resources/maternity

Recently, I watched a documentary entitled Hungry for Change. This film condemns commercially produced foods, and features journalist Michael Pollan who warns us of the effects of consuming what he refers to as “food-like products.” Although the film mainly reiterates the importance of diet and physical health, it briefly touches upon the association between nutrient intake and cognition. According to Ralph DiLeone- Associate Professor of Psychiatry and Neurobiology at Yale University- “What we eat really affects our brain, our behavior, our neural circuits, and our health in many ways.”  The National Institutes of Health more specifically demonstrates the correlation between nutritional intake and learning:

“The ingestion of nutrients triggers the release of hormones or peptides, such as insulin and glucagon-like peptide 1, into the circulation; these substances can then reach centers such as the hypothalamus and the hippocampus and activate signal-transduction pathways that promote synaptic activity and contribute to learning and memory.”

Why is this important? 

While the correlation between nutrition and learning is known, many American schools- institutions designed for learning- are failing to provide children with healthy meal programs that support their education despite school nutrition standards (mentioned below). This makes no sense. If the aim of education is to learn and if the educational value of nutritious foods has been established, why do so many schools fail to instill healthier foods into their meal programs?

School Nutrition Laws and Policies:

Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act (2010): Federal Statute signed into law by President Barack Obama, with the focal point on improving child nutrition within the school systems.

Local School Wellness Policy (2004): Document that guides local education Agency or school district’s efforts to establish a school environment that promotes students’ health, well-being, and ability to learn by supporting healthy eating and physical activity.

What’s the Problem?

Despite being signed into law, there is much debate surrounding the implementation of the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act. While it promotes improved nutrition nationally, funding is an issue. Schools are reimbursed $3.01 per healthy lunch. However, schools only receive this reimbursement if they follow certain health rules: more fruits and vegetables, more whole grains and less sodium. While this may seem like a step in the right direction, that $3.01 per meal is also expected to cover labor, kitchen equipment and repairs. This makes it unsustainable for schools, particularly in lower income areas. In May 2014 a bill was passed that included a waiver to opt out of meeting USDA standards in schools with proven financial hardship.

Why should you care?

There is a disparity that is occurring. Schools in low income areas are among the most poorly funded; this makes it almost impossible to follow the rules that would allow them to receive reimbursement on meals. Without reimbursement on meals, it highly unlikely students will receive nutrient intake adequate enough to support cognitive functioning and learning. These are students who more than likely depend on school meals as main source of food, students who already have health deficiencies that may affect learning. If more people recognized the importance of nutrition on learning they would realize that we are in fact leaving children behind, by stunting their educational growth. Nutrient intake is just as, if not more, important than pencils, textbooks etc. It is our job, as humans, to recognize this and advocate for the vulnerable populations that may not be as familiar with their rights.

Who is in Charge?

-US Department of Agriculture: responsible for administering all school food service

-Congress (funding):

House: Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education

Senate: Subcommittee on Nutrition, Specialty Crops, Food and Agricultural Research

Legalizing marijuana has been a major topic in politics and it is unclear whether it should be legalized medically at a national level. This indecisiveness may stem from possible consequences, if any, and not enough research conducted in this area. Although research has grown, there is still a lot to learn about marijuana. This topic is important because marijuana may have a medicinal use and be able to help people live a comfortable life, which other drugs may not provide as efficiently. The goals of research are to find if the benefits of legalizing marijuana (for medical purposes) will be more helpful, rather than harmful. Whether someone is against or with legalizing medical marijuana, the important thing to look at is its effectiveness.

To begin with, many people believe that people will abuse marijuana if it is legalized medically. I suggest looking if the benefits of legalizing it will outweigh the harm, if any, which may occur. Marijuana has been able to provide treatments “for severe pain, muscle spasticity, anorexia, nausea, sleep disturbances, and other numerous other uses” (Lamarine 2012). It’s important to look at the several uses this drug has because it can have less severe side effects than others. In several cases, marijuana may be the best option for some individuals and the lack of opportunity in certain states may lead them to suffer medically. Furthermore, there is worry that medical marijuana laws will increase usage among adolescents. K. Hill (2015) states. “the growing body of research that includes this study suggests that medical marijuana law do not increase adolescent use.” In other words, his intentions are to warn people that research and evidence should guide how we apply medical marijuana laws and policies, rather than our own beliefs or assumptions.

Overall, I believe that medical marijuana should be legalized in our nation because it can provide several benefits and many people are deprived from this. Aside from this, stereotypes associated with marijuana may provoke policy makers to become indecisive about making decisions. Decisions should be based on the current and updated research and this will provide a more efficient process for legalizing medical marijuana. Those involved in creating policies and laws should view research and data concerning this issue. The next thing that should happen is looking at how marijuana is categorized by the DEA and decriminalizing in the United States. By looking at research and applying that knowledge to policies in the United States, we will be able to show the usefulness of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

Executive summary

Social justice is a core component of the social work profession. It would be unethical to ignore the injustice occurring in communities with high concentrations of minorities. The mass incarceration in the United States has become what some may consider a modern parallel to the Jim Crow laws post-Civil War, wreaking havoc on minorities and their children to come.

Introduction

For a country that boasts equality and opportunity for all, it seems that in the U.S., an unequal amount of minorities find themselves with less and less opportunity. Even though research has shown that drug use and crime is not partial to one race or races in particular, rates of incarceration do not reflect these findings. The U.S., total population about five percent of the world population, currently possesses roughly two million prisoners, about one fourth of the world’s total prisoner population, and roughly sixty percent consists of people of color. This type of mass incarceration reaps consequences on minorities far beyond jail time – it affects minorities’ abilities to prosper economically, creates even more unsafe environments once prisoners are released due to poor prison conditions, and perpetuates a system of systematic oppression, in which stockholders in the private prison industry can benefit from high recidivism rates at privatized prisons.

A disproportionate prison population reflects a failed judicial system. The primary reason to oppose this injustice is moral – the majority culture remains unaffected by what goes on in a minority population. People of color find themselves limited by the effects of jail time. Mass incarceration, specifically concentrated on minorities, hurts the children of a community, whose parents cannot parent them. Mass incarceration concentrated in specific communities also hurts the community’s economy, since so many of its workers are behind bars and the conditions in prisons do not serve to rehabilitate and prepare an individual to return to their community. But perhaps the starkest parallel to the Jim Crow laws post-Civil War is a convicted individual’s lack of voting rights while incarcerated or on parole, rendering them no voice in their communities.

Results

The “criminalization” of urban spaces and the War on Drugs has led to a disproportionate amount of minorities in prison. The 1968 Supreme Court decision Terry vs. Ohio has given law enforcement much more flexibility and power to stop whoever they may deem “suspicious,” extending to even schools, arresting minors for what, up until recently, was dealt with by school administration. And having gone to prison makes it much more difficult to succeed afterwards. Employers and landlords can legally discriminate based on conviction of a felony, wrecking a convicted felon’s chances of supporting themselves and their families.

Implications and Recommendations

A society in which an industry does well based off of high prison rates is a society that is doomed to catastrophe at one point or another. Steps in the right direction would include repealing laws that specifically target urban populations (such as sleeping in public spaces), giving incarcerated individuals voting rights, eliminating mandatory sentencing on a wide scale, and most importantly, ending the private prison industry, from which stockholders gain a profit from high recidivism rates.

 

Introduction

On October 13^th, Academy Award winner Jennifer Lawrence penned a piece for the Lenny Letter expressing her frustration on how she was paid significantly less than her male costars. This piece received some harsh backlash from some critics, expressing that she is a millionaire movie star that has no right to complain. However, the amount of money she makes isn’t the point. Lawrence expressed herself that she didn’t need any more money. The point was that when a man negotiates a deal he is seen as “fierce” and tactical, while a woman is seen as a “spoiled brat” if she tries to do something similar and how unjust that is. Sadly, equal pay for women is an issue that still hasn’t been rectified to this day, and it is up to us to finish the job.

Why is it important?

Making is so women get equal pay for doing an equal amount of work is important because it is a basic civil right. It is as simple as that. Unfortunately, due to sexist archaic stereotypes that women cannot be the primary breadwinner (even though 41% of women are), that they are the weaker sex, and that “women’s work” does not deserve a respectable wage, we still live in a society where women make 78 cents to every dollar a man makes. It is even more egregious when it comes to people of color, where African Americans make 64 cents and Latinas make 56 cents to every dollar a man makes. This is not only unfair, but dangerous due to the fact that Latinas and African Americans make up the lowest wage makers. These claims that prevent equal pay are unequivocally false, and yet any attempt to reform unfair pay is met with opposition. For example the Paycheck Fairness Act, which gave women the power to stop paying disparities among other things, was only two votes away from being passed.

What can be done?

There are several things that can be done. We can strengthen our equal pay laws where we eliminate loopholes that allow unequal pay and scrutinize those who do. We can improve access to nontraditional jobs that are higher paying for women currently struggling to get into jobs that are typically thought of to be the job of a man such as engineers, pilots, lawyers, etc. We can lift the wage of women in lower class jobs , and pass the Fair Minimum Wage Act which would raise the minimum wage from 7.25 dollars an hour to 10.10 dollars an hour. And finally we can adopt modern policies to protect women especially those who are pregnant or caregivers.

Conclusion

JFK said upon signing the Equal Pay Act that this was the “first step” and that much effort would be required. Before the act was signed, the gap was that women would make 59 cents to a dollar, and now it is 77 cents to a dollar. This isn’t going to cut it. This is 23 cents too short, too slowly. However, if we keep working at it and keep combating the old way of thinking we can reach the equality that is so desperately needed.

We live in a time where having a college education is becoming increasingly necessary, but at the same time, increasingly more expensive. Most Americans are drowning in college debt for decades after they graduate and then find themselves wondering, “was my bachelor’s degree worth the expense?”

Why is this important?

Making public higher education free is something important to think about because so many Americans have been affected by debt. Taking away this huge cost would mean removing a burden from many students’ lives, allowing them to focus fully on their studies instead of having to worry about their finances. Eliminating the cost of attending a public college would allow all individuals, regardless of their background, a chance at a higher education. This is an issue of education as a personal right.

What are the facts?

• The federal government generally spends $139 billion per year on grants and loans.
• The cost of making all public universities free, including community colleges, would be $128 billion.
• The current financial aid system is uneven and makes low income students very conscious of their status.
• Making public higher education free would take the added financial stress out of the already taxing lives of college students and make the playing field more equal.

 

 

 

Conclusion

Aside from a small adjustment period, the federal government would not be spending more money than they currently do if public higher education were free. The federal government could take the money it spends on higher education tax credits, grants, and loans, and put it towards something new, like making education free at all public colleges.

What can you do?

Our country is still quite a ways away from implementing free public higher education. But with your active help, we can take steps towards one day being able to send our children to college without having to pay a cent.

• Know the facts http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=76
• http://www.collegerank.net/tuition-free-college/
• Educate yourself http://futureofhighered.org//wp-content/uploads/2013/02/CFHE-Working-Paper-Free-Higher-Ed.pdf
• http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-samuels/why-all-public-higher-edu_b_1099437.html