Work—family policy strategies reflect gendered assumptions about the roles of men and women within families and therefore may lead to significantly different outcomes, particularly for families headed by single mothers. The authors argue that welfare states have adopted strategies based on different assumptions about women's and men's roles in society, which then affect women's chances of living in poverty cross-nationally. The authors examine how various strategies are associated with poverty rates across groups of women and also examine more directly the (...) effects of specific work—family policies on poverty rates. They find that while family benefits and child care for young children unequivocally lower poverty rates, particularly for families headed by a single mother, long parental leaves have more ambivalent effects. The findings suggest that it is critical to examine the gendered assumptions underlying work—family policies rather than viewing all work—family policies as the same. (shrink)

This article examines the uneven welfare support accorded to Black and white women at the end of the twentieth century. The author analyzes the generosity of Aid to Families with Dependent Children benefits in the 48 contiguous U.S. states in 1970, 1980, and 1990 to determine if the state is less supportive of Black than white women. The author argues that the race-biased policies and procedures implemented with the inception and expansion of the welfare state remained throughout the program, resulting (...) in uneven levels of support for Black and white families. More specifically, the author demonstrates that the generosity of AFDC is lower in states with a larger proportion of Black single mothers and higher in states with a larger proportion of white single mothers. These findings are relevant in the current period because such institutionalized race inequalities perpetuate white privilege and Black women's poverty. (shrink)