top of page

Lesson Plan

Life on Welfare: Experiences with Means-Tested Cash Assistance

Location

Years

 Cleveland, Ohio

1960s/1970s

Theme

Classroom

Poverty Policy

Distribution of Public Resources

College, High School

About this Module

service-pnp-ppmsca-77900-77970v LOC no restrictions.jpg
Posed picture of an unmarried mother being interviewed by a welfare worker at a desk, at the Child Welfare Center, 815 Rhode Island Ave, Washington, D.C. Photographer: Warren K. Leffler. Photo archived at the Library of Congress.

        In this lesson, students will learn about experiences of means-tested cash assistance through firsthand accounts from women on Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). Students will examine the two-tiered New Deal social safety net while analyzing a variety of primary sources. Students will develop a better understanding of how the unequal distribution of public resources through antipoverty policy elevated some families into the middle class and trapped others below the poverty line.

       The setting is Northern U.S. cities, with a heavy emphasis on Cleveland, Ohio. The two sources are first-hand accounts of life on Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) that offer a compelling snapshot of the daily financial struggles for households headed by women on means-tested public assistance. Recipient activists, such as Gwen Louise Gaston in Primary Source #1, publicized their experiences to demonstrate how there was no way to survive on means-tested public assistance. This lesson offers a way for

students to understand how the two-tiered social safety net favored some family types over others by limiting the "undeserving poor's" access to public resources. It also reveals welfare recipients' understanding of their financial status as caused by federal, state, and local policy, not their own actions.    

Primary Source #1 - My Existance on an ADC Budget

Gwen Louise Gaston, "My Existence on an ADC Budget," 1967, box 3, folder 1, MS 3869 Paul Alden Younger Papers, Western Reserve Historical Society, Cleveland, Ohio.

Primary source one--My Life on an ADC Budget by Gwen Hall

Primary Source #2 - Excerpt from Testimony of Mrs. Alice Aarons, Mrs. Ella Kershaw, Mrs. Carole King, Mrs. Evaline McCreaey, and Mrs. Ethel Thomas, Cleveland, Ohio

Primary source two page 6--Testimony before U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Primary source two page 4--Testimony before U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Primary source two page 2--Testimony before U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Primary source two page 5--Testimony before U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Primary source two page 3--Testimony before U.S. Commission on Civil Rights
Primary source two page 1--Testimony before U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

Core Question: How did Aid to Families with Dependent Children impact the financial well-being of women-headed households?

Context

      During the Great Depression, the Social Security Act of 1935 created a two-tiered American welfare state. On the higher tier is social insurance. Social Security and Unemployment Insurance are programs that Americans can apply for IF they have a history of employment. Through wages and payroll taxes, citizens gain the right to claim these benefits. On the lower tier is means-tested assistance. Disability Insurance and Aid to Dependent Children (later renamed Aid to Families with Dependent Children) were designed for populations unable to work. Access to a monthly income through these programs, therefore, required undergoing a “means test.” Based on this divide, some cash benefits were “earned,” and others were “unearned.” In the decades following the Great Depression, U.S. citizens started using the term “welfare” in a derogatory way to refer to “unearned” benefits, broadly, and Aid to Dependent Children, specifically. Life on welfare was not easy because miserly benefit levels meant families could not afford all of the necessities of life. Single mothers had to decide between paying for groceries, heat, or other bills. This module's sources characterize the impoverished conditions that welfare recipients endured, such as nutritionally deficient diets, inadequate clothing, and an inability to pay bills. Single mothers had to find other ways of meeting their children's needs or do without basic necessities. 
      The two sources in this module detail the difference between cash assistance and expenses for six households. The second source explains how five single mothers stretched their cash as far as possible and what necessities they had to forego. In 1967, Gwendowlyn Louise Gaston wrote out her budget and published it in community newspapers to demonstrate that she simply could not afford a decent life on her current benefits. The year prior, five other mothers testified before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights about their inability to escape welfare because their benefits trapped them in poverty. These women publicized their stories to persuade policymakers and voters to support increasing Aid to Families with Dependent Children payments. Their stories pushed back against a growing perception that economically disadvantaged mothers chose to stay on welfare, instead of entering the workforce, because cash assistance allowed them to live a life of luxury. Welfare rights activists, such as the women in these sources, used their own experiences as evidence of the inadequacies of means-tested cash assistance, the American welfare state's lower tier. 

Teaching

The struggle to make ends meet on welfare was a never-ending and losing battle. Here is a list of prompts that students can respond to in group discussions or short writing assignments. These questions can lead students to understand how the American welfare state's lower tier of means-tested cash assistance trapped some families below the poverty line by providing less money than was needed to survive. 
​
  • For the 1967 document, teachers can prompt students to consider why nonpoor Americans thought welfare provided a desirable lifestyle. 
     
  • For the 1966 document, how did welfare prohibit financial security? Since benefit levels were so low and regulations prevented any other source of income, how did recipients obtain resources they could not afford? What resources were they unable to obtain at all?
     
  • Drawing on both sources, teachers should instruct students to reflect on why Aid to Dependent Children benefits were so low. Since cash assistance awards were less than a family's expenses, why would recipients continue utilizing the program? Point out that women had to borrow money or leave bills unpaid each month, meaning that they had to pay off debts once their check arrived. Consider how the mothers framed themselves in opposition to others' views of welfare recipients, and ask what myths nonpoor Americans believed about life on welfare. Teachers could center the two-tiered welfare state policy by reframing welfare as referring to all social safety net programs. College students and advanced learners may discuss the various programs (Unemployment, Social Security, etc.) that middle-class families enjoyed without facing stigma or derision. 

Further Context and Teaching Resources

Linda Gordon, Pitied but not Entitled: Single Mothers and the History of Welfare (Free Press, 1994).​

​

​This book explores the history of welfare programs designed for women-headed households and demonstrates how many policymakers and voters did not view single mothers as deserving of public resources. Gordon explains how Aid to Families with Dependent Children was designed to push single mothers into marriage to a breadwinner who had access to the American welfare state's higher tier. 

​

Premilla Nadasen, Rethinking the Welfare Rights Movement (Routledge: 2012). 

 

Chapter one explores the origins of the welfare rights movement through local resistance to surveillance of recipients' personal lives and the punitive measures enacted by social workers. 

​

Lisa Levenstein, "From Innocent Children to Unwanted Migrants and Unwed Moms: Two Chapters in the Public Discourse on Welfare in the United States, 1960-1961," Journal of Women's History 11, no. 4 (2000): 10-33.

​

Levenstein explores two instances of the public's response to state-level cuts to Aid to Families with Dependent Children to show how the program changed, in many middle-class voters' minds, from one that benefited children who could not be blamed for their poverty to one that benefited unwed mothers who were personally responsible for their destitution. 

​​

bottom of page