THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA AT CHAPEL HILL
SCHOOL OF SOCIAL WORK
COURSE NUMBER:
COURSE TITLE:
SEMESTER AND YEAR:
TIMES:
LOCATION:
SOWO 832
Policy Analysis, Development, and Change:
Multigenerational Family Policy
Spring Semester, 2015
Mondays, 9:00 – 10:20 a.m.
Tate-Turner-Kuralt Building, Room 226
INSTRUCTOR:
Mark Testa, Ph.D.
Spears-Turner Distinguished Professor
School of Social Work
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
325 Pittsboro St., Campus Box 3550
Chapel Hill, NC 25599-3550
Tel: (919) 962-6496 Fax: (919) 962-1486
mtesta@unc.edu
OFFICE HOURS:
548-C Monday, 12:00 – 1:30 pm or by appointment
COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course will provide students with a framework for
advanced policy analysis and strategies for policy change, with a focus on
multigenerational families.
COURSE OBJECTIVES: At the conclusion of this class students will be able to:
1. Identify current demographic trends associated with multi-generational
families in need of supportive, supplemental and substitute care.
2. Identify the principles, foundations, and provisions of the primary social
welfare programs that affect multi-generational families.
3. Conceptualize the interactions among social, economic and political factors
that shape family policy.
4. Demonstrate the analytical, theoretical, and value assessment skills that
enable social workers to evaluate policies, apply change strategies, and
advocate for client and community needs.
5. Develop leadership strategies for addressing policies that affect
multigenerational families in the context of empowerment and partnership.
6. Discuss ethical issues in current policies affecting multigenerational families,
including individual and family rights, distributive justice and power, and
discrimination/oppression particularly with regard to ethnic and racial
minorities.
1
EXPANDED DESCRIPTION:
Many of the policy issues affecting multigenerational families pose the problem
of where to draw the boundary between public and private care: Should the
public subsidize children's formal foster care by grandparents or should they be
expected to assume informal care of their dependent grandchildren on their
own? Should the government compensate adult children for the care of their frail
elderly parents or should they be held financially liable for the support of adult
family members? Should the state support adolescent parents to finish school or
obligate them to enter the paid labor force to support their children? The choices
over how much of the care of dependent family members by legally and nonlegally liable relatives should be absorbed within the multigenerational family,
purchased privately in the market, or provided by the state are at the core of
many key social policy dilemmas, such as the long-term care of the frail elderly,
the social support of adolescent parents, and the kinship care of neglected and
abused children. Confronting these choices remains one of the critical domestic
policy challenges of the early 21st century.
This course defines multigenerational families as those in which caregiving and
supportive roles extend beyond the two-generation, nuclear family, including
parents (or in-laws) and adult children; parents (or in-laws), adult children (and
spouse or children in law), and grandchildren; and grandparents and
grandchildren without co-resident parents. Caregiving and supportive roles
encompass adult children’s providing care for frail elderly parents; parents’
caring for adult dependents with chronic disabilities; families containing an
adolescent parent and her or his children; grandparents’ providing kinship care
to grandchildren; and parents with chronic disabilities caring for children.
Students will explore the evolution of policies and programs that affect
multigenerational families as well as controversial laws and regulations that
inhibit the formation of particular family forms, such as prohibitions against
foster care and adoption by lesbian and gay couples and the sterilization of
persons with intellectual disabilities. The course will analyze the intended and
unintended consequences of multigenerational family policies and programs as
well as identify opportunities for enhanced service delivery, policy advocacy,
and restorative justice.
REQUIRED READINGS:
Required readings (articles and selected book chapters) will be posted on Sakai.
TEACHING METHODS
Teaching methods will include lecture and class discussion, as well as
multimedia presentations, case scenarios, and small group activities. My
perspective is that we all have much to learn and much to teach. Full
engagement is essential to your learning process in the class, and will allow you
2
to apply successfully the course material in a way that is personally and
professionally meaningful.
POLICY ON CLASS ATTENDANCE AND PARTICIPATION:
Students are expected to attend every class and come prepared to share concepts from
the readings, ask questions, and respond to questions about the materials. If you
should need to miss a class session for any reason, e-mail me your reasons for
missing class prior to the day of the session. An unexcused class absence may result
in a loss of points from your grade for active participation (see Grading Components
below). Any student who foresees difficulty with fulfilling the class attendance
requirements should speak with me at the beginning of the semester so that
alternative forms of participation can be arranged.
POLICIES ON THE USE OF ELECTRONIC DEVICES IN THE CLASSROOM:
I expect that we will all be invested in creating a learning environment of respect
and engagement. I welcome the use of laptops in class for taking notes or
completing small group tasks. However, I ask that you use them only for
relevant activities – not for checking email or surfing the Web. During class, cell
phones and other devices should be silenced.
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES:
Students with disabilities that affect their participation in the course should
notify the instructor if they wish to have special accommodations in
instructional format, examination format, etc., considered. Accommodations and
services are provided by Disability Services (Voice/TDD 962-8300; 966-4041).
Learning Disability Services (962-7227) provides supportive services for
students with learning disabilities and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorders.
POLICY ON ACADEMIC DISHONESTY:
Academic dishonesty is contrary to the ethics of the social work profession,
unfair to other students, and will not be tolerated in any form. All written
assignments should include the following signed pledge: “I have neither given nor
received unauthorized aid in preparing this written work.” Omission of a
statement to this effect will result in the return of your assignment without a
grade. It’s OK to receive help as long as you acknowledge the assistance in your
signed pledge, e.g., “I have received editorial aid in preparing this written work.”
In keeping with the UNC Honor Code, if reason exists to believe that academic
dishonesty has occurred, a referral will be made to the Office of the Student
Attorney General for investigation and further action as required. Please refer to
the APA Style Guide for information on attribution of quotes, plagiarism, and
appropriate citation.
POLICY ON INCOMPLETES AND LATE ASSIGNMENTS:
Late assignments are strongly discouraged, but may be accepted in some cases.
All assignments are due at the beginning of class on the day noted. You must
3
contact me prior to a due date if you would like to request an extension, or you
will lose 10% of the assignment’s points per day (including weekends and the
date on which the assignment was due, if submitted after the beginning of class).
Incompletes may be granted if (a) there are extreme and unforeseeable
circumstances that affect your ability to complete the semester’s work, and (b)
you meet with me in advance to develop a plan and timeline for completing your
work.
ASSIGNMENT GUIDELINES:
All written assignments must be typed and follow APA format. Several writing
resources are posted on the SSW website. You can also refer to the APA
Publication Manual (6th edition), and to
http://www.lib.unc.edu/instruct/citations/apa/index.html.
ASSIGNMENT DESCRIPTIONS:
Descriptions of the course assignments are below. As needed, we will discuss
further guidelines and resources as we move through the semester.
Assignment 1: Class Elective Exercise
Due February 16
You will each prepare a 1-page (single-spaced) proposal with an associated
set of readings pertaining to a special topic on multigenerational families.
These topics may include issues related to multigenerational families, such as
kinship care, elder abuse, emerging adulthood, feminist perspectives and the
like. The proposals will be circulated and voted on by the class on February
23 to decide which two should be selected for the class elective sessions on
March 23 and April 6. You should be prepared to argue for your proposal,
including a brief justification of the importance of the issue and why it
deserves a special place on the federal, state or local policymaking agenda.
These proposals should be submitted electronically on Sakai to the instructor
before midnight February 15/16 for distribution to the class a week in
advance of the class elective exercise.
Assignment 2: Group Assignment
March 23 and April 6
Student groups of four will be assigned to assist the winning class elective
teams in organizing the class sessions during weeks 11 and 13. Each group
will be led by the authors of the winning proposals, who will assign each
team member to one of the following tasks: 1) scholarly research review
that provides a narrative summary of a minimum of four (4) scholarly
sources (peer-reviewed research articles, reports from government websites,
or reports from “think tanks”) on the elective topic; 2) background and
ethical analysis that summarizes why this topic merits consideration at this
time and what specific ethical principles are promoted or thwarted; and 3)
policy recommendations and discussion that summarize the policy
4
interventions or programmatic changes the team recommends and how the
nonrational policy approaches discussed by O’Connor & Netting (2010)
might inform your messaging of these recommendations?
These three products will be presented at the special elective sessions that
can be organized in any form that the team leaders deem would be most
effective in communicating why the topic is relevant to multigenerational
family policy. The sessions may take the form of PowerPoint presentations,
small-group exercises, simulations, or some combination as well as other
types of learning activities.
Assignment 3: Multigenerational Family Policy or Program Analysis
Due April 21
This assignment asks you to complete a systematic analysis of a program or
policy related to multigenerational families using the policy practice and
advocacy framework outlined by Jansson (2011) in Week 6’s reading.
Your analysis shall incorporate: (a) scholarly research using a minimum of
four (4) scholarly sources (peer-reviewed research articles, reports from
government websites, or reports from “think tanks”) and (b) first-person
reflections and insights from a service provider or a service recipient (these
can come from in-person interviews or from online sources, depending on
feasibility and logistics. Your analysis should specifically address the
following:
1. Background (One page)
- Policy name and description.
- The importance of the policy.
- The stakeholders involved—policy beneficiaries and policy
losers; see Schneider and Ingram (1993) in Week 6’s reading.
- Summary of the historical, social, political, or economic factors
that clarifies why this policy merits consideration at this time.
2. Deciding what is right and wrong (Two pages)
- What specific ethical principles (e.g. autonomy, personal
achievement, health, safety, equality, and communal solidarity)
are promoted or thwarted by the policy? Are there any inherent
dilemmas (competing or contradictory ethical principles)?
- Does the policy operate in a way that promotes social justice, or
does it contribute to oppression and/or discrimination?
3. Choosing where to focus attention (One-half page)
- Should the program or policy concern be addressed at the local,
state, or federal level?
- Should the focus be on the policies of a specific organization,
domestic public policies, or policies in international venues?
5
4. Gauging the political salience of the policy or program: (Two pages)
- Who might see this policy or program as desirable or
undesirable? Are any particular agendas favored or disfavored?
- What reflections or insights have you obtained from a service
provider or service recipient about the conditions favorable for
consideration of the policy or program at this time?
5. Assessing the evidence in support of or opposed to the policy or
program (Two pages)
- What (if any) research has been conducted on the causes and
nature of specific problems and their prevalence and location?
- What analyses have been done on the efficacy and effectiveness
of the policy or program? Is the evidence consistent?
- What is the quality of the research? Are findings generalizable to
relevant populations?
6. Recommending policy interventions and programmatic changes
(One-half page)
- What policy interventions or programmatic changes do you
recommend taking to address the concerns or problems
identified above?
- Will the focus be on how the policy or policy is implemented in
practice or on what underlying assumptions and theory of action
ought to be changed?
7. Discussion and Conclusion (Two pages)
- What are the limitations of Jansson’s (2011) rational approach to
policy practice and advocacy for implementing your
recommended policy interventions and programmatic changes?
- How might the nonrational policy approaches discussed by
O’Connor & Netting (2010) inform how you message and
evaluate your recommendations?
- What is your one-sentence summary conclusion?
Your paper should be about 10 double-spaced pages long (excluding tables, charts
and references).
SUMMARY OF COURSE EVALUATION COMPONENTS AND GRADING SCALE:
Grades will be assigned based on the following components and weights:
Active Participation
10
Class Elective Exercise
25
Group Assignment
25
Policy or Program Analysis
40
Total
100
94 – 100 = H
80 - 93 = P
70 – 79 = L
<70
=F
6
COURSE OUTLINE
Date
Topic & Readings
Week 1
Jan 12
Introduction to Course
Week 2
Jan 19
No Class (University Holiday)
Week 3
Jan 26
Emergence of the Modern (Two-Generation) Family
Week 4
Feb 2
Spread of the Multigenerational (Accordion) Family
Assignments
due
Required Reading:
Dizard, J. E. & Gadlin, H. (1990). The minimal family. Amherst, MA: The
University of Massachusetts Press, pp. 3-65.
Required Reading:
Newman, K.S. (2012). The accordion family: Boomerang kids, anxious
parents, and the private toll of global competition. Boston:
Beacon Press, pp. 37-62.
Asma, S. (2013). The myth of universal love. Opinionator. The New York
Times, January 5, pp. 1-6.
Week 5
Feb 9
The Enduring Significance of Multigenerational Bonds
Required Reading:
Putney, N.M., Bengston, V., & Wakeman, M.A. (2007). The family and the
future: Challenges, prospects, and resilience. In Pruchno, R.A. &
Smyer, M.A. (Eds.), Challenges of an aging society: Ethical
dilemmas, political issues (pp. 117-155). Baltimore: The Johns
Hopkins University Press.
England, P., Folbre, N., & Leana, C. (2012). Motivating care . In Folbre, N.
(Ed.), For love and money: Care provision in the United States (pp.
21-39). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
7
Date
Week 6
Feb 16
Topic & Readings
Policy Practice and Theoretical Perspectives
Required Reading:
Jansson, B. S. (2011). Becoming an effective policy advocate: From policy
practice to social justice. Belmont, CA: Books/Cole, pp. 79-87.
Assignments
due
Special Topic
Proposals Due
Supplemental Readings:
O’Connor, M.K. & Netting, F.E. (2010). Analyzing social policy: Multiple
perspectives for critically understanding and evaluating policy.
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Chs. 4 & 6.
Kahan, D. K. (2012). Cultural cognition as a conception of the cultural
theory of risk. In S. Roeser, R. Hillerbarnd, P. Sandin & M.
Peterson (Eds.), Handbook of Risk Theory (pp. 726-759). New
York: Springer.
Schneider, A. & Ingram, H. (1993). Social construction of target
populations: implications for politics and policy. The American
Political Science Review, 87(2), 334-347.
Week 7
Feb 23
Class Elective Exercise
Week 8
Mar 2
Caring for Adult Dependents with Chronic Disabilities
Week 9
Mar 9
No Class (Spring Break)
Week 10
Mar 16
Parents with Intellectual Disabilities
Required Reading:
Class Elective Proposals
Required Reading:
Hooyman, N.R. & Gonyea, J. (1995). Feminist perspectives on family care:
Policies for gender justice. Thousand Oak, CA: SAGE Publications,
pp. 183-209.
Required Readings:
Woodside, M. (1950). Sterilization in North Carolina: A sociological and
psychological study. Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina
Press, pp. 96-114.
Reader Advisory: The above reading is a historical document
that uses language contrary to NASW guidelines for writing about
people. It reflects the language of the time in which it is written
and should be read with this advisory in mind.
8
Date
Topic & Readings
Assignments
due
IASSID Special Interest Research Group on Parents and Parenting with
Intellectual Disabilities. (2008). Parents labeled with intellectual
disability: Position of the IASSID SIRG on parents and parenting
with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Applied Research in
Intellectual Disabilities, 21: 296–307.
Week 11
Mar 23
Special Topic Electives Session I
Week 12
Mar 30
Support and Care of Adolescent Parents
Start of Group
Assignments
Required Readings:
Testa, M. F. (1992). Racial and ethnic variation in the early life course of
adolescent welfare mothers. In M.K. Rosenheim & M.F. Testa
(Eds.), Early parenthood and coming of age in the 1990s (pp. 89112). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
Haight, W., Finet, D., Bamba, S. & Helton, J. (2008). The beliefs of resilient
African-American adolescent mothers transitioning from foster
care to independent living: A case-based analysis. Children and
Youth Services Review, 31: 53-62.
Week 13
Apr 6
Special Topics Elective Session II
Week 14
Apr 13
Kinship Foster Care
Required Readings:
Testa, M. F. (1997). Kinship foster care in Illinois. In J. Duerr Berrick, R.
Barth & N. Gilbert, N. (Eds), Child welfare research review,
volume two (pp. 101-129). New York: Columbia University
Press.
Testa, M., Bruhn, C. & Helton, J. (2010). Comparative safety, stability, and
continuity of children’s placements in informal and formal
substitute care arrangements. In M.B. Webb, K. Dowd, B.J.
Harden, J. Landsverk & M.F. Testa (Eds.). Child welfare and child
well-being: New perspectives from the National Survey of Child
and Adolescent Well-Being. New York: Oxford University Press.
Week 15
Apr 21
Foster Care and Adoption by Lesbian and Gay Couples
Required Reading:
Mallon, G.P. (2006). Lesbian and gay foster and adoptive parents.
Washington, DC: CWLA Press, pp. 2-4, 7-12, 29-44, 91-96.
Policy or
Program
Analysis Due
9