A concluded that babies of poor mothers who received cash stipends experienced changes in their brain activity patterns. Advocates for the now-expired child tax credit hope the finding will help restore support for this and other federal anti-poverty programs.
鈥淣ot so fast,鈥� writes , a professor of history and health policy at the , and a practicing physician, in a published in the newspaper鈥檚 鈥淢ade by History鈥� section. 鈥淭his line of argument suggests that ending poverty in its own right is not a sufficient goal and that improving the brain function and biology of poor babies should drive policy.鈥�
Raz draws on her own research while also tracing the history of anti-poverty policies in the US such as Project Head Start. She asks:
If poor children鈥檚 brains are 鈥渋mproved鈥� from cash benefits, does that imply that their brains are biologically inferior to begin with? Presenting social science interventions as having the potential of 鈥渇ixing鈥� poor children鈥攁nd among this group the overrepresented number of children who are from minority backgrounds鈥攈as the distinct risk of fueling a debate about whether some children and families are innately and immutably inferior.
Based on a wealth of evidence, working to reduce child poverty is good policy in itself, she argues. With nearly living in poverty, a rate far higher than in peer countries, 鈥渢hese children deserve better, and their advocates don鈥檛 need to rely on the shape of children鈥檚 brain waves to make that case.鈥�
Raz is the University鈥檚 Charles E. and Dale L. Phelps Professor in Public Policy and Health, professor of history, and a physician at the University鈥檚 Strong Memorial Hospital. The author of What鈥檚 Wrong with the Poor? Psychiatry, Race, and the War on Poverty (University of North Carolina Press, 2013) and Abusive Policies: How the American Child Welfare System Lost Its Way (University of North Carolina Press, 2020), Raz is an expert on the history of US poverty and child abuse policies over the last half century.
- Read the full .
