Social Welfare Law Commons^™

Stratification Of The Welfare Poor: Intersections Of Gender, Race & "Worthiness" In Poverty Discourse And Policy, Bridgette Baldwin

Faculty Scholarship

This Article analyzes the historical, cultural and legal treatments and representations of poor black women from Progressive Era philanthropic aid to early "work-to-welfare" reform protocol. When black women serve as the case study for a larger examination of social policy issues we see that welfare was rarely meant to remedy the structural crunch of poverty. Working class black women have been at the center of the construction of the poor and serve as the designation to determine which people deserve to be compensated for being poor.

Furthermore, the Author discusses both the ramifications and rationale of why the government never …

Lifting Burdens: Proof, Social Justice, And Public Assistance Administrative Hearings, Lisa Brodoff

Faculty Articles

In "Lifting Burdens: Proof, Social Justice, and Public Assistance Administrative Hearings," Lisa Brodoff describes the administrative hearing system for public assistance recipients and applicants, and asserts that it is the primary social justice system for the poor. She discusses why public assistance appellants are always placed at a significant disadvantage in this system. The article proposes that the best way to even out the inequities in adjudications is to always place the burdens of production and persuasion by clear and convincing evidence on the government in these hearings. She argues that policy, efficiency, and fairness require a consistent and heavy …

Slums, Slumdogs, And Resistance, Tayyab Mahmud

Faculty Articles

No abstract provided.

Poverty Revenue: The Subversion Of Fiscal Federalism, Daniel L. Hatcher

All Faculty Scholarship

Fiscal federalism is a staple of economic theory that underlies the federal-state partnership in the nation‘s largest federal grant-in-aid programs, such as Medicaid and Title IV-E Foster Care. The theory is founded on a simple principle, the collaboration of the federal government‘s financial power and stability and state governments‘ ability to deliver services tailored to regional needs. However, the theory ignores a vast industry that has grown around the flow of federal funds. In addition to providing operational and consulting services for all aspects of government aid, this poverty industry - which usurps inherently governmental functions and is rife with …

What Went Wrong? Why Family Preservation Programs Failed To Achieve Their Potential, Steven M. Cytryn

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The failure of family preservation programs in the child welfare system stems from structural and legal shortcomings, including inadequate funding, unclear guidelines, and insufficient oversight. These issues, compounded by the Supreme Court's Suter v. Artist M. decision, which undermined the enforceability of the "reasonable efforts" standard, have led to inconsistent implementation and reduced accountability. To address these challenges, the article advocates for reforms such as aligning funding incentives with family preservation goals, establishing clear program standards, and distinguishing between neglect caused by poverty and other forms of maltreatment. By implementing these changes, the child welfare system can better support families …

Killing, Letting Die, And The Case For Mildly Punishing Bad Samaritanism, Ken Levy

Georgia Law Review

For over a century now, American scholars(among others) have been debating the merits of "bad-Samaritan" laws-laws punishing people for failing to attempt "easy rescues." Unfortunately, the opponents of bad-Samaritan laws have mostly prevailed. In the United States, the "no-duty-to-rescue" rule dominates. Only four states even have bad-Samaritan laws, and these laws impose only the most minimal punishment-either sub-$500 fines or short-term imprisonment. This Article argues that this situation needs to be remedied. Every state should criminalize bad Samaritanism. For, first, criminalization is required by the supreme value that we place on protecting human life, a value that motivates laws against …

Social Welfare And Fairness In Juvenile Crime Regulation, Elizabeth S. Scott, Laurence Steinberg

Faculty Scholarship

The question of how lawmakers should respond to developmental differences between adolescents and adults in formulating juvenile crime policy has been the subject of debate for a generation. A theme of the punitive law reforms that dismantled the traditional juvenile justice system in the 1980s and 1990s was that adolescents were not different from adults in any way that was relevant to criminal punishment – or at least that any differences were trumped by the demands of public safety. But this view has been challenged in recent years; scholars and courts have recognized that adolescents, due to their developmental immaturity, …

Social Security Benefits Formula 101: A Practical Primer, Francine J. Lipman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.

Guest Editor's Introduction, Special Issue: Ensuring Access To Justice For Self-Represented, Amy Applegate

Articles by Maurer Faculty

I am pleased to be the guest editor of his special issue of Family Court Review, which focuses on "Access to Justice for Self-Represented Litigants." I am even more pleased that this issue includes articles written by some of the leaders of Indiana's pro bono legal community; several outstanding students; my collaborators who conduct research about the effect of self-representation in the mediation context, especially where there is intimate partner violence or abuse (IPVA); and colleagues in the national clinical and law school pro bono community whose students provide pro bono services to disadvantaged or marginalized individuals with family …

Rethinking Guardianship (Again): Substituted Decision Making As A Violation Of The Integration Mandated Of Title Ii Of The Americans With Disabilities Act, Leslie Salzman

Articles

In every state, when an adult has a diminished capacity to make decisions about personal affairs or property management, a court may transfer the individual’s right to make decisions to a guardian. This Article argues that, in most cases, it would be preferable to support decision making rather than supplant it through guardianship, and then seeks to locate a right to receive such support as a less restrictive alternative to the substituted decision making that characterizes guardianship.

Building on the reasoning in Olmstead v. L.C. and subsequent decisions interpreting the Americans with Disabilities Act’s integration mandate, this Article argues that …