From Poor Law to Welfare State, 6th Edition

A History of Social Welfare in America

Walter I. Trattner

• Publisher: Free Press
• Year: 2007
• ISBN:
  9781416593188
• Topic: Geschichte
• Subtopic: Sozialgeschichte

Over twenty-five years and through five editions, Walter I. Trattner's From Poor Law to Welfare State has served as the standard text on the history of welfare policy in the United States. The only comprehensive account of American social welfare history from the colonial era to the present, the new sixth edition has been updated to include the latest developments in our society as well as trends in social welfare.
Trattner provides in-depth examination of developments in child welfare, public health, and the evolution of social work as a profession, showing how all these changes affected the treatment of the poor and needy in America. He explores the impact of public policies on social workers and other helping professions -- all against the backdrop of social and intellectual trends in American history. From Poor Law to Welfare State directly addresses racism and sexism and pays special attention to the worsening problems of child abuse, neglect, and homelessness. Topics new to this sixth edition include:

• A review of President Clinton's health-care reform and its failure, and his efforts to "end welfare as we know it"
  
• Recent developments in child welfare including an expanded section on the voluntary use of children's institutions by parents in the nineteenth century, and the continued discrimination against black youth in the juvenile justice system
  
• An in-depth discussion of Charles Murray and Richard Herrnstein's controversial book, The Bell Curve, which provided social conservatives new weapons in their war on the black poor and social welfare in general
  
• The latest information on AIDS and the reappearance of tuberculosis -- and their impact on public health policy
  
• A new Preface and Conclusion, and substantially updated Bibliographies

Written for students in social work and other human service professions, From Poor Law to Welfare State: A History of Social Welfare in America is also an essential resource for historians, political scientists, sociologists, and policymakers.

CHAPTER 1

The Background

The basic tenets and programs of any social welfare system reflect the values of the society in which the system functions. Like all other social institutions, social welfare systems do not arise in a vacuum; they stem from the customs, statutes, and practices of the past. Therefore, one cannot understand current efforts to help the needy without first comprehending the foundations on which they were built. And since the practice of assisting people in need as we know it in America did not originate in this country but was transplanted from the Old World to the New during the colonial period, we must go back in time, perhaps even to antiquity, to begin our study of American social welfare.

Hospitality to strangers, for example, was recognized as a virtue even among primitive peoples. Hammurabi, the famed ruler of Babylonia some two thousand years before Christ, made the protection of widows and orphans, and the weak against the strong, an essential part of his code. Buddhism, founded about 400 B.C., taught that all other forms of righteousness “are not worth the sixteenth part of the emancipation of the heart through love and charity.”

The ancient Greeks and Romans frequently discussed the matter. Aristotle (384–322 B.C.) spoke of man as a social animal and, as such, one who had to cooperate with and assist his fellow men. He also said it was more blessed to give than to receive. Then there was Cicero (106–43 B.C.), the famed Roman, who wrote: “Justice commands us to have mercy on all . . . , to consult the interests of the whole human race, to give everyone his due,” rich and poor alike. In fact, the words “philanthropy” and “charity,” and the concepts for which they stand—love of mankind, love of humanity, brotherhood—are of Greek and Latin origin.¹ It is not surprising, then, that the ancient Greeks, and the Romans after them, had a variety of ways of relieving distress and helping those in need. Some of those we might not recommend today, such as infanticide, slavery, concubinage, and euthanasia. On the other hand, they also had such other practices as daily allowances or pensions for the crippled, public distribution of grain for the needy, and institutions for the custodial care of various unfortunates, especially youngsters orphaned as a result of fathers lost in battle.

Even more important for the history of American philanthropy and social welfare are the ancient Jewish doctrines which teach the duty of giving and, equally important, the right of those in need to receive. Throughout the Old Testament, the ancient Hebrew collection of historical books, laws, proverbs, psalms, and prophetic writings that go as far back in time as the late eleventh century B.C., one finds commandments to give to others (tzedakah), especially the sick, the old, the handicapped, and the poor, not as a matter of charity but out of a sense of justice (or tzedek).² Thus, the Scriptures not only state that “one might break off his iniquities” by showing mercy to the poor, but command that “thou shalt not harden thy heart nor shut thy hand” to the poor, and note that “it is forbidden to turn away a poor man . . . empty-handed.” Moreover, such aid “should be given with a friendly countenance, with joy, and with a good heart.”

Not only is everyone who can afford to do so obliged to contribute to the unfortunate, but according to the Old Testament, all those in need are obliged to take it. Thus, as Maimonides (1135–1204), the Jewish scholar and philosopher, put it: “Whosoever is so much in need of charity that he cannot live unless he receives it—as, for instance, a man who is old or sick or in constant pain—but takes none out of pride, is guilty of bloodshed and is responsible for his own life; so that he has nothing for his suffering, save punishment and sin.”

The Talmud, a collection of Jewish law and tradition (based upon biblical texts and rabbinical commentaries on those texts) codified around A.D. 500 and still considered the source of authority among Orthodox Jews today, prescribes exactly how “charitable” funds are to be collected and distributed, including the appointment of gabbaim, or tax collectors, to administer the system.

How much should be given a poor man? The Talmud provides the answer: “Sufficient for his needs in that which he wanteth.” Thus, if someone is hungry, “he should be fed; if he needs clothing, he should be clothed; if he lacks household utensils, they should be purchased for him. . . . [E]ach and every one should be supplied with what he needs.”

Christianity carried on this tradition. Its emphasis upon good deeds, love of one’s enemies, and entry into heaven through mercy and charity stemmed, of course, from Old Testament doctrine and Hebraic law and custom. Since Jesus, Peter, Paul, and the other founding fathers of the Christian church—including the first fifteen bishops in Jerusalem—were Jews, it is not surprising that the New Testament no less than the Old contains many verses that stress charity.³ The text that perhaps more than any other weaves together the threads of early Christian-New Testament teaching on charity is the description of the Day of Judgment in St. Matthew, especially: “And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily, I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.”

The Decretum, a compilation of papal decrees, canons of church councils, and commentaries of church lawyers codified in the twelfth century which, along with subsequent decrees and writings, is considered the authoritative source of law for Christians, contains an elaborate discussion of the theory and practice of charity. Study of the Decretum reveals that the leading principle underlying early Christian social welfare policy was similar to the Hebrew idea that preceded it—poverty was not considered a crime. And while discretion was to be observed in bestowing assistance, and careful rules were elaborated for discriminating among the various classes of needy people,⁴ generally speaking, evidence of need overrode all else. It was assumed that need arose as a result of misfortune for which society, in an act of justice, not charity or mercy, had to assume responsibility. In short, the needy had a right to assistance, and those who were better off had a duty to provide it.

In practice, these ideas operated in a variety of ways. At the outset, when the church was small and its early followers owned no private property, there was little need to establish any formal social services. While there was some poverty, it was not a social problem. Those suffering misfortune were among close friends and associates who came to their assistance as a matter of course; mutual aid, in other words, sufficed to meet the needs of the faithful.

With the passage of time, the end of persecution (as marked by Emperor Constantine’s conversion to Christianity in the fourth century), an increase in members and wealth, and greater ease of travel, church fathers found it more and more necessary to establish a formal system of charities. Beginning in the sixth century, the monasteries that emerged served as basic agencies of relief, especially in rural areas. Some monastic orders, in fact, were organized to help the needy. Receiving income from their lands and from donations, legacies, and collections, they not only gave generously to those who came to their doors, but carried food and other provisions to the poor in the community.

By the eleventh century, with the evolution of feudalism, a system of government in which those who possessed landed estates also held political power, there was little uncared-for distress, at least in theory. Most people lived on feudal manors as serfs, protected by their liege lords or masters against such hazards as sickness, unemployment, and old age. In return for imposing a strong measure of constraint on individual freedom, feudalism, in other words, provided a form of social insurance against the exigencies of life.

Those who received no such protection, especially in the rapidly emerging cities, were often helped by social, craft, and merchant guilds. While for the most part the guilds provided benefits for their own members (who, because of their craft or trade, were somewhat removed from the immediate threat of poverty), they also provided assistance to others. Thus, many maintained “works of charity” for the town poor—they distributed corn and barley yearly, fed the needy on feast days, provided free lodgings for destitute travelers, and engaged in other kinds of intermittent and incidental help.

A more important source of aid to the needy during the Middle Ages was the hospital (or hospitale in Latin). Medieval hospitals did not merely provide medical assistance to the sick poor; rather, they housed and cared for lepers, for weary wayfarers and pilgrims, for orphans, the aged, and the destitute, and in general provided a variety of services for all those in need. Most early hospitals were attached to monasteries or were found along main routes of travel. Soon they appeared in cities and later were taken over by municipal authorities, thus forming a link between ecclesiastical and secular charity. By the middle of the fourteenth century, there were more than eleven hundred such institutions in England alone. They varied in size from those caring for a dozen or so people, to others accommodating up to several hundred.

Most important in terms of administering medieval poor relief was the aid dispensed by ecclesiastical or church authorities at the diocese or parish level. The bishop of each diocese was charged with the duty of feeding and protecting the poor within his district. He was directed to divide the total revenue of the diocese, which came from the church tithe, and distribute a fixed portion—from a third to a fourth—to those in need. In most cases, though, the diocese was divided into several parishes, and in practice it was the parish priest who became directly responsible for relieving distress.

Most priests were diligent in carrying out their duties, and the money available for care of the poor was sufficient for the need. By the “high” Middle Ages, then, a highly developed and effective system of poor relief had been established. Because the church was a public institution and the tithe a compulsory tax, it could be argued that the system as regulated by the church was the prototype of the one that arose under the famous English Poor Law of 1601. With the rise of the modern state, which in the middle of the sixteenth century absorbed the church, civil authorities naturally became responsible for administering the system of poor relief conducted earlier by church officials.

In any case, medieval poor relief, it must be remembered, was governed by the time-honored beliefs that poverty was a permanent and inescapable feature of society and that the better off were obliged to share some of their riches with their poorer brethren. Furthermore, it was practiced in an environment of localism and social stability in which strangers and mass destitution were absent; relief, for the most part, had to be provided only for members of the community with unusual cases of poverty occasioned by accident, illness, death, or some other calamity that strained the resources of families, landlords, and voluntary associations.

In the meantime, however, certain social and economic upheavals occurred that altered the situation greatly. The general dissolution of feudalism and the manorial system resulted, on the one hand, in an increase of individual freedom but, on the other hand, in social disorder, uncertainty, and serious hardship for many, especially agricultural laborers forced from the land. The growth of commerce and international trade and the rise of a money economy with its elements of capital investment, credit, interest, rent, and wages also affected the incidence and nature of poverty. So too did the Industrial Revolution and development of the factory system, which led to the decline of rural handicrafts and the rise of urban masses with limited skills who experienced not only seasonal but also cyclical unemployment and other social and economic hazards over which they had no control. Subsistence, in other words, depended much less now than previously on the individual, or on work itself, as on the farm or in the home, than on employment by those who owned the resources, on the factory whistle and the time clock—and on the state of the market.

In England, conditions were made worse by the so-called enclosure movement, which resulted from the growth of the woolens industry. As the demand for wool increased, and with it the price, it became extremely profitable for landowners to turn their fields into pastures and to raise sheep. Since sheep-raising could not be done on small fields, this upset the earlier feudal system of tillage, which rested on landlords dividing their estates into small tracts and parceling them out to tenants (or serfs) in return for certain specified services. Thus, enclosure led to the further destruction of rural homesteads, t...