Social Welfare Proposal

1. The issue:

The article that I chose for social welfare policy discussed a proposed plan to implement drug testing welfare recipients, published in October of 2011. The article discusses that various different studies have found that anywhere between 4-37% of recipients participate in some form of substance abuse. It goes on to discuss various reasons why different studies had various different outcomes, being that some studies included substance abuse to be defined as use within the last week, while others included abuse defined as any use within the last month, and even up to 1-2 years prior. Further discussed is that, most studies found that recipients of TANF (temporary assistance for needy families) benefits had slightly higher substance abuse rates than the general population not receiving benefits, but “not greatly so”. Currently, there are two provisions used to guide substance use and abuse

among recipients.

The article identifies the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act, both from 1996. These acts state that it is individually up to the States in that they may require drugs tests for recipients and have the option to penalize those who fail. Further, states may put a “lifetime ban on TANF and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program… benefits for persons convicted of a drug-related felony”, however, most states chose to offer and/or require substance abuse treatments for those receiving benefits. Further, the article discusses a pilot test conducted in Florida for drug testing welfare recipients. It states that, “drug testing did not produce reliable estimates of the level of drug use” amongst recipients and goes on to discuss that several candidates likely to have tested positive instead returned negative tests. Also discussed is the cost to test welfare recipients. State costs were estimated to run between $92,487 and up

to $20 million.
2. My reaction:
The wide variation in definition of abuse can cause discrepancies in comparable data to determine the true problem of substance abuse amongst users. This can be very problematic, as some may view a substance abuse problem as a person actively using illicit drugs, while other studies view an abuse problem as someone who may have used a drug one time two years ago. This is, to me, an unfair means of identifying abuse. I see implementation of programs like this as a way to offer fewer benefits to those in need. More often than not, people who receive food and housing benefits are granted these benefits based on whether or not they have dependents. It is not the child’s fault that his or her parent makes the decision to abuse illicit drugs, and no child should be left without food in the case that their parent is denied benefits because of this. The article does a very good job at remaining objective, and merely presents facts and data. It does not take a stance on whether this is the right or wrong decision, which is helpful for reviewing in order to pick a stance for yourself.
3. Article source:
https://aspe.hhs.gov/basic-report/drug-testing-welfare-recipients-recent-proposals-and-continuing-controversies