Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Regardless of Race, Families Headed by Single Women Are ________

Soc Sci Res. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 February 1.

Published in final edited course as:

PMCID: PMC5300078

NIHMSID: NIHMS819748

Single Mother Families and Employment, Race, and Poverty in Changing Economical Times *

Sarah Damaske

The Pennsylvania Land University

Jenifer L. Bratter

Rice Academy

Adrianne Frech

The Academy of Akron

Abstruse

Using American Community Survey data from 2001, 2005, and 2010, this paper assesses the relationships betwixt employment, race, and poverty for households headed by single women across different economical periods. While poverty rates rose dramatically among single-mother families betwixt 2001 and 2010, surprisingly many racial disparities in poverty narrowed past the finish of the decade. This was due to a greater increase in poverty amongst whites, although gaps betwixt whites and Blacks, whites and Hispanics, and whites and American Indians remained quite large in 2010. All employment statuses were at higher adventure of poverty in 2010 than 2001 and the take a chance increased most sharply for those employed part-fourth dimension, the unemployed, and those not in the labor force. Given the concurrent increase in part-time employment and unemployment between 2000 and 2010, findings paint a dour picture of the price the last decade has had on the well being of unmarried-mother families.

Keywords: Employment, Poverty, Race, Recession, Single Mothers

i.one INTRODUCTION

At the start of the 21st century, researchers saw positive signs that poverty rates amongst single-parent households were on the refuse (Lichter and Crowley 2004). Employment levels amongst single mothers likewise increased and the number of such families on welfare declined (Clampet-Lundquist et al. 2004; Lerman and Ratcliffe 2001). Notably, these benefits were credible among the nearly vulnerable of families, those headed by women of color (Lichter & Crowley 2004). X years later, in the wake of the Great Recession of 2007–2009, much of this optimism has receded. Overall poverty rates were the highest of the decade at 15.ane per centum in 2010 and single-female parent households with children under 18 had poverty rates of 45 percentage from 2006–2008 (DeNavas-Walt, Proctor, and Smith 2010; Writer 2013). A decade into the 21st century, Black and Hispanic single-mothers and their children go on to bear a much higher poverty gamble than their white counterparts (McLanahan and Percheski 2008; U.S. Census Bureau 2010; Van Hook, Dark-brown, and Kwenda 2004). While greater poverty rates amid single mother families are not surprising in the wake of an economical downturn, did families headed by women of color disproportionately comport a greater burden of poverty take a chance?

Despite the wealth of data well-nigh the relationship between race, family structure, and poverty, critical gaps remain in researchers' understanding of how the benefits of work vary beyond race for single-mothers. First, employment patterns differ by race (Reid 2002) and education (Hamil-Luker 2005) and the race wage-gap is persistent (Dozier 2010; McCall 2001). This suggests that the relationship between employment and poverty may differ according to race, with minority women more probable to exist working in jobs that pay below-poverty wages than white women, yet these relationships have been for the most function only indirectly explored (see Lichter and Crowley 2004 for a notable exception). Second, there has been relatively fiddling inquiry on how these relationships might differ during different economical periods, even though research suggests that piece of work-focused welfare programs are less constructive during times of economic depression when the number of people seeking jobs increases and the number of jobs decreases (Kwon and Meyer 2011). The beginning decade of the 2000s marking the showtime full decade since the passage of the Welfare Reform Human action of 1996 that moved the bulk of poor families off of the welfare rolls (Clampet et al. 2004). The more than hopeful inquiry about the decline of poverty and the decline of women of color in poverty that emerged at the first of the xxth century likely reflected the fact that the economic system had expanded steadily for close to ten years by 2000 (NBER 2001). In contrast, we examine the beginning of the decade (2001), a fourth dimension at which the economy experienced a mild recession, the eye of the decade (2005), a time at which the economy was in the midst of an expansion, and the end of the decade (2010) a fourth dimension that followed a significant recession (Autor 2010; National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) 2001; Smeeding, Thompson, Levanon, and Burak 2011). Looking at the relationship between employment, race, and poverty across the decade at three distinct points (commencement, middle, and close) volition allow u.s.a. to encounter if changes in the broader economy have affected the tie between employment and poverty for the about vulnerable families, those headed by single women. Further, we also examine whether in that location is a racial dimension to this vulnerability past exploring whether Blackness and Hispanic women are placed at particular gamble.

This paper asks: What are the relationships between employment, race, and poverty? Do these relationships alter across the first decade of the 21st century? Using data from the 2001, 2005, and 2010 American Community Survey, we explore racial differences in poverty among single-mother households over the decade, as well as differences in how full-time employment, role-time employment, or unemployment may attenuate or exacerbate poverty rates during iii distinct economical periods in the 21st century: the economic recession of 2001 that followed a long period of expansion, a menstruum of economic growth and labor market expansion in 2005, and a menstruum of meaning economic refuse at the close of the decade (for detailed characterizations of these economic periods, see Autor 2010; National Agency of Economic Inquiry (NBER) 2001; Smeeding et al. 2011).

2.1. Race, Poverty, and Employment in Single-Mother Households

Families headed by single women are the ones near vulnerable to poverty (McLanahan and Percheski 2008) and some of the almost probable to be among the working poor (Brady, Fullerton, and Cross 2010) and race continues to stratify single mothers' likelihood of living at or below the poverty line. Relative to white and Asian unmarried-mother households, Black and Hispanic women (and their children) living in unmarried-parent households are at high risk of being in poverty (Elmelech and Lu 2004; Lichter and Crowley 2004; Lichter, Qian, and Crowley 2005; McLanahan and Percheski 2008;). In that location is some variation in kid poverty risks amidst Asians and Hispanics, which reflects differences between new immigrants and second generations that take been attributed to the economical benefits of acculturation (Lichter et al. 2005; Van Hook et al. 2004). Recent research suggests that multiracial single-parent families may experience poverty at rates in between mono-racial whites and mono-racial unmarried-parent families of color (Author 2013). These patterns are consistent with other indicators that demonstrate the power of racial stratification to exacerbate disadvantage fifty-fifty amid already disadvantaged sub-groups, such every bit single mothers.

Although maternal employment can reduce poverty rates (Lichter and Crowley 2004), particularly when the economy is strong (Iceland 2003), the relationships between race, employment, single-parent births, low education levels, and a lack of work feel (Alon and Haberfeld 2007; Ciabattari 2007; Musick 2002; Pettit and Ewert 2009) may make employment less effective in pulling some groups of women out of poverty. Women who become unmarried-mothers mostly take less man capital to bring to the labor market due to having less educational activity and fewer work experiences than their peers (Ciabattari 2007; Musick 2002). Furthermore, Blackness and Hispanic unmarried mothers often begin motherhood at a younger historic period than whites and Asians, which frequently delays or completely eliminates educational progress across loftier schoolhouse, decreasing cumulative earnings (Hoffman and Maynard 2008). On the other hand, Lichter and Crowley (2004) found that the greatest gains of increased maternal employment in the 1990s, in terms of decreases in poverty rates, were to African-American families (Lichter and Crowley 2004). Both lines of enquiry suggest that the benefits of employment and its touch on poverty status differ beyond race. But what remains unclear is whether employment itself differently affects single mothers' risk of poverty beyond race.

Race and gender variation in poverty is strongly tied to labor force experiences, encompassing both the type of employment that women secure and the wages women receive. Women'south employment rates differ by race (Browne and Misra 2003; England, Garcia-Beaulieu, and Ross 2004; Reid 2002), as practice women'due south wages (Dozier 2010; Pettit and Ewert 2009). Although in the mid-20thursday century, women of color were more likely to piece of work than their white counterparts, this trend has reversed in recent decades (England et al. 2004; Higginbotham and Romero 1997; Reid 2002). Black women's wages have fallen behind white women's since the early 1980s: the wage gap between white and Black women has grown from under five pct at the commencement of the 1980s to between 12 and xv percent today (Neal 2004; Pettit and Ewert 2009). Hispanic women also experience a wage gap compared to white women (Alon and Haberfeld 2007; England et al. 1999; McCall 2001), and, dependent on their local labor market, Asian women may experience this gap as well (McCall 2001). Ultimately, a lack of employment opportunities for women of color in urban environments may pb to an accumulation of disadvantages and an increased likelihood of living in poverty (Tienda and Stier 1996). When work is not bachelor or poorly paid, social condom cyberspace programs, including welfare or SNAP (too known as food stamps), may provide a buffer from poverty (Moffit 2013).

2.2 THE LABOR Market, EMPLOYMENT, & POVERTY

While it seems clear that single-mothers who are Black and Hispanic may be at greater take chances of experiencing poverty than their white or Asian peers, research has left unclear whether this risk of poverty changes depending on the broader economical context. The economic system hit a top of expansion in March 2001 later ten years of steady expansion and roughshod into a recession (NBER 2001). The recession was brusque lived, catastrophe in November 2001 after which the economy rebounded, calculation ii percent to the total labor market by 2005 (Autor 2010). This expansion lasted until Dec 2007 (NBER 2008). 2005 stands both halfway through the decade, then, and besides, approximately, half way through the catamenia of expansion that lasted 73 months. Finally, the 2007 recession led to large increases in unemployment, significant decreases in wages, and the ensuing recovery has been halting with extremely slow job growth (Hoynes, Miller, and Schaller 2012; Smeeding et al. 2011). Moreover, the Great Recession did non evenly influence the life chances of all workers: risk of unemployment, of home loss, and of bankruptcy all varied across factors such as race, gender, and class (Grusky, Western, and Wimer 2011). While much attention has been paid to how the Great Recession impacted young men, there has been less focus on the ramifications of the recession for immature women. In particular, it is unclear if the changes in the broader labor market have inverse the relationship betwixt race, poverty, and employment for single mothers.

How might race matter to employment and thus poverty in the midst of the recession? On one hand, the contempo economic downturn has increased poverty rates among all families (Cancian and Danzinger 2009) and economical downturns tin reduce employment levels amongst those leaving welfare (Kwon and Meyer 2011), regardless of race. Since the risk of poverty is tied not only to employment, merely also to the availability of government safety nets (Clampet-Lundquist et al. 2004; Misra, Moller, and Budig 2007), poverty rates may increase amidst all unemployed single mothers in periods of economical downturn. Moreover, in that location has been a turn down in wages across groups in the wake of the recession (Hoynes et al. 2012), which suggests that employment during an economic downturn might non be equally protective from poverty as employment during an economic upswing. Employment levels decreased almost dramatically among loftier school dropouts and those with simply a loftier school degree (Hout, Levanon, and Cumberworth 2011). However, African Americans faced greater economic costs from the Bang-up Recession than whites, including habitation loss and bankruptcy, because they had fewer resources to buoy them in the wake of the recession (Wolff, Owens, and Burak 2011). Moreover, African Americans had the highest rates of unemployment compared to other racial groups prior to the recession and too experienced the greatest increase in unemployment during and in the wake of the recession of 2007–2009 (Hout et al. 2011). Moreover, pedagogy appears to deed as less of a buffer from chore loss for African Americans than information technology does for whites (Hout et al. 2011).

Finally, employment status may play an important role in the relationship betwixt employment, race, and poverty among single mothers. Black and Hispanic women report higher levels of part-time employment and higher levels of unemployment than do their white and Asian peers (Author 2012; England et al. 2004). Role-fourth dimension employment is more tenuous than full-time employment and often lacks the wellness and other bellboy benefits of total-time work (Mishel, Bernstein, and Boushey 2004), as well as a significant loss of pay, every bit function-time piece of work rarely pays besides as full-time work and is for fewer hours (Webber and Williams 2008).

What remains unexplored is whether racial stratification leads to even greater disparities across race among single mother households during harsh economic times. The recession produced a broad based uptick in the unemployment and poverty rates (Grusky et al. 2011) however, some work has pointed to the ways racial minorities, particularly African Americans and to a lesser extent Latinos were peculiarly negatively impacted (Hout et al. 2011;Wolff et al. 2011). Poverty risks may accept elevated for certain groups, as forces that underline enhanced poverty risks (Lin and Harris 2008) become more than acute over this catamenia. Alternatively, the realities of racially stratified opportunities may mean that racial differences in poverty are maintained, demonstrating the ways racial hierarchies persist. Ascent racial inequalities in poverty beyond this period would suggest that race-based poverty represents the result of culmination of a variety of disadvantages plaguing groups of color.

In light of these bug, nosotros provide one of the merely (to our knowledge) time-series appraisals of race, employment and poverty for single mothers. Our x-year view investigates to what degree failing economic times creates greater inequality by enhancing disparities, or unifies circumstances by doing "equal harm" across the race. Additionally, we provide a new way to exam the "value added" past employment for unmarried mothers. Full time employment is a crucial ways to keeping single mothers, of all races, out of poverty, but it is unclear how or if this has changed every bit the economy declined.

two.two.one Hypotheses

The existing literature on the intersections of race, gender, and employment lead us to form 3 primary hypotheses.

First, we anticipate that race volition continue to shape poverty risk above and beyond SES or other background characteristics throughout the decade. Moreover, research suggests that people of color were hit harder by the economic recession than were whites, leading to our kickoff hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1 (Hone): Racial differences in poverty amongst unmarried mothers volition increase across years, regardless of employment status, and other aspects of socioeconomic resource.

Second, the continued racial differences in workforce participation and wages suggest that there will be unequal returns for total-time work for women attempting to leave poverty across the decade:

Hypothesis 2 (Hii). Regardless of menses, Black and Hispanic single mothers working full or part-time will be more than likely to experience poverty than white women who are similarly employed.

Tertiary, the current literature suggests that the broader macroeconomic climate influences a person's ability to exit poverty, but it is unclear whether change over time influences the relationship between race, employment, and poverty. This leads usa to our third hypothesis:

Hypothesis 3 (H3). Regardless of race, those employed total or part-time in 2010, a time of economical downturn, will be more than probable to feel poverty than those similarly employed in 2001.

3.1 Material & Method

three.ane.1 Information and Sample

The data for this research comes from a pooled sample of the American Community Survey (ACS), examining the years 2001, 2005, and 2010 (one yr estimates). 1 These files were made bachelor through the Integrated Public Utilise Microdata Sample series (Ruggles et al. 2010a). The ACS is a repeated cantankerous exclusive survey modeled after the former United States Demography long form, including many of the same questions as the Census long-form (National Research Quango 2007). The full sample includes data on over iii one thousand thousand respondents per yr. We restrict our analytical samples to primary families that include mothers (every bit householders) with co-resident children and perhaps unmarried partners only no spouses. Although some households include multiple families, aggregate estimates of poverty among unmarried-mother (and married-couple) families exercise not vary much if poverty is measured at the family unit level as opposed to the household level (Iceland 2003). Children may be listed as children of householders, children "in-law" (or step-children), grandchildren, and children who are listed as "other relatives."

We began by constructing a household level file of households designated as "female householder – no husband nowadays," which included 318,860 households. We added farther restrictions to households with at least one child, kid-in-law or grandchild (related to the householder) that was under 18 years of age at the time of the survey (116,572 cases dropped) and where valid information on mother's employment was available (53 cases dropped). We included female householders with grandchildren both to ensure that we captured the broadest sample of the children living with a female householder and also equally low-income families are more than likely to rely on extended kin to care to act as primary caregivers for children (Sarkisian and Gerstel 2012). This express our sample to 202,241 families in full, (north=34,031 in 2001; northward=81,490 in 2005; n= 86,720 in 2010).

3.1.2 Variables

Poverty status

Our dependent measure for this paper is presence of a family in poverty. We draw on the poverty status measure out that captures the full family income of the previous year as a pct of the poverty threshold, ranging from 0 to 500 percent or more. A family is considered in poverty if the value is betwixt 0 and 100 percent, indicating an income at (100%) or beneath the poverty line. The poverty threshold, which was established in 1964 by the Social Security Administration, varies depending on the total persons in the family (see Fisher 1992). This measure is critiqued on many fronts (see National Research Quango 1995). Although new measures, most notably the supplemental poverty measure, have been constructed to address these criticisms, this measure requires information non available for years of the ACS used in this analysis. Additionally, employing this standard measure allows for comparability to other analyses used in policy discussions of economic and material hardship.

Race/Ethnicity

We draw on questions on race and Hispanic ethnicity and the number of races selected to construct categories reflecting the standard Census administrative categories fix forth past the Office of Management and Budget (OMB): Hispanic, White, Black/African American, American Indian/Alaskan Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Some other Race, Two or more races. This adopts the convention of classifying respondents commencement into one pan-ethnic Hispanic category, regardless of other race(s) selected, and classifying those selecting one race into their self-reported category. Non-Hispanic respondents selecting multiple races are classified as "Multiracial."

While the U.S. Census allows for a broad range of race/ethnic complexity, the sample sizes of many groups were besides minor to yield meaningful estimates. We therefore narrow our give-and-take of poverty distinctions to the iv largest (monoracial) race/ethnic groups: Whites, Asians, African Americans, and American Indians. Pacific Islanders and Some Other Race are collapsed into ane category and those designated multiple races are placed in a separate category.

Demographic Characteristics

In improver to race, nosotros include covariates for year of data drove, and assign 2001 equally the reference group, with covariates for 2005 and 2010. We adjust for child's age, female parent's historic period, and mother's marital status. We introduce age of the youngest child equally series of dichotomous variables with the categories a) < than 6 years former (reference), b) 6 to x years old, and c) 11 to 17 years old. Female parent'due south marital status has the following categories a) Married (husband not present), b) separated, c) divorced (reference), d) widowed, and eastward) never-married.

Acculturation

Nosotros include several proxy measures of acculturation, including a measure out combining nativity and citizenship of the female parent, as a series of dichotomous variables (reference = U.S. Born mothers) that are assorted with strange-born denizen and strange born, non a citizen. We also include measures of English proficiency. Those who speak merely English are the reference category and the remaining categories are: speaks English or speaks it well, speaks English not well, speaks no English.

Family Limerick

We provide a series of measures tapping different aspects of family composition. We include covariates for presence of cohabiting partner (cohabiting=ane). Additionally, we command for whether that partner was of the same sexual activity (in this example female) as the respondent (aforementioned-sexual practice=1). Using a variable constructed by IPUMS, we besides include a control for whether the household has three or more than co-resident generations in occupancy (1=multigenerational, 0=otherwise), and a continuous mensurate for the full number of children in the family.

Maternal employment

To mensurate mother'south employment, we introduce a chiselled measure for workforce participation of working full time (35 hours per calendar week or more) (reference), part time (betwixt 1 and 34 hours per week), unemployed, and not in the labor strength. We draw on the "usual hours worked" variable to distinguish between full time and part-time employment.

Other Socioeconomic Status measures

To adjust for other homo capital influences, nosotros include mother's education and mother'south occupation. Mother's didactics is entered as a categorical variable denoting less than loftier school educational activity (reference), loftier school (i.east., high school graduate/GED), some college experience with no degree or an associate's caste, and college degree or more than. Finally, we conform for occupational status, using standard occupational categories of (1) professional/managerial (reference), (2) service, (3) sales, (4) production, and (5) armed services and related services. Occupational data comes from a variable indicating current or most recent occupation, and, amid those with more than one job, from the occupation to which the private devotes the most fourth dimension. In addition, we adjust for receipt of public assistance with 2 dichotomous measures indicating a) whether or non anyone in the household receives food stamps or a food stamp benefit card and b) indicating whether the householder receives income from a state or local welfare office.

3.2 Analysis

The assay involves estimating univariate and bivariate statistics likewise as multivariate analyses of the likelihood of a family'due south presence in poverty. The ACS engages a multistage circuitous sampling strategy that must exist adapted for in statistical tests. The IPUMS extracts of this data provide person weights, cluster, and strata variables to estimate variances and standard errors using Taylor series linearization method to adjust for complex survey blueprint (Ruggles et al. 2010b). This arroyo differs from the utilise of replicate weights that are also employed to arrange for the multistage sampling approach of the ACS. Replicate weights, while more precise, are only available for ACS samples taken from 2005 onward. To ensure twelvemonth-to-year continuity in our pooled sample, we employ strata, household weights, and cluster variables that are bachelor at every year of the ACS.

We employ household-level weights for descriptive and multivariate analyses, every bit recommended past IPUMS (Ruggles et al. 2010b). All of our descriptive analyses, statistical tests, and multivariate models apply these weights to limit the impact of sampling error on our estimates of standard errors and significance tests. These weights and other design bug are adapted through use of the "svy" commands in Stata (version 12). We also computed variance aggrandizement factors to bank check for multicollinearity in our statistical models finding no testify of collinearity.

Our multivariate assay estimates the likelihood of a single-female parent family unit living in poverty. We employ standard logistic regression models to analyze this dichotomous outcome and nowadays relative risk ratios of poverty, which are the ratio of probabilities of poverty instead of odds. When predicting dichotomous outcomes, odds ratios and relative risk ratios are generally equivalent. However, when the consequence is common, say exceeding 30 percent, odds ratios may overestimate the likelihood. Poverty among single female parent families is more than 35 percentage in any given yr under ascertainment, qualifying equally a mutual occurrence. Interpretation of a relative take a chance ratio is highly similar to that of an odds ratio, where we study the percent alter in likelihood of being in one category compared to respective reference group.

4.1 Results

Table 1 shows descriptive information about our sample of single mothers at each twelvemonth: 2001, 2005, and 2010. Nosotros note changes that are statistically pregnant (p < .01) with superscripts a (2001 vs. 2005) and b (2005 vs. 2010). Poverty is increasingly prevalent among unmarried mothers across the 2000s. More than ane-tertiary of households headed by unmarried mothers lived in poverty in 2001 (35.7%) and this increased to 40.5 per centum over approximately ten years. On average, single mothers are in their late thirties at the time of survey; most are either divorced or never married, and they normally head a household with at least one kid under six years old. Profiles have shifted some from 2001–2010 with an increasing share headed by never married women (33.7% vs. 40.0%) and raising immature children under half dozen (38.7% vs. 40.0%). The composition of families has also shifted since 2001, with an increasing share of families including a cohabiting partner (xiii.3% vs. 15.8%), or housing a multigenerational family (12.9% vs. 15.3%). Generally, single mothers are almost often U.S. born and speak but English, though an increasing share, 9.2 percent in 2010 from 6.viii percent in 2001, are un-naturalized immigrants.

Table 1

Descriptive Statistics of Independent Variables (except Race/ethnicity) among female person headed families, 2000, 2005, 2010

Variables 2001 2005 2010

Poverty 35.7a 38.3b 40.5
Mother'south Age (Thousand (SE)) 38.three(.08)a 38.9(.05)b 39.6 (.05)
Mother's Marital Status
Married, no spouse present 5.0 5.1 five.one
Separated 14.viia 13.9b 12.7
Divorced 38.1a 36.5b 34.9
Widowed viii.4 vii.viiib 7.4
Never Married 33.7a 36.7b 40.0
Age of Youngest Child
under six 38.viia 40.1b 41.7
Between 7 and 10 27.6a 25.5b 24.8
Betwixt xi and18 33.7 34.4b 33.5
Number of minor children in household i.79(.01) 1.79 (.01)b ane.81(.01)
Cohabiting 13.3a 13.3b fifteen.8
Same Sexual practice Partner 0.four 0.5 0.five
Multigenerational Household (3+ generations) 12.ninea thirteen.1b 15.3
Nativity and Citizenship
 U.Southward. Born 88.2a 86.1b 84.5
 Foreign Built-in, Citizen five.1a 5.7b 6.3
 Foreign Born, Non-citizen 6.8a 8.2b 9.2
Female parent's English Proficiency
 Speaks merely English 82.2a 79.9b 77.8
 Speaks English/Well xiii.2a 14.threeb xvi.2
 Speak English not well 3.twoa 3.8b 4.3
 Speaks No English language 1.foura 2.0 1.9
North (Sample Size) 34,031 81,490 86,720
Mother's Employment
 Full time 57.iva 54.8b 52.1
 Part Fourth dimension 12.1a 13.ivb 15.7
 Unemployed 7.1a 8.0b 10.4
 Not in the Labor Force (NILF) 23.iv 23.nineb 22.0
Mother'due south Education
 Less than High School 22.foura 19.4b 17.0
 High School 31.2a 31.5b 27.nine
 Some College 33.iia 34.5b 39.0
 College Degree or More 13.iiia fourteen.7b sixteen.1
Mother's Occupation
 Managerial or Professional 10.0 9.6b 10.4
 Service and Manufacture 35.6a 38.ix 39.4
 Sales and Office 31.iia 30.ib 28.1
 Production 11.2a ten.0b 8.iv
 Military machine 0.005 0.01b 0.08
 No occupation 11.9a 11.fourb 13.7
Region
 Northeast xviii.ninea 17.eight 17.three
 Midwest 21.8a 21.4 20.nine
 Due south 38.9a 40.4 41.0
 West 20.5 20.iv twenty.8
Public Assistance
 Receives income from welfare ten.7a nine.ninea 8.eight
 Receives Food Stamps 26.7a 33.1a 42.0
Northward (Sample Size) 34,031 81,490 86,720

While many demographic characteristics remained fairly stable over the decade, we notice increased vulnerability in several labor market characteristics. While the majority of women are employed full-time in 2010, this is decreasingly the case across time, (57% in 2001 vs. 52% in 2010). Meanwhile a growing share of mothers are either part-fourth dimension employed or unemployed compared to about no alter amongst those not in the labor force (NILF). We detect a steady share of single mothers occupying professional/managerial sector (approximately ten%) and an increasing share employed in the service industry (35.6% vs. 39.4%). We observe increases in educational attainment with a growing percentage having some college (which includes assembly degrees) or college degrees and beyond. Every bit of 2010, near an equal percent of single mothers have a college degree or more every bit have less than a high school diploma (16.1% vs. 17.0%) in stark contrast to 2001, when those with less than high schoolhouse were more mutual than were higher graduates (22.4% vs. xiii.three%). Geographically, single mothers are full-bodied in the poorest region of the country, the Due south, with close to 40 percent at each year; meanwhile the Midwest and W each accept approximately 20 percent. Receipt of public assistance has also inverse, specifically far more mothers receive food stamps in 2010 than in 2001 (42% vs. 26.7%). The percent receiving income from country or local welfare offices has declined slightly, from x per centum in 2001 to eight.8 percent in 2010.

4.one.2 Poverty Rates and Single Mothers: 2001–2010

In Table 2, nosotros show the race/ethnic composition of single mothers across each year and the associated poverty rates past race-ethnicity. Over the decade, the movement in the race/ethnic composition of mothers trends closely to the nation as a whole. Whites represent a diminishing share of female-headed families (49% in 2001 vs. 45.5% in 2010), while Blackness women remain steady, heading 30 percent of single mother families in 2001 and 29 percent in 2010. Hispanics occupy increasing shares of single mother families, with Hispanic women heading twenty percent of these families in 2010, upward from xv per centum at the beginning of the decade. Meanwhile, the share of families headed by Asians rose slightly, from 1.9 to 2.1 percentage. American Indian mothers represent barely more than one percent of mothers at whatsoever year, and the share of Pacific Islander/Another Race mothers is less than ane per centum. The per centum of single mothers declaring multiple races (i.east. "Multiracial") correspond just less than ii pct of mothers at any given year.

Table 2

Distribution of Mother's Race/Ethnicity and associated Poverty Rates, 2001–2010

Racial Composition Percentage in Poverty

2001 2005 2010 2001 2005 2010

White 49.0 47.0 45.4 28.five 31.one 33.7
Blackness 30.4 thirty.5 28.8 42.iv 44.vii 46.two
Asian one.nine 2.ane 2.1 30.vii 27.0 27.7
American Indian 1.1 i.two i.1 46.4 44.4 47.9
Hispanic 15.7 17.4 20.vi 44.89 47.iii 48.4
Pacific Islander/SOR 0.3 0.iv 0.3 35.54 37.ii 37.0
Multiple Races 1.7 1.5 one.8 39.1 43.ane 42.7

Sample Size 34,031 81,490 86,720 34,031 81,490 86,720

While poverty has increased overall (run into Tabular array 1), race/ethnic groundwork strongly shapes the level of poverty and caste of modify over time. The highest poverty rates (in backlog of twoscore%) occur amidst Black, American Indian, and Hispanic women. At the close of the decade, well-nigh one-half of women in these race/ethnic groups head a family in poverty. Poverty is least common amid single-mother families headed past white and Asian women, with poverty rates increasing from 28 percent to i-tertiary for families headed by white women and poverty rates decreasing for single-female parent families headed by Asians from xxx.7 to 27.seven percent. Poverty rates amid Pacific Islanders/Some other race mothers are slightly lower than for single mothers in general, between 35 and 37 percent, meanwhile poverty has increased among Multiracial mothers, from 39 to 42 percent.

4.1.three Race and Employment over Fourth dimension

Table 3 shows changes in employment profiles over time and across race. Total-fourth dimension employment is associated with a lower likelihood to written report living in poverty, but employment security -- as indicated past decreases in total-time employment and increases in part-time piece of work and unemployment -- appears to have dropped over the 2000s. This turn down is apparent for white and Black women, whose rate of full time employment has dropped from 60.vii percent to 54.5 pct for whites and from 55.8 percentage to 50.4 percentage for Blackness women. Meanwhile, Hispanic women's full-time employment has only declined slightly, from 51.vii percent to 49.four percentage. Notably, Asian women accept increased their presence among the full-fourth dimension employed, from 54.nine pct to 58.three percentage. Office-time employment, which is markedly less resistant to poverty, was more than common in 2010 than 2000 across nearly all race/ethnic groups. Between xv and 16 percent of white, Asian, and Hispanic women are part-fourth dimension employed equally of 2010, upwardly from betwixt 11 and 13 percent, respectively, in 2001. Unemployment has also risen across all race/ethnic groups, with the highest rates, 13 and 11 percent respectively, among Black and American Indian women and the lowest among Asian women, less than 7 percent of whom are unemployed in 2010. The share of women NILF has varied considerably by race, with decreasing shares amidst not-White women, virtually markedly among Asian women, whose share declined from 29 percent to nineteen.9 percent over this ten-year period.

Table 3

Employment Status by Year for each Race/ethnic grouping, 2001–2010 (Source: American Customs Survey)

Full time Part Time Unemployed Not in Labor Strength

2001 2005 2010 2001 2005 2010 2001 2005 2010 2001 2005 2010
White lx.vii 57.6 54.five 13.9 fifteen.one xvi.seven five.ane half-dozen.0 eight.three 20.3 21.4 20.v
Black 55.8 52.eight 50.4 9.5 11.v 13.viii nine.vii 10.nine xiii.2 25.0 24.eight 22.7
Asian 54.9 58.0 58.3 12.iii 11.9 15.0 3.seven 3.6 6.8 29.1 26.5 nineteen.9
American Indian 46.0 46.1 47.8 ten.2 xi.viii 11.5 9.iii nine.9 eleven.9 34.5 32.iii 28.ix
Hispanic 51.7 51.7 49.4 11.5 12.three 16.v vii.8 8.three 9.9 29.0 27.eight 24.two
Pacific Islander/SOR 56.3 49.v 58.ane 13.2 13.9 eleven.four seven.2 6.4 vii.4 23.three thirty.1 23.ii
Multiple Races 55.three 48.four 47.4 13.ix fifteen.vii fifteen.8 10.3 10.4 13.0 twenty.5 25.6 23.8

4.2.1 Multivariate Models

We now turn to our multivariate models, which investigate the relationships between race, employment and poverty amidst single mothers, shown in Table 4. Nosotros begin with a baseline model that shows the relative risk of poverty across mother's race/ethnicity, independent of twelvemonth (Model 1). Our get-go question is whether increases in poverty beyond yr accept impacted unmarried mothers as across race, with the prediction that poverty has increased even more and then among non-white single mothers every bit compared to white mothers (Hi), which we appraise with a series of interaction effects betwixt race and year (come across Model Ii). We so adjust for demographic, family unit, and acculturative characteristics that may also exist associated with poverty (see Model III). We then arrange for socioeconomic characteristics that may exist associated with poverty, including the receipt of public assist (see Model 4). In Models V though Seven, we exam the relationships between maternal employment and poverty and explore to what degree these associations vary across race and fourth dimension. We anticipate a greater risk of poverty amongst those not employed full fourth dimension, and for women of color and women interviewed in 2005 or 2010 to exist more than likely to face poverty than non-fulltime employed white women (H2) or women interviewed in 2001 (H3).

Table 4

Multivariate Logistic Regression analyses: Relative Take a chance Ratios (RRR) and Odds Ratios (OR) of hazard of poverty amidst Single Mothers, 2001–20101 (north=202,241)

Constant Model I Model II Model Iii Model IV

−0.89*** −0.92*** −0.20*** −0.47***
RRR/OR RRR/OR RRR/OR RRR/OR
Race of Female parent (ref=NH White)2
 Black/African American ane.40*** 1.39*** i.28*** 1.09***
 Asian 0.92** 0.92 0.93 0.96
 Native American/American Indian ane.42*** 2.17*** 1.34*** 1.xi
 Hispanic 1.46*** ii.04*** 1.nineteen*** 0.99
 Pacific Islander/Some Other Race 1.sixteen* 1.38 i.08 1.03
 Multiracial i.29*** ane.61*** 1.19* 1.01
Year (ref=2001)
 2005 1.06*** ane.06*** i.06*** one.01
 2010 one.12*** 1.12*** 1.xiii*** 1.02
Race * Year Interactions3
 Black*2005 0.97 0.97 0.99
 Black*2010 0.91* 0.91* 0.97
 Asian*2005 0.74* 0.78+ 1.00
 Asian*2010 0.68** 0.79+ 1.x
 Hispanic*2005 0.97 0.92 1.05
 Hispanic*2010 0.90* 0.87** 0.98
Demographic and Family unit Composition
Mother's Historic period 0.98*** 0.97***
Mother'due south Marital Status (ref=Divorced)
 Married, spouse absent 1.34*** 1.17***
 Separated i.38*** 1.xvi***
 Widowed ane.24*** 0.91***
 Never Married one.37*** ane.11***
Age of Youngest Child (ref=historic period<6)
 Historic period 6–x 0.76*** 0.91***
 Age 11–17 0.64*** 0.89***
Female parent Cohabiting (ref=no partner) i.11*** 1.13***
Female parent has same sex partner 0.87* 0.79***
Multigenerational Household 0.70*** 0.lx***
Acculturative Characteristics
Mother's Nascence & Citiz. (ref=U.s.a. Born)
 Female parent is Foreign born, The states Citizen one.05* 0.91***
 Female parent is Foreign built-in, Non citizen 0.78*** 0.89***
Language Ability (Ref=Speaks English Only)
 Speaks no English 1.82*** one.22***
 Speaks English not well 1.58*** 1.15***
 Speaks English language/Well 1.05** 1.02
Socioeconomic Characteristics
Mothers Employment (ref=Full Fourth dimension employment)
 Office Fourth dimension 1.83***
 Unemployed 1.98***
 Not in the Labor Force two.47***
Mother's Education (ref= Higher or Above)
 Less than loftier school ane.72***
 Loftier School i.51***
 Some College 1.27***
Mother's Occupational Status (ref= Professional)
 Service one.57***
 Sales ane.35***
 Production 1.19***
 War machine 0.79+
 No occupation 1.28***
Public Assistance
 Receives Income from welfare 1.05**
 Receives Food Stamps 1.79***
F statistic 324.93*** 143.78*** 323.87*** 600.54***

iv.ii.2 Have Poverty Increases varied past Race?

According to Model I of Table 4, on boilerplate, African American, Hispanic, and Native American mothers have the highest risks of poverty, in backlog of 40 percent higher relative to white women. Risks for Multiracial, Pacific Islander, and SOR women are notwithstanding in backlog of white women. Asian women stand up out equally having a lower take chances of poverty by a modest margin (RRR=0.92). Relative to 2001, poverty risks for unmarried mothers, across race, is six percent higher in 2005 and 12 percent higher in 2010 compared with 2001.

We test our offset hypothesis in Model II by adding a series of interactions between race-ethnicity and yr. The coefficients for 2005 and 2010 bear witness that, for whites, poverty gamble increased significantly over time. Yet countering our expectations, we do not detect evidence of increasing racial disparities in poverty levels across year for near groups. The significant, negative (beneath 1.00) interactions between race-ethnicity and yr testify that the race gap for Blacks and Hispanics relative to whites declined over time, with Blacks and Hispanics showing a smaller increment in the odds of poverty compared with white peers betwixt 2001 and 2010. This is particularly surprising given other research that has reported increased racial disparities after the Smashing Recession (Hout et al. 2011; Wolff et al. 2011). We too observe that Asian single mothers in 2005 and 2010 were less likely than whites to report poverty.

Figure 1 graphically depicts these changes across the decade, highlighting the increased risk of poverty in both 2005 and 2010 for whites and the narrowing racial gap between 2001 and 2010 across whites versus Blacks and Hispanics. Asian Americans, in contrast, experienced a decreased take a chance of poverty in both 2005 and in 2010. This counters our original expectations (H1) and suggests that the recession may have decreased racial inequalities in poverty (but not decreased poverty levels itself) amongst white, Blackness, and Hispanic single mother households.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.  Object name is nihms819748f1.jpg

Risk of Poverty for Unmarried Mothers by Race-ethnicity and Year (2001–2010)

* Asterisks betoken statistically significant difference (alpha =.05) relative to 2001 poverty estimate (generated from Model II. Tabular array IV).

These results remain intact upon introducing a range of demographic, family, and acculturative characteristics in Model III. Poverty is negatively associated with maternal historic period, having children who are older than six years former, and living in a multigenerational household. Poverty risks tend to be higher among mothers who are unmarried, separated, widowed, or married (spouse absent-minded) when compared to divorced mothers. Mothers who are non English speakers are far more likely to exist poor, however those who are strange born citizens have about comparable poverty risks to the US born and those who are non-citizens are less likely to be poor.

In Model Four we introduce socioeconomic variables (education, income, and occupation) too as receipt of public assist (food stamps, income from welfare ). Not surprisingly, poverty is higher amongst those who are not employed full fourth dimension, take less than a college education, or are not employed in a professional person occupation, meanwhile those who receive public help are more likely to be in poverty. Net of these bug, nosotros find little bear witness race/indigenous variation in poverty among unmarried mothers. Black women are still significantly more likely to be in poverty, merely past a small-scale margin (RRR=ane.09), while all other groups accept RRR that are close to one.00. Ancillary analyses (not shown) reveals that net of their education, employment, and occupational characteristics, Black, Native Americans, and Hispanic women still have higher poverty rates than White women. Notwithstanding, receiving welfare, which is a function of being in poverty, reduces the remaining differences equally these groups are virtually probable to receive public assistance. Finally, in supplemental analyses not shown, merely bachelor upon request, we examine models I–IV for unmarried mother households in which the mother is non cohabitating and observe relatively similar patterns beyond race and time.

iv.2.iii Employment and poverty: does the association vary by race or across time?

In Table v in Models 5 through Vii, nosotros examine the office of employment in unmarried mothers' poverty and how it potentially intersects with race and time. In this table, we add a serial of interactions to our Table 4 covariates to test whether the relationships between poverty and employment status vary beyond race-ethnicity, and whether the relationships between employment status and poverty vary over time. Employment is strongly associated with poverty: a unmarried mother who is not full-time employed (i.e. being part-time employed, unemployed, or not in the labor force) experiences nearly or to a higher place twice the hazard of poverty compared with single mothers who were employed fulltime. Hypothesis ii asks whether this human relationship between poverty and employment varies by race. According to Model V of Table 5, the relationship between employment and poverty does not seem to vary by race for the bulk of racial groups, and nosotros tabular array only meaning interactions to notation some exceptions (interactions for all races are included in the model and full output is available upon request). For Hispanic women, Asian women NILF, and Native American women working function-time, poverty risks were lower than they were for whites working at similar levels of employment. Hispanics, however, are the only group for whom all categories of labor force participation varied significantly from whites in their associations with run a risk of poverty, suggesting a lower run a risk of poverty for Hispanics at each level of employment relative to whites. Withal, we are cautious to translate this as indicating that Hispanic women experience benefits to beingness exterior of the total-time employment, but rather that their high rates of poverty indicate that the employment makes less of a difference to Hispanics' poverty levels overall. Thus there is relatively little support for our 2d hypothesis.

Table 5

Multivariate Logistic Regression analyses: Relative Risk Ratios (RRR) and Odds Ratios (OR) of risk of poverty amongst Single Mothers1, 2001–20101 (n=202,241) ane

Constant Model Five Model VI Model VII

−0.54*** −0.41*** −ii.09
RRR/OR RRR/OR RRR/OR
Race of Mother (ref=NH White)2
 Black/African American one.24*** one.24*** ane.eleven***
 Asian 0.91 0.91 1.02
 American Indian/Alaskan Native (AIAN) 1.21*** 1.23** one.16+
 Hispanic 1.13*** 1.14*** 1.01**
 Pacific Islander/Another Race 1.05 one.05 1.00
 Multiracial i.09+ 1.ten* 0.98
Year (ref=2001)
 2005 1.03** 1.04* 1.00
 2010 1.08*** i.09 0.94***
Race * Year Interactions3
 Black*2005 0.97* 0.97 0.99
 Black*2010 .xc* 0.92+ 0.98
Mothers Employment (ref=Full Time employment)
 Function Time 1.98*** 1.98*** one.84***
 Unemployed 2.fifteen*** 2.fifteen*** ane.94***
 Not In the Labor Force 2.94*** 2.94*** 2.44***
Race* Employment
 Asian* NILF 0.56*** 0.71*
 AIAN* Part Time 0.64** 0.57*
 Hispanic* Part Time 0.74*** 0.77***
 Hispanic* Unemployment 0.72*** 0.78**
 Hispanic* NILF 0.62*** 0.62***
Employment* Yr
 Part time*2005 0.96 0.97
 Role-time*2010 1.16*** 1.xv*
 Unemployed*2005 i.03 1.05
 Unemployed*2010 one.23** 1.35***
 NILF*2005 i.05 ane.13*
 NILF*2010 one.57*** 1.53***
Female parent's Education (ref=College and Above)
Less than Loftier School 1.71***
Loftier School 1.51***
Some College 1.27***
Mother'south Occupation (ref=Prof.)
Service 1.56***
Sales ane.35***
Production 1.xix***
Armed services 0.78+
No Occupation 1.28***

F Statistic 466.06*** 658.01*** 438.88***

Next we enquire whether the disadvantages of existence outside of full-fourth dimension employment accept varied across fourth dimension. In back up of our tertiary hypothesis (H3), we find a stronger connection between being outside of full-fourth dimension employment and poverty in 2010 (see Model Half-dozen). We find significant positive interactions revealing that poverty is more likely for mothers who are part-time employed, unemployed or not in the labor force in 2010 compared to 2001. To better highlight and interpret the alter in human relationship between employment status and poverty over fourth dimension, we have graphed the relative risk of poverty past employment condition beyond year, shown in Figure 2. Nosotros tested for year-to-year significant differences (with 2001 as the reference) in poverty rates, marked with an asterisk, to highlight how employment operates across the fourth dimension periods. According to Effigy two, the probability of poverty has significantly increased from 2001 to 2010 for every labor force condition, with the sharpest increases for those outside of full time employment. While this blueprint of vulnerability is not entirely surprising, the shift in caste of vulnerability is notable. This provides additional back up for our tertiary hypothesis (Hiii) that employment would prove to be less protective during periods of economic downturn.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.  Object name is nihms819748f2.jpg

Risk of Poverty for Single Mothers by Employment Status and Year (2001–2010)

*Asterisks point statistically significant difference (alpha =.05) relative to 2001 poverty estimate (generated from Model Five, Table five).

In Model VII, which adjusts for all controls (just socioeconomic characteristics are shown), the relationship between part-fourth dimension employment and non in the labor forcefulness and poverty in 2010 versus 2001 compared to total-time employment remains little inverse. Moreover, poverty risks for Blacks and Native Americans all remain significantly college than whites even in the final model, though the Hispanic mothers, net of these bug, take nearly parallel poverty rates relative to white women (RRR=i.01).

v.i Discussion, Limitations, and Determination

This paper seeks to evaluate at unlike economic periods the benefits of employment across race for lifting single mothers out of poverty. As the majority of enquiry on single mothers and poverty has focused on the role of wedlock (see Lichter, Graefe, and Browne 2003 for an insightful discussion), this newspaper makes a unique contribution by comparison the risk of poverty by race and employment status across the first decade of the 21st century. Overall, the findings paint a bleak picture of the price the last decade has had on the well existence of unmarried-female parent families. Showtime, nosotros find that poverty rates dramatically increased amidst nigh single-mother families between 2001 and 2010 with the exception of Asian-American families. Second, nosotros find that racial disparities in poverty announced to lessen for some groups at the finish of the decade, suggesting a reduction in inequality between whites and Blacks and Hispanics. Third, our multivariate analyses revealed a sharp increase in poverty risk for those non in full-time employment at the end of the decade (come across Figure 2), while the share of those in full-time employment declined during the decade across all groups except Asians (see Table 3).

At the start, centre and close of the decade, we notice that Blacks, American Indians, Hispanics, and Multiracials all experience significantly higher adventure of poverty than their white counterparts, although the poverty gap betwixt whites and Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians was moderately lower at the end of the decade. We further test for differences in the benefits of employment to poverty across race with interaction effects finding mixed evidence that the impact of employment depended on racial background. For well-nigh groups, there was footling modify in the human relationship betwixt employment and poverty depending on racial background, but Hispanics were the outlier. Moreover, we find that the relationship between employment status and poverty risk changes across the decade—those outside of full-time employment have higher risks of poverty at the end of the decade than at the offset. And more women were exterior of full-time employment by the terminate of the decade than at the beginning. Ultimately, the total models presented in table 5 point to connected economic vulnerability of Black and American Indian single mothers and a lingering, yet diminished, racial gap in single mother poverty rates.

By comparing the links between race, employment, and poverty beyond time, our research lends some insight into how the recession impacted single-mother families—an already economically disadvantaged group. Concurrent with prior research, we find that in the wake of an economic downturn, single-female parent families are at increased risk of experiencing poverty (run across Clampet-Lundquist et al. 2004; Misra et al. 2007). We point to the changing relationship between employment status and poverty as a crucial component of the increased risk of poverty. Moreover, the changing distribution of women in employment categories, specially the increased presence of women amongst the function-time and the unemployed, is of utmost importance for agreement why single mothers may face this increased level of vulnerability during an economical downturn. Our models advise that some of the increased risk of poverty stems from the decreasing admission to total-fourth dimension piece of work combined with the increasing vulnerability of those in part-time and unemployed piece of work statuses. On its ain, this would be striking, merely we see this pass up in access to full-fourth dimension work despite the fact that the unmarried mothers of 2010 are improve educated than their counterparts were in 2001 (run into Table i).

There are several implications of our analysis for studies of employment, single-parent families, and poverty risks across race. First, our findings serve as a challenge to the notion that increased employment rates alone could solve the racial differences in child poverty. It is quite clear even when we concord employment constant, racial differences in poverty, peculiarly betwixt whites and Blacks and whites and American Indians, still persist. The reduced race/indigenous variation of Model 4 reflects the office of public help, pointing, perhaps, to the ways combining the labor market and the public safety net is necessary to make ends meet. Second, the particularly high take chances of poverty amidst those outside of full-time employment (as seen in figure 2) suggests that access to full-fourth dimension employment may be a crucial dimension of single mother poverty and may help explain some of the racial differences in poverty rates. Third, our observation that racial disparities in single poverty risks declined marginally at the end of the decade is surprising. While we had anticipated finding evidence of increased (or maintained) racial disparities, particularly given other findings suggesting Blacks and Hispanics faced greater economical costs from the recession than whites (Hout et al. 2011; Wolff et al. 2011), our findings suggest a decrease in the poverty gap between whites and other groups. This decline appears to reflect a particularly abrupt increase in poverty take chances amongst white mothers simply not declines in poverty amid other disadvantaged groups. In fact, other groups, including Blacks, also experienced rate increases in overall poverty levels. And overall rates of poverty risk remain much higher for Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians, budgeted nigh l pct in 2010, when compared to whites, one third of whom are in poverty at the end of the decade. The decrease in disparity is surprising, nonetheless, and is not explained away by the factors included in our models. Both whites and Blacks experienced decreases in overall employment rates and increases in unemployment rates (which would lead u.s.a. to expect the poverty gap to remain the same over time, rather than reduce). It may be that participation in full-fourth dimension paid employment (for which white women have the highest levels compared to Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians) may exist less protective in 2010 compared to earlier in the decade. Yet, despite a decrease in the gap at the terminate of the decade, the remaining persistent racial disparities among single mothers suggests that a continued pattern of racial inequality that disproportionately harms children of colour (for farther discussion encounter Huston, McLoyd, and Coll 1994).

There are several limitations to this inquiry. Start, the information used is cross-sectional rather than longitudinal. Additionally, there may be unmeasured accomplice differences between the single-mothers in 2001, 2005, and those in 2010 that impact their hazard of poverty. This concern may exist somewhat alleviated past the fact that education and occupation levels rose across the decade, which suggests that the younger cohorts should have more access to man capital letter, and, therefore, be at a lower risk of poverty, suggesting that our findings may actually downplay the furnishings of the recession. Moreover, some measures facilitate entry into poverty (eastward.g. chronic unemployment, less education), while others are a product of living in poverty (i.eastward. receiving food stamps). Time to come inquiry should further tease apart these factors.

Looking forward, we contend that it can exist quite useful, even necessary, to examine the intersections of race and employment status when assessing poverty chance for single-mother families, particularly when this is combined with an test of the affect of unlike economic fourth dimension periods. Our enquiry contributes to the notion that race continues to matter among vulnerable population like single mothers. Moreover, prior inquiry suggests that moving from welfare to work can reduce both poverty rates and expectations of future fabric hardship for women who notice full-time paid work (Clampet-Lundquist et al. 2004; Danziger et al. 2000). While these are sound strategies, our enquiry suggests that fifty-fifty total-fourth dimension employment may not lift single-parent families out of poverty (come across figure 2). This may be particularly truthful if women are unable to maintain full-time employment (encounter Author 2011 for discussion). Our research does, suggest, still, that those outside of total-fourth dimension employment were about at risk of poverty at the finish of the decade. This suggests that policies aimed at supporting women's full-time employment would probable prove nigh beneficial in reducing single mother family'due south poverty risk. Increasing all women'due south access to full-time employment may besides be the best way to reduce racial inequalities in child poverty. Our research finds that by the decade's close poverty was a norm for single mothers, affecting the majority of women who are non employed total-time, and, disproportionately impacting women of color and their children, despite the heightened risk for white women at the middle and end of the decade.

Acknowledgments

The starting time author acknowledges support provided by the Population Research Institute at the Pennsylvania State University, which is supported by an infrastructure grant by the National Institutes of Health (2R24HD041025-11).

Footnotes

*The authors thank John Iceland, Daniel Lichter, Ryan Lamare, Rose Mederios, and the members of the Pennsylvania State University School of Labor and Employment Relations faculty paper workshop for their detailed and insightful comments on prior iterations of this paper. We additionally profoundly appreciate the comments of the editor, Stephanie Moller, and the reviewer.

iThe ACS reports response rates of 96.7% for 2001, 97.three% for 2005, 97.5% for 2010. For additional information, delight see: http://www.demography.gov/acs/world wide web/methodology/sample-size-and-data-quality/response-rates/

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers nosotros are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before information technology is published in its terminal citable form. Please note that during the product process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that utilize to the periodical pertain.

Contributor Information

Sarah Damaske, The Pennsylvania Land Academy.

Jenifer L. Bratter, Rice Academy.

Adrianne Frech, The University of Akron.

6.one References

  • Alon Sigal, Haberfeld Yitchak. Labor Strength Attachment and the Evolving Wage Gap Between White, Black, and Hispanic Young Women. Work and Occupations. 2007;34(4):369–98. [Google Scholar]
  • Autor David. Center for American Progress and The Hamilton Project. 2010. The Polarization of Job Opportunities in the Us Labor Market: Implications for Employment and Earnings. [Google Scholar]
  • Brady David, Fullerton Andrew S, Cross Jennifer Moren. More than Than Just Nickels and Dimes: A Cross-National Assay of Working Poverty in Flush Democracies. Social Problems. 2010;57(4):559–85. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Browne Irene, Misra Joya. The Intersection of Gender and Race in the Labor Market place. Almanac Review of Sociology. 2003;29:487–513. [Google Scholar]
  • Cancian Maria, Danziger Sheldon. Changing Poverty, Changing Policies. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2009. [Google Scholar]
  • Ciabattari Teresa. Single Mothers, Social Capital, and Work-Family unit Conflict. Journal of Family unit Issues. 2007;28(1):34–60. [Google Scholar]
  • Clampet-Lundquist Susan, Edin Kathryn, London Andrew, Scott Ellen K, Hunter Vicki. Making a Way Out of No Way. In: Crouter Ann C, Booth Alan., editors. Piece of work-Family unit Challenges for Low-Income Parents and Their Children. New York: Taylor & Francis; 2003. pp. 203–41. [Google Scholar]
  • Danziger Sandra, et al. Prosperity for All?: The Economic Boom and African Americans. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2000. Barriers to the Employment of Welfare Recipients; pp. 245–78. [Google Scholar]
  • DeNavas-Walt Carmen, Proctor Bernadette D, Smith Jessica C. Electric current Population Reports. U.S. Census Bureau; 2010. Income, Poverty, and Wellness Insurance Coverage in the United States: 2009; pp. 60–238. [Google Scholar]
  • Dozier Raine. Accumulating Disadvantage: The Growth in the Black–White Wage Gap Amidst Women. Journal of African American Studies. 2010;14(3):279–301. [Google Scholar]
  • Elmelech Yuval, Lu Hsien-Hen. Race, Ethnicity, and the Gender Poverty Gap. Social Scientific discipline Research. 2004;33(1):158–82. [Google Scholar]
  • England Paula, Christopher Karen, Reid Lori Fifty. Gender, Race, Ethnicity, and Wages. In: Brown Irene., editor. Latinas and African American Women at Piece of work: Race, Gender, and Economic Inequality, Latinas and African American at Work: Race, Gender and Economic Inequality. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 1999. pp. 139–82. [Google Scholar]
  • England Paula, Ross Mary, Garcia-Beaulieu Carmen. Women's Employment Among Blacks, White and 3 Groups of Latinas: Practise More Privileged Women Have Higher Employment? Gender & Society. 2004;eighteen(4):494–509. [Google Scholar]
  • Fisher Gordan. Poverty guidelines for 1992. Social Security Bulletin. 1992;55(1):43–46. [Google Scholar]
  • Grusky David B, Western Bruce, Wimer Christopher. The Great Recession. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  • Hamil-Luker Jenifer. Women'south Wages: Accomplice Differences in Returns to Pedagogy and Training over Time. Social Science Quarterly. 2005;86(supplement):1261–78. [Google Scholar]
  • Higginbotham Elizabeth, Romero Mary. Women and Work: Exploring Race, Ethnicity, and Class. G Oaks: SAGE; 1997. [Google Scholar]
  • Hoffman Saul D, Maynard Rebecca A. The Consequences of Teenage Childbearing on the Mother and Their Spouse. Washington, D.C: The Urban Institute; 2008. [Google Scholar]
  • Hoynes Hilary W, Miller Douglas L, Schaller Jessamyn. Who Suffers During Recessions? National Bureau of Economical Research; 2012. (No. w17951) [Google Scholar]
  • Hout Michael, Levanon Asaf, Cumberworth Erin. The Groovy Recession. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. Task Loss and Unemployment; pp. 59–81. Retrieved October 23, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  • Huston Aletha C, McLoyd Vonnie C, Coll Cynthia Garcia. Children and Poverty: Problems in Contemporary Inquiry. Child Development. 1994;65(2):275–82. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Iceland John. Why Poverty Remains High: The Role of Income Growth, Economic Inequality, and Changes in Family Structure, 1949–1999. Demography. 2003;40(three):499–519. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Kwon Hyeok C, Meyer Daniel R. How Do Economical Downturns Impact Welfare leavers? A Comparison of Two Cohorts. Children and Youth Services Review. 2011;33(v):588–597. [Google Scholar]
  • Lerman Robert I, Ratcliffe Caroline. Are Single Mothers Finding Jobs Without Displacing Other Workers. Monthly Labor Review. 2001;124(vii):3–12. [Google Scholar]
  • Lichter Daniel T, Graefe Deborah Roempke, Brian Brown J. Is Wedlock a Panacea? Union Germination among Economically Disadvantaged Unwed Mothers. Social Issues. 2003;50(1):60–86. [Google Scholar]
  • Lichter Daniel T, Crowley Martha L. Welfare Reform and Kid Poverty: Effects of Maternal Employment, Spousal relationship, and Cohabitation. Social Science Research. 2004;33(3):385–408. [Google Scholar]
  • Lichter Daniel T, Qian Zhenchao, Crowley Martha L. Child Poverty amidst Racial Minorities and Immigrants: Explaining Trends and Differentials. Social Science Quarterly. 2005;86:1037–59. [Google Scholar]
  • Lin Ann Mentum, Harris David. Why is American Poverty Notwithstanding Colored in the 20 Beginning Century? In: Lin Ac, Harris D, editors. The Colors of Poverty: Why Racial And Ethnic Disparities Persist. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2008. pp. one–18. [Google Scholar]
  • McCall Leslie. Sources of Racial Wage Inequality in Metropolitan Labor Markets: Racial, Indigenous, and Gender Differences. American Sociological Review. 2001;66(four):520–541. [Google Scholar]
  • McLanahan Sara, Percheski Christine. Family Structure and the Reproduction of Inequalities. Almanac Review of Sociology. 2008;34(1):257–76. [Google Scholar]
  • Mishel Lawrence, Bernstein J, Boushey Heather. The Country of Working America, 2002/2003. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University Press; 2004. [Google Scholar]
  • Misra Joya, Moller Stephanie, Budig Michelle J. Work—Family Policies and Poverty for Partnered and Single Women in Europe and North America. Gender & Society. 2007;21(half dozen):804–27. [Google Scholar]
  • Moffitt RA. The Nifty Recession and the Social Condom Net. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 2013;650(1):143–166. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Musick Kelly. Planned and Unplanned Childbearing Amongst Unmarried Women. Journal of Matrimony and Family unit. 2002;64(4):915–29. [Google Scholar]
  • National Bureau of Economical Research. The Business Cycle Peak of March 2001 2001 [Google Scholar]
  • Citro Constance F, Michael Robert T., editors. National Research Council. Measuring Poverty: A New Approach. Washington, D.C: National University Press; 1995. [Google Scholar]
  • Citro Constance F, Kalton Graham., editors. National Inquiry Council. Using the American Community Survey: Benefits and Challenges. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2007. [Google Scholar]
  • Neal Derek. The Measured Black-White Wage Gap among Women Is Likewise Small. Journal of Political Economy. 2004;112(S1):1–28. [Google Scholar]
  • Pettit Becky, Ewert Stephanie. Employment Gains and Wage Declines: The Erosion of Black Women's Relative Wages since 1980. Demography. 2009;46(3):469–92. [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Reid Lori L. Occupational Segregation, Human Capital, and Motherhood: Black Women's Higher Leave Rates from Full-Fourth dimension Employment. Gender & Society. 2002;16(5):728–47. [Google Scholar]
  • Ruggles Steven J, Alexander Trent, Genadek Katie, Goeken Ronald, Schroeder Matthew, Sobek Matthew. Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0. Academy of Minnesota; 2010a. [Google Scholar]
  • Ruggles Steven J, Alexander Trent, Genadek Katie, Goeken Ronald, Schroeder Matthew B, Sobek Matthew. Analysis and Variance Gauge with the IPUMS. University of Minnesota; 2010b. [Google Scholar]
  • Sarkisian Natalia, Gerstel Naomi. Family Problems: The Power of Race, Class, and Gender. New York: Routledge; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • Smeeding Timothy, Thompson Jeffrey P, Levanon Asaf, Burak Esra. The Peachy Recession. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. Poverty and Income Inequality in the Early Stages of the Great Recession; pp. 82–126. [Google Scholar]
  • Tienda Marta, Stier Haya. Generating Labor Marketplace Inequality: Employment Opportunities and the Accumulation of Disadvantage. Social Problems. 1996;43(2):147–65. [Google Scholar]
  • U. S. Demography Bureau. Children Beneath Poverty Level by Race and Hispanic Origin. Washington, D.C: U.Due south. Census Bureau; 2010a. Retrieved June 24, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • Van Hook Jennifer, Brown SL, Kwenda MN. A Decomposition of Trends in Poverty amidst Children of Immigrants. Demography. 2004;41(four):649–670. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Webber Gretchen, Williams Christine. Mothers in 'Good' and 'Bad' Part-Time Jobs: Different Problems, Aforementioned Results. Gender & Guild. 2008;22(vi):752–77. [Google Scholar]
  • Wolff Edward N, Owens Lindsay A, Burak Esra. The Corking Recession. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2011. How Much Wealth Was Destroyed in the Groovy Recession? pp. 127–58. [Google Scholar]

salinaskinters.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5300078/

Post a Comment for "Regardless of Race, Families Headed by Single Women Are ________"