Page images
PDF
EPUB

their children. I would like to interpolate here that day care is not a program of subsidy to mothers. I think somebody on the committee made such a statement. It is a program to provide care for children and to strengthen family life, and in some cases the home may not have a mother.

It may be a father who is helped to keep his family together because he is not able to go to work, but there is a day care service.

The Children's Bureau, in a report based on data collected in 1958, stated that there were more than 400,000 children under 12, in our country, whose mothers work full time and for whom no arrangements whatsoever are made during the day.

Psychiatrists tell us that neglect is more deadly in its effect than the most virulent of the childhood diseases. Millions of dollars have been spent in our country on vaccines for polio, scarlet fever, diphtheria, smallpox. We ask for $5 million this year to give the vaccine that will prevent destruction that occurs from neglect in early childhood.

It is very hard when you are talking about only measuring economic need to talk about prevention, because when you give polio shots you are not always sure you are giving them only to the children who would have gotten polio. You give them to all children to prevent it.

We want to give day care to those children who need it in order to prevent some of the social ills that are caused by the lack of care during the day. We believe day care can prevent such exorbitantly expensive social ills as juvenile delinquency and emotional breakdown. Day care reaches young children and young families when they can still be helped-when patterns have not yet become hardened. The failure of "cure" programs has been amply demonstrated. Juvenile delinquency and emotional illness rates are alarmingly high. In every year in the past, with the exception of 1959, the increase in delinquency cases exceeded increase in the child population.

The current figures of the National Association for Mental Health indicate that 1 out of 10 in our population has some form of mental illness needing psychiatric attention. It is obvious that the "cure" programs have been inadequate in preventing dependency, delinquency, and emotional breakdown Should it not therefore be equally obvious that we must increase our preventive programs?

There has been some increase in the number of commercial day-care centers in the country. However, since these must operate for profit, the fees they must charge places them out of the reach of many families. In October 1960, a survey made by the Child Welfare Studies Board of the Division of Research of the Children's Bureau indicates that all but 3 of the 44 States who replied to the question asking about the need for additional day-care facilities reported that such a need existed.

During the last 5 years, there has been an increase in both the number of preschool and school age children whose mothers work full time. The rate of increase is larger in the school age group, which indicates that too many young children are joining the so-called latch key group. These are the children who wander our city streets, or return home to an empty house. Supervision is needed for this highly vulnerable group during their out-of-school hours. Certainly

supervision is needed for the preschool children, too many of whom were recorded in a study made in 1958 as being left without any care during the day.

Kindergarten or short-day nursery schools are not the answer. They provide a valuable service but the children who have no one at home to care for them all day long must have not only a full-day program but a special kind of program that compensates for the loss of family life.

America has lagged dangerously behind other countries in its concern for the neglected child. According to a report prepared by the United Nations, in France, for example, the Government may allocate up to 50 percent of operating costs for crèches and day nurseries.

In Norway, the State provides a fixed per capita amount for children receiving day care. In every one of the Communist countries the importance of day care to the preservation of manpower is recognized, and heavily subsidized.

In Denmark, the combination of public subsidies and fees from parents cover running expenses of most day-care centers today.

In the United Kingdom, grants are given by both the Treasury and local governments amounting to approximately two-thirds of the running costs of the day nurseries.

In Finland, both the national and local governments provide subsidies for crèches, kindergartens, and leisure-time activities.

In Yugoslavia, where day-care services are institutions of the state, financing is shared by the National Government and the local community, with parents paying approximately one-third of the cost of care for each child. Mothers who are the sole wage earners in a family, however, are required to pay only 3 percent of such cost.

In the United States, on the other hand, there are no Federal funds for day care except for certain limited types of service. Only one State, California, supports a widespread day-care program with public funds congratulations and only two major cities. New York and Philadelphia, allocate substantial public funds for this purpose.

Unless Federal aid is available to stimulate day-care programs, we know from experience that such programs will not come into existence and that child day-care service with damaging and dangerous standards will persist. Other countries throughout the world have made this discovery.

I am confident that no one on this committee, absent or present, would withhold help from a child locked up in a room, or one wandering the streets with a latchkey around his neck, or suffering from the indifferent and often cruel care of some woman who is gouging the working or incapacitated mother.

Very little money is being sought in relation to the vast amount spent by this country for all other kinds of services, but this small amount of $5 million could serve to stimulate our States at least to take a look at what is happening to children in our city slums, in our migrant farm camps, on military installations, and in defense-impacted areas and in rural and suburban communities-and to provide the answer for the children who are now being neglected.

On behalf of the membership of the National Committee for the Day Care of Children, Inc., we urge you to give favorable consideration to the appropriation of $5 million for the coming fiscal year and

$10 million for the following year, so that we may provide decent care during the day for the children in this country who desperately

need it.

Mr. KING. Thank you, Mrs. Guggenheimer. Does that conclude your statement?

Mrs. GUGGENHEIMER. May I just hand in for the record a statement which is Dr. Eliot's and my joint statement on H.R. 9299. It has been referred to.

Mr. KING. Without objection you may.

Mrs. GUGGENHEIMER. Thank you very much.

(The statement referred to above follows:)

STATEMENT OF ELINOR C. GUGGENHEIMER, NEW YORK, N.Y.

On behalf of Dr. Martha Eliot and myself, I would like to submit this brief statement in support of the chairman's bill-H.R. 9299-which provides for research grants to nonprofit institutions of higher learning or other nonprofit research agencies or agencies engaged in maternal and child health or crippled children's programs.

The research undertaken with these grants would be that related to the maternal and child health and crippled children's services which are already aided with funds authorized under title V of the Social Security Act. I refer to this bill because research of the kind proposed will help in providing the standards for safe care of children who are cared for in the day-care centers about which I have been speaking.

The grants for these health services also need to be increased so that health services may be made more widely available to children in our large cities. It is especially in the large industrial cities that day-care centers are urgently required. Dr. Eliot, a former chief of the Children's Bureau, has made proposals to the chairman of this committee that H.R. 9299 be amended to include increases to the States in the grants for maternal and child health services and crippled children's services. We both believe that the increases suggested should be made. The work that is done for children by the States with the help of these grants is well known to you. To increase the grants would mean that many more children who are in need would benefit greatly.

Mr. KING. The committee will now adjourn until Tuesday morning next at 10 a.m.

(Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., Friday, February 9, 1962, the committee was adjourned, to be reconvened at 10 a.m., Tuesday, February 13, 1962.)

PUBLIC WELFARE AMENDMENTS OF 1962

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 13, 1962

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS,

Washington, D.C.

The committee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in the committee room, House Office Building, Hon. Wilbur D. Mills (chairman of the committee) presiding.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will please be in order.

We are privileged this morning to have as our first witness our colleague from Iowa, the Honorable Neal Smith. Mr. Smith, please come to the witness table; and you are recognized, sir.

STATEMENT OF HON. NEAL SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

Mr. SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will try to be as brief as possible. First of all, due to the fact that I am going to say some things that may sound rather critical of the program, I want to make clear that I think the ADC program is needed and that it has been a needed program in spite of the shortcomings.

As a background I would mention this: In 1955 and 1956 I was chairman of the Polk County Welfare Board in Iowa. Polk is the biggest county in Iowa, and we distributed about $3 million a year through that board so I, through this and through the fact that my wife was a welfare worker before we were married and I had previously been a State's attorney assigned to the board, have been interested in and had an opportunity to see this program administered on the local level. In the years that I have been interested I have noticed that the vast majority of ADC cases actually do not involve abuse.

However, there is a percentage-it may be 10 percent, it may be 15 percent of the people that are on the program have been freeloaders. The problem is how to get rid of the freeloaders, because it is these freeloaders that take the money from the ones that need it.

In all this time, in Iowa at least, and I know this is the case in many States, we have never had enough money for the people that need it and it has been drained off by some of these freeloaders who should have become self-supporting.

This bill deals with rehabilitation and this is good as far as it goes, but about half of these freeloaders do not want to be rehabilitated and I cannot see that anything would be done in this bill to solve this situation. This is fine as far as those people are concerned that would like somehow to get off of the relief roll and become self

80118-62-28

« PreviousContinue »