One of the biggest problems for low-income women is that they are not aware of what exists, and they have no opportunity to hear about what exists; so, therefore, they cannot have any opportunity to take advantage of what exists. So, it is just a matter of having more opportunities made available; through CETA-excellent recommendations-public benefit programs, and more coordination of public benefit programs.

Mr. BURTON. Thank you.

Ms. Fleming, how does WOW get funded? Hook or by crook? Ms. FLEMING. We have run CETA programs for about 8 years; we have foundation money; we get contributions; fees; we sell publications.

Mr. BURTON. Could you supply the subcommittee with a list of the 100 women's employment groups that you mentioned in your testimony?

MS. FLEMING. We have a national directory of women's employment groups coming out in about 2 weeks, and we will send it to you. Mr. BURTON. Fine.

Has CETA really done much to alleviate the problems of midlife women?

Ms. FLEMING. No.

Mr. BURTON. Has it done anything?

Ms. FLEMING. A few programs; very minimal, very token.

Mr. BURTON. Does it raise false hopes? People probably do not even know about it.

Ms. FLEMING. I don't think that women know what potential there is in CETA, and I think the new legislation has stronger affirmative action language, and disadvantaged women are now identified as a target group, so there is a lot more leverage to use on prime

sponsors.

Mr. BURTON. What is a breakdown of the women served by your organization; mostly middle aged?

Ms. FLEMING. About half are midlife women.

Mr. BURTON. Middle class?

Ms. FLEMING. Some. In our CETA programs, they are CETA eligible women and mostly low income. They have to be low income. Mr. BURTON. Do you operate any employment development programs just for middle-aged and older women?

Ms. FLEMING. We have what we call the WOW Work Center which is where midlife women come for specifically designed services, for what they need, and we do run programs designed for them.

Mr. BURTON. Gerry.

MS. FERRARO. I am sorry I did not hear all of the testimony of the three witnesses, but I did hear the first three who testified.

Ms. Candela, with reference to the HEW report, I believe the model that they put forward indicates the homemaker would be covered for benefits in her own right for half of the total benefits that had been contributed during the marriage. When you have that situation, the total benefits to the couple would be reduced; her individual benefits would be raised, according to the HEW model; am I correct? Given that situation and the economic times, are we willing to sacrifice the total couple's benefits in order to raise the individual's benefits?

Ms. CANDELA. Well, the important task is to begin to recognizing that women are making an economic contribution, including their role as homemaker, and that the country must rectify this inequity now. That is the most important factor to look at.

MS. FERRARO. So you would be willing to accept the lower benefits to the couple, which is going to result if you follow the HEW model? Ms. CANDELA. Yes.

Ms. FERRARO. With reference to the earnings sharing plan in the HEW report, which tries to eliminate the concept of dependency as a basis for eligibility, under the plan, a widowed homemaker would only receive a 1-year adjustment benefit instead of a survivor's benefit, unless she were disabled and caring for a child under 7. How do you feel about that concept?

MS. CANDELA. The most severe problem that a woman faces is child support if she suddenly finds herself in a situation where she no longer in being cared for as a dependent. It is important that she be allowed some time to readjust to a different lifestyle. Women are beginning to recognize today that in most circumstances they have to be prepared to take care of themselves. It is happening slowly, but it is a necessary adjustment. Society must prepare women to be economically self-sufficient, a learning process that must begin in grade school. It is very important that we project that kind of image for women. MS. FERRARO. Thank you.

Ms. Eidson, do you support allowing homemakers to establish IRA accounts to allow them to put away up to $1,500 per year? MS. EIDSON. I certainly do; and now it is half of that; right? Ms. FERRARO. Yes.

MS. EIDSON. However, $1,500 is pretty inadequate, even though it is under a system. I think that the same thing, the IRA, by its very nature, of a percentage of up to, discriminates against women who are actually in the lower scale; and 15 percent of a very low salary is not much in the way of any kind of security program for the future. Ms. FERRARO. You obviously would recommend raising the limit; what would you suggest would be reasonable.

MS. EIDSON. I would suggest a proportionate kind of thing. Basically, as it is, 15 percent or $1,500 per year is very minimal kinds of retirement. But if you have a very low salary, as many of the working women do as we have heard by testimony and as we all know-then that is a very low percentage of any kind of thing. As to dollar amount, I would suggest "a percentage of up to" and certainly, as it comes off the income tax, perhaps that is the cheaper way of even financing it, as far as an independent retirement program for the future. But $1,500, for men or women, is very inadequate in today's economy. MS. FERRARO. I would just like to make a comment, Ms. Davis, because, again, I left during your testimony. But I did hear your initial comments with reference to what goes in hearings, and that you feel that perhaps the Federal Government is not listening. Last year I was sitting in that spot saying the same thing.

So I am hoping that now that I am here, I will help to make a little bit of a change in that.

I was reading through your testimony, Mrs. Gaines. Could you give us a typical situation in which a displaced homemaker needs counseling, and the type of counseling you would give the person?

Ms. GAINES. That I would give them?

Ms. FERRARO. Yes.

Ms. GAINES. Well, what I do relates to other than employmentwhen they have any kind of problem relating to, maybe, food stamps or health problems-anything at all-that's when they come to the resource and referral department. The biggest problem that we have is in housing. There is just not adequate housing for women in midlife crisis. Also, help with social services, because on many occasions these women are left with nothing. They don't have any income at all, and the only thing they can get, sometimes, is what they call general public assistance for employables. And this is-I think it is $90 a month, and they can only get it for a limited amount of time.

If we get them on social services, it is still not enough money to place them in some kind of housing. So, it is really very difficult to really help them when they are left like this. They can't get financial assistance; they can't find housing.

Ms. FERRARO. So what you do then is you let them know what programs are available to them so they can take advantage of what is available.

Ms. GAINES. Yes. And that is very limited. What we have done—a group of agencies in Baltimore that deal with problems, we got together to try to form a coalition for emergency housing because it is such a big problem to place participants of our center.

Ms. FERRARO. You described your children; is there any kind of counseling available to these women so they can adjust to

Ms. GAINES. For the children?

Ms. FERRARO. For them in their relationship with their children, and to the children themselves, who also are victims when a situation like this occurs.

Ms. GAINES. No. I don't know of any such counseling right now. There are some agencies like Family and Children's Society. I think they do it on a limited basis, but it is not enough to really help them with the needs that they have. It is really a crucial need that these women have.

I hear everybody, when they were testifying, talking about providing child care, but nobody talks about what to do with these teenaged children, and that is when you really need the help. A woman by herself, especially with sons; you are trying to play the role of mother and father, and it is just impossible, and you don't know what to do. I know when my sons got in trouble, I went everywhere. I went to church; I went to the agencies; and nobody could help me. And it ended up with my sons getting in trouble. After the fact, you can get all the help you need, but, we want to prevent this.

MS. FERRARO. Unfortunately, the court systems in the States do provide assistance after it is already too late; the kid already has a record.

Ms. GAINES. Yes. My son was on drugs and he knew he needed help. I didn't know he was on drugs at the time. He went to a drug program that he had heard about for help, and they told him he couldn't get help because you have never been to jail. So, I think, really, that is why he got in trouble and went to jail. Now, he is doing fine, because he had to commit the crime, to go to jail, so that he could

go to the drug program. And that is what happens to many young men. You have to get in trouble to get help. And they are crying for help, the mothers and the sons; we really need the help, but it is just not there.

Ms. FERRARO. Thank you for your testimony.

Mr. BURTON. Thank you very much. The record will remain open. We will have, I am sure, some written questions that we may want to send you.

Thank you very much for your testimony. The hearings are adjourned.

[Whereupon, at 1:06 p.m., Tuesday, May 8, 1979, the hearing was adjourned.]

APPENDIX 1

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DR. JOYCE BROTHERS

POLICY PROPOSALS ON MIDLIFE WOMEN'S PROBLEMS

1. Exploration of fundamental issue

The moment the word "midlife" is combined with the words, "women" or "female," two gigantic, virulent forces automatically take precedent over, and inevitably color any other topic of discussion, whether the subject be jobs, family, marriage, divorce, sex, death or taxes.

This over-powering double-headed monster attacks, and in some way, cripples every American female, especially in her middle years, whether she's a successful career woman in Chicago or New York, a working-class mother in a small Georgia town, a poor factory worker in Massachusetts, or a suburban housewife in Oregon. These forces that play a part in every woman's life are not a product of those "raging, hormonal changes" we've all heard so much about, but are a traditional home-made product we all use and take for granted. The product's been around a long time and is considered by some to be as American as Congress, or apple pie, but unlike either of these two venerable institutions, it's a killer.

This double-edged weapon that stulitifies, wounds and cripples is forged from ageism and sexism. We see it every day. Most of us ignore it, or even accept it as something that is inevitable. It isn't! And I feel this is why this committee is meeting today.

People often become impatient with what seems to be a preoccupation with these "isms," but to ignore or gloss over them in order to move directly to a discussion of more specific problems is to spend time and money treating only the symptoms of very serious disease.

Attitudes and traditions, however, are deeply ingrained and take time to change, so it's important, necessary to treat and alleviate the symptoms through the media, through legislation and educational process with the hope that by raising public awareness, the disease itself will be exposed, recognized, and eventually cured. Of course, men, too, are victims of these twin prejudices. It's sexist, for instance, to assume that a "real man" wouldn't or shouldn't dare to weep, or that he alone should bear the responsibility of providing for the family, or of protecting that family.

We all know that men suffer from ageism, but we also know, that a man in his 50's is in his prime. He's a "young" president, or executive, or business leader, while a woman at that same age is often considered to be "over the line," or "a bit long in the tooth."

Why is there this discrepancy in attitudes about aging between males and females? I suspect, once again, it has very little to do with hormonal changes, for we now know that men, too, undergo hormonal changes in midlife. I believe it has to do with how men and women define themselves as individuals and how they are defined by others from childhood on. . . . With the few exceptions of the John Travoltas and the Robert Redfords of the world, most males are not defined primarily in terms of their appearance. Many, if not most, women are!

While it may be an advantage for a male newscaster, a male secretary or office worker, or a male on almost any job to be attractive, we all know that realistically how a man looks just isn't considered as important as it is for a woman. His appearance isn't at the core of his identity or his sexuality. He identifies himself in many other ways, so that when he begins to have bags under his eyes and lines on his forehead, his self-image is not shattered. He may regret it, but he's able to keep it in perspective. Too often, women have been taught to view themselves as commodities whose value is dependent upon appearance.

(99)