Volume 8, Issue 8 (August 2021), Pages: 118-122

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

 Title: Changes from AFDC to TANF in the welfare reform

 Author(s): Abdullah Alshrari *

 Affiliation(s):

 College of Business Administration, Northern Border University, Arar, Saudi Arabia

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9297-1872

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2021.08.015

 Abstract:

This study seeks to present a conceptual framework on the importance of the federal government increase the funds for child care programs. United States Congress passed an act: “Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)” and was signed by President Bill Clinton and in 1997, the Aid to Families with Dependent Children Act become the “Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Act (TANF). In 1996, the grants were no dependent on state spending on welfare and were earmarked to provide time-limited benefits to a border range of low-income families. The AFDC was replaced by TANF. TANF changes the time limit to five years for receiving cash assistant and required most recipients to work. AFDC was a program that entitled. So that any family meets the federal and the state requirement should receive cash assistance. TANF is funded by the federal government and individual states, TANF provides support to low-income families with children. Also, one biological parent must be absent. TANF replaced the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program which began in 1935 in order to support widows and orphans. The purpose of welfare reform is to increase state flexibility, keeping the children in their homes and parents depending on themselves rather than the government. The federal government should increase the funds for the child care program. This study has reached an understanding of the necessity of reconsidering the rules of Welfare care programs. 

 © 2021 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Welfare, Family dependent, Children act, Financial assistance

 Article History: Received 25 February 2021, Received in revised form 21 May 2021, Accepted 24 May 2021

 Acknowledgment 

No acknowledgment.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Alshrari A (2021). Changes from AFDC to TANF in the welfare reform. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(8): 118-122

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 No Figure 

 Tables

 No Table 

----------------------------------------------

 References (19)

1. Cancian M, Meyer DR, and Wu CF (2005). After the revolution: Welfare patterns since TANF implementation. Social Work Research, 29(4): 199-214. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/29.4.199   [Google Scholar]
2. Cheng T (2002). Welfare recipients: How do they become independent? Social Work Research, 26(3): 159-170. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/26.3.159   [Google Scholar]
3. Daguerre A (2008). The second phase of US welfare reform, 2000–2006: Blaming the poor again? Social Policy and Administration, 42(4): 362-378. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9515.2008.00609.x   [Google Scholar]
4. Doyle R (2006). Welfare woes. Scientific American, 294(5): 25-25. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican0506-25   [Google Scholar]
5. Friedman JW (2006). TANF: Reauthorization or AFDC redux? (Temporary assistance for needy families act). Policy and Practice, 64(3): 3. 
6. Gruber J (2005). Public finance and public policy. Macmillan, Basingstoke, UK.   [Google Scholar]
7. Handler JF and Hasenfeld Y (2006). Blame welfare, ignore poverty and inequality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511511493   [Google Scholar]
8. Katel P (2009). Straining the safety net. CQ Researcher, 19: 645-667.   [Google Scholar]
9. Larrison CR, Nackerud L, and Risler E (2001). A new perspective on families that receive temporary assistance for needy families (TANF). Journal of Sociology and Social Welfare, 28(3): 49-69.   [Google Scholar]
10. Lein L and Schexnayder DT (2007). Life after welfare: Reform and the persistence of poverty. University of Texas Press, Austin, USA.   [Google Scholar]
11. Martin EJ (2007). Liberalism, postmodernism, and welfare policy. New Political Science, 29(3): 333-347. https://doi.org/10.1080/07393140701510178   [Google Scholar]
12. Ozawa MN and Yoon HS (2005). “Leavers” from TANF and AFDC: How do they fare economically? Social Work, 50(3): 239-249. https://doi.org/10.1093/sw/50.3.239   [Google Scholar] PMid:16152746
13. Pavetti LA (2000). Creating a new welfare reality: Early implementation of the temporary assistance for needy families program. Journal of Social Issues, 56(4): 601-616. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00187   [Google Scholar]
14. Pickering KA (2006). Welfare reform in persistent rural poverty: Dreams, disenchantments, and diversity. Penn State Press, University Park, USA.   [Google Scholar]
15. Schorr AL (2001). Welfare reform: Failure and remedies. Praeger Publisher, Westport, USA.   [Google Scholar]
16. Weber BA, Duncan GJ, and Whitener LA (2002). Rural dimensions of welfare reform. WE Upjohn Institute, Kalamazoo, USA. https://doi.org/10.17848/9781417508884   [Google Scholar]
17. Weil A and Finegold K (2002). Welfare reform: The next act. The Urban Insitute, Washington, USA.   [Google Scholar]
18. Wiseman M and Wamhoff S (2005). The TANF/SSI connection. Social Security Bulletin, 66(4): 21-36.   [Google Scholar]
19. Zivi K and Smith AM (2008). Welfare reform and sexual regulation. Politics and Gender, 4(4): 661-663. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1743923X08000561   [Google Scholar]