there was no clear consensus on how to define or address child poverty (McKeen, 2006). Several impactful investments have been made to benefit children in Canada (UNICEF, n.d.). After income tax benefits and transfers, Canadian child poverty rates decreased from 26 percent to 14 percent (UNICEF, n.d.). The tenth UNICEF Report Card indicates that Canada can still be doing more to protect children from poverty (UNICEF, n.d.). UNICEF suggests that the Canadian government should become ‘child-sensitive' and make a budget that makes children's needs the top priority (UNICEF, n.d.). Canada must establish an official definition of child poverty (UNICEF, n.d.). They also indicate that the existing income tax benefits and transfers can be improved in a number of ways (UNICEF, n.d.). McKeen argues that changes to Canadian social policy and the political promises to address issues of social cohesion and increase social investment at the meso level are inadequate and fail to acknowledge the bigger picture (McKeen, 2006). Mainstream social policies often focus on casework and assume that social problems are the result of individual deficiencies or failures and should to be solved by addressing issues at this individual level (McKeen, 2006). This narrow approach neglects to acknowledge the larger social and structural factors that can lead to individual issues (McKeen, 2006). Though social policies are usually well intentioned, a narrow case-work inspired approach may actually perpetuate inequality, social divisiveness, stress on individuals, and poverty rather and encourages attitudes such as victim blaming (McKeen, 2006). Services using this case-work approach are often based on judgements of who is deserving and who is not and are often delivered in a condescending and patronizing way (McKeen, 2006).
You've reached the end of your free preview.
Want to read the whole page?