Understanding “Power Talk

Language, Public Policy, and Democracy

Bibliographic Data

ID6320697
AuthorsJocelyn Elise Crowley (0000-0001-9468-4412, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey), Margaret Watson (0000-0002-8198-9273, Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey), Maureen R Waller (0000-0001-7381-1902, Cornell University)
Year2008
Volume6
Issue01
Publication date2008-03-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePerspectives on Politics (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1537-5927 • E-ISSN: 1541-0986
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s1537592708080079
OpenAlexW2122187454
LanguageEN
Citations received9
References cited48

This project expands upon social construction studies by critically examining the discourse patterns of two very different groups as they discuss their problems with the child support enforcement system: fathers' rights members (mostly white, middle class fathers who are organizing for emotional support and to reform the child support system) and fathers with children on welfare (mostly poor, African-American fathers). We use standard, qualitative analytical methods on primary, in-depth interview data collected from fathers' rights members, and compare that with in-depth interview data drawn from fathers with children on welfare. In brief, we find three overlapping perceptions in this policy area: child support awards are economically hurtful to fathers, child support obligations are not adjusted for other types of support, and child support enforcement discourages parental cooperation. However, we also show that while there is broad overlap in terms of the general nature of these complaints, each group's members use very different language to describe their difficulties. Fathers' rights members are much more likely to remain connected to the system, and while challenging current policy, do not champion lawbreaking as a viable means of demonstrating their opposition. Fathers with children on welfare, on the other hand, speak in terms that reflect their disconnection from these policies, and frequently reveal their subsequent choice to engage in evasive and even illegal behavior as viable means of expressing their dissatisfaction. Finally, we conclude that these different ways of speaking about public policy problems can have important implications for policymaker responsiveness, and ultimately, each group's political inclusion in a democratic society.Jocelyn Elise Crowley is Associate Professor of Public Policy at The Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey ([email protected]). Margaret Watson has her Master's Degree in Public Policy from The Edward J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey ([email protected]). Maureen R. Waller is Assistant Professor of Policy Analysis & Management, Cornell University ([email protected]). The authors would like to thank Joe Soss, Sandy Schram, Anne Schneider, Helen Ingram, M.B. Crowley, the Columbia University School of Social Work Seminar Series participants, the University of Washington West Coast Poverty Center Seminar Series participants, the NICHD Transition to Fatherhood Project, and the anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on this manuscript

Champion · Child support · Enforcement · Opposition (politics · Political science · Politics · Public policy · Qualitative research · Sociology · Welfare · Gender Politics and Representation · Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics · Law · Psychology · Social Policy and Reform Studies · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub