07 January 2009

A few weeks ago I read an article in the New York Times Magazine about an anti-poverty program in Mexico called Oportunidades. This program is attempting to address and break the culture of poverty by paying parents when their children attend school and are taken to regular health check-ups, for example. It is interesting to note that New York City has implemented a pilot program called "Opportunity NYC." Inspired by the Mexican program ( which is currently being practiced in a number of other countries) New York Mayor Bloomberg ignored the recommendation of his own Commission on Economic Opportunity ( created to find ways to help poor New Yorkers) and began the program in 2007 with private donations.

Critics argue that “if Opportunity NYC goes large scale it will further break down the moral obligation to care for one’s child and adopt the repertoire of parenting behaviors the middle class takes for granted. It will replace that with the expectation that I’m only going to do it if you pay me. ... living in the present is the central cause of poverty and echoes his skepticism that government can help. What government cannot do is create personal responsibility and drive in individuals." (Heather MacDonald, Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute).

Supporters say that "change is usually generational, produced by education." They see Oportunidades as an investment in the future.
"Linda Gibbs, the deputy mayor for health and human services, agreed. 'We know
that education and health as children are key to getting out of poverty as
adults,” she said. 'You can have an endless, circular debate about why people
don’t do things. This program is less focused on the why and more focused on
whether a different approach can have an impact in a way traditional approaches
have not.' "

I have attached various articles from the New York Times, however, after a Google search I found many more links to articles and studies about the Oportunidades program.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/21/magazine/21cash-t.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=Oportunidades&st=cse


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/17/opinion/17tues4.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=oportunidades&st=cse


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/25/nyregion/25antipoverty.html?_r=1&scp=5&sq=oportunidades&st=cse


http://select.nytimes.com/2006/11/16/opinion/15talkingpoints.html?_r=1&scp=6&sq=oportunidades&st=cse

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

It is encouraging to see different and creative ways being implemented to help end the cycle of poverty in our generation. The program in Mexico seems to have had some success and there is cause for hope in the changes that have already begun.

Having said that, I believe we must also work to find ways to increase employment. I work with many people in the West Michigan area who are unemployed and have an education and am able see that any program helping people get an education only to have zero opportunities when they graduate will not be successful. I believe two major components of any program must include incentives as well as a way for those who complete these programs to continue to be stable.

I have no problem with giving monetary incentives to encourage parents to make sure their children are getting the help they need. Money can be a great motivator and if it can help break the generational cycle of poverty we need to use it. The present system is not working so we need to be open to other ideas but we must support these programs through better quality schools and clinics.

Change can be a very good thing, especially when these changes are working well and the effects can be studied in other countries. If we are ready to commit to these programs we need to support them all the way.