Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 05241988 - 2.01 TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 2-001 FROM' CwtI a Phil Batchelor, County Administrator DATE: WJ* May 17, 1988 SUBJECT: SUGGESTED PREVENTIVE MEASURES TO STEM THE FAMILY CRISIS IN OUR COMMUNITY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) & BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATION: Acknowledge receipt of the County Administrator' s report on suggested solutions. to the crisis in the family. BACKGROUND: In three weeks the Board of Supervisors will receive the proposed budget for the 1988-89 fiscal year. It will detail the impact that the crisis in the family has had on local government. Workloads are increasing in every , department that addresses the problems of the family. Social Services workloads are up in the area of child abuse. Probation caseloads are up in response to increasing juvenile delinquency. Alcohol and drug abuse problems, among' both adults and young people, are increasing. The criminal justice . system is overwhelmed with murder, rape, burglary and drug-dealing charges. Divorce rates reflect the pressures on the family. Teenage pregnancy continues unabated. One response to this situation is to throw more and more taxpayer money at the problem. Hire more social workers, put more children in foster homes and institutions, pass more and stiffer laws against any number of social ills, confine more and more criminals in jail for longer and longer periods of time, invent new and more imaginative ways of counseling alcohol and -drug abusers. All of this has been tried here and elsewhere - with little success. Government is now becoming aware that with its limited resources it is simply not possible to throw enough money at any of these problems to "solve" them. Government has generally dealt with the end result of the crisis in the family, not with the cause. Government treats symptoms = it seldom cures social ills. It seems that the answers, the solutions to the problems that we have do not lie in the Halls of Congress or in the Board Chambers or the City Council- Chambers or even in the classroom. The answers to these problems lie within the walls of our homes. Since we have finally seen that we will never be able to throw enough money at these symptoms to cure the underlying causes we must take a fresh look at the role of the family and what government' s role should be in supporting the family. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT; ^ YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE X APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE. s ACTION-OF BOARD ON A`.-PROVED AS RECOMMENDED X OTHER X it The Board accepted the above-mentioned report and REQUESTED the County Administrator to report back to the Board with suggestions for disseminatina this information to the public. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE X UNANIMOUS (ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TARN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: County Administrator ATTESTED _ May 24, 1988 PHIL BATCHELOR, CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR M382/7Y83 BY ,DEPUTY - -2- The Board of -Supervisors has been in the forefront of redefining government's responsibilities in this area. As far back as 1982 the Board of Supervisors declared "The Year of the Family" and encouraged community organizations to undertake programs to help and support the primary role of the family in instilling sound values in our children. The Board has more recently created the Family Alliance, a private non-profit organization to celebrate the family and encourage programs which will strengthen the family. The Board has encouraged private efforts to discourage alcohol and drug abuse use on the part of our young people. The Board recognized early what the law enforcement community is now saying - the drug problem will never be solved by trying to eliminate the supply of drugs - only by reducing the demand for drugs. One of the most effective ways of doing this is to educate the family to the terrible price drugs exact from the family and then encourage parents to maintain an environment of love and support where drugs are not acceptable and where the adults set an example for their children of the type of . behavior which is acceptable. Some 18 months ago a federal working group chaired by the Undersecretary of Education presented a report to the President. This report, titled The Family: Preserving America' s Future, lays out a series of policies designed to support and strengthen the role of the family. This report outlines nine policy statements which can form the philosophical framework against which to measure proposed actions and plans by government. This pro-family policy statement is attached. 7 A Pro-Family Policy . This report proposes standards and principles by which to judge public policy and its effects on the family. It is not meant to be the last word on this matter but , rather, is intended to advance the emerging national consensus that can translate rhetoric into reality. In that process , we propose the following guidelines : 1. Fi=st and most important, a pro-family policy must recognize that the rights of the family are anterior , and superior , to those of the state. Government does not create the family, though it has an obligation to protect it. And Government cannot abolish the family, or intrude upon its functions , without undermining the social foundation of the state itself. 2. Parents are fundamental , in terms of both rights and responsibilities . They have the duty to provide for their offspring, and they are usually the best judges of their children 's needs . Parental control is not perfect ; and our society has always recognized that, in certain circumstances , it can be contravened. But law and policy should presume the reasonableness of parental action, and the authority of the home should be respected except in cases of substantial risk of harm. 3 . When dealing with the family, the starting point for government at any level--Federal , State, or local--should be the central tenet of the Hippocratic Oath : Primum, non nocere. 7irst of all , do no harm. Vne indirec_ impact of government activity is often more impo--tant than its intended effect. Our courts , our legislation, and even the rhetoric of our leaders send signals t the Amer - can family. Those who pushed instant no-fault divorce laws through 49 State legislatures did not intend to facilitate the abandonment to poverty of millions of women and children. But clearly these laws have contributed to t'-:e hi _-_ori : 311y high divc=_a rates and lower financial settleme^=s fo_ women and: chit-ren. Our judges probably did not intend to touch off an explosion of illegitimacy when they.• minimized the power of States to legislate on that sub_.ect. But it ha:�pene' , and today our society wonders how to get the gene of personal indulgence back into the bottle of legal restraints . 4 . We :rust guard against abusing and misusing the pro-family label . In the past, it has been used to cover an incredible array of political schemes . During 0 8 the 1930s and 1940s , for instance, Social Democrats in several European nations purported to "save" the family by socializing the costs of child rearing . State-funded day care, child allowances, national health systems , school feeding programs , and other welfare programs were put in place, but at tremendous expense. Government grew and taxed, pinching pocketbooks and forcing mothers into the workplace. Birth rates declined. All this has been done elsewhere in the name of the family. It must be avoided here. 5. A family policy is not a remedy in itself but a standard by which proposed remedies car. be judced . The nation 's response should begin with questions : Will this program, this change, this law be fair , supportive, and encouraging to the families of America? Does it justify the financial burdens it would impose upon household income? Is there a way to accomplish our purpose that involves less government or a private-sector substitute for it? 6. Although many family problems are not amenable to policy solutions , the public sector can nonetheless influence patterns of culture. There never has been, and never will be, a governmental solution to the interpersonal problems of spouses and children. There never will be a governmental substitute for individual responsibility for the results of our own actions . But that does not :Wean government has to ignore problems that are rooted in a contemporary culture hostile to, or ambivalent towards the family. Although government cannot mandate cultural change, public officials can, as opinion leaders, ' influence its direction. For example, they can be intolerant of drug abuse within their own offices . They can avoid occasions which give respectability to those who demean women through pornography. Just as we expect them to shun segregated facilities , so we should expect them to avoid association with anti-religious bigotry. In short , their conduct must not be value-neutral. 7. When intervention into famil•., affairs is necessary, it should be undertaken by institutions closest to control by citizens themselves . There are literally thousands of private sector organiza_ions across America that help meet family needs . These include churches , neighborhood groups , voluntary associations--the whole panoply of self-help organizations which has characterized America since Alexis de Tocqueviile marvelled at our networks of private institutions. Many of the problems of the mid-century welfare state could have been avoided if those in power had reinforced these mediating institutions , instead of undermining them. 5 9 8 . When government intervenes in family affairs , whether through assistance or correction, the action should be .undertaken by the level of government closest to the people involved . 9. Family policy must be built upon a foundation of economic growth. It is futile to apportion slices of a shrinking pie . Sustained, vigorous expansion of the economy--with all the opportunity that flows therefrom--is an essential part of any pro-family program. That means low marginal tax rates . It means keeping inflation under control . It means resisting spending schemes--even those wrapped up in pro-family rhetoric--which undermine household prosperity. 10 . There is great reason for hope. No trend is irreversible. Most of America ' s families are pulling through, and our institutions are rallying to assist those in trouble. From inner-city neighborhoods to rural communities , most households hold together. Most youngsters aspire to productive, independent lives. Most young adults , upright and responsible , hope to build families of their own. Most families endure. For most Americans , life is not a matter of legisla- tive battles, judicial decrees , and executive decisions . It is a fabric of helping hands and good neighbors , bedtime stories and shared prayers , lovingly packed lunchboxes and household budget-balancing, tears wiped away_ , a precious heritage passed along_ . It is hard work and a little put away for the future. No government commands these things . No government can replicate taem. In a faddish culture that emphasizes living for the moment and for oneself, they affirm an older, and more lastinc, set of priorities. This fa--ric of family life has been frayed by the abrasive experiments of two liberal decades. If by some terrible turn of events , it were to unravel , then both economic p_Dgre__= an. _: personal literty would disappear as well . Neither orosperity nor freedom can be sustained without a trans=usicz, from generation to generation, of family values: respect and disci line , res-raint and self-sacrifice, interdependence a-d cooperation , loyalty . and fidelity, and an ethical code that gives to individuals , however lowly, a transcendent impart. The idols of our recent past were those who defied norms and shattered standards , and indeed there is always a 10 place for "rebels. But in a healthy society, heroes are the women and men who hold the world together one home at a time: the parents and grandparents who forego pleasures , delay purchases, foreclose options , and commit most of their lives to the noblest undertaking of citizenship: raising children who, resting on the shoulders of the previous generation, will see farther than we and reach higher. This is social responsibility at its best. Parental nurturing and education of the young is our most important national investment. I -- is the fundamental task of humanity.