Abstract
This study analyzed, through case studies of day-to-day observations and interviews with recipients and operators, the operations of nine children’s feeding programs in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Newfoundland.
We found that children’s feeding programs result in the stigmatization of participants and families, despite an ideology of equality. Most programs adopt a family substitution role in the lives of children they serve and function in a way that excludes parental participation. Programs also transmit a hidden curriculum to children that teaches them how to behave and how a ‘proper’ family functions. We found that the professionalization of food and nutrition, a desire for an expanded client base, and dependency creation through the provision of other material goods, permit programs to exert increasing institutional control over recipients, a process we, following Illich, call the dragnet. While these programs may be meeting some nutritional needs in a few poverty-stricken children, they ultimately reproduce, rather than reduce, inequities.
Résumé
Nous avons étudié neuf programmes alimentaires pour les enfants mis en oeuvre dans les écoles en Nouvelle-Ecosse, au Nouveau Brunswick et à Terre-Neuve selon des méthodes qualitatives.
Nous avons découvert que les programmes alimentaires à l’intention des enfants stigmatisent les bénéficiaires et leurs familles malgré une idéologie d’égalité. La plupart des programmes finissent par s’approprier le rôle de la famille auprès des enfants à qui ils s’adressent, et même par exclure la famille de toute participation. Ils ont également un effet subtil chez les enfants: ils modèlent leur comportement en tenant à leur montrer comment une famille ªnormale« devrait fonctionner. Nous avons découvert que la professionalisation dans le secteur des aliments et de la nutrition, le désir d’avoir une clientèle plus large et la création d’une dépendance par l’approvisionnement en autres denrées matérielles, permettent aux programmes d’exercer un contrôle institutionnel de plus en plus grand sur les bénéficiaires; c’est un processus que nous appelons ªdragnet« à l’instar d’Illich. S’il est vrai que ces programmes répondent aux besoins de quelques enfants pauvres, en fin de compte ils ne font que reproduire plutôt que réduire les inégalités.
Footnotes
This study was funded by NHRDP No. 6603-1461-201.
References
- 1.National Council of Welfare. Poverty Profile 1995. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services; 1997. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Maxwell C, Simkins S. Background Paper on Nutrition for the Disadvantaged. 1985. [Google Scholar]
- 3.Shah CP, Kahan M, Krauser J. The health of children of low-income families. CMAJ. 1987;137:485–90. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Starfield BH. Child health and socioeconomic status. Am J Public Health. 1982;72:523–24. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.72.6.532. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Vitale JJ, Good RA (Eds). Symposium: Nutrition and immunology. Am J Clin Nutr 1974;27:623.
- 6.Anderson R. Magic, Science, and Health. The Aims and Achievements of Medical Anthropology. Toronto: Harcourt Brace; 1996. [Google Scholar]
- 7.Center on Hunger, PovertyNutrition Policy. The Link Between Nutrition and Cognitive Development in Children. Tufts University, Medford, MA: Center on Hunger, Poverty and Nutrition Policy; 1994. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Chamberland C, Bouchard C, Beaudry J. Abusive and negligent treatment of children: Canadian and American realities. Can J Behav Sci. 1986;18:391–412. doi: 10.1037/h0079963. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Downey DB. The school performance of children from single-mother and single-father families: Economic or interpersonal deprivation? J Family Issues. 1994;15:129–47. doi: 10.1177/019251394015001006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Duncan GJ, Brooks-Gunn J, Kato Klebanov P. Economic deprivation and early childhood development. ChildDev. 1994;65:296–318. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.McIntyre L, Dayle J. Exploratory analysis of children’s nutrition programs in Canada. Soc Sci Med. 1992;35:1123–29. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(92)90224-E. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Rachlis M, Kushner C. Second Opinion. What’s Wrongwith Canada’s Health Care System and How To Fix It. Toronto: Harper & Collins; 1989. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ramcharan S. Social Problems and Issues. A Canadian Perspective. Scarborough, ON: Nelson Canada; 1989. [Google Scholar]
- 14.Troccoli KB. Eat to Learn, Learn to Eat: The Link between Nutrition and Learning in Children. 1993. [Google Scholar]
- 15.UNICEF. The State of The World’s Children. United Nations Children’s Fund. Toronto: Oxford University Press; 1994. [Google Scholar]
- 16.CEA: Canadian Education Association. CEA Information Note. 1989. Food for thought: School board nutrition policies and programs for hungry children. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Mclntyre L, Simpson AC, Officer S. Strategies for Feeding Low Income Children. 1991. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Pollitt E, Gersovitz M, Gargiulo M. Educational benefits of the United States school feeding program: A critical review of the literature. Am J Public Health. 1978;68:477–81. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.68.5.477. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Congressional Digest. Congressional Digest. 1990. Existing federal programs; pp. 36–37. [Google Scholar]
- 20.McLennan G. Evaluation of the food and nutrition at school (FANS) pilot project: Year two. 1989. [Google Scholar]
- 21.Cassell L. Bishop Field lunch program. Evaluation Report to Hungry Children’s Committee. 1989. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Lemieux C. Poor children in our schools-Focus-on-Future Schools Project update. 1988. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Glaser BG. Theoretical Sensitivity. Advances in the Methodology of Grounded Theory. Mill Valley, CA: The Sociology Press; 1978. [Google Scholar]
- 24.Jorgensen DL. Participant Observation: A Methodology for Human Studies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1989. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Glaser BG, Strauss AL. The Discovery of Grounded Theory. Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine; 1967. [Google Scholar]
- 26.Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods. Beverly Hills: Sage; 1984. [Google Scholar]
- 27.Achterberg C. Qualitative methods in nutrition education evaluation research. J Nutr Ed. 1988;20:244–50. doi: 10.1016/S0022-3182(88)80065-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Marshall C, Rossman GB. Designing Qualitative Research. London: Sage; 1989. [Google Scholar]
- 29.Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1990. [Google Scholar]
- 30.Illich I. Limits to Medicine. Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health. London: McClelland & Stewart; 1976. [Google Scholar]
- 31.Crawford R. Individual responsibility and health politics. In: Conrad P, Kern R, editors. The Sociology of Health and Illness. Critical Perspectives. 2nd edition. New York: St.: Martin’s Press; 1986. pp. 369–77. [Google Scholar]