Negotiating the discourse of race within the United States welfare system

Abstract

The incendiary dynamic between race and welfare in the United States is well-known. An under explored aspect of this dynamic is how recipients of colour navigate the racial undercurrents that permeate welfare and which may result in differential treatment. Drawing from qualitative interviews with twenty-four recipients of colour, this study seeks to understand the ways in which they negotiate their relationships with workers. The study finds that to deflect racial stereotypes, participants monitor their behaviour for traces of anger that could be construed as ‘street’ rather than ‘decent’, and divorce themselves from those that don't. Participants also rejected the discourse of citizenship, seeking to sooth and placate workers rather than asserting a right to benefits. This discourse replicates historical patterns of powerlessness in the United States, where the need to beseech rather than insist and avoid appearing too angry resonates loudly for people of colour. This serves to reinforce the dominant discourse of undeservingness and racial stereotyping within the welfare system.

Keywords:

• Street-level bureaucracy
• poverty
• qualitative
• institutions
• social exclusion
• racial discourse

Acknowledgements

The views expressed in this paper are solely there of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Children's Aid Society.

Notes

1. Racial stereotypes do differ by gender; for example the stereotype of promiscuity is more often associated with women than men. While this study revealed the commonality of experiences of men and women of colour in the welfare system, further research is needed to more closely examine how the interplay of gender and race may affect the experience of negotiating for welfare benefits.

2. To protect the confidentiality of the participants, all names are pseudonyms.