UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Educational programs for lone parent families in the city of Vancouver Heath, Jean 1982

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1982_A8 H43.pdf [ 5.3MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0055876.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0055876-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0055876-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0055876-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0055876-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0055876-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0055876-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0055876-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0055876.ris

Full Text

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR LONE PARENT FAMILIES IN THE CITY OF VANCOUVER by JEAN HEATH B.A., Brandon U n i v e r s i t y , 1976 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES Department of Adul t Education We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA A p r i l , 1982 © Jean Heath, 1982 In presenting t h i s thesis i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the Library s h a l l make i t f r e e l y available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. I t i s understood that copying or publication of t h i s thesis for f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my written permission. Department of A d u l t Education The University of B r i t i s h Columbia 1956 Main Mall Vancouver, Canada V6T 1Y3 Date A P r i l 15,1982 DE-6 (3/81) i ABSTRACT The main purpose of this thesis was to investigate the characteristics of lone parent families and the types of educational programs available to them in the City of Vancouver. Based on the investigation, the study outlines factors underlying the ineffectiveness of some of these educa-tional programs and offers recommendations for action. The i n i t i a l phases of this study were prompted by a grant from the Continuing Education Division of the British Columbia Ministry of Education to carry out two research projects on the lone parent family in the summer of 1980. The fi r s t phase of the study consisted of the analysis of census data on lone parent families in Canada and the second phase consisted of the compilation of an annotated bibliography on the subject of the lone parent family. The results were published jointly by the Vancouver School Board and the Ministry of Education under the respective titles of Lone Parent Families in Canada and British Columbia and Lone Farent Families: A Selected and Annotated Bibliography. In subsequent phases of the study, data on educational programs for lone parent families in the City of Vancouver were collected through a series of interviews conducted with educators who were either working with lone parent families in the setting of public education institutions or in conjunction with these institutions in the calendar year of 1981-82. A set of criteria was established to define the group of programs under study and representatives from the following government ministry, public institutions, and social agencies were Interviewed for data on i i educational programs for lone parent families i n the City of Vancouver: 1. The Ministry of Human Resources, Victoria 2. The University of B r i t i s h Columbia, Women Student's Office 3 . Vancouver Community College, Vancouver k. Douglas College, New Westminster 5. The City of Vancouver Health Department 6. Community Centres i n Vancouver a. False Creek b. Britannia Community Services Centre c. Thunderbird Neighbourhood Centre 7. Family Services of Greater Vancouver 8. Y.W.C.A., Vancouver 9. The People's Law School, Vancouver 10. Single Parent Groups, Greater Vancouver 11. Vancouver School Board, Career and Community Education Services 12. New Westminster School Board, Continuing Education, New Westminster 13. The National Council of Welfare, Ottawa Ik. Federated Anti-Poverty Group of B. C , Vancouver The effort yielded data on a variety of educational programs available to lone parent families, but only those programs which met the established c r i t e r i a were included i n t h i s study. The analysis of the 1976 Census data yielded the following s t a t i s t i c a l picture of lone parent families i n Canada, B r i t i s h Columbia, Greater Vancouver, and the City of Vancouverj I i i Total % Male % Female % Canada 559,070 100 93.590 16.7 465,480 83.3 British Columbia 60,200 100 10,415 17.3 49,785 82.7 Gt. Vancouver 29,265. 100 4,570 15.6 24,695 84 .4 Vancouver, City 12,235 100 1,855 15.2 10,385 84.8 Source: Statistics Canada, 1976 Census of Canada In the five-year intercensal period between 1971 and 1976, the total number of lone parent families in Canada increased by l ? . l per cent compared to an increase of just 13.0 per cent among husband-wife families. As an indication of significance in Canadian society, one in ten families in 1976 was a lone parent family. The incidence of lone parenthood was found to be highest in urban centres with a population of 100,000 and over. A total of 685,915 children of under 18 years of age were found living in lone parent families throughout Canada in 1976, and of the total number of lone parent families 83.3 per cent were headed by women and only 16.7 per cent by men. The average lone parent family had 1.9 children, and families headed by women appeared to be larger than families headed by men. The largest group of children belonged to the age group of 6 to 14. When the socio-economic characteristics of lone parent families were analyzed, i t was found that 36.1 per cent of the total parents in Canada had less than grade 9 schooling. In view of the general iv pervasiveness of undereducation among the group, i t was not surprising to find that only 47.5 per cent of the group were employed. Among those who were employed, there was a vast discrepancy between the sexes. Only 46.7 per cent of the female lone parents were employed compared to 73«5 per cent of the male lone parents. The typical lone parent was a woman who had two children and required social assistance due to her unemployed status, her relatively low level of education, and her general susceptibility to poverty. A report released by the National Council of Welfare (1979) showed that 44 per cent of a l l Canada's female lone parents were poor in 1975. Educational programs for lone parents and their families were conducted at a l l levels of public education institutions i n the City of Vancouver i n the calendar year of 1981-82. Some of these institutions worked i n close conjunction with community centres and social agencies i n the c i t y . The majority of the programs offered, however, succeeded i n reaching only a very small percentage of the total lone parent families i n the city. Various attempts by the Ministry of Education to introduce new programs met with only limited success and a number of programs were terminated due to the lack of interest on the part of lone parents and their families. Yet an examination of the needs of lone parent families and the goals of educational programs offered revealed a high degree of congruency between the two. Alternative explanations for the ineffectiveness of program were sought from theories pertaining to needs and participation patterns i n adult education; and i t was concluded that the failure of educational V prograaB for lone parent families lay In a variety of factors including social and psychological barriers which hindered members of the target population fron active participation. -vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT i LIST OF TABLES v i i i LIST OF FIGURES X CHAPTER 11 INTRODUCTION . . . 1 Statement of the Problem Sources of Data Definitions Limitations of the Study Plan of the Study CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . 7 Introduction Definitions Lone Parent Family as a New Family Form Pervasiveness of Lone Parent Families Demographic Characteristics of Lone Parent Families Poverty Among Female-Headed Families . Children of Lone Parent Families Problems and Needs of Lone Parent Families Educational Programs for Lone Parent Families Summary CHAPTER III: DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF LONE PARENT FAMILIES . 33 Introduction Distribution Family Size Family Composition Sex and Age of Parent Marital Status of Parent Mother Tongue of Parent Labour Force Activity of Parent Income Status of Parent Level of Schooling of Parent v i i Page CHAPTER IV: NEEDS OF AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR LONE . . . ?6 PARENT FAMILIES IN THE CITY OF VANCOUVER Introduction Meeting the Needs of Lone Parent Families In the City of Vancouver Educational Programs for Meeting the Psycho-Social Needs of Lone Parent Families i n the City of Vancouver CHAPTER V: SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 95 Summary Recommendations APPENDIXi LIST OF EDUCATORS AND INSTITUTIONS INTERVIEWED . 105 REFERENCES 106 v i i i LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1 Family Types f o r 1971 and 1976 and Rates of Change i n Canada since 1971 13 2 Lone Parent Families i n Great B r i t a i n with M a r i t a l Status of Parents and Number of Children i n 1971 15 3 D i s t r i b u t i o n of Lone Parent Families i n Canada by Provinces, 1971 & 1976 35 4 Lone Parent Families i n B r i t i s h Columbia by C i t i e s and by M u n i c i p a l i t i e s of 5,000 Population and Over, 1971 & 19?6 . 37 5 Size of Lone Parent Families i n Canada by Provinces, 1971 & 1976 40 6 Family Composition of Lone Parent Families i n Canada by Sex of Parent and Age of C h i l d , 1976 42 7 Family Composition of Lone Parent Families i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Sex of Parent and Age of C h i l d , 1976 43 8 Age of Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex of Parent, 1976 . . . . 45 9 Age of Lone Parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Sex of Parent, 1976 46 10 Age of Lone Parents i n Greater Vancouver by Sex of Parent, 1976 47 11 Age of Lone Parents i n Vancouver (City) by Sex of Parent, 1976 48 12 M a r i t a l Status o f Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex of Parent, 1976 . 51 13 Lone Parents i n Canada by Age and M a r i t a l Status, 1976 . . . 52 14 M a r i t a l Status of Lone Parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Sex of Parent, 1976 53 15 M a r i t a l Status of Lone Parents i n Greater Vancouver by Sex of Parent, 1976 54 16 M a r i t a l Status of Lone Parents i n Vancouver (City) by Sex of Parent, 19?6 55 i x Mother Tongue o f Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex o f Parent, 1976 Mother Tongue o f Lone Parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Sex of Parent, 1976 Mother Tongue o f Lone Parents i n Greater Vancouver by Sex of Parent, 1976 Mother Tongue o f Lone Parents i n Vancouver ( C i t y ) by Sex of Parent, 1976 Labour Force A c t i v i t y o f Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex of Parent, 1976 Labour Force A c t i v i t y o f Lone Parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Sex of Parent, 1976 Labour Force A c t i v i t y of Lone Parents i n Greater Vancouver by Sex o f Parent, 19?6 Labour Force A c t i v i t y o f Lone Parents i n Vancouver ( C i t y ) by Sex of Parent, 19?6 D i s t r i b u t i o n of Lone Parent F a m i l i e s i n Canada by Income Groups and Sex o f Head, 1977 D i s t r i b u t i o n of Lone Parent F a m i l i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Income Groups and Sex of Head, 1977 D i s t r i b u t i o n of Poor and Non-Poor Female Lone Parents i n Canada by M a r i t a l Status, 1975 L e v e l o f Schooling of Lone Parents In Canada by Sex of Parent, 1976 L e v e l o f Schooling of Lone Parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Sex of Parent, 1976 Le v e l of Schooling o f Lone Parents i n Greater Vancouver by Sex o f Parent, 1976 : L e v e l o f Schooling of Lone Parents i n Vancouver ( C i t y ) by Sex o f Parent, 1976 L e v e l o f Schooling of Heads o f F a m i l i e s lay Family Type i n Canada, 1976 • X LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1 Maslow's Hierarchy of Human Needs Adopted from Knowles, 1977, p. 24 79 2 Educational Programs f o r Meeting the Psycho-Social Needs of Lone Parent F a m i l i e s i n the C i t y o f Vancouver 87 3 Psycho-Social Needs o f Lone Parent F a m i l i e s 90 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 2 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Statement of the Problem As a growing phenomenon i n Canadian society, the lone parent family i s causing increasing concern f o r educators who attempt to provide educational programs which w i l l cater to the needs of the group. As a high percentage of the lone parent families are undereducated and require social assistance, educators i n existing education institutions face the all-important task of helping the group to acquire s k i l l s and training which w i l l provide them with new options and free them from long-term social assistance. An analysis of the 1976 Census data revealed the presence of a significant percentage of lone parent families i n a l l but three of the 14 college regions and 72 or the 75 school d i s t r i c t s i n B r i t i s h Columbia (Heath, 1980). Investigation of educational programs f o r lone parent families i n the City of Vancouver showed that a variety of programs are available i n a l l three levels of public education institutions - university, community college and school - and i n various social agencies, but the majority of these programs succeeded i n reaching only a very small percentage of the target population. E f f o r t s to introduce new programs i n these institutions are often unsuccessful or aborted i n their early stages due to the lack of interest and poor sub-scription rate on the part of lone parent families.' This study intends to achieve the following purposes: 1. To identify and review literature on lone parent families i n Canada, U.S., and Great Britain. 2. To determine the demographic characteristics of lone parent families i n Canada and i n B r i t i s h Columbia. 3 3 . To determine the needs of and educational programs for lone parent families i n the City of Vancouver. 4. To forward a set of recommendations for action. Sources of Data Three major sources of data were employed i n th i s study. The f i r s t , the id e n t i f i c a t i o n and review of related literature on the lone parent family, derived data contained i n an annotated bibliography compiled e a r l i e r (Heath, 1980). Most of the literature included was written or published after 1970 and was obtainable from major l i b r a r i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia. The bulk of research f o r t h i s part of the study was conducted i n the Vancouver Public Library and the Social Work Library and the Main Library of the University of B r i t i s h Columbia. Other sources such as the Ministry of Human Resources, the Ministry of Education, United Way of the Lower Mainland, Y.W.C.A., lone parent groups, the National Council of Welfare, the Federated Anti-Poverty Groups of B. C , agencies and i n d i v i -duals working with lone parent families i n the Lower Mainland were con-tacted for information leading to publications and literature on the subject of the lone parent family. An ERIC search was also conducted to uncover other sources of materials on the subject. Secondly, data pertaining to the demographic characteristics of the Canadian lone parent family were derived from the" 1976 Census with some tabulations conducted by the Ministry of Education, the Ministry of Human Resources, and the National Council of Welfare. Thirdly, data on educational programs for lone parent families i n the City of Vancouver were collected through a series of interviews conducted with educators, counsellors, social workers, and other pro-fesslnals working with lone parents and their children. A l l the educa-tional programs included in the study were conducted either under the auspices of the Ministry of Education or by agencies which work in close cooperation with institutions which come under the administrative umbrella of the Ministry of Education. The main Institutions and agencies included in the study were the University of British Columbia, Vancouver Community College, the Vancouver School Board, the City of Vancouver Health Department, Family Services of Greater Vancouver, and the Y.W.C.A. Definitions Lone parent family - a family headed by a male or female parent with one or more children. Lone parent - a parent who i s separated, divorced, widowed, single (never married), or has an absentee spouse. Children - sons and daughters (including adopted and step-children) under 18 years old who have never married and who are living in the same dwelling as their parent. Educational programs - a series of meetings or learning experiences con-ducted over a specified period of time with certain pre-determined objectives. Family composition - the combined classification of families by number of children, of children by age and school attendance, and average number of children per family. Undereducatlon - less than grade 9 schooling. 5 L i m i t a t i o n s of the Study Although t h i s study i s p r i m a r i l y exploratory i n nature, i t s main focus i s on meeting the needs of lone parent f a m i l i e s through educational programs conducted i n the C i t y of Vancouver. The programs included i n the study are selected according t o a set of e s t a b l i s h e d c r i t e r i a and, t h e r e f o r e , share c e r t a i n common c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . T h i s study, however, i s l i m i t e d i n scope and does not claim t o be an exhaustive study o f a l l educational programs f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s conducted i n the C i t y of Vancouver. Among lone parent f a m i l i e s , the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s selected f o r study are those which can be measured o b j e c t i v e l y and which are r e a d i l y obtainable from e x i s t i n g census data. In r e p o r t i n g the number of c h i l d r e n i n lone parent f a m i l i e s , c e r t a i n problems were encountered since age was not used as a c r i t e r i o n i n the d e f i n i t i o n adopted by S t a t i s t i c s Canada. By i n c l u d i n g a l l never-married sons and daughters ( i n c l u d i n g adopted and step c h i l d r e n ) l i v i n g i n the same famil y dwelling, r e g a r d l e s s o f age, as " c h i l d r e n " s t a t i s t i c s Canada might have Incurred c e r t a i n i n a c c u r a c i e s i n i t s data p e r t a i n i n g t o the number of c h i l d r e n l i v i n g i n lone parent f a m i l i e s since 40.6 per cent o f the t o t a l number of c h i l d r e n reported were over the age of 18, and a l a r g e number of these s o - c a l l e d c h i l d r e n were p o s s i b l y independent a d u l t s sharing the same household as t h e i r parents. For the purpose of t h i s study, c h i l d r e n w i l l i n c l u d e only never-married sons and daughters ( i n c l u d i n g adopted and stepchildren)whose ages were eighteen or under a t the time of enumeration. 6 P l a n of the Study The f o l l o w i n g chapters o f t h i s study w i l l focus on the review of l i t e r a t u r e on lone parent f a m i l i e s , the demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the group as revealed by e x i s t i n g census data, the needs of lone parent f a m i l i e s and educational programs f o r the group i n the C i t y o f Vancouver, and recommendations f o r a c t i o n . 7 CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE 8 CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Introduction With the lone parent family becoming an i n c r e a s i n g l y common s o c i a l phenomenon, a s i g n i f i c a n t volume of l i t e r a t u r e on the subject has been produced i n the three major English-Speaking countries of Canada, U.S., and Great B r i t a i n i n the l a s t two decades. This review of l i t e r a t u r e w i l l fOcus on the f o l l o w i n g aspects: 1. D e f i n i t i o n s 2 . Lone parent f a m i l y as a new family form 3. Pervasiveness of lone parent f a m i l i e s 4. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of lone parent f a m i l i e s 5. Poverty among lone parent f a m i l i e s headed by women , 6. C h i l d r e n of lone parent f a m i l i e s 7. Problems and needs of lone parent f a m i l i e s 8. Educational programs f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s 9. Needs and p a r t i c i p a t i o n pattern i n a d u l t education D e f i n i t i o n s Most of the l i t e r a t u r e on the lone parent family employs the use of the terms " s i n g l e parent family" and "one-parent family". Schlesinger (1975, 1977, 1978, 1979a, 1979b), the foremost a u t h o r i t y on the study of the lone parent family i n North America, used the term "one-parent family" i n the majority of h i s work. Two other major studies of the lone parent 9 family i n Canada, one by Guyatt (1971) and the other by the Canadian Council on S o c i a l Development ( l 9 ? l ) , also employed the term "one-parent family". The National Council of Welfare (1975, 1976a, 1976b, 1979a, 1979b, 1979c), on the other hand, used the term " s i n g l e parent famil y " i n i t s s e r i e s of reports. Among B r i t i s h studies, the term "one-parent family" was used i n the F i n e r Report (1975) while another comprehensive study c a r r i e d out by Hunt (1970) used the two terms " f a t h e r l e s s family" and "motherless family." Hunt was a l s o the f i r s t to employ the term "lone parent family." Other B r i t i s h studies such as the work of Marsden (1969), George and Wilding (1972), and Kriesberg (1970) a l s o tended to employ the two terms "motherless family" and " f a t h e r l e s s family." I n the U.S., lone parent f a m i l i e s headed by women seemed t o have received the bulk of a t t e n t i o n . The two terms " s i n g l e parent family" and "one parent family" are used i n some studies (Education USA, 1980; Eisenberg, 1975; Tucker, 1975) while another group of studies (Brown and M i l l e r , 1976; Department of Health, Education , and Welfare, 1977; Honig, 1971; Ross & Sawhill, 1975; Women's Bureau, 1977) tended to employ the use of the terms "male-headed family," "female-headed family," and " f a m i l i e s headed by women." The d i s t i n c t i o n between the two terms "lone parent family" and " s i n g l e parent family" was f i r s t e s t a b l i s h e d by S t a t i s t i c s Canada i n i t s I976 Census p u b l i c a t i o n s on the lone parent family ( S t a t i s t i c s Canada, 1976a, 1976b). While " s i n g l e parent family" was used to describe a family headed by a parent who has never married, "lone parent family" 10 described a family headed by a parent who was either widowed, divorced, separated, single (never married), or had an absentee spouse. A "lone parent family," according to Statistics Canada, consists of a parent, regardless of marital status, with one or more children (including adopted children) l i v i n g i n the same dwelling. Similar c r i t e r i a were adopted <by Schlesinger i n defining the term "one parent family". In the B r i t i s h study by Hunt (1970), another criterion was added when he included lone parents and children l i v i n g as members of a near relative's household without a male head as another category of lone parent families. This study has opted for the term "lone parent family" for three main reasons. F i r s t l y , i t was the term employed by St a t i s t i c s Canada and, i n obtaining data, i t was important to have a common frame of reference. Secondly, the term allows the distinction between lone parents who were once married and lone parents who have never married as the l a t t e r -single parents - can be subsumed under the general category of lone parents. Thirdly, the status of lone parenthood i n Canadian society carries certain social implications such as isolation and loneliness which were aptly conveyed by the term "lone parent family," but are not conveyed by the other terms. The definition of "children" also varies from study to study. In the census publications by St a t i s t i c s Canada, children referred to sons and daughters (including adopted and stepchildren) who had never married, regardless of age, and were l i v i n g i n the same dwelling as their parents. Schlesinger did not define the term i n any of his studies. As can be seen from the definition adopted by S t a t i s t i c s Canada, no age l i m i t was 11 set i n the process of enumerating, and "children" would include sons and daughters who were s t i l l l i v i n g with their parents hut were no longer dependent on their parents for support. In some studies such as the B. C. Public School St a t i s t i c s (1976) and Cowhig's study (1970) on families headed by women i n the U.S., however, the upper age lim i t s for "children" were set at 19 and 18 respectively. The general lack of consensus on the definition has resulted i n a certain amount of confusion and inaccuracy i n data pertaining to the number of children from lone parent families. As stated i n the introduction, "children" i n this study w i l l include only sons and daughters under the age of 18. Lone Parent Family as a New Family Form Among early literature on lone parenthood, there was a tendency for scholars to treat lone parent families as a deviant group or, as Schlesinger (1975) suggested, the " f i f t h wheels" of society. I t i s , therefore, important to stress that many of the problems faced by the average lone parent family are also commonly shared by the average husband-wife family, and society's attitude toward the lone parent family i s changing. In a report sponsored by the Anglican Church of Canada, Thompson (1969) noted the general fear of the "broken home" harboured by the general public and recent tentative evidence that unhappy husband-wife families might pose greater risk for the young than more stable lone parent families. Thompson also noted that serious disturbances among the young have many complex causes and cannot be attributed solely to family structure. 12 I n a recent conference report entitled What Holds Tomorrow? (l 9 8 l ) , the lone parent family was identified as a future trend i n the development of the family as " l i f e i n the traditional family i s being eroded by changing p o l i t i c a l , social and cultural conditions..." (p. 4) and other family forms are being born. The report also stressed the need for the future family to be adaptable and for a wide range of support services i f modern families are to survive i n the face of social change and the lack of a value consensus. In a discussion paper (June, 1981) published by the Ministry of Education, Thomas also noted technological and social impact on the structure of the family and identified eight kinds of unions resulting i n the "blended or reconstituted families" and other familial groupings. The recent increase i n the number of younger lone parents, the changing attitude of society, and the problems faced both by working lone parents and by lone parents on welfare were also noted. Pervasiveness of Lone Parent Families Significant increases i n the number of lone parent families were reported by studies conducted by Canada, the U.S., and Great Britain i n the l a s t two decades. Sta t i s t i c s Canada reported that one i n ten Canadian families i n 1976 was a lone parent family. The changes i n s t a t i s t i c s of different f a m i l y types are shown i n Table I. The rate of increase was even greater among lone parent families i n Bri t i s h Columbia which, according to Statistics Canada, experienced an increase of 20.6 per cent between 1971 and 1976. A l l provinces reported Table 1« Family Types f o r 1971 and 19?6 and Rates of Change Since 1971 m x •« n *IJ Husband-Wife Male-Headed Female-Headed T o t a l Lone Parent Year T o t a l Families _, .,. ™ ™ * n Families Families F a m i l i e s F a m i l i e s 1971 5.053.170 4,575.640 100,355 377,165 477,525 1976 5.727,895 5.168,560 94,990 464,345 559,330 Change since 1971 13% 13% -5M 23% 17% Sources Anne-Marie Ambert, Divorce i n Canada, Don M i l l s i Academic Press, 1980, Table 13. 14 an increase i n the total number of lone parent families. The largest groups of lone, parent families were found i n the two most populous provinces of Quebec and Ontario (see Statistics Canada, 1976a, 1976b). Data supplied by the National Council of Welfare (December, I98l) showed that lone parent families had the tendency to congregate i n the larger urban centres. Of the total number of Canadian lone parent families, 79.0 per cent li v e d i n urban centres with populations of less than 15,000. On the B r i t i s h scene, the Finer Report (1974) also indicated a significant increase i n the number of lone parent families since 1955. According to -the report, there were 620s000 lone parent families in Great Britain i n 1971. A total of one million children were reported to be l i v i n g i n these families and 720,000 of them liv e d i n female-headed households. Table 2 shows the breakdown of data on lone parent families as presented by the report. As in Canada and the U.S., these data showed that one-tenth of a l l families with dependent children had only one parent. The rapid growth of female-headed families i n the U.S. was reported by Ross and Sawhill (1975) and Cowhig (Welfare Review, 1970, 8, pp. 16-20). Cowhig reported a total of 5«3 million lone parent families headed by women i n 1968. The total number of children l i v i n g i n female-headed families was 6.7 million. As with lone parent families i n Canada, the majority of these families, especially those headed by Negro women (62 per cent), tended to congregate i n urban centres. Ross and Sawhill Table Zt Lone Parent Families i n Great B r i t a i n with M a r i t a l Status of Parents and Number Children i n 1971 Parent Number of Families % Number of C h i l d r e n Female Single 90,000 14.5 120,000 11.1 Married 190,000 30.6 360,000 33-4 Widowed 120,000 19.4 200,000 18.5 Divorced 120,000 19.4 240,000 22.2 Sub-Total 520,000 83.9 920,000 85.2 Male 100,000 16.1 160,000 14.7 620,000 100.0 1,080,000 Note: Tables may not add up to 100 per cent due to rounding. Source: B. Schlesinger, "One-Parent Families i n Great B r i t a i n " , The Family Coordinator, 1977, V ol. 26, pp. 139. 16 did not concentrate on s t a t i s t i c s , but analyzed the increasingly common phenomenon of the female-headed lone parent family i n the context of social changes and contended that changing economic and social status of women was the main cause for the increase i n female-headed lone parent families. Demographic Characteristics of Lone Parent Families The majority of lone parent families i n Canada, U.S., and Great Britain were reportedly headed by women. Of the 599i070 Canadian lone parent families reported by Statistics Canada i n 1976, a total of 465,480 (83.3 per cent) were headed by women and only 93,599 ( l 6 . 7 per cent) were headed by men. In Br i t i s h Columbia, the ratio of male- and female-headed families was similar to that for Canada. The correlation between marital status and age of lone parents was indicated by a number of Canadian studies. Statistics Canada (1976a, 1976b) found that 41 .2 per cent of Canada's total lone parents were widows and the majority of them were over the age of 55. On the other hand, the majority of lone parents i n the separated and divorced categories were women between the ages of 25 and 44. Lone parents who were single or never-married constituted only a small percentage of the total lone parent population and most of them were under 35-The typical lone parent, according to a report by the National Council of Welfare (1979)• was a 40 to 45 year old woman who was either divorced or separated, with teenage children, and whose main source of income was welfare. 1? As i n Canada, the majority of lone parent families i n Great Britain and the U.S. were headed by women. The Finer Report found i n 1971 that 83.8 per cent of the 620,000 lone parent families were headed by women and only 16.1 per cent by men. The same report found a total of 1,080,000 children l i v i n g i n lone parent families i n 1971 and 95.2 per cent of them lived i n families headed by women. The study by Hunt revealed a significant number of female-headed families who shared a common household with a near relative. The same study also showed that over 90 per cent of a l l female-headed families included children of ages five to 15. The average Bri t i s h lone parent family had 2.0 children. In the U.S., the study by Cowhig showed that 81 per cent of a l l lone parent families were headed by women. Of the 6.7 million children (under 18) l i v i n g i n lone parent families, about 38 per cent belonged to Negro families. Compared to female heads of White households, female heads of Negro households appeared to be younger. In fact, the average Negro lone parent was almost 12 years younger than her White counterpart. The largest congregation of female lone parents was found i n the two age groups of 35-44 and 45-54. Compared to her Canadian counterpart, the average lone parent i n the U.S. appeared to be older. There also seemed to be some correlation between age and marital status among U.S. lone parents. Widows formed the largest group of lone parents (86.0 per cent i n the age group of 65 and over); while separa-tion and divorce were the two main reasons for lone parenthood for approxi-mately 40.0 per cent of female-headed White and Negro families. Among the 18 middle age groups, about one o f every f i v e o f the women was divorced, one i n ten was never married, and the remaining 46.0 per cent were widowed. Divorce seemed to be much more common than separation f o r White than f o r Negro mothers. L i t e r a t u r e on the lone parent f a m i l y tends to s i n g l e out the case o f the female-headed f a m i l y since the l a t t e r dominates every category of lone parenthood. Male-headed motherless f a m i l i e s claimed only s l i g h t l y over 10.0 per cent o f the t o t a l population of lone parent f a m i l i e s i n Great B r i t a i n . The most extensive study on the Canadian male-headed motherless f a m i l y was c a r r i e d out by Todres (1975) whose survey o f 72 motherless f a m i l i e s i n the metro-Toronto area i d e n t i f i e d gaps i n community se r v i c e s and the s c a r c i t y of c h i l d care among the group. U n l i k e the t y p i c a l female lone parent, t h i s group of male parents were well-educated and had good average incomes. Todres a l s o noted the more severe and enduring nature of l o n e l i n e s s and depression rendered by widowhood than th a t rendered by m a r i t a l d i s s o l u t i o n . Dore (1977) employed the "career path" model to analyze the progressive phases of lone parenthood and commented on the Importance of the extended f a m i l y as a source of support f o r the male lone parent f o l l o w i n g m a r i t a l d i s s o l u t i o n . S c h l e s i n g e r and Dominic (1979a) examined patterns o f male parenthood among those f a t h e r s who had s e t t l e d the custody o f t h e i r c h i l d r e n out of wedlock and those who had s e t t l e d custody i n court, and noted the superior q u a l i t y of f a t h e r i n g provided by the former. The authors a l s o noted the f e a r o f l o s i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n among the majority of the f a t h e r s . 19 G a t l e y and Koulack (1979) produced a handbook which o f f e r s advice f o r male lone parents. Few s t u d i e s have been conducted up t o date on male-headed lone parent f a m i l i e s i n the U.S. S c h l e s i n g e r et a l . ( C h i l d r e n Today, 1970, 7_, pp. 12-19) estimated a t o t a l of 450,000 male lone parents i n the U.S. i n 1976. The subsequent in t e r v i e w s conducted with 49 separated or div o r c e d f a t h e r s who l i v e d i n the Boston area by Keshet and Rosenthal showed that the m a j o r i t y o f the f a t h e r s were h i g h l y educated and belonged t o e i t h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l o r semi-professional categories. Interviews con-ducted by Mendes with 32 lone f a t h e r s i n Southern C a l i f o r n i a and 20 lone f a t h e r s i n North C a r o l i n a revealed s i m i l a r income status f o r the f a t h e r s , but pointed out the l a c k of r o l e c l a r i t y among the group and the r e s u l t a n t s t r e s s e s . In Great B r i t a i n , George and Wilding's study (1972) of 588 motherless f a m i l i e s found that the l o s s of the mothers i n a f a m i l y had serious economic, emotional, and s o c i a l consequences f o r the family. Unlike t h e i r North American counterparts, the B r i t i s h male parent appeared t o share many o f the socio-economic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f the female lone parent. An overview o f the common themes which had emerged from s t u d i e s conducted on motherless f a m i l i e s i n c l u d e d f i n a n c i a l problems f o r some f a t h e r s , the l a c k of c h i l d care f a c i l i t i e s , d i f f i c u l t y i n a t t a i n i n g a balanced home and s o c i a l l i f e , the l a c k of experience i n parenting and homemaking, personal problems r e l a t e d to the s t r a i n s and s t r e s s of lone parenting, and the l a c k o f community support. 20 Poverty Among Female-Headed F a m i l i e s Poverty among female-headed f a m i l i e s i n Canada was documented by S t a t i s t i c s Canada (1976a, 1976b), the National Council of Welfare (1975. 1976a, 1977. 1979a, 1979b, 1979c), the Royal Commission on the Status of Women (1970), S c h l e s i n g e r (1975. 1979), Guyatt (1971), and the National Council of S o c i a l Development ( l 9 7 l ) . One of the reports by the National Council of Welfare (1979) pointed out that poverty among female-headed f a m i l i e s had become so pervasive t h a t such f a m i l i e s had become the stereo-type of the female poor. The same re p o r t a l s o pointed out that next to widows and other formerly married women l i v i n g alone, female lone parents c o n s t i t u t e d the next poorest group o f women i n Canada as 44.0 per cent of t h i s group were poor. There a l s o seemed t o be a wide discrepancy i n income s t a t u s between male- and female-headed lone parent f a m i l i e s . A report on income d i s t r i -bution c a r r i e d out by S t a t i s t i c s Canada (1977) showed that among female heads of f a m i l i e s not i n the labour f o r c e , 11.2 per cent had annual incomes o f under $3,000. Among male heads of f a m i l i e s not i n the labour f o r c e , however, only 4.4 per cent had incomes of under $3,000. Another re p o r t r e l e a s e d by S t a t i s t i c s Canada i n 1978 on Canada's f a m i l i e s showed t h a t the most n o t i c e a b l e d i f f e r e n c e i n average income was found between heads of male and female lone parent f a m i l i e s . The National C o u n c i l o f Welfare's r e p o r t on one-parent f a m i l i e s (1976) pointed out that the incidence of poverty among lone parent f a m i l i e s was fou r times greater than t h a t f o r husband-wife f a m i l i e s , and the poverty rate of female lone parents was 59.6 per cent compared t o only 14.1 per cent f o r male lone parent: 21 Citing s t a t i s t i c s from the report of the Royal Commission on the Status of Women released to the public in 1970, Schlesinger (1975) reported that more than one-third of a l l female heads of lone parent familes were poor i n 1967 and although female-headed families represented only 7 .5 per cent of a l l Canadian families at the time, 14.8 per cent of the low-income families had female heads. Altogether there was a total of 123,320 poor female-headed families i n 196?. The same report also pointed out the correlation between the incidence of poverty and the number of children i n a lone parent family among both male-and female-headed lone parent families. The percentages of poverty among male and female heads of lone parent families with four or more children were 23.7 per cent and 66.8 per cent respectively compared to 11.4- per cent and 4-2.2 per cent of male and female heads with only one child. The most common causes of poverty among lone parent families were unemployment, lack of training and s k i l l s , and inadequate welfare pay-ments. The Canadian Council on Social Development (1976) cited the respec-tive employment rates for male and female lone parents i n 1974 as 89.0 per cent and 45.0 per cent. The 1976 Census showed that 73 '5 per cent of the male lone parents were i n the labour force compared to only 46.7 per cent of the female lone parents. In the report on Canada's families, S t a t i s t i c s Canada (1978) cited family obligations, fewer opportunities for promotion, and a large proportion of widowed lone parents l i v i n g off acquired assets and small incomes as other causes of poverty. The odds against female lone parents striving for financial independence was stressed by the National Council of Welfare's report 22 (1976) of lone parent families i n Canada. Negative cultural orientation toward the role of bread-winner, and lack of financial incentives and day care f a c i l i t i e s were cited as important odds i n addition to discrimination against women i n the work force. The same report also pointed out that female heads of families were just as well, i f not better, educated than their male counterparts, but had a much narrower range of job opportunities due to discrimination women experienced i n the job market. Compared to their counterparts i n the general population, however, female lone parents seemed to have a lower level of education. This assertion was supported by Schlesinger (l9?6) who reported that 49.0 per cent of female heads of families i n 1967 had only elementary school education or no schooling. •Statistics Canada (1976a) reported a higher proportion of under-educated male lone parents (27.5 e r cent) than female lone parents (19.7 per cent). In Brit i s h Columbia, the percentage of undereducated lone parents appeared to be even higher. The inadequacy of welfare payments was stressed by the National Council of Welfare (1975, 1976a, 19?6b, 1979a, 1979b, 1979c), Guyatt (1971), the Canadian Council on Social Development (l97l), Newton (1979), Edmonton Social Services (1979), and Schlesinger (1975)' One of the reports by the National Council of Welfare (1979a) stated that 4l.5 per cent (almost an equal proportion as those i n full-time employment) of the female lone parents i n 1974 were dependent on welfare for their major source of income. The report advocated the urgent need for a new program 23 of guaranteed income which would at least match the existing poverty-l i n e . The report summed up the situation as follows: I f a single-parent woman has a full-time paid job, her chances of having at least a minimum adequate income are almost as good as those of a married woman l i v i n g with her husband. I f her only sources of income are a former husband or the government, however, she w i l l almost certainly be destitute, (p. 12) Similar contentions on the need for reforms i n welfare policies were held by Guyatt, the Canadian Council on Social Development, Newton, Edmonton Social Services, and Schlesinger. Like i t s Canadian counterpart, the poverty of the average female-headed lone parent family i n the U.S. i s well documented. Studies conducted by Kriesberg (1970), Congress of the U.S. (1979), Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1977), Brown and M i l l e r (1976), and Eisenberg et a l (1975) attempted to show some of the negative effects of poverty and the high percentage of lone parent families, especially those headed by women, who were poor. Female lone parents were among the poorest i n the country and the major consumers of welfare. About one-thi r d of a l l families headed by women were poor with a median income of $2,926 i n 1975 and this rate of poverty was five times that for male-headed lone parent families. Although women made up only 14.0 per cent of a l l poor, they constituted 48.0 per cent of a l l poor family heads. This rate of poverty was almost identical to that found among female lone parents i n Canada. 24 Another similarity between lone-parent families i n the U.S. and lone parent families i n Canada emphasized by literature was the great discrepancy between the income status of a male-headed and female-headed family. Cowhig's study revealed that the median income for a female-headed family i n 1967 was about $4,300 compared to a median income of about $8,400 for a male-headed husband-wife family. The group of lone parents with the lowest income were female parents of under 25. Negro families were found to be more susceptible to poverty than White families. One-third of the families headed by women had incomes of less than $3,000 i n 1967 and half had incomes of $2,114 or less. Among both White and Negro families, the proportion of families with incomes less than $3,000 was much greater for female-headed than for male-headed families. As i n the case of the Canadian lone parent family, the poverty status of the female-headed family i n the U.S. was directly related to the number of persons i n the family. The study by the Women's Bureau of Washington, D.C, for example, showed that larger families suffered a higher incidence of poverty. The same study also attributed the greater prevalence of poverty among female lone parents to other causes such as higher unemployment rate, c h i l d care responsibilities, and the greater longevity of women. Cowhig, on the other hand, saw the comparatively low educational attainment of the female lone parents both as the cause and the effect of their poor economic status. The theory of intergenerational transmission of poverty had been explored by many sociologists and transmission of poverty among female-headed families has been frequently used as an example of this theory at 25 work. Kriesberg (1970) dismissed this theory i n her study of poor female-headed families i n the U.S. and concluded that the connection between the poverty of broken families i n one generation and the next i s non-existent or small. Instead, she pointed out the importance of contemporary situational factors such as a mother's education i n affecting the income status of a female-headed family. ,The extent of deprivation suffered by fatherless families i n Great Britain was described by Marsden's study (1969) of 116 female-headed lone parent families. Marsden noted that financial and emotional deprivation are intermeshed and that "poverty accentuates a l l the morbid tendencies of grief - the isolation, bitterness, apathy...." (p.. 3). Children of Lone Parent Families The traumatic effects of marital upsets on children were dealt with by a number of studies though the results were inconclusive. Stuart and Edwin (1972) described children of separation and divorce as "pawns" i n the power struggles between parents. Schlesinger (Ed., 1979b) examined the effect of divorce on children i n nursery schools and concluded that divorce had a significant impact for the majority of the children i n this age group. Ercul, Goldenberg, and Schlesinger (Schlesinger Ed., 1979b) concluded from their study of children from broken homes that most of their subjects had mixed feelings about the absentee parent. The National Council of Welfare (1975) reported the overwhelming probability of poverty among children l i v i n g i n families headed by mothers i n a l l provinces and a l l population categories. These children, according 26 to the Council's report, tended to have a high dropout rate during their school years, low educational aspirations; but strong desire to earn money. The majority of them were also found to be susceptible to i l l -health and poor nutrition. Some of these assertions were supported by Stat i s t i c s Canada's 1976 Census data. The damaging effects of children growing up i n poverty were studied by Forrest (1979a), the Canadian Council on Social Development (1975), and F e r r i and Robinson (1976). The conclusions from these studies tended to support the theory that children from lone parent families tend to have a lower level of attainment i n school. A report which appeared i n Education USA (Aug. 4 , 1980) pointed out the presence of 12 million children from lone parent families i n the U.S. and stressed that children from such families were potentially "at risk" since they were more l i k e l y to be poor achievers and school dropouts than children from husband-wife families. Another study by Ross and Sawhlll (1975) yielded inconclusive evidence on the issue of school per-formance, but Cowhig's study (1970) showed that school performance by children from lone parent families was more affected by factors such as family income and maternal role, and children from poor female-headed families often performed better than children from poor husband-wife families. Kriesberg (1970) forwarded some alternatives for rearing children from poor families for independence and achievement based on the conclusion that there were no overall differences between children of fatherless families and husband-wife families. 27 Problem and Needs of Lone Parent Families The d i f f i c u l t y of determining the "real" needs of clientele has prompted many debates i n adult education literature. The nebulous nature of the term and i t s definitions were discussed by G r i f f i t h (School Review, 1978, ^, pp. 384-394). In this study, "needs" w i l l generally refer to either " f e l t needs" or "expressed needs" ( G r i f f i t h , p. 384). Major studies conducted by Schlesinger, Guyatt, the National Council of Welfare, and the National Council for Social Development overwhelmingly stressed poverty as the main underlying cause of most problems faced by lone parent families, especially those families headed by women. Next to poverty, the majority of these families face varying degrees of social isolation i n a society which i s , to a large extent, s t i l l dominated by the values and norms set by the traditional nuclear family. Issuing from the two problems of poverty and isolation are needs pertaining to income assistance, education and training opportunities, day care, housing, and self-help groups. The need for day care was examined by L i (1978) who studied the ch i l d care arrangements of 87 working lone mothers i n Toronto. Poulas (1969), i n her study of the needs of lone parent families i n the City of Vancouver, ranked the ten most frequent needs of the group as follows: 1. Day care 6. Getting along i n the community 2. Income management 7. Employment 3- Personal adjustment 8. Sex education 4. Living arrangement 9. Job training 5. Child rearing and care 10. Family court action 28 Another study "by Bowers (1979) revealed similar needs expressed by lone parents i n the Okanagan College region of B r i t i s h Columbia. Other literature dealing with the needs of lone parent families revealed a hierarchy of " f e l t needs" and "expressed needs" which can be summed up by the following extract from a report prepared by the National Council of Welfare (1974): She (lone mother) may have need of some form of remedial or educational services to help her adjust to her new role and to enable her to help her children adjust to the new situation. And she w i l l have need of situations i n which her sense of self ... can be reaffirmed. Once her most immediate need of ensuring that she and her children are not without food and shelter has been met, the opportunity for participation i n a peer-group setting i n which she can both establish relationships with others i n similar situations and engage i n a c t i v i t i e s that interest and challenge her may represent the most important need-meeting vehicle that can be made available to her. (p. 28) Educational Programs for Lone Parent Families A number of studies had been carried out on educational programs i n B r i t i s h Columbia. Wilmut (1975) reported the large number of lone parents i n the Work Incentive Program sponsored by the Ministry of Human Resources. Pearson (1979) studied women returning to the work force and found that almost 70.5 per cent of divorced or separated women aged 35-44 29 were i n the labour force and that the majority had returned out of financial necessity. Widows, on the other hand, seemed to be less prepared for the role of the working mother and tended to possess low and outdated work s k i l l s . Women enrolled i n the office career programs i n two. community colleges i n the Lower Mainland were the subjects of Hoek's study (1978) which revealed that participants of such programs were part of a non-traditional group with low income, l i t t l e education or employment ex-perience, and relatively "non-risking" l i f e s t y l e s . Their resources, both financially and emotionally, were under strain i n meeting the demands of the student role. Hoek's findings also revealed the lack of a f f i n i t y of these women with the area of their study, and their tendency to have diffused goals. Bowers (1979) documented the results of the Single Parent Study in Okanagan College and identified programs for f u l f i l l i n g these needs. Blown (l979) reported the findings and results of another similar study. She pointed out factors such as nominal fees, free child care, convenient schedule and location as important concerns i n organizing educational programs for lone parents. The report recommended that educators work with existing groups of lone parents to ensure ongoing group support for the program. Carl i s l e (1980) documented another educational project created to serve the needs of lone parents and their families i n the school d i s t r i c t of New Westminster. She outlined the extreme isolation experienced by some 30 lone parent families and offered insights into the extent of poverty among the group. She concluded: I t was apparent that programs can only alleviate some of the problems that poor families encounter u n t i l the basic economic/ p o l i t i c a l problem of poverty i s dealt with on a much broader scale at the government level, (p. 6) A recent comprehensive report on family learning a c t i v i t i e s i n Br i t i s h Columbia by Thomas (l98l) documented a total of 53^ family-related courses and a number of special projects offered under the Continuing Education Division of the Ministry of Education i n the academic year of 1979-80. The report also offered discussions on family types i n Canada and future trends i n the development of the family. Needs and Participation Patterns i n Adult Education Among adult education literature dealing with the needs and p a r t i -cipation patterns of adults i n educational programs, Maslow's (1970) theory of human motivation offered some insight into the ordering of human needs and helped to predict participation behaviour based on the relative degrees of satisfaction experiences by the individual at different need levels i n the so-called hierarchy of human needs. Using the theory, the adult educator can possibly predict the participation pattern of an individual or a group of potential participants with certain known socio-economic characteristics. Anderson and Niemi (1969) examined the role of education i n altering the personal and social characteristics of socially disadvantaged adults 31 and offered explanations for the failure of programs with middle-class orientations and traditional marketing strategy i n reaching disadvantaged adults who are hampered by certain psychological and physical factors. Lorge's (l9o3) theory of power and load employed a formula i n the form of a ratio to explain the relationship between an individual's total a b i l i t i e s and total tasks at any particular time i n the person's l i f e . The ratio would indicate the presence or absence of a comfortable margin which would, i n turn, determine the voluntary participation pattern of the individual i n less essential tasks such as adult education programs. Miller's (196?) force f i e l d theory analyzed participation patterns of adults i n educational and vocational programs. At any moment, Mi l l e r asserted, an individual's participation pattern i n an educational program i s determined by the interaction between the two forces of individual needs and social class orientation. An understanding of the various patterns of interaction between these two factors, therefore, w i l l enable the adult educator to predict the participation pattern of an individual or a group of potential learners i n an educational program. Assuming that Maslow's, Anderson and Niemi's, Lorge's, and Miller's theories are viable, adult educators should be able to predict, explain, and manipulate the participation patterns of such clientele as lone parents i n educational programs with a f a i r degree of accuracy. 32 Summary The review of related literature on lone parent families in Canada, the U.S., and Great Britain shows that there i s a lack of consensus in the use of terminologies and the tendency for lone parent families to he regarded with prejudice despite their pervasiveness in modern society. The majority of lone parent families are headed by women, and a significant percentage of them are poor. Studies on the children of lone parent families have yielded inconclusive findings, but the traumatic effects of marital upsets on children are generally recognized. Lone parent families face many needs ranging from basic survival to personal fulfillment. Studies on educational programs and participa-tion of adults in education suggest that the latter i s likely affected by personal needs and social class orientation. 33 CHAPTER III DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF LONE PARENT FAMILIES 34 CHAPTER III DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF LONE PARENT FAMILIES Introduction Despite recent increases i n number, and society's greater tolerance, the lone parent family has not yet been f u l l y accepted as a norm i n the development of the modern family. As a group, lone parent families are ident i f i e d by certain characteristics which set them apart from the general population. In the following discussion of the demographic characteristics of lone parent families i n Canada and Br i t i s h Columbia based primarily on the 1976 Census data, i t i s important to point out that not a l l lone parent families share a l l these characteristics. Indeed many lone parent families enjoy greater affluence and s t a b i l i t y than the average husband-wife family. Male lone parents i n Canada and the U.S., for example, are often better educated and of higher socio-economic status than the average population. The majority of Canada's lone parent families, however, are headed by women who tend to share certain common characteristics of the socially disadvantaged. Distribution According to S t a t i s t i c s Canada (l9?6a, 1976b), the number of lone parent families i n Canada increased from 477,520 i n 1971 to 559,070 i n 1976 (Table 3)• This figure included lone parents of over 65, a group consisting mainly of widows with unmarried children l i v i n g i n the same 35 3» D i s t r i b u t i o n of Lone Parent F a m i l i e s i n Canada by Provinces. 1971 & 1976 ' !971 % 1976 % Increase/ Decrease Newfoundland 9.675 2.0 10,800 1.9 11.6 P.E.I. 2,470 0.5 2,875 0 .5 16.5 Nova S c o t i a 19,070 4 .0 21,470 3.8 12.6 New Brunswick 13.810 2.9 16,160 2.9 17.0 Quebec 138,370 29.0 158,900 28 .4 14 . 8 Ontario 167,770 35.1 202,450 36.2 20.7 Manitoba 22,620 4.7 24,730 4 .4 9.4 Saskatchewan 18,550 3-9 19,100 3.4 3.0 A l b e r t a 34,100 7.1 41,200 7.4 20.8 B r i t i s h Columbia 49,920 10.5 60,200 10.8 20.6 Yukon 395 0.1 "" 500 0.1 26.3 Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s 780 0.2 950 0.2 22.2 Canada: 477.520 100.0 559,070 99.9 17.1 Source: 1976 Census o f Canada Supplementary B u l l e t i n s , Housing and F a m i l i e s , Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93-833 » Increase/Decrease i n percentage d i s t r i b u t i o n s l i k e l y represent other phenomena such as changes i n m o b i l i t y and b i r t h r a t e s w i t h i n provinces. 36 dwelling. Based on these data, the number of lone parent f a m i l i e s appeared t o have increased by 17.1 per cent i n the f i v e - y e a r i n t e r c e n s a l p e r i o d compared t o only 13.0 per cent f o r husband-wife f a m i l i e s i n the same p e r i o d . The greatest increase occurred i n the Yukon T e r r i t o r y (26.3 per cent) and the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s (22.2 per c e n t ) , but these i n c r e a s e s were r e l a t i v e l y i n s i g n i f i c a n t i n view of the small numbers i n v o l v e d . In the two most populous provinces of Quebec and Ontario, the increases were 28.4 per cent and 36.2 per cent r e s p e c t i v e l y . The smallest increases occurred i n the p r a i r i e provinces of Saskatchewan (3 .0 per cent) and Manitoba (9 .4 per cent). I n B r i t i s h Columbia, the t o t a l number of lone parent f a m i l i e s increased from 49,920 i n 1971 t o 60,200 i n 1976. The r a t e of increase f o r the province was 20.6 per cent (Table 4 ) . The m a j o r i t y of lone parent f a m i l i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia l i v e d i n c i t i e s and m u n i c i p a l i t i e s with populations of 5»000 and over. In 1976, a t o t a l of 49,095 (81 . 5 per cent) of the t o t a l lone parent f a m i l i e s were l o c a t e d i n c i t i e s and m u n i c i p a l i t i e s with populations of 5.000 and over, and n e a r l y 25.0 per cent of them were l o c a t e d i n the C i t y of Vancouver. Due t o changes i n boundary, name, and status, the percentage of population change was not known i n some c i t i e s and m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , but a wide v a r i a t i o n was evident from area t o area. For example, the C i t y o f Langley and the M u n i c i p a l i t y o f Mackenzie, both of which were f a s t -growing areas, reported increases of over 100 per cent; whereas the C i t y of C h i l l i w a c k and the m u n i c i p a l i t y of Oak Bay both showed only s l i g h t i n c r e a s e s . 37 Table 4i Lone Parent F a m i l i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia by C i t i e s and by M u n i c i p a l i t i e s of 5,000 Population and Over, 1971 and 1976 C i t i e s and Lone Parent F a m i l i e s % Average No. of M u n i c i p a l i t i e s Increase/ Persons Per Family 1971 1976 Decrease 1971 1976 T o t a l No. of F a m i l i e s - 49,095 - - 2.8 Abbotsford, D.M.* 265 _ _ 2.8 Burnaby, D.M. 3,320 3.700 11.4 2.8 2.7 Campbell River, D.M. 230 325 42.1 3.1 2.8 C a s t l e g a r , C* - 140 - - 2.8 C e n t r a l Saanich, D.M. 75 110 46.7 2.9 3.0 C h i l l i w a c k , C. 295 260 -9.9 3.0 2.8 C h i l l i w h a c k , D.M.* 430 590 - 3-2 2.9 Comox, T-V* 35 95 - 3.2 2.9 Coquitlam, CM.* - 1,290 - - 2.8 Courtenay, C * 150 250 - 3.1 2.8 Cranbrook, C * 245 380 - 3.1 3.0 Dawson Creek, C. 335 365 10.2 3.5 3.1 D e l t a , D.M. 595 1.105 86.6 3-2 3.0 Esquimalt, D.M. 340 555 60.5 2.9 2.7 F o r t S t . John, C * 170 225 - 3.2 3.1 Kamloops, C * 615 1,500 - 3.1 2.9 Kelowna, C * 450 1,230 - 3.0 2.9 Kimberley, C * 140 155 - 2.9 2.7 K i t i m a t , D.M. 105 135 31.^ 3.0 2.9 Langley, C. 125 295 140.7 3.1 2.8 Langley, D.M. 415 615 48.8 3-0 2.8 MacKenzie, D.M. 20 50 123.8 3-0 2.8 Maple Ridge, D.M. * 560 630 12.9 3-1 2.9 Matsqui, D.M. 395 525 31.7 3.1 2.9 M e r r i t t , " T - V 110 135 22.3 3.3 3.1 M i s s i o n , D.M. 220 345 56.8 3-1 2.9 Nanalmo, C * 400 1,100 - 3.0 2.8 Nelson, C * 270 290 - 2.9 2.7 New Westminster, C. 1,460 1,245 15.1 2.8 2.6 North Cowichan, D.M. 210 355 67.5 3.1 2.9 North Vancouver, C. 995 1,080 9.0 2.7 2.6 North Vancouver, D.M. 1,010 1,470 46.4 3.0 2.8 Oak Bay, D.M. 445 420 -6.1 2.8 2.7 P e n t i c t o n , C. 425 5^ 5 27.5 3.0 2.7 P o r t A l b e r n i , C. 425 445 4.0 3.1 2.9 Port Moody, C. 240 425 78.2 3.2 2.9 Powell River, D. M. 265 315 17.3 3.2 2.8 38 Table 4, Page 2i Lone Patent F a m i l i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia by C i t i e s and by M u n i c i p a l i t i e s of 5,000 Population and Over, 1971 and 1976 C i t i e s and M u n i c i p a l i t i e s Lone-Parent F a m i l i e s 1971 1976 Increase/ Decrease Average No. Of Persons Per Family 1971 1976 P r i n c e George, C* 745 1.435 - 3.3 3.0 P r i n c e Rupert, C. 380 335 11.8 3.3 2.8 Quesnel, T-V* 140 210 - 3.2 3.1 Richmond, D.M. 1.255 I . 8 6 5 48.2 3-0 2.8 Saanich, D.M. 1.365 1,820 33.4 3.0 2.8 Salmon Arm, D.M. 165 175 9.2 2.9 2.9 Sidney, T-V 110 140 30.8 2.9 2.7 Squamish, D.M. 95 145 58.2 3.0 2.7 Summerland, D.M. 90 115 30.3 3.0 2.7 Surrey, D.M. 2.105 3.055 45.2 3.2 2.9 Terrace, D.M. 200 235 15-9 3.3 3-1 T r a i l , C * 255 215 - 2.9 2.7 Vancouver, C* 12.565 12,240 - 2.7 2.6 Vernon, C. 325 530 - 3.0 2.8 V i c t o r i a , C. 1,905 1,940 1.7 2.8 2.6 West Vancouver, D.M. 740 785 5-7 2.8 2.7 White Rock, C. 260 265 0.4 2.9 2.6 Williams Lake, T-V* 60 125 3.0 3.0 B r i t i s h Columbia: 49,920 60,200 20.6 3.0 2.8 Source: 1976 Census of Canada Supplementary B u l l e t i n s , Housing and F a m i l i e s , Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93-833 * I n d i c a t e changes to boundary, name o r status D.M. D i s t r i c t M u n i c i p a l i t y C. C i t y T-V Town 39 Family S i z e The average Canadian lone parent f a m i l y had 3«1 persons i n 1971• but only 2.9 persons i n 1976 (Table 5 ) ' The l a r g e s t f a m i l i e s were found i n the Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s with 3.k persons per family, and the smallest f a m i l i e s were found i n Ontario and B r i t i s h Columbia with only 2.8 persons per f a m i l y . While the average family s i z e of a lone parent f a m i l y decreased i n a l l provinces between 1971 and 1976, there were s i g n i f i c a n t i n c r e a s e s i n the t o t a l number of lone parent f a m i l i e s during the period. The province of Saskatchewan, f o r example, showed a decrease o f 3«4 per cent i n the t o t a l number of persons i n lone parent f a m i l i e s although the number of lone parent f a m i l i e s increased by 3«0 per cent i n t h a t province. The average lone parent f a m i l y i n B r i t i s h Columbia had 2 .8 persons i n 1976. Compared t o the average Canadian lone parent family, B r i t i s h Columbia's lone parent f a m i l i e s were smaller. Among c i t i e s and munici-p a l i t i e s with populations of 5»000 and over, the average s i z e of a lone parent f a m i l y ranged from 2.6 to 3 '1 persons. The C i t y of Vancouver had the l a r g e s t number of lone parent f a m i l i e s but the smallest f a m i l y s i z e with j u s t 2.6 persons per famil y . The c i t i e s of Dawson Creek, F o r t S t . John, the towns of M e r r i t t and Quesnel, and the m u n i c i p a l i t y of Terrace a l l had l a r g e r f a m i l i e s of 3*1 persons. Except f o r C e n t r a l Saanich, the average s i z e o f a lone parent family i n a l l m u n i c i p a l i t i e s , c i t i e s , and towns had decreased since 1971 despite the general increase i n the t o t a l number of lone parent f a m i l i e s i n these centres during the 40 Table 5» S i z e of Lone Parent F a m i l i e s i n Canada by Provinces Average No. Provinces T o t a l T o t a l /° Increase/ Decrease of Persons Per Family 1971 1976 1971 1976 Newfoundland 34,090 35,020 2.7 3.5 3-2 P.E.I. 7,885 8,590 8.9 3.2 3-0 Nova S c o t i a 59,050 63,250 7.1 3.1 2.9 New Brunswick 44,495 48 ,920 9.9 3.2 3.0 Quebec 434,470 463,450 6.7 3-1 2.9 Ontario 494,070 570,040 15.4 2.9 2.8 Manitoba 68,740 71,135 3.5 3.0 2.9 Saskatchewan 58,120 56, l60 - 3 . 4 3-1 2.9 A l b e r t a 102,290 119,800 12.7 3-1 2.9 B r i t i s h Columbia 148,870 169,110 13.6 3-0 2.8 Yukon 1 .315 1,520 15.6 3.3 3.0 Northwest T e r r i t o r i e s 2,910 3.270 12.4 3-7 3.4 Canada] 1,460,310 1,610,260 10.3 3-1 2.9 Source: 1976 Census o f Canada Supplementary B u l l e t i n s , Housing and F a m i l i e s , Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93-833 41 same pe r i o d . Average f a m i l y s i z e f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia are shown In Table 4 together with the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f lone parent f a m i l i e s i n the province. Family Composition According to the 1976 Census data, there were 685,915 c h i l d r e n o f under 18 l i v i n g i n f a m i l i e s with only one parent. The average number of c h i l d r e n per f a m i l y was 1.8 f o r male-headed lone parent f a m i l i e s and 1.9 f o r female-headed lone parent f a m i l i e s . Compared to only 1.6 c h i l d r e n f o r the average husband-wife family, lone parent f a m i l i e s appeared t o be l a r g e r (Table 6 ) . The highest concentration of c h i l d r e n (55«7 per cent) was found i n the 6'. t o 14 age group. The l a r g e number of lone parents i n the three middle age groups of 25 to 34, 35 to 44, and 45 to 54 was probably the cause o f t h i s phenomenon. Of the c h i l d r e n i n the 15 to 17 age group, only 51 -5 per cent were attending school f u l l - t i m e compared to 59.4 per cent o f the children i n s i m i l a r ages from husband-wife f a m i l i e s . The f a c t t h a t only s l i g h t l y more than h a l f of the c h i l d r e n attended school f u l l - t i m e a f t e r the compulsory school age of f i f t e e n suggested that schooling was no longer the primary concern f o r these c h i l d r e n , and a l a r g e number o f them would drop out of school e a r l y t o become the future undereducated a d u l t s . There were 78,430 c h i l d r e n of under 18 years o l d l i v i n g i n lone parent f a m i l i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia i n 19?6. The average number of c h i l d r e n per f a m i l y was 1.8 f o r female-headed f a m i l i e s , but only 1.7 f o r 42 Table 6: Family Composition o f Lone Parent F a m i l i e s i n Canada by Sex of Parent and Age o f C h i l d , 1976 T o t a l No. o f * Under 6 ^ 6-14 ^ 15 - 17 * C h i l d r e n * Years * Years * Years / 0 T o t a l Lone Parent F a m i l i e s : 685,915 100.0 173.755 20.1 382,130 55-7 166,030 .24,2 Male-Headed: 106,130 100.0 16,565 15-6 57,950 54.6 31.615 29.8 Female-Headed: 878,275 100.0 121,185 20.9 324,180 55.9 134,415 23.2 Source: 1976 Census o f Canada Supplementary B u l l e t i n s , Housing and F a m i l i e s , Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93*833 43 male-headed f a m i l i e s (Table ? ) • Compared t o the number of c h i l d r e n f o r an average lone parent f a m i l y i n Canada, B r i t i s h Columbia's lone parent f a m i l i e s had fewer c h i l d r e n . C onsistent with patterns e s t a b l i s h e d at the n a t i o n a l l e v e l , the l a r g e s t concentration of c h i l d r e n was found i n the 6 t o 14 age group (56 .4 per cen t ) . As with trends set a t the n a t i o n a l l e v e l , the number o f c h i l d r e n attending school f u l l - t i m e dropped d r a s t i c a l l y a f t e r the age of 14. I n the 15 t o 17 age group, only 48.0 per cent of the c h i l d r e n were at t e n d i n g school f u l l - t i m e . Compared to s i m i l a r data f o r Canada, B r i t i s h Columbia's c h i l d r e n had an even lower r a t e o f f u l l - t i m e school attendance a f t e r the compulsory school age. Sex and Age o f Parent Of the 559,070 lone parent f a m i l i e s reported i n 1976 by S t a t i s t i c s Canada, 83.3 per cent were headed by women and 16.7 per cent by men. The high percentage o f women among heads of lone parent f a m i l i e s could probably be explained by the d i f f e r e n c e i n death rate between men and women (41.2 per cent o f the t o t a l lone parents were widowed), and the t r a d i t i o n a l awarding o f c h i l d custody t o the mother i n cases o f separation and divorce (Table 8). The m a j o r i t y o f lone parents belonged to the three middle age groups of 25 to 34, 35 t o 44, and 45 t o 54. Together these three age groups accounted f o r 62 .3 per cent of the t o t a l lone parents i n Canada. Only 6 .4 per cent o f the t o t a l lone parents were found i n the youngest age group of 15 t o 24. The f a c t t h a t 15.0 per cent of the t o t a l lone parents were over 65 was probably a r e f l e c t i o n o f the high percentage of widows i n t h i s age group (92 per cent) and the l a c k of age as a c r i t e r i o n i n 44 Table 7» Family Composition o f Lone Parent F a m i l i e s i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Sex o f Parent and Age o f C h i l d , 1976 T o t a l No. o f Under 6 ^ 6-14 * 15-17 C h i l d r e n / 0 Years / o Years * Years T o t a l Lone Parent F a m i l i e s : 78,430 100.0 16,340 20.8 44,250 56.4 17,840 22.7 Male-Headed: 12,395 100.0 1,960 15.8 6,750 54.5 3,685 29.7 Female-Headed: 66,035 100.0 14 ,375 21.8 37,495 56.8 14,155 21.8 0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada Supplementary B u l l e t i n Housing and F a m i l i e s , Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93-833 <*5 Table 8: Distribution of Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex and Age, 1976 Age of Parent Male % Female % Total % 15-24 2,925 0.5 32,810 5.9 35.730 6.4 25-3^ 12,125 2.2 98,360 17.6 110,485 19.8 35-^ 21,335 3.8 101,645 18.1 122,980 21.9 45-54 24,680 4.4 98,990 17.7 123,670 22.1 55-64 15.955 2.8 66,260 11.9 82,215 14.7 65 & Over 16,585 2.9 67.405 12.1 83,990 15.0 Total 93.590 16.7 465,480 83.3 559,070 99.9 Source: 1976 Census of Canada Supplementary Bulletins, Housing and Families, Lone Parent Families. Catalogue 93-833 46 S t a t i s t i c s Canada's d e f i n i t i o n of " c h i l d r e n " . The majority of lone parents i n t h i s age group were probably e l d e r l y widows with adul t o f f s p r i n g l i v i n g a t home a t the time of enumeration. Data p e r t a i n i n g to the sex and age of lone parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia were consistent with those f o r Canada. Of the 60,200 lone parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia, 82.7 per cent were women and 17.3 per cent were men (Table 9). Greater Vancouver reported a t o t a l of 30,875 lone parents of whom 84.0 per cent were women and l 6 . 0 per cent were men (Table 10). In the C i t y o f Vancouver, there was a t o t a l o f 12,236 lone parents of whom 84.9 per cent were women and 15.1 per cent were men (Table l l ) . L i k e t h e i r n a t i o n a l counterparts, the majority of the lone parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia belonged t o the three middle age groups. The combined t o t a l of these three groups c o n s t i t u t e d 70.9 per cent of the t o t a l lone parents i n the province. Each of the two remaining groups, the youngest and the ol d e s t , c o n s t i t u t e d l e s s than 10.0 per cent of the t o t a l lone parents. M a r i t a l Status of Parent For lone parents i n Canada, widowhood seemed t o be the most common predicament. A l t o g e t h e r 41.2 per cent of the lone parents were widowed. Next to widows, separation was claimed t o be the m a r i t a l status of 26.0 p e r cent of the t o t a l lone parents. Divorced lone parents formed 20.5 per cent of the t o t a l lone parents and the percentage of s i n g l e parents and lone parents with absentee spouse were 7.0 per cent and 5-3 per cent r e s p e c t i v e l y . These data shattered the common assumption that increase i n »7 Table 9» Distribution of Lone Parents in British Columbia by Sex and Age, 1976 Age of Parent Male % Female % Total % 15-24 340 0.6 3,875 6.4 4,215 7.0 25-34 1,480 2.5 12,705 21.1 14,180 23.6 3 5 - ^ 2,865 4.7 12,260 20.4 15,125 25.1 45-54 2,890 4.8 10,490 17.4 13.385 22.2 55-64 1.570 2.6 5,730 9.5 7,300 12.1 65 & Over 1.230 2.0 4,750 7.9 5.980 9.9 Total 10,410 17.3 49,785 82.7 60,200 99.9 Source: 1976 Census of Canada Supplementary Bulletins, Housing and Families, Lone Parent Families. Catalogue 93-833 48 Table 10: D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Lone Parents i n Greater Vancouver by Sex and Age, 1976 Parent M a l e * Female % T o t a l % 15-24 140 0.5 1,580 5.1 1,720 5.6 25-34 700 2.3 6,240 20.2 6,940 22.5 35-44 1.320 4 .3 6.315 20.4 7.635 24.7 45-54 1,345 4 . 4 5.720 18.5 7,065 22.9 55-64 775 2.5 3,285 10.6 4,060 13.1 65 & 610 2.0 2,845 9.2 3,455 11.2 Over T o t a l 4,890 16.0 25.990 84.0 30,875 100.0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, F a m i l i e s , C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93-825 49 Table 11: D i s t r i b u t i o n o f Lone Parents i n Vancouver ( C i t y ) by Sex and Age, 1976 Age o f Parent Male % Female T o t a l * 15-24 70 0.5 560 4.6 630 5.1 25-34 250 2.0 2,235 I8 .3 2,485 20.3 35-44 430 3.5 2,350 19.2 2,785 22.7 45-54 465 3 .8 2,205 18.0 2,675 21.8 55-64 315 2.6 1,470 12.0 1,785 14.6 65 & Over 330 . 2.7 1.565 12.8 1.895 15.5 T o t a l 1.855 15.1 10,385 84.9 12,236 100.0 Source: I976 Census of Canada, SDF AMB13 50 lone parenthood i s the r e s u l t o f a r i s i n g rate of i l l e g i t i m a t e b i r t h s (Table 12). As with f i n d i n g s i n the U.S. and Great B r i t a i n (see Chapter I I , Review o f L i t e r a t u r e ) , there appeared to be some c o r r e l a t i o n between age and m a r i t a l status. The m a j o r i t y of widowed lone parents were ol d e r , n e a r l y a l l the s i n g l e parents were under the age of 35 • and most o f the separated and d i v o r c e d lone parents were between the ages of 25 and 44 (Table 13). By and l a r g e , the m a r i t a l status of lone parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia conformed with the n a t i o n a l norms with the majority of the parents (88.5 per cent) found i n the widowed, separated, and divorced c a t e g o r i e s . There were, however, d i f f e r e n c e s worth noting between the two groups.. Compared to the m a r i t a l status of lone parents i n Canada, B r i t i s h Columbia had a smaller percentage of widowed lone parents, but claimed higher percentages of lone parents i n the separated and divorced c a t e g o r i e s . Tables 14, 15 and 16 i l l u s t r a t e d the m a r i t a l status o f lone parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia, Greater Vancouver, and the C i t y of Vancouver by sex o f parent. As can be seen, the percentages of widowed, divorced, and separated lone parents f l u c t u a t e from t a b l e to t a b l e . Widowhood again claimed the l a r g e s t groups of lone parents i n Greater Vancouver and the C i t y of Vancouver, but i n each case the percentage was lower than that f o r lone parents i n Canada. 51 Table 12: M a r i t a l Status of Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex of Parent, 1976 M a r i t a l Status Male % Female % T o t a l % M a r r i e d Spouse 11.955 2.1 17,775 3.2 29,725 5-3 Absent Separated 23,905 4.3 121,765 21.8 145,670 26.0 Widowed 36,065 6.5 194,115 34.7 230,180 41 .2 S i n g l e 4,415 0.8 34,595 6.2 39,010 7.0 Divorced 17,250 3.0 97,240 17.4 114 ,485 20.5 T o t a l : 93.590 16.7 465,480 83.3 559,070 100.0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada Supplementary B u l l e t i n s , Housing and F a m i l i e s , Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93~833 Table 131 Lone Parents i n Canada "by Age and M a r i t a l Status, 1976 Age T o t a l Lone Parents No. % Married Spouse Absent % Separated % Widowed % Divorced % Single 15-24 35,730 6.4 3,350 0.6 12,970 2.3 915 0.2 3,990 0.7 14,505 2.6 25-34 110,485 19.8 7,265 1.3 45,560 8.1 7,775 1,4 35,275 6.3 14,610 2.6 35-44 122,980 21.9 7,000 1.3 43,640 7.8 23,875 4.3 42,610 7.6 5,860 1.1 45-54 123,670 22.1 6,710 1.2 31,010 5.5 58,130 10.4 25,400 4.6 2,410 0.4 55-64 82,215 14.7 3,505 0.6 9,825 1.8 61,830 11.1 6,115 1.1 950 0.2 65 & 83,990 15.0 1,905 0.3 2,665 0.5 77,655 13.8 1,095 0.2 675 0.1 Over T o t a l i 559,070 . 99.9 29,725 5.3 145,670 26.0 230,180 41.2 114,485 20.5 39,010 7.0 Sourcet 1976 Census of Canada Supplementary B u l l e t i n s , Housing and F a m i l i e s , Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93-833 53 Table l4t Marital Status of Lone Parents in British Columbia by Sex of Parent, 1976 Marital Status Male % Female % Total % Married Spouse 1.185 2.0 1,985 3.3 3.175 5.3 Absent Separated 3,150 5.2 15,045 25.0 18,200 30.2 Widowed 2,830 15,155 25.2 17,980 29.9 Single 495 0.8 3,270 5.4 3,765 6.2 Divorced 2,755 4.6 14,330 23.8 17,080 28.4 Total: 10,410 17.3 49.785 82.7 60,200 100.0 Source: 19?6 Census of Canada, Special Tabulations conducted by Ministry of Economic Development, Victoria, B. C. 54 Table 15* Marital Status of Lone Parents in Greater Vancouver by Sex of Parent, 1976 Marital Status Male % Female % Total % Married Spouse 565 1.8 915 3.0 1,480 4.8 Absent Separated 1.350 4.4 7.455 24.1 8,800 28.5 Widowed 1.380 4.5 8,160 26.4 9,540 30.9 Single 215 0.7 1.555 5.0 1,770 5.7 Divorced 1.385 4.5 7,900 25.6 9,285 30.0 Total: 4,895 15.9 25.985 84.1 30,880 99.9 0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, Special Tabulations conducted by Ministry of Economic Development, Victoria, B. C. 55 Table l6j Marital Status of Lone Parents in Vancouver (City) by Sex of Parent, 1976 6 Marital Status Male % Female % Total % Married Spouse Absent 260 2.1 440 3.6 700 5.7 Separated 410 3-3 2,440 20.0 2,855 23.3 Widowed 600 4.9 3,860 31.5 4,455 36.4 Divorced 450 3.7 2,870 23.4 3.325 27.2 Single 110 0 .9 795 6.5 910 7.4 Total: 1,840 15.0 10,400 85.O 12,240 100.0 Source: 1976 Census o f Canada, SDF AMA24 5 6 Mother Tongue o f Parent Data p e r t a i n i n g t o the mother tongue o f lone parent f a m i l i e s i n Canada i m p l i e d that the lone parent family i s a s o c i a l phenomenon which transcends e t h n i c d i f f e r e n c e s . Among the t o t a l number of lone parents, 60 .5 per cent were English-speaking, 27 .6 per cent were French-speaking, and the remaining 11 . 5 per cent belonged t o other language groups (Table 17). In B r i t i s h Columbia, 82.0 per cent of the t o t a l lone parents were English-speaking and only 2.0 per cent were French-speaking (Table 18 ) . Data p e r t a i n i n g to the mother tongue of lone parents i n Greater Vancouver and the C i t y of Vancouver were consistent with those of the province (Tables 19 and 20). Labour Force A c t i v i t y of Parent The 1976 Census data i n d i c a t e d that 286,430 (51.2 per cent) lone parents were i n the labour force and of t h i s number, 47 . 3 per cent were employed (Table 2 l ) . The percentage o f lone parents i n the labour f o r c e was much g r e a t e r among males (73-5 P e r cent) than females (46 . 7 per cejii)-. For lone parents i n the labour f o r c e , however, male lone parents appeared t o have a higher r a t e of unemployment (4.2 per cent) than t h e i r female counterparts ( 3 « 7 per cent). The high percentage o f female lone parents outside the labour f o r c e (53*3 per cent) suggested t h a t over h a l f of t h i s group had no earned incomes, but were dependent on other sources f o r support. As pointed out by the N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l o f Welfare's r e p o r t on women and poverty (1979a), the lack o f earned income was the prime cause o f poverty f o r female lone 57 Table 17: Mother Tongue of Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex of Parent, 1976 Mother Tongue Male % Female % Total % English 55,115 9.9 283,315 50.7 338,430 60.5 French 25,460 4.6 128,620 23.0 154.080 27.6 German 2,350 0.4 9,785 1.8 12,135 2.1 I t a l i a n 1,725 0.3 5.550 1.0 7,275 1.3 Ukranian 1,695 0.3 7,135 1.3 8,830 1.6 Others 1,595 0.3 4,210 0.7 5,805 1.0 Not Stated 7,055 1.3 25,730 4.6 32,785 5-9 Total: 94,990 17.0 464,340 83.O 559,070 100.0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, Families, Characteristics of Parents i n Lone Parent Families. Catalogue 93-825 58 Table l8i Mother Tongue of Lone Parents in British Columbia by Sex of Parent, 1976 Mother Tongue Male % Female % Total % English 8,110 13.5 41,265 68.5 .49.375 82.0 French 255 0.4 975 1.6 1,230 2.0 German 450 0.7 1,725 2.9 2,175 3.6 Italian 120 0.2 405 0.7 525 0.9 Ukranian 165 0.3 685 1.1 850 1.4 Others 215 0.4 590 1.0 805 1.4 Not Stated 1.095 1.8 4.135 6.9 5.230 8.7 Total t 10,410 17.3 49.785 82.7 62,200 100.0 Source: 19?6 Census of Canada, F a m i l i e s , C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Parents i n Lone Parent F a m i l i e s . Catalogue 93-825 59 Table 19« Mother Tongue of Lone Parents In Greater Vancouver by Sex of Parent, 1976 Mother Tongue Male % Female % Total % English 3,460 11.8 19,880 68.0 23,340 79.8 French 105 0 .4 510 1.7 615 2.1 German 205 0.7 820 2.8 1,025 3 .5 Italian 70 0.2 250 0 .9 320 1.1 Ukranian 80 0.2 345 1.2 425 1.4 Others 110 0 .4 340 1.1 450 1.5 Not Stated 545 1.9 2,550 8.7 3,095 10.6 Totalj 4,570 15.6 24,695 84.4 29,270 100.0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, Families, Characteristics of Parents in Lone Parent Families. Catalogue 93-825. 60 Table 20i Mother Tongue o f Lone Parents i n Vancouver ( C i t y ) by Sex of Parent, 1976 Mother Tongue Male % Female % T o t a l .* E n g l i s h 1.265 10.3 7.700 63.O 8.965 73 .3 French 30 0 .3 200 1.6 230 1.9 German 85 0 .7 380 3.1 465 3 .8 I t a l i a n 50 0 .4 185 1.5 235 1.9 Ukranian 30 0 .2 165 1.3 190 1.5 Others 55 0 .4 160 1.3 215 1.7 Not Stated 325 2.7 1.615 13.2 1.940 15.9 T o t a l j 1,840 15.0 10,400 85.0 12,240 100.0 Source: 1976 Census o f Canada, SDF AMA20B 61 Table 21: Labour Force A c t i v i t y of Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex of Parent, 1976 Labour Force A c t i v i t y Male % Female % T o t a l % Lone Parents i n 68,775 12.3 217,650 38.9 286,430 51.2 Labour Force Employed 64,900 11.6 200,365 35.8 265,260 47.3 Unemployed 3,880 0.7 17,285 3.1 21,170 3-8 0 Lone Parents not i n 24,815 4.4 247,825 44.3 272,635 48.7 Labour Force T o t a l : 93,590 16.7 465,430 83.3 559,070 100.0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, Supplementary B u l l e t i n s , Housing and Fami l i e s , Lone Parent Families. Catalogue 93-833 62 parents. The fact that the percentage of lone parents i n the labour force decreased with each successively older group also implied possible d i f f i -c u l ties encountered by older parents who attempted to enter the work force. Of the 36,630 (60.9 per cent) lone parents reported to be i n the labour force i n 1976 i n B r i t i s h Columbia, 32,?60 (5^-5 per cent) were employed. The number of lone parents outside the labour force was 23,555 (39.2 per cent) (Table 22). Among a total of 8,115 (78.2 per cent) male lone parents i n the labour force, only 6.4 per cent were unemployed. Only 57.2 per cent of the 28,505 female lone parents were i n the labour force, but their rate of unemployment was identical to that for male. Compared to the labour force a c t i v i t y of lone parents i n Canada, there seemed to be a higher percentage of lone parents i n the labour force i n British Columbia accompanied by a higher rate of unemployment. The percentage of female lone parents i n the labour force was also higher i n B r i t i s h Columbia (57-2 per cent) than i n Canada as a whole (46.7 per cent). Data pertaining to the labour force ac t i v i t y of lone parents i n Greater Vancouver and the City of Vancouver were consistent with those for the province (Tables 23 and 24). Income Status of Parent Statistics Canada's report of income distribution (1977) stated the average and median incomes of an average female-headed family i n Canada as $12,089 and $9,715 respectively. The average and median incomes for an average male-headed family (including both lone parent and husband-wife families), on the other hand, were $20,947 and $19,385 respectively. 63 Table 22: Labour Force A c t i v i t y o f Lone Parents i n B r i t i s h Columbia by Sex of Parent, 1976 Labour Force A c t i v i t y Male % Female % T o t a l % Lone Parents i n Labour Force Employed Unemployed Lone Parents not i n 2,260 3.8 21,295 35.4 23,555 39.2 Labour Force Totals 10,375 17.3 49,800 82 .7 60,200 100.0 8,115 13.5 7,455 12.4 665 1.1 28,505 47 .3 25,305 42.0 3.209 5.3 36,630 60.8 32,760 5^-4 3,865 6.4 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, Sp e c i a l t a b u l a t i o n s conducted by M i n i s t r y of Economic Development, V i c t o r i a , B. C. 64 Table 23: Labour Force A c t i v i t y of Lone Parents i n Greater Vancouver by Sex of Parent, 1976 Labour Force A c t i v i t y Male % Female % T o t a l % Lone Parents i n 3,855 12.5 14,950 48.4 18,805 60.9 Labour Force Employed 3,540 11.5 13,495 ^3.7 17,040 55-2 Unemployed 305 1.0 1,460 4.7 1,765 5«? Lone Parents not i n 1,040 3.4 11,025 35.7 12,065 39.1 Labour Force T o t a l : 4,890 15.9 25,975 84.1 30,880 100.0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, S p e c i a l t a b u l a t i o n s conducted by M i n i s t r y of Economic Development, V i c t o r i a , B. C. 65 Table 24s Labour Force A c t i v i t y of Lone Parents i n Vancouver ( C i t y ) by Sex of Parent, 1976 Labour Force A c t i v i t y Male % Female % T o t a l % Lone Parents i n 1,320 10.8 5,525 ^5.1 6,840 55.9 Labour Force Employed 1,200 9.8 4,940 40 . 4 6,145 50,2 Unemployed 155 0.9 585 4.8 700 5.7 Lone Parents not i n 535 4.4 4,860 39-7 5.395 44 .1 Labour Force Totals 1,855 15.2 10,385 84 .8 12,240 100.0 Sources 1976 Census of Canada, SD FAMB31 66 According to these data, the average and median incomes of a female-headed family were only half those of a male-headed family (Table 25)• In Br i t i s h Columbia, the average and median incomes for a female-headed family were $11,647 and $10,906 respectively compared to $21,880 and $21,123 for a male-headed family. Altogether, 12.6 per cent of the female-headed families received incomes of under $3,000 per year and over half (50.4 per cent) received incomes of under $11,000 (Table 26). Compared to the income status of female-headed families i n Canada, B r i t i s h Columbia seemed to have a higher percentage of female-headed families i n the middle income group ($11,000 to $19,999). On the other hand, the percentage of female-headed families i n the under $3,000 group was also much higher than that for the whole country. The comparison of income status of male- and female-headed families, including lone parent families, i n the different categories also suggested a great disparity between the incomes of the two groups. Of the 351,000 divorced, separated, or widowed female lone parents surveyed by the National Council of Welfare i n one of i t s recent studies (1979b), 44.2 per cent were poor. The extent of poverty was even more pronounced among single parents as 75.9 per cent of the 29,000 parents surveyed were poor (Table 27). Level of Schooling of Parent The 1976 Census data revealed that 202,350 ( 36.2 per cent) of the lone parents i n Canada had less than grade 9 schooling (Table 28). The percentage of female lone parents (35-2 per cent) i n this category was, 67 Table 25: Distribution of Families i n Canada by Income Groups and Sex of Head, 1977 Income Group Male-Headed % Female-Headed % Under $3,000 1.6 8.4 $3,000 - $10,999 17.8 47.4 $11,000 - $19,999 33.0 28.2 $20,000 - $3^,999 37.0 13.2 $35,000 and over 10.6 2.8 Total: 100.0 100.0 Average Income $20,947 $12,089 Median Income $19,385 $ 9,715 Source: S t a t i s t i c s Canada, Income Distributions by Size i n Canada, 1977 68 Table 26s Distribution of Families i n Bri t i s h Columbia by Income Groups and Sex of Head, 1977 Income Group Male-Headed % Female-Headed % Under $3,000 2.2 12.6 $3,000-$io,999 15.9 37.8 $11,000-$19,999 27.2 36.4 $20,000-$34,999 43.1 10.8 $35,000 and over 11.5 2.4 Total 100.0 100.0 Average Income $21,880 $11,647 Median Income $21,123 $10,906 Source: S t a t i s t i c s Canada, Income Distributions by Size i n Canada, 1977 69 Table 27: Distribution of Poor and Non-Poor Female Lone Parents in Canada by Marital Status, 1975 Marital Status Poor Parents % Non-Poor Parents % Single (Unmarried) 22,000 13-1 7,000 3.3 Divorced, Separated, 146,000 86.9 205,000 96.7 and Widowed Total 168,000 100.0 212,000 100.0 Source: National Council of Welfare, Women and Poverty, October, 1979 70 Table 28: Level of Schooling of Lone Parents i n Canada by Sex of Parent, 1976 Level of Schooling Male % Female % Total Less than grade 9 38,650 6.9 163,700 29.3 202,350 36.2 Grade 9-10 16,565 2.9 96,620 17.3 113,185 20.2 Grade 11-13 ..14,665 2.6 90,705 16.2 105,370 18.8 Post-Secondary Non-University 10,500 1.9 67,915 12.2 78,415 14.1 University 13,200 2.4 46,540 8.3 59,740 10.7 Total 93.580 16.7 465,480 83.3 559,070 100.0 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, Special tabulations conducted by Ministry of Economic Development, Victoria, B. C. 71 as generally suspected, lower than that for male lone parents (41.2 per cent). These data were inconsistent with those found i n studies conducted on male-headed families i n Canada since the l a t t e r tended to portray male lone parents as a highly educated group (Schlesinger et a l . , Children Today, 1970, 2 . PP- 12-19). The overall extent of undereducation among lone parents was clearly demonstrated by a comparison of the percentage of undereducated lone parents (36.1 per cent) with that of undereducated male heads of husband-wife families (29.6 per cent). The percentage of lone parents who pro-ceeded to post-secondary non-university and university education were 14.0 per cent and 10.7 per cent respectively. The extent of undereducation among lone parents i n Br i t i s h Columbia was not as great as that found among lone parents i n Canada as a whole. Only 21.0 per cent of the total lone parents i n British Columbia had less than grade 9 schooling. The percentages of lone parents who proceeded to post-secondary non-university and university education were 18.7 per cent and 15.2 per cent respectively (Table 29). The extent of undereducation among lone parents in Greater Vancouver (18.7 per cent) was smaller thai that found among lone parents i n the province as a whole (Table 30). The number of undereducated lone parents i n the City of Vancouver, however, was slightly greater than that of Greater Vancouver (Table 31). Table 32 shows the level of schooling of heads of families by family types i n Canada. 72 Table 29s Level of Schooling of Lone Parents i n Bri t i s h Columbia by-Sex of Parent, 1976 Level of Schooling Male % Female % Total < Less than grade 9 2,855 4.7 9,815 16.3. 12,670 21.0 Grades 9-10 1.905 3-2 9,430 15.7 11,330 18.9 Grades 11-13 2,080 3-5 13,610 22.6 15,680 26.1 Post-Secondary Non-University 1.615 2.7 9,690 16.1 11,310 18.8 University 1,920 3-2 7,265 12.1 9,185 15.3 Totals 10,375 17.2 49,810 82.8 60,200 100.1 Sources 1976 Census of Canada, Special tabulations conducted by Ministry of Economic Development, Victoria, B. C. 73 Table 30s Level of Schooling of Lone Parents i n Greater Vancouver by-Sex of Parent, 19?6 Level of Schooling Male % Female * Total % Less than grade 9 1,090 3.5 4,710 15-3 5,800 18.8 Grades 9-10 790 2.6 4,490 14.5 5,285 17.1 Grades 11-13 1,140 3-7 7,390 24.0 8,530 27.7 Post Secondary Non-University 800 2.5 5,140 16.7 5.940 19.2 University 1,085 3.5 4,250 13.8 5.325 17.3 Total 4,890 15-7 25,980 84.3 30,870 100,1 Source: 1976 Census of Canada, Special tabulations conducted by Ministry of Economic Development, Victoria, B. C. 74 Table 31' Level of Schooling of Lone Parents i n Vancouver (City) by Sex of Parent, 1976 Level of Schooling Male % Female % Total % Less than grade 9 470 3.8 2,460 20.1 2,930 23-9 Grades 9-10 260 2.1 1,625 13-3 1,890 15.4 Grades 11-13 390 3.2 2,570 21.0 2,960 24.2 Post-Secondary Non-University 265 2.2 1,930 15.8 1,105 18.0 University 460 3.8 1,795 14.7 2,255 18.4 Total 1,850 15.1 10,380 84.9 12,240 100.0 Sources 1976 Census of Canada, SDF AMB13 75 Table 32: Level of Schooling of Heads of Families by Family Types i n Canada, 1976 Level of Schooling Husbands i n Husband/Wife Families % Husbands/Wive s i n Lone-Parent Families % Less than Grade 9 1,533.775 29.8 202,345 36.2 Grades 9 - 1 0 897,315 17.4 113.185 20.2 Grades 1 1 -13 959,495 18.6 105,370 18.8 Post-Secondary Non-University 781,145 15.2 78,420 14.0 University 983,485 19.0 59,740 10.7 Total: 5,155,215 100.0 559,060 99.9 Source: Adapted from Audrey M. Hunt, Family Learning A c t i v i t i e s i n  Br i t i s h Columbia, Discussion Paper 0 ? / 8 l . 76 CHAPTER IV NEEDS OF AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR LONE PARENT FAMILIES IN THE CITY OF VANCOUVER 77 CHAPTER IV NEEDS OF AND EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS FOR LONE PARENT FAMILIES IN THE CITY OF VANCOUVER Introduction The lack of consensus among adult educators on the definition of "need" was pointed out by G r i f f i t h (1978) i n a discussion paper on the concept of need i n adult education literature. With reference to the work of other prominent adult educators, he presented the following definitions on the four categories of need: 1. Normative need - the discrepancy between observed (by a profes-sional) level and desired level of capability, or simply, the gap between "what i s " and "what ought to be." 2. Felt need - something the intended recipient of a service believes he or she wants. 3. Expressed need - a f e l t need turned into action. 4. Comparative need - the discrepancy between two services received by two comparative groups (pp. 384-394). The nebulous nature of the term "need" and the lack of absolute standards from which human needs can be assessed, as G r i f f i t h stressed, present endless problems for the educators and professionals working i n education Institutions and social services. In the absence of absolute standards, educators and professionals tend to resort to establishing a standard i n the form of "normative need" ( G r i f f i t h , 1978, p. 384). Using 78 "normative need" as the d e s i r e d standard, the need of a c l i e n t can be determined by comparing what standard i s d e s i r a b l e and what standard a c t u a l l y e x i s t s . However, "normative need" does not c o n s t i t u t e an absolute standard and i t i s e a s i l y i n f l u e n c e d by the value judgement of those who d e f i n e i t i n the f i r s t p lace as w e l l as the changing v a l u e s of s o c i e t y . I n conducting an e d u c a t i o n a l program, the l a c k of an absolute standard m u t u a l l y acceptable t o a d u l t educators and l e a r n e r s means t h a t d e c i s i o n s concerning the e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f l e a r n e r s are made i n the context of d i f f e r i n g p e r s p e c t i v e s and norms, and c o n f l i c t becomes an i n h e r e n t f e a t u r e of the whole process of need assessment. D e c i s i o n s regarding e d u c a t i o n a l needs can a l s o be approached from the l e a r n e r s ' p o i n t of view.. Needs determined by l e a r n e r s are e i t h e r " f e l t needs" or "expressed needs." I d e a l l y , there should be a h i g h degree of consensus between "normative needs" determined by the a d u l t educators and " f e l t needs" and "expressed needs" determined by the l e a r n e r s . I n r e a l i t y , however, c o n f l i c t o f t e n ensues f o r the reasons mentioned e a r l i e r . From the i n t e r v i e w s conducted w i t h a d u l t educators and lone p a r e n t s , the l a c k of consensus w i t h regard t o the e d u c a t i o n a l needs of the l a t t e r was obvious i n some programs which had proved i n e f f e c t i v e i n r e a c h i n g t h e i r t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . Such programs were o f t e n set up independently of the " f e l t needs" and "expressed needs" of t h e i r t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . By and l a r g e , the a d u l t educators who were i n t e r v i e w e d demonstrated understanding and empathy toward t h e i r c l i e n t s ' needs. Some were lone parents themselves and a number acted as advocators f o r t h e i r c l i e n t s . 79 In contrast, programs which were effective involved a high degree of consensus between the adult educators and their clients with regard to the needs of the l a t t e r . Many of the programs were planned with input of an advisory committee consisting of members from the community and lone parents. The following examination of educational programs for lone parent families i n the City of Vancouver w i l l focus on the following aspects: 1. Maslow's hierarchy of human needs. 2 . Meeting the needs of lone parent families i n the City of Vancouver. 3. Educational programs for lone parent families i n the City of Vancouver. Maslow's Hierarchy of Human Needs Figure 1: Maslow's hierarchy of human needs adapted from Knowles, 1977, P. 24. 80 Maslow (1970) contended i n his theory of human motivations that human needs are arranged i n hierarchical order (see Figure l ) , starting from the most fundamental needs for survival to the highest-level need for self -actualization. The five levels of needs, according to Maslow's scheme, are as follows (see pp. 35 - 46) : 1. Physiological needs - the most prepotent of a l l needs, these physiological drives include the basic survival needs for food, clothing and shelter. 2 . Safety needs - the need for security, s t a b i l i t y , order, and freedom from fear, anxiety, and chaos: for example, a person's preference for a safe, orderly, predictable, lawful, and organized world. 3. Belongingness and love needs - the need for affectionate relations with people i n general; for example, a person's need for a place i n his or her group or family. 4. Esteem needs - the need for a stable, firmly based self-image; for example, a person's need for self-esteem and for the esteem of others. 4. Need for self-actualization - the need to realize one's f u l l postentiali for example, a person's desire for self-fulfilment. Higher-level needs emerge as their prepotent lower level needs are satisfied. Consequently, any effort to satisfy human needs must recognize a l l levels of the pyramid. A need does not have to be to t a l l y satisfied i n order for the next higher-level need to emerge as Maslow took pains to explain: 81 In actual fact, most members of our society who are normal are p a r t i a l l y satisfied i n a l l their basic needs and p a r t i a l l y unsatisfied i n a l l their basic needs at the same time. A more r e a l i s t i c descrip-tion of the hierarchy would be i n terms of decreasing percentages of satisfaction as we go up the hierarchy of prepotency (pp. 53-54). Meeting the Needs of Lone Parent Families i n the City of Vancouver / Judging from demographic characteristics described i n Chapter III, the average lone parent family clearly has many " f e l t needs" and "expressed needs" across a l l levels of Maslow's hierarchy. Poverty of the average female-headed family, for example, i s a well-documented fact. The average lone parent family i n the City of Vancouver possesses many of the general characteristics of i t s national counterpart. Character-i s t i c s such as the low income status of the family, the low level of school-ing of the parent, and the high risk of unemployment experienced by the parent place the average lone parent family i n the category of the socially disadvantaged. The most frequently stressed needs of lone parent families i n Greater Vancouver are for financial assistance, subsidized housing and greater social acceptance (see C a r l i s l e , 1980; Poulas, 1969). These expressed needs were consistent with those put forward i n studies conducted by Guyatt (1971), the National Council of Welfare ( l9?6a), and Schlesinger (1975» 1979)i and could be c l a s s i f i e d as lower-level needs in Maslow's hierarchy as they pertain to the fundamental needs of lone parent families i n contrast to higher-level needs such as the need for self-actualization. 82 Many lone parents tended t o view t h e i r needs w i t h p e r s p e c t i v e s which i s s u e from the lower end o f the needs h i e r a r c h y since t h e i r most immediately expressed needs were the s o - c a l l e d fundamental needs described above. By and l a r g e , the educators i n t e r v i e w e d were aware o f the p e r s p e c t i v e o f t h e i r c l i e n t s and attempted t o minimize p o t e n t i a l c o n f l i c t between t h e i r own p e r s p e c t i v e s and those o f t h e i r c l i e n t s by d e f i n i n g "normative needs" a t the grass r o o t s l e v e l . I n other words, they t r i e d t o r e c o n c i l e the d i f f e r e n c e s between "normative needs" on the one hand and " f e l t needs" or "expressed needs" on the other. As a consequence, they r e c o n c i l e d the d i f f e r e n c e s between "normative needs" and " f e l t needs" o r "expressed needs" by a d j u s t i n g the l e v e l of the former t o the l a t t e r . T h i s d i d not, however, mean t h a t these educators share t h e i r c l i e n t s ' p e r s p e c t i v e s . I n determining t h e i r c l i e n t s ' needs, however, these educators were more l i k e l y t o pose f o r themselves the qu e s t i o n s "What can be achieved i n the l i g h t o f e x i s t i n g standards?" i n s t e a d of "What ought t o be achieved?" I n working w i t h a s o c i a l l y disadvantaged group such as lone parent f a m i l i e s , i n the author's o p i n i o n , i t was t h i s q u a l i t y o f per c e p t i v e n e s s which d i s t i n g u i s h e d an e f f e c t i v e from an i n e f f e c t i v e a d u l t educator. Instead o f t a k i n g steps t o reduce the discrepancy between "normative needs" and " f e l t needs" o r "expressed needs", the i n e f f e c t i v e educator tended t o create discrepancy by s e t t i n g standards which were too remote and, t h e r e f o r e , o f t e n p e r c e i v e d as t h r e a t e n i n g by t h e i r c l i e n t s . McMahon (1970) p o i n t e d out the importance of d e a l i n g w i t h c l i e n t s ' " f e l t needs" and "expressed needs" i n the context o f the v o l u n t a r y nature o f most p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n a d u l t education programs. 83 He stated: . . . i n the l a s t analysis, i t i s always the client who makes the judgement about his own need and what w i l l satisfy that need. The voluntary nature of most participation i n adult education leaves the ultimate decision with the adult who either enrols or stays away. (p. 11) G r i f f i t h (1978) further pointed out the importance of the adult educator's role as conciliators. He stated: The problem arises that while the individual i s ordinarily free to abstain from supporting any given offering, he i s not usually able to exert a direct influence on the selection of course to be offered. The adult education program planner i s l e f t with the responsibility of bridging the gap between providers and the clients they serve, (p. 386) Educational Programs for Meeting the Psycho-Social Needs of Lone  Parent Families i n the City of Vancouver A diverse range of educational programs exists i n the City of Vancouver, but attempts to study these programs presented two problems: 1. What c r i t e r i a should be used to select programs to be studied and to impose some form of classification on the programs? 2 . How should one locate and identify those programs applicable to lone parent families amidst a l l the general interest and community education programs offered by institutions, agencies, and community groups? 84 To solve the f i r s t problem, the following set of c r i t e r i a for program selection were drawn up: C r i t e r i a for Program Selection 1. Goals of program - goals of program must be related to self-maintenance and self-development rather than professional training. 2. Target population - program i s designed wholly or p a r t i a l l y with the needs of the lone parent family i n mind. 3' Institution a f f i l i a t i o n - program must come under the auspices of the B.C. Ministry of Education. 4. Program administration - program must be conducted and administered within the City of Vancouver. 5. Accessibility - program must be accessible to the lone parent family i n terms of proximity, time, duration and prerequisites. 6. Time commitment - program f a c i l i t a t e s part-time rather than full-time attendance. 7. Fee structure - program charges only a nominal fee. The solution for the second problem proved rather elusive as programs for lone parent families were offered by a multitude of different i n s t i -tutions, agencies, and community grops under a highly complex administra-tiv e structure. To avoid labelling their clients, these institutions, agencies, and community groups generally preferred to place educational programs or community education programs with such t i t l e s as "Assertiveness Training," "Parenting," and "Confidence Building." Consequently, i t was d i f f i c u l t to separate educational programs which had specific relevance 85 f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s from general i n t e r e s t and community education programs. Most o f the programs i n c l u d e d i n t h i s study were i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the h e l p o f educators and p r o f e s s i o n a l s working w i t h the group. Since many of the e d u c a t i o n a l needs o f a lone parent f a m i l y are i d e n t i c a l t o those o f a husband-wife f a m i l y , some o f the programs were designed t o c a t e r t o the needs o f both groups. On the whole, a l l the programs i n c l u d e d i n t h i s study were known t o be attended p r i m a r i l y by members of lone parent f a m i l i e s . Although t h i s i s by no means an exhaustive study of a l l the ed u c a t i o n a l programs f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s i n the C i t y o f Vancouver, i t does represent a l l the major types o f ed u c a t i o n a l programs conducted f o r the group i n the c i t y . ( F i g u r e 2) Of the 39 programs i n c l u d e d i n t h i s study, 25 were e i t h e r co-sponsored o r conducted j o i n t l y by two or more i n s t i t u t i o n s , agencies, o r community groups. Of the remaining 14 programs, one was conducted by B r i t a n n i a Community S e r v i c e s Centre, s i x by Vancouver Community C o l l e g e , and seven by the U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia. Thus co-operation o r co-sponsorship between i n s t i t u t i o n s and agencies was the r u l e r a t h e r than the exception i n e d u c a t i o n a l programs conducted f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s i n the C i t y o f Vancouver. No e f f o r t was made t o c l a s s i f y a l l the programs under a common code o r category a t the d i s t r i c t l e v e l . I n s t e a d , the c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of programs was l e f t t o the i n d i v i d u a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , agencies, o r groups r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the programs. As s t a t e d e a r l i e r , there was a tendency among these i n s t i t u t i o n s , agencies, and community groups t o a v o i d l a b e l l i n g lone parent f a m i l i e s as a unique group although they acknowledged the many 86 unique circumstances related to lone parenthood and this tendency was probably responsible f o r the lack of a systematic cl a s s i f i c a t i o n of the programs under study. As stated i n the c r i t e r i a for program selection, the primary goals of a l l the programs under study were related to the self-maintenance and self-development of the participants rather than professional or job training. Of the 39 programs included i n this study, six were for children from lone parent families, three were for both parents and children, and the remaining 30 programs were for parents only. Most of the programs were informal. Through various forms of group interaction such as workshops, discussions, meetings, counselling sessions, group sharing, family gym, and social gatherings conducted under the trained leadership of an adult or community educator, attempts were made to meet individual and group needs. F u l f i l l i n g - these needs provides members of lone parent families with sufficient "power" to cope with th e i r daily "load" i n l i f e (McGlusky, 1963, pp. 15-16). The programs under study did not offer any direct aid to lone parent families i n some of their most c r i t i c a l needs such as the basic survival needs f o r food, clothing, and housing; and other needs f o r security and income assistance, as these needs are not amenable to educational means. Figure 3 i l l u s t r a t e s two main categories of psycho-social needs identified by educators working with lone parent families. The f i r s t category contains certain needs which are non-amenable to educational intervention, while the second category contains needs which are amenable to educational intervention rendered either i n an individual or group setting. Since many of the 87 Figure 2s Educational Programs for Meeting the Psycho-Social Needs of Lone Parent Families i n the City of Vancouver. Institutions T i t l e s of Programs Target Population Britannia Community Services Centre School D i s t r i c t No. 39 (Vancouver), Bayview Community School & Family Services of Greater Vancouver School D i s t r i c t No. 39 (Vancouver), Bayview Community School School D i s t r i c t No. 39 (Vancouver), S i r John Franklin Community School & Family Services of Greater Vancouver School D i s t r i c t No. 39 (Vancouver), S i r John Franklin Community School Family Services of Greater Vancouver, School D i s t r i c t No. 39 (Vancouver), 1. Drop i n Centre for Parents 1. 2. 3. l . 2. 1. 2. 1. 2. 3 . 4. Kids from Divided Homes Parenting Alone Effective Parenting Bayview Single Parent Group Family Gym 1. Kids from Divided Homes and Community Groups 5« Franklin Recreational Education Experience (F.R.E.E.) After School Day Care Kids from Divided Homes Parenting Alone Uncoupling Positive Parenting The Challenge of Being Assertive Parents Children Parents Parents Parents Parents & Children Children Children Children Children Parents Parents Parents Parents 88 Figure 2: (Continued, Page 2) Institutions T i t l e s of Programs Target Population Family Services & 6. Assertiveness for Women Who Have Parents Community Groups Experienced Violence i n Relationship (Continued) 7. Looking at Options - Chance for Parents Change 8. Self-Help Groups Parents University of 1. Assertiveness Groups 1 & 2 Parents Br i t i s h Columbia, 2. Career Counselling Parents Women Students' 3. Time Management Parents Office 4. Panel Discussions Parents 5. Test Anxiety Parents 6. Brown Bag Lunch Parents 7. Women Coping with Campus Parents Vancouver Community l . On Being Single Parents College, Continuing 2. Changing Families Parents Education, Langara 3. Children Get Divorced Too Parents & Children Campus 4. Confidence Building Parents Vancouver Community 1. Basic Training for S k i l l Parents College, King Edward Development (B.T.S.D.) Campus 2. Employment Orientation for Parents Women (E.O.W.) Britannia Community 1. Ray-Cam Parent Education Program Parents Services Centre and Ray Cam Day Care Britannia Community 1. Single Parenting Parents Services Centre and 2. Shared Parenting Parents Eastside Family 3. Setting Up Babysitting Co-op Parents Place 4. Legal Rights Parents 5. Drop i n Centre Parents & Children 89 Figure 2: (Continued, Page 3) Institutions T i t l e s of Programs Target Population Britannia Community 1. Kids from Divided Home Services Centre and 2. Looking at Options for Single Family Services of Mothers on Social Income Greater Vancouver 3. Assertiveness Training for Battered Women Children Parents Parents 90 Figure Ji Psycho-Social Needs of Lone Parent Families. Category 1: Needs which are Category 2 : Needs which are amenable non-amenable to educational to educational intervention - individual intervention or group Physiological needs - Counselling - group & individual Counselling - career Counselling - legal Parenting s k i l l s Employment orientation Confidence Building Social acceptance Food Clothing Housing Day care Transportation Security Household assistance Effective communication Child care assistance Income assistance Income management Coping alone Personal adjustment Stress management Conflict resolution Personal grooming Health and fitness Better nutrition and diet Self-help groups Day care co-operative Peer group membership and support Community membership and support Information workshops Adult basic education Neighbourhood ESL classes 91 needs which are non-amenable t o e d u c a t i o n a l i n t e r v e n t i o n are c l o s e l y r e l a t e d t o the b a s i c p h y s i o l o g i c a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l w e l l - b e i n g of lone p a r e n t s , the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f e d u c a t i o n a l programs c a t e r i n g t o those needs c l e a r l y hinges on the r e l a t i v e degree o f s a t i s f a c t i o n experienced by lone p a r e n t s and t h e i r f a m i l i e s i n the f i r s t category o f needs - the needs which are non-amenable t o e d u c a t i o n a l i n t e r v e n t i o n . A s i d e from those needs which are non-amenable to e d u c a t i o n a l i n t e r -v e n t i o n , the types of e d u c a t i o n a l programs under study seem t o be the i d e a l s o l u t i o n s f o r the o t h e r category of needs expressed by lone parent and t h e i r f a m i l i e s . The need f o r more adequate day care f a c i l i t i e s , f o r example, can be met i f groups o f lone parents can be helped t o organize t h e i r own b a b y s i t -t i n g co-op. Education can a l s o help t o b u i l d g r e a t e r self-esteem and c o n f i -dence, another category o f needs f r e q u e n t l y expressed by lone parents. Thus there seemed to be a genuine need f o r e d u c a t i o n a l programs d e a l i n g w i t h s e l f -maintenance and self-development. Yet a l l the educators i n t e r v i e w e d expressed t h e i r common exas p e r a t i o n a t not being a b l e t o reach more than a sm a l l percentage of t h e i r t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n through such programs. The average program, according to these educators and programmers, manages to reach only 3 "to 10 per cent o f the lone parents and t h e i r f a m i l i e s i n any c i t y zone and p l a n s f o r new programs are o f t e n c a n c e l l e d due t o the l a c k o f enrolment (see Blown, 1979; C a r l i s l e , 1980). Meanwhile, lone parent groups continue t o express the need f o r more programs amidst the bew i l d e r -ment and exasperation o f educators and programmers. A survey o f a d u l t education l i t e r a t u r e p e r t a i n i n g to p a r t i c i p a t i o n p a t t e r n s o f disadvantaged a d u l t s i n a d u l t education programs l e d the author t o a r r i v e a t the c o n c l u s i o n 92 t h a t the cause of i n e f f e c t i v e programming f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s can be t r a c e d t o a combination o f the f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s ; 1. The m o t i v a t i o n t o f u l f i l h i g h e r - l e v e l needs through e d u c a t i o n a l programs is weak among lone parents and members of t h e i r f a m i l i e s who experience o n l y a low degree o f r e l a t i v e s a t i s f a c t i o n i n t h e i r prepotent needs (see Maslow, 1970, Chapter 4). According t o Maslow's h i e r a r c h y o f human needs, p h y s i o l o g i c a l needs are the most prepotent of a l l needs and tend t o dominate over a l l o t h e r needs. To quote Maslow, " i f a l l the needs are u n s a t i s f i e d , and the organism i s then dominated by the p h y s i o l o g i c a l needs, a l l other needs may become simply n o n e x i s t e n t o r be pushed i n t o the background." (p. 37) I n the case o f lone parent f a m i l i e s i n need, i t i s q u i t e l i k e l y t h a t the ex i s t e n c e o f u n f u l f i l l e d p h y s i o l o g i c a l needs w i l l dominate over a l l other needs, i n c l u d i n g e d u c a t i o n a l needs, and ed u c a t i o n a l programs, t h e r e f o r e , w i l l have l i t t l e relevance f o r such a group u n t i l t h e i r p h y s i o l o g i c a l needs f o r fo o d , c l o t h i n g , and s h e l t e r are s a t i s f i e d to some degree. 2. The perso n a l needs of lone parents and t h e i r f a m i l i e s c o n f l i c t w i t h s o c i a l f o r c e s r e s u l t i n g i n t e n s i o n w i t h i n the proposed e d u c a t i o n a l program and subsequently undermining i t s e f f e c t i v e n e s s (see M i l l e r , 1967, p. 4). According t o M i l l e r ' s f o r c e - f i e l d a n a l y s i s , the w i l l i n g n e s s o f an a d u l t t o p a r t i c i p a t e i n v o l u n t a r y a c t i v i t i e s such as e d u c a t i o n a l programs demonstrates some personal needs which are shaped, c o n d i t i o n e d , and cha n n e l l e d by the s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e s and f o r c e s of the p a r t i c u l a r s o c i e t y t o which the person belongs. Thus p a r t i c i p a t i o n p a t t e r n s i n v o l u n t a r y a c t i v i t i e s such as e d u c a t i o n a l programs are determined by the i n t e r a c t i o n between personal needs and s o c i a l f o r c e s . I n a case where there i s c o n f l i c t 93 between p e r s o n a l needs and s o c i a l f o r c e s , t e n s i o n w i l l r e s u l t . Lone parent f a m i l i e s are c o n s t a n t l y under pressure from s o c i e t y t o reduce t h e i r depen-dency on s o c i a l a s s i s t a n c e by a c h i e v i n g s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y through e d u c a t i o n a l programs r e g a r d l e s s of the relevance o f these programs. From the p o i n t of view o f lone p a r e n t s , however, e d u c a t i o n a l programs have l i t t l e relevance u n t i l t h e i r p h y s i o l o g i c a l needs are f u l f i l l e d . T h i s p o l a r i t y o f i d e a s i n e v i t a b l y c r e a t e s t e n s i o n between lone parent f a m i l i e s and educators who represent the v a l u e s o f s o c i e t y a t l a r g e . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of the program i s , i n t u r n , diminished. 3. A l a r g e number of lone parents and t h e i r f a m i l i e s are s o c i a l l y disadvantaged and a r e , t h e r e f o r e , unable t o take advantage o f e d u c a t i o n a l programs such as those d e s c r i b e d i n t h i s study (see Anderson & Niemi, 1964, A b s t r a c t ) . F i n d i n g s from Anderson and Niemi's study on the disadvantaged a d u l t showed t h a t the disadvantaged are hampered by both p h y s i o l o g i c a l and p s y c h o l o g i c a l b a r r i e r s w i t h regard t o p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n education. L a r g e l y because of d i s c r i m i n a t i o n , the poverty subculture i s compelled to evolve i t s own way o f l i f e , and any program o f change w i l l be doomed t o f a i l i f i t adheres t o t r a d i t i o n a l p a t t e r n s of e s t a b l i s h i n g contact w i t h i t s c l i e n t s . According t o data p e r t a i n i n g t o the demographic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f lone parent f a m i l i e s , many members of the group f i t the above d e s c r i p -t i o n s . Educators and programmers, on the other hand, may have the tendency t o i d e n t i f y w i t h m i d d l e - c l a s s v a l u e s and t o adhere t o t r a d i t i o n a l methods o f e s t a b l i s h i n g contact w i t h c l i e n t s . Consequently, the standards and e x p e c t a t i o n s e s t a b l i s h e d by these educators and programmers may be u n r e a l i s t i c and do not r e l a t e t o the e x i s t i n g a b i l i t y nor to the "expressed 94 needs" of t h e i r c l i e n t s . The i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f programs conducted under these circumstances i s , t h e r e f o r e , t o be expected. 4. As a s o c i a l l y disadvantaged group, lone parents and t h e i r f a m i l i e s have l i t t l e "margin" l e f t f o r p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n v o l u n t a r y e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s a f t e r coping with the c o m p l e x i t i e s of lone parenthood (see McClusky, Howard W. Course of the A d u l t L i f e Span. I n Wilbur C. Hellenbeck, Ed., Psychology of A d u l t s , 1963, p. 1?). McClusky's concept of power and l o a d maintained t h a t "the key f a c t o r s o f a d u l t l i f e are the l o a d the i n d i v i d u a l must c a r r y i n l i v i n g " and "the power which i s a v a i l a b l e t o him t o c a r r y the loads" (p. 15)• Based on t h i s concept, he forwarded a formula t o express the r a t i o between the i n d i v i d u a l ' s l o a d and the power a v a i l a b l e t o him. The r a t i o , i n t u r n , determines the margin a v a i l a b l e t o the i n d i v i d u a l . Lone parents g e n e r a l l y assume a heavy " l o a d " w i t h l i t t l e "power" a v a i l a b l e t o them due to t h e i r disadvantaged s t a t u s . T h e i r r e s u l t a n t l i f e s t y l e i s a h i g h l y s t r e s s f u l one w i t h l i t t l e o r no "margin." As McClusky a l s o p o i n t e d out, the d i f f e r e n c e s i n "margin" i n f l u e n c e a person's a b i l i t y to perform, and l o n e parents who have l i t t l e o r no "margin" w i l l most l i k e l y l a c k the energy or "power" t o perform w e l l i n any e d u c a t i o n a l a c t i v i t y . 95 CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS 96 CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary The significant increase i n the number of lone parent families i n recent years indicates that this new form of family i s becoming firmly entrenched i n Canadian society. Social policies, on the other hand, have not kept pace with changes i n society, but continue to treat the tradi -tional nuclear family as the norm. Many politicians, educators, and professionals uphold the view that lone parents who stay home to care for their children and receive social assistance are non-productive citizens and constitute prolonged and unnecessary dependency on welfare. In the social service sector, however, anticipated changes i n societal and family structures prompted a recent conference on future planning for human care needs, including the needs of the future family. The report of the conference stated the issue as follows: - L i f e i n the nuclear family Is being eroded by changing p o l i t i c a l , social, and cultural conditions such as: i n f l a t i o n and the growing scarcity of resources; the growth of population outward from the city; and the replacement of the nuclear family by different family forms, e.g. dual-career families, single parent families, multi-family households, etc. - In the face of social change comes a lack of value consensus. - Resources families w i l l need to survive the next two decades include a sense of their own adaptability, an increasing range of support services and decentralized services, combined with community support network. '(What Holds Tomorrow? 1980, p. 4) 97 E d u c a t i o n a l programs alone w i l l have l i m i t e d impact on the problems f a c e d by lone parent f a m i l i e s u n l e s s the programs are accompanied by neces-s a r y changes i n e x i s t i n g s o c i a l p o l i c i e s . The s t a r t i n g p o i n t f o r change must i s s u e from the acceptance of the lone parent f a m i l y as a l e g i t i m a t e new f a m i l y form and the r e c o g n i t i o n of the r o l e of f u l l - t i m e p a r e n t i n g i n a l l forms o f f a m i l y as a p r o d u c t i v e and important occupation. As f a r as e d u c a t i o n a l programs are concerned, t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s can be enhanced by c l o s e r co-operation between government m i n i s t r i e s such as the M i n i s t r y of Human Resources and the M i n i s t r y of Education. A c l o s e r l i a i s o n between the v a r i o u s m i n i s t r i e s concerned w i l l not only f o s t e r a b e t t e r understanding of the needs of lone parent f a m i l i e s and the types of e d u c a t i o n a l programs necessary t o meet such needs, but w i l l a l s o improve the q u a l i t y and e f f e c t i v e n e s s of c u r r e n t and f u t u r e e d u c a t i o n a l programs. Apart from government m i n i s t r i e s , a number of s o c i a l agencies such as F a m i l y S e r v i c e s of G r e a t e r Vancouver, Y.W.C.A., and l o c a l community centres a l s o provide i n v a l u a b l e s e r v i c e s and programs f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s . N e a r l y a l l these agencies are funded from v o l u n t a r y c o n t r i b u t i o n s . Should a d d i t i o n a l funding be made a v a i l a b l e t o these agencies, i t i s conceivable t h a t the e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f these s e r v i c e s and programs w i l l be g r e a t l y improved. The p o l a r i t y i n p e r s p e c t i v e s between some educators and lone parent f a m i l i e s i s another i s s u e which must be r e s o l v e d i f e x i s t i n g e d u c a t i o n a l programs are t o be more e f f e c t i v e i n r e a c h i n g t h e i r t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . To achieve t h i s , educators should understand t h a t lone parent f a m i l i e s c o n s t i -t u t e a s o c i a l l y disadvantaged group and possess many c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of a poverty s u b - c u l t u r e . Any e d u c a t i o n a l program c a t e r i n g t o the group must, 98 t h e r e f o r e , attempt f i r s t t o remove the numerous i n s t i t u t i o n a l , f i n a n c i a l , and p s y c h o l o g i c a l b a r r i e r s which tend t o hamper the group from p a r t i c i p a t i n g . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of e d u c a t i o n a l programs can a l s o be improved i f educators use lone parent groups and o r g a n i z a t i o n s as p o i n t s of c o n t a c t w i t h t h e i r c l i e n t s . Many lone parents, except f o r the extremely i s o l a t e d , belong t o a t l e a s t one of many lone parent groups and o r g a n i z a t i o n s i n the Lower Mainland (see Beaven, 1981). With c l e a r l y d e f i n e d l e a d e r s h i p and g o a l s , such groups f u n c t i o n as s e l f - h e l p o r g a n i z a t i o n s among lone p a r e n t s . An a d d i t i o n a l f u n c t i o n of p r o v i d i n g e d u c a t i o n a l programs c o u l d be undertaken by these o r g a n i z a t i o n s and groups i f arrangements can be made t o employ t h e i r l e a d e r s t o work i n c l o s e co-operation w i t h educators i n d e s i g n i n g and conducting e d u c a t i o n a l programs f o r group members. Thus e d u c a t i o n a l programs f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s can be much more e f f e c t i v e i f c e r t a i n changes are made i n s o c i a l p o l i c i e s t o meet some of the needs which are o f t e n non-amenable t o e d u c a t i o n a l programs. Based on the above p e r c e p t i o n s of the n e c e s s i t y f o r change, the f o l l o w i n g recommenda-t i o n s are d i r e c t e d a t the f o l l o w i n g government m i n i s t r i e s : 1. The M i n i s t r y of Human Resources. 2. The M i n i s t r y of Education. 3. The M i n i s t r y of H e a l t h . 4. The M i n i s t r y of Labour. Although the main focus of t h i s t h e s i s i s on e d u c a t i o n a l programs aimed a t self-maintenance and self-development, the recommendations take i n t o con-s i d e r a t i o n the wide range of e d u c a t i o n a l and t r a i n i n g programs a v a i l a b l e t o lone parent f a m i l i e s . 99 Recommendations s (a) That steps be taken to raise income assistance to lone parent families to the level of the current poverty lin e as defined by St a t i s t i c s Canada Educational programs have l i t t l e direct relevance for lone parent families whose basic survival needs such as food, clothing, and housing are not being met satisfactorily. The anguish suffered by lone parents on welfare i s well-documented. Annual welfare payments are assessed by the National Council of Welfare to be as much as $2,000 to $3,000 below the poverty line and the recent restrictions on welfare e l i g i b i l i t y w i l l make i t even harder for the average lone parent family to maintain a decent standard of l i v i n g ; for full-time parents, regardless of the family forms to which they belong, are the victims of society's double standard which praises the contributions of full-time parenting on one hand, but deprives full-time parents of basic financial support on the other. The raising of income assistance to a l l lone parents with children of under 15 years old w i l l not only give legitimacy and recognition to full-time parenting, but free lone parents from their daily struggle for increased participation i n educational pro-grams aimed at their self-maintenance and self-development. (b) That the amount of earned income a welfare parent i s permitted to keep be raised over and above his or her welfare payments to such a level that, upon combining the two sources of income, the monthly income of the individual parent equals the current poverty line defined by Statistics Canada. Under Section 6 ( l 6 ) of the Guaranteed Available Income for Need Act (GAIN) , a family of two or more i n Br i t i s h Columbia can only retain income 100 o r g i f t s e q u i v a l e n t to the value o f up t o $100 per month i n order f o r the f a m i l y to r e t a i n i t s e l i g i b i l i t y f o r f u l l income a s s i s t a n c e . Such a r e g u l a t i o n not only discourages welfare r e c i p i e n t s such as lone parents from o b t a i n i n g part-time employment, but f o r c e s many working lone parents i n low-paying jobs t o r e c o n s i d e r the two options of working o r remaining a t home t o care f o r t h e i r c h i l d r e n since t h e i r monthly earned incomes h a r d l y exceed e x i s t i n g welfare payments. By adopting the above formula, w e l f a r e r e c i p i e n t s such as lone parents w i l l be f r e e t o choose t o c o n t r i -bute toward the improvement of t h e i r income s t a t u s t o an acceptable l e v e l w ithout any f e a r of p e n a l t y . As lone parents seek t o meet t h e i r need f o r a d d i t i o n a l income, another b a r r i e r t o p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n e d u c a t i o n a l programs i s being removed. (c) That the p e r i o d o f income a s s i s t a n c e t o lone parents undertaking e d u c a t i o n a l programs o r v o c a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g under S e c t i o n 10 (5) o f the GAIN A c t be extended to accommodate i n d i v i d u a l need. The purpose o f the e d u c a t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n i s to a i d i n d i v i d u a l s toward s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y . I n l i m i t i n g the p e r i o d o f t r a i n i n g to two year s , the p o l i c y i s l i m i t i n g the range o f v o c a t i o n a l t r a i n i n g an i n d i v i d u a l can under-take and d i s c r i m i n a t i n g a g a i n s t those who wish to embark on more s e r i o u s c a r e e r t r a i n i n g which may r e q u i r e l o n g e r p e r i o d s o f time. The removal of t h i s r e s t r i c t i o n w i l l g i v e lone parents and other p a r t i c i p a n t s i n e d u c a t i o n a l programs more f l e x i b i l i t y i n the choice of program and added i n c e n t i v e to p a r t i c i p a t e i n programs l e a d i n g t o h i g h e r academic o r p r o f e s s i o n a l development. 101 (d) That more q u a l i t y day care f a c i l i t i e s f l e x i b l e enough t o meet the whole range of day care needs expressed by lone parent f a m i l i e s be c reated. There i s s t i l l a great shortage of day care f a c i l i t i e s i n the Lower Main-l a n d . Lone parents cannot begin to c o n s i d e r e n t e r i n g the work f o r c e or p a r t i c i p a t e i n f u l l - t i m e e d u c a t i o n a l and t r a i n i n g programs u n t i l they are assured t h a t t h e i r c h i l d r e n are w e l l cared f o r , and thus any suggestion of employment, t r a i n i n g , or p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n e d u c a t i o n a l programs i s rendered meaningless u n l e s s a wide range of day care f a c i l i t i e s are made a v a i l a b l e t o lone parent f a m i l i e s . At the same time, compensations should be i n i t i a t e d f o r both part-time and f u l l - t i m e working parents i n low-paying j o b s t o meet expenses i n c u r r e d by c h i l d care. (e) That h e l p and support continue t o be provided f o r lone parent . f a m i l i e s through the Homemaker Programs o r other emergency p r o v i s i o n s . The f e a r of being unable t o cope alone i n times of s i c k n e s s and o t h e r emergencies i s f r e q u e n t l y expressed by lone parents p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n e d u c a t i o n a l programs f o r , u n l i k e a husband-wife f a m i l y , a lone parent f a m i l y does not have a second a d u l t t o assume f a m i l y r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n times of emergency. Lone parents f r e q u e n t l y have t o drop out o f e d u c a t i o n a l programs due t o s i c k n e s s o r other emergencies i n the f a m i l y . Good rapport e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h a homemaker who knows the f a m i l y w i l l g r e a t l y r e l i e v e lone parents from such f e a r and ensure t h a t lone parents p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n educa-t i o n a l programs are able t o continue d e s p i t e s i c k n e s s and o t h e r emergencies i n the f a m i l y . 102 (f) That an emergency fund which i s accessible to lone parent families experiencing sudden financial crises be created to meet the emergency financial needs of lone parent families. The majority of lone parent families l i v e from hand to mouth and become destitute i n times of financial crises. The creation of such a fund accompanied by guidelines and screening of applicants w i l l remove some of the panic and constant sense of insecurity experienced by the majority of lone parents who lack economic security and free them for learning. (g) That the provision of educational programs for lone parents be continued under the Individual Opportunity Plan. The Individual Opportunity Plan i s one viable scheme for providing educa-tional upgrading and vocational training for welfare recipents such as lone parents who wish to become economically self-sufficient. Applicants to the plan, however, often complain of the limited number of places in certain training programs and the inconvenience posed by some "out of town" program locations. Some applicants complain of having to wait for a long period of time before being accepted for a specific program they have requested. In cases where programs are being held "out of town", the problem of travel proves to be an insurmountable obstacle for lone parents who lack transportation and who have to juggle constantly with housework, ch i l d care, and other everyday demands posed by lone parenthood. Ministries concerned should cater to the educational and training needs of lone parents who have applied to enroll i n the Individual Opportunity Plan. Closer co-operation between ministries w i l l not only boost the Individual Opportunity Plan, but w i l l also take the uncertainties out of programming 103 for lone parent families and make certain educational programs more accessible to members of the group. (h) That the community services model such as that used by Britannia Community Services Centre and the Community Schools be adopted i n the planning and delivering of those educational programs aimed specifically at the self-maintenance and self-development of lone parent families. In general, educational programs based on the community services model have proved to be more successful i n reaching their target population than programs based on more traditional and formal methods. From the interviews conducted with educators and programmers involved i n the two types of programs, the author has reached the conclusion that the greater effectiveness of those programs based on the community services model can be attributed to the following components of the programs: 1. The presence of an existing clientele and peer group support as a significant number of lone parent families are active members of local community centres. 2. The input into program planning stages from an advisory committee consisting of representatives from the community to which the target population belong. 3. The decision to employ the strategy of contacting clients through local community groups. 4. The informal and accepting atmosphere established by educators and community leaders responsible for the implementation of the programs. 5« The location of programs within the community to which the target population belong. 104 6. The p r o v i s i o n of f r e e c h i l d care f o r p a r t i c i p a n t s of programs. 7. The charging of only a nominal fee. I n c o n t r a s t t o programs based on the community s e r v i c e s model, programs based on more t r a d i t i o n a l methods may be p e r c e i v e d as t h r e a t e n i n g by some lone parents and members of t h e i r f a m i l i e s . T h i s i s e s p e c i a l l y t r u e f o r those who are under-educated and who may be l a c k i n g i n s e l f - c o n f i d e n c e and m o t i v a t i o n . The f a c t t h a t programs are o f t e n conducted i n p u b l i c i n s t i t u t i o n s may a c t as a f u r t h e r d e t e r r e n t since many lone parents are members of the p o v e r t y s u b c u l t u r e , and tend t o harbour d i s t r u s t and f e a r of p u b l i c educa-t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s due t o p r e v i o u s negative experience with such i n s t i t u t i o n s . The adoption of the community s e r v i c e s model can remove t h i s element of t h r e a t . I t would help t o bridge the e x i s t i n g gap between p u b l i c education i n s t i t u t i o n s and lone parent f a m i l i e s from d i v e r s e c u l t u r a l s e t t i n g s , and f u r t h e r i n c r e a s e the a c c e s s i b i l i t y o f e d u c a t i o n a l programs f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s . ( i ) That an education fund be e s t a b l i s h e d so t h a t lone parent groups, community groups, and s o c i a l agencies can apply f o r funding of e d u c a t i o n a l programs, approved by an education committee, c o n s i s t i n g o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s from lone parent groups, educators from the M i n i s t r y o f Education and the o r g a n i z a t i o n o r group a p p l y i n g f o r funding. A l a r g e number of lone parent groups, community c e n t r e s , and s o c i a l agencies a l r e a d y o f f e r a v a r i e t y o f h i g h l y s u c c e s s f u l e d u c a t i o n a l programs f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s i n the C i t y of Vancouver. With a d d i t i o n a l sources of f u n d i n g made a v a i l a b l e , these groups and agencies w i l l be a b l e t o f u r t h e r expand t h e i r r o l e o f programming f o r lone parent f a m i l i e s and, i n the p r o c e s s , be granted r e c o g n i t i o n , autonomy, and l e g i t i m a c y i n t h e i r e f f o r t s . 105 APPENDIX LIST OF EDUCATORS AND INSTITUTIONS INTERVIEWED Educator N. Horsman M. Cairns L. Fast B. Anderson R. F. Cunningham P. Littleboy M. Hoek R. Yee E. MacAuly E. Zack E. Gurriero L. Manuel J. MacGregOr G. Long L. B. Dulude M. Car l i s l e A. Taylor M. Jack J. Rogers L. Alden Spokesperson Institution Women Students' Office, University of Brit i s h Columbia Women's Centre, Simon Fraser University Langara Campus, Vancouver Community College Continuing Education, Langara Campus, Vancouver Community College King Edward Campus, Vancouver Community College King Edward Campus, Vancouver Community College New Westminster Campus, Douglas College Bayview Community School, School D i s t r i c t No. 39 (Vancouver) S i r John Franklin Community School, School D i s t r i c t No. 39 (Vancouver) Career & Community Education Services, Vancouver School Board Britannia Community Services Centre, Vancouver False Creek Community Centre, Vancouver Thunderbird Neighbourhood Centre, Vancouver Federated Anti-Poverty Groups of B.C., Vancouver National Council of Welfare, Ottawa Continuing Education, New Westminster School Board City of Vancouver Health Department East Vancouver Health Unit, Vancouver Y.W.C.A., Vancouver Family Services of Greater Vancouver, Vancouver People's Law School, Vancouver 106 REFERENCES Anderson, Darrel & Niemi, John A. Adult Education and the Disadvantaged  Adult. Syracuse, New York, 1969. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 029160). Ambert, Anne-Marie. Divorce i n Canada. Don M i l l s : Academic Press, 1980. Barber, Dulan. Unmarried Fathers. Loneon: Hutchinson & Co. Ltd., 1975-Bearing the Burden Sharing the Benefits. Ottawa: National Council of Welfare, March 1978. Beavan, Sandy Ha l l . Resource Manual for Single Parents and One-Parent Families.. Women Students' Office, University of Br i t i s h Columbia, 1980. Blown, Nerys. Report on Single Parents Project. Vancouver: Vancouver Community College, 1979. Bowers, Joan. Single Parent Study: Revelstoke. Okanagan College, 1979. B.C. Public School Statistics. Victoria: Ministry of Education, Science and Technology, 1978. Brora, Lawrence & Mi l l e r , Renee. Characteristics of Low-Income Populations Under Alternate Poverty Definitions. Washington, D.C: Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1976. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 141435). Canada's Families. Ottawa: Statistics Canada, 1978. (Catalogue 98-801E). Ca r l i s l e , Mary. Resources for Single Parents. Victoria: Ministry of . Education, 1980. Cowhig, James D. Characteristics of Families Headed by Women. Welfare i n Review, 1970, 8, 16-20. 107 Dare, Cam. The Career Path of the Single Father. Student Paper, School of Social Work, University of Bri t i s h Columbia, 1977. Early Childhood and Family Development Programs Improve the Quality of  Li f e for Low-Income Families. Washington, D.C: Congress of the U.S., 1979. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 165914). Eisenberg, Jeanne G. et a l . Single Parent Families: Results of Pr o f i l i n g  Techniques i n a Sample of Welfare ADC Families. Washington, D.C: Office of Child Development, 1975. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 118668). Families, 1976 Census of Canada. Ottawa, 1978. (Catalogue 93-825). F e r r i , Elsa _ Robinson, Hilary. Coping Alone. Berks: NFER Publication Co. Ltd., 1976. Forrest, Leigh. The One-Parent Family: Issues i n Social Change, Social Roles and Social Policy. Student Paper, School of Social Work, University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1979. George, Victor & Wilding, Paul. Motherless Families. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1972. G r i f f i t h , William. Educational Needs: Definition, Assessment, and Ut i l i z a t i o n . School Review. 1978, 3, 384-394. Guarantee Available Income for Need Act. Government of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1976. (Reg. 390.176). Gurstein, Penny & Hood, Nancy. Housing Needs of One Parent Families. Vancouver: YWCA and Department of Human Resources, 1976. Guyatt, Doris E. One-Parent Families i n Canada. Ottawa:. The Vanier Institute of the Family, 1971. 108 Heath, Jean. Lone Parent Families i n Canada and Br i t i s h Columbia. Victoria: Ministry of Education, 1980. . Lone Parent Families: A Selected and Annotated Bibliography. Victoria: Ministry of Education, 1980. The Hidden Welfare System. Ottawa: National Council of Welfare, November, 1976b. The Hidden Welfare System Revisited. Ottawa: National Council of Welfare, March 1979a. Hoek, M. A Descriptive Study of. Women Enrolled i n the Office Careers Programs at Selected Community Colleges. Master's Thesis, University of Victoria, 1978. Honig, M. H. The Impact of the Welfare System on Labor Supply and Family Stability: A Study of Female Heads of Family. Washington, D. Office of Research & Development, 1971- (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 081991). Hunt, Audrey. Families and Their Needs, Volumes 1 & 2. London: H.M.S.O., 1973. In the Best Interest of the Child. Ottawa: National Council of Welfare, December, 1 9 7 9 c Jobs and Poverty. Ottawa: National Council of Welfare, June, 1977. Keiesberg, Louis. Mothers i n Poverty: A Study of Fatherless Families. Chicago: Aldine Pub. Co., 1970. L i , Salina. Options for Single Mothers. Student Paper, Froject Child Care and Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, 1978. 109 Lone Parent Families. 1976 Census of Canada, Ottawa, 1978. (Catalogue 93-833) . McClusky, Howard Y. Course of the Adult Life Span. In Wilbur C. Hellenheck (Ed.), Psychology of Adults. Chicago: Adult Education Association of the U.S.A., 1963. Marsden, Dennis. Mother Alone: Poverty and the Fatherless Families. London: The Penguin Press, 1969. Maslow, Abraham H. Motivation and Personality. New York: Harper & Row, 1970. M i l l e r , Harry L. Participation of Adults i n Education: A Force Field  Analysis. Occasional Paper No. 14. Boston: Centre for the Study of Liberal Education for Adults, 196?. One i n a World of Two's. Ottawa: National Council of Welfare, A p r i l , 1976a. The One-Parent Family. Ottawa: Canadian Council on Social Development, 1971. The One-Parent Family i n Edmonton. Edmonton: Edmonton Social Services, 1975. Pearson, Mary. The Second Time Around: A Study of Women Returning to  the Work Force. Ottawa: Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women, 1979. Poor Kids. Ottawa: National Council of Welfare, March, 1975. Poulas, Susan. A Problem Inventory of Single Mothers. Vancouver Children's Aid Society, 1969. 110 Ross, H. L. & Sawhill, I. V. Time of Transitions the Growth of Families Headed by Women. Washington: Urban Institute, 1975. Royal Commission on the Status of Women Report, Ottawa, 1972. Schlesinger, Benjamin. The One-Parent Family i n Canada: Some Findings and Recommendations, The Family Coordinator, 1973, 22, 305-308. . The One-Parent Family. University of Toronto, 1975. . The One-Parent Families i n Great Britain, The Family Coordinator, 1977, 26, 139-142. . Single Parent Fathers: A Research Review, Children Today, 1978, 7, 18-39. Schlesinger, Benjamin (Ed.). One i n Ten. Toronto: University of Toronto, 1979b. School Must Help One-Parent Children, Education U.S.A., August 4, 1980, p. 361. Thomas, Audrey M. Family Learning A c t i v i t i e s in British Columbia. Victoria: Ministry of Education, 1981. Thomson, L i l i a n . The One-Parent Family. Toronto: Anglican Church of Canada, 1969. Thornton, James E. An Exploratory Study of the Educational Deficiencies of Occupationally Unstable Economic-Opportunity Migrants. Master's Thesis, University of Michigan, 196?. Todres, Rubia. A Study of Seventy-Two Motherless Families i n the Metropolitan Toronto Area. Occasional Paper, University of Toronto, 1975. I l l Tucker, Mary K. & Z e l l , Laverne G. Day Care Arrangements of Low-Income Single Parents. I n s t i t u t e of Urban Studies, Cleveland State University, 1975. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 118254.) Welfare Reform; For Whom and by V/hom? Washington, D.G.; Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1977. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED I56763.) What Holds Tomorrow? Conference Report, United Way i n Coordination with U.B.C. Centre f o r Continuing Education, Vancouver, 1981. Wilmut, Ann M. Report on Work Incentive Programme. V i c t o r i a ; M i n i s t r y of Human Resources, 1975' Wolf, Abraham. A Self-Kelp Program f o r One-Parent Households. F i n a l Report. Washington, D. C.s Social and Rehabilitation Service, 1971 ' (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED IO6473.) Women and Poverty. Ottawa: National Council of Welfare. October, 1979b. Women With Low Incomes. Washington, D.C: Women's Bureau, 1977. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 147645.) 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0055876/manifest

Comment

Related Items