18-THE CAROLINA TIMES
SAT., MAY 19,1979
PERCEPTIONS OF CHILDHOOD AND YOUTH
NEW YORK—What will be the
role of children and youth in an ag
ing society and in an increasingly
childless one? Will they get better or
worse schooling and services as their
numbers diminish? Will parents and
taxpayers be more generous toward
the fewer children there are, or will
the needs of young people be seen
increasingly to conflict with adult
personal goals?
These are some of the questions
posed for the 1980s and 1990s by
Alan Pifer, president of Carnegie
Corporation of New York, in his
essay entitled “Perceptions of
Childhood and Youth,” appearing
in the foundations’s 1978 annual
report.
The essay explores the impact of
recent demographic, economic, and
social changes in American life on
emerging public attitudes toward
the young. It states that, among
other “deep and far-reaching”
developments, the dramatic fall in
the birthrate following the baby
boom of the 1950s is serving to shift
public and private attention away
from children toward adults.
Since 1970, the population under
age 14 has shrunk by 6.4 million,
while that of 25-to-34 year-olds has
swelled by 7.9 million. “One would
think,” comments Pifer, “that in
the face of the steady decline in the
numbers of young people being
born today, we would be more
favorably disposed to do our best by
those we have. The irony is that just
the opposite seems to be the case: as
the numbers have declined, public
attitudes have turned to indifference
or even outright antagonism.”
As evidence of changing at
titudes, Pifer cites the widespread
exclusion of families with children
from rental housing, the growth of
single life styles, the reluctance of
many parents to stint themselves on
behalf of children, the “massive
shift that has already taken place in
the allocation of public spending
toward the elderly.” and mounting
taxpayer opposition to spending on
the schools and on aid with depen
dent children.
Other evidence, he say, can be
found in erosion of the political
base for the social programs of the
1960s, so many of which were
designed to benefit children, and in
the lackluster performance by
government in pressing for
children’s legislation.
The consequences of ignoring the
needs of children could be serious,
he suggests, for “Every child alive
today or born in the years just
ahead.. .will be a scarce resource and
a precious asset as an adult in the
early part of the next century,” ad
ding, “At that time, the nation’s
standard of living, its capacity to de
fend itself-perhaps its very viability
as a nation-will be almost wholly
dependent on the small contingent
of men and women who are today’s
children.”
The start of the next century will
be a time of “unprecedented oppor
tunity combined with maxiumu
responsibility” for young adults, ac
cording to Pifer. Not only will they
have to produce the nation’s cadres
of professional, adminstrative,
technical, and skilled workers, but
they will have to ensure the well
being of the generation behind them
as well as provide assistance to the
15 to 20 percent of the populaiton of
elderly people the nation will have
by then.
Much of this responsibility, he
points out, will fall upon members
of minority groups, particularly
Blacks and Hispanics, who are ex
pected to make up a larger percen
tage of the population by then.
In calling for measures to prepare
today’s children for the world they
will face tomorrow, Pifer asks those
“who are concerned about
children” to “place less emphasis
on an appeal to the nation’s finer
instincts-the perception of young
people as a special part of humanity
deserving of adult love, protection,
and nurturing—and more emphasis
on a frank appeal to adult self-
interest based on demograhpic con
siderations.”
Such an approach, he suggests,
“would say that we must invest in
children now to assure our own
well-being as elderly people a few
decades hence.”
While agreeing that such an argu
ment might seem “cynical and un
worthy of us as a people with a great
humanitarian tradition,” it would
be justified “provided it directs
public attention back to the needs of
children and serves thereby to make
their lives happier and more fruit
ful.”
Pifer concludes by saying, “No
nation, and especially not this one at
this stage in its history, can afford
to neglect its children. Whatever
importance we attach as a people to
expenditure on armaments, to pro
grams for old Americans, to main
taining high levels of consumption
and to a hundred other purposes,
the welfare of children has to be our
highest priority. Not only are they
are future security, but their dreams
and ideals can provide a much-
needed renaissance of spirit in what
is becoming an aging, tired, and
disillusioned society. In the end the
only thing we have is our young peo
ple. If we fail them, all else is in
vain.”
Related to demographic trends,
Pifer writes, are other changes that
are helping create problems for
children and families, including:
• Continued high inflation and
sluggish economic growth, which
have increased financial pressures
on the family, undermined con
fidence in the economy, and made
many Americans fearful of the
future.
• The increased cost of raising
children, to the point today that a
family with an annual income of
$10,000 must spend more than
$50,000 to raise a child to the age of
18, not including savings set aside
for higher education.
• The breakup of traditional
family patterns, including the high
divorce rate, numerous unmarried
couples living together, an increased
percentage of children born to un
married women, and such a growth
in single-parent families headed by
women that they now comprise one
out of every five families.
* The dramatic rise in the labor
force participation of women with
young children.
* The growth of the two-worker
family, serving to widen drastically
the income disparity between this
group and single-worker or single
parent families.
* A radical shift in social values
and conventions, including the ap
pearance of self-centered, inward
turning attitudes among the more
affluent and a growing tendency
among Americans generally to live
for the present rather than defer im
mediate gratification in hopes of en
suring a better future for themselves
and their children.
The problems of the young,
which show up in the high rates of
juvenile crime, drug and alcohol
use, suicide, academic failure and
unemployment among youth, and in
the widespread abuse and neglect of
children and other symtoms of
troubled family life, are exacerbated
by the lack of adequate public
policy response to changing family
patterns, according to Pifer.
Targets of action, he states, are
reform of a welfare system that
presently “humiliates and
demoralizes the so-called
beneficiaries yet penalizes their ef
forts and dulls their desire to work
themselves out of their predica
ment.”
Needing help almost as much as
families on public assistance, he
says, are “those single-parent or
single-worker families which do not
live below the official poverty line
but which, nonetheless, cannot af
ford certain necessities such as de
cent housing, adequate health care,
and a nutritious diet.”
For working women, especially
those heading families, Pifer calls
for efforts to break down the sex
division of labor that “prevents
many qualified women from gaining
access to the better-paying jobs with
more opportunity for advancement-
-jobs that traditionally have been
available only to men.” These need
to be matched by more nontradi-
tional vocational training oppor
tunities for women. Pifer also urges
the wider provision of maternity
and paternity leave and more flexi
ble work scheduling to allow parents
to combine work and family life
with greater ease.
Lack of adequate cfiild care ar
rangements is another "major pro
blem for single working parents and
two-worker families. The issue is
“not whether women should work
but how to make this possible with
the least harmful consequences for
children,” Pifer emphasizes. The
nation’s institutions, “from govern
ment to employers to the family
itself, simply have to recognize the
permanently changed circumstances
under which children are growing
up today and make the necessary
adjustments.”
In addition, Pifer stresses the
need for renewed efforts and
reforms aimed both at raising the
school achievement levels of educa
tionally disadvantaged children and
keeping them in school. “No longer
can the educational system be allow
ed to function as if substantial
numbers of youngsters can be con
sidered expendable.”
Finally, Pifer calls on women,
“joined by their husbands, to
organize and work for reforms that
would ease pressures on the fami
ly.” Such efforts “could go a long
way toward solving some of the pro
blems of children that are caused by
anachronistic assumptions about
the nature of the family life today.”
Fire Burns Smokehoi
Again; Inspector Sml
Gives Prevention Hii
By Pal Bryant
During the year ended September
30, 1978, the trustees of Carnegie
Corporation appropriated
$12,166,856 for grants. This figure
includes $877,000 for the Interna
tional Program. The Corporation
made a total of 94 grants or ap
propriations, including 30 to
schools, colleges, and universities
and 64 to other organizations.
Three appropriations were made for
programs administered by the of
ficers.
The charter of the Corporation
provides that all funds are to be us
ed for “the advancement and diffu
sion of knowledge and understan
ding.” Grants must be broadly
educational in nature but are not
necessarily limited to the formal
educational system of to educa
tional institutions. The foundation
has made it a policy to select a few
areas in which to concentrate its
grants over a period of years. Cur
rently these areas fall under the
headings of higher education, early
childhood, elementary and secon
dary education, social justice, and
the International Program.
It pays to keep an eye
on the smoke house, Mrs.
Henrietta Stanback learn
ed last weekend. Her
smoke house, filled with
hams and bacon, caught
fire and cooked the expen
sive meats before Mrs.
Stanback was ready to
serve them. Homeland
Avenue again was with
seasonable excitement.
Ten public safety of
ficers zoomed onto the
usually quiet street, at
tached their hoses, and
after a brief delay with
their new pumper truck,
began dousing with water
the flames that could be
seen for several blocks.
As the fire smothered,
the aroma of cured pork
filled the air. An in
quisitive public safety of
ficer nosed into the wood
framed smoked house and
found the goodies.
Fire losses included
blistered paint on Mrs.
Stanback’s house and an
oil storage tank, plus ruin
of the large smoke house,
and the six hams and
bacon. One fireman said
that he had known fire to
burn Mrs. Stanback’s
smoke house on two
previous occasions.
Fire Prevention Inspec
tor, Milton Smith gave
THE CAROLINA
TIMES some helpful hints
to homemakers who want
to cure meat and diminish
the possibilities of fire.
First, he says, the
to the structure sho
earthen. A pit shoe
dug and reinforced
stone wall. Only h
chips should be use
meat should be hunj
ing should be inspee
the structure, and
chips are smouldei
watchful eye shoe
kept, and a garder
handy.
Most important,
Smith, is a free insp
from the City’s
Prevention D:
before curing the
Smith and other i
tors can be reach
683-4233.
At the Stanback
the floor was wood(
smouldering wood s
to have been kept
galvanized tub.
You don’t have to bor
your neighbor's copy
THE CAROLINA TIA
Call 682-2913
Powerful anti
drug you can
without an I
stop itching fast of 
vaginal, rectal, and oti
conditions. Doctors fi
severe itching can be
with a special drug, t
now get this anti-itc
ingredient with no pres
in BiCOZENEL Use
directed. The medicalh
creme for j
itching.
BiCOZ
City Department Heads’ Residen
Requested; Report Due By June
DURHAM, N.C.
^alr
MAY 17 - 19, 1979
THURSDAY thru SATURDAY
SOUTH SQUARE MALL
DEALERS IN QUALITY ANTIQUES FROM THROUGHOUT THE
EASTERN AND MIDWESTERN STATES
FREE ADMISSION FREE PARKING
A Jeff Stewart Promotion
south
square
CHAPEL HILL BLVD &
ROUTE 15-501, DURHAM
mall
BELK-LEGGETT • J.C. PENNEY • MONTGOMERY WARD
PLUS 110 OTHER FINE STORES & SERVICES
OPEN MONDAY THRU SATURDAY 10 AM TO 9 PM Some Stores Open Sundays 1-t
by Pat Bryant
A proposal to make the
city workforce more
reflective of Durham’s
population surfaced last
week at a meeting of the
City Council Finance
Committee. If the pro
posal is enacted, top level
administrators, depart
ment heads, and division
heads, would be required
to live within the city’s
limits. The proposal was
referred to the City
Manager for study and
concurrence by the City
Attorney’s office. A
report is due by June 7.
C.D. Hunt, represen
ting the Durham Commit
tee on the Affairs of Black
People presented the pro
posal which would require
current top level ad
ministrators to become
residents after six months,
and future administrators
within two months.
Similar policies have been
enacted in Charlotte and
Richmond, Va.
City Councilman
William Smith asked for
copies of the Charlotte
and Richmond or
dinances. “I am in favor
of it in principal, and was
last year when it came
up”, an instance when
former City Councilman
Howard Harris suggested
that all city employees by
required to reside in the ci
ty limits.
However, City Manager
Dean Hunter, who the
council asked to make the
report, questioned
distinguishing between top
level employees and lower
level workers as a stipula
tion which would cause
some constitutional pro
blems. Lower level
employees who buy homes
outside the city and then
move up to higher ad
ministrative jobs would
experience some hard
ships, said Hunter.
Although at the helm of
city government for more
than seven months.
Hunter and his family of
ficially reside in Kentucky,
where he last worked. He
hasn’t been able to find a
suitable house, acc
to published report
Distinction b
policy makers and
dinates doesn’t
Councilman
Margaret Keller,
remarked that “d
who holds a higi
position in the com
can indicate comn
to the community t
residency.”
Supporting the
posal, Sam Reed,
dent of the I
Chapter of the b
Council of
Citizens, raised
eyebrows calling
redefinition of “I
Continued on pa
MOVING???
We Specialize In Household
Moving and Light Hauling
Call
Jackson and Son’:
Transfer
544-1083
LauchHervY helped Und
the missing ingredient
toerkKateminoritY
engineers. MoneY-
Lauchland Henry is a teacher. And a
scientist. And an engineer He 's gen-
uinely concerned about other people
And he has expressed some of that
concern m his participation with the
National Fund for Minority Engineering
Students.
The fund is a non-profit organiza
tion attempting to increase the number
of Blacks. Puerto Ricans. Chicanos.
Mexican-Americans and American
Indians enrolled m engineering schools.
These under-represented minorities
constitute a nch untapped resource to
help fill the growing need for engineers,
a need that is expected to continue
through the mid-1980's.
IBM's social leave program enabled
Dr Henry to take a year 's leave to assist
the fund. And IBM continued to pay
him his full salary.
The National Fund for Minority
Engineering Students is a very worth
while program. \A^ think so. Lauchlarxi
Henry thinks so But most important of
all. lots of minority engineering students
enrolled at colleges and universities
all over the country think so.