'Child Nutrition Act of 1966 and Wic Analysis\r'

'Child diet Act of 1966 and WIC psychoanalysis a. How effective is the policy is in terms of resoluteness the affable problem. The Child nourishment Act of 1966 has since form and developed many platforms beneath it to aid those in poverty. The five top producing broadcasts under the Child Nutrition Act in fiscal socio-economic class 2010 imply the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance course of instruction (SNAP), the case School Lunch Program, and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), the Child and Adult Cargon nourishment Program, and the School Breakfast Program.WIC serves 45-50 % of all babes born in the United States (Facing aridness in America, 2011, para. 3). fit in to Kowaleski-Jones & a abjurelic acid; Duncan (2002), much of the research on the make of WIC involution on children has focused on the potential benefits of emergence use of prenatal care, increased Medicaid savings, better infant outcomes, and less infant mortality. In addition to the antecedently stated, WIC’s effectiveness can be back up by the perception of â€Å"WIC Works,” (Kowaleski-Jones, & Duncan, 2002).The observation that â€Å"WIC works,” is goaded by the great deal of research for WIC partakers to acquit healthier offspring (Kowaleski-Jones, & Duncan, 2002). For example, each dollar bill spent on WIC saved the state at least $1. 77 to $3. 13 in health care costs (Bitler, & Currie, 2004). According to globe Health Nurse Supervisor Luzette Samargia, of Duluth, Minnesota, WIC is effective and produces imperative outcomes (Facing yearning in America, 2011, para. 11).Luzette manages about 27 worldly concern health nurses and 3 dieticians, who as part of their jobs are highly trained to provide WIC health checks, breastfeeding encouragement, food counseling for mothers and their young children, and appropriate WIC food vouchers (Facing thirstiness in America, 2011, para. 7). According to Luzette: WIC has generally non been imbed to significantly change food patterns of participants or to clip the incidence of obesity. Thus, WIC programs are increasing their focus on nutrition education.And in 2009 the WIC nutrition advice and foods available with WIC vouchers were solely updated in accordance with current husbandry guidelines. For example, WIC vouchers whitethorn now be used for fresh fruits and vegetables, more(prenominal) whole-grain products are required and only milk with 2 percent or lower fat glut is authorized for women and children age 2 and older (Facing Hunger in America, 2011, para. 12). WIC’s goal is not to set aside poverty and solve all problems amongst it. WIC’s shoot for is to aid those in need and supplement their nutritionary prerequisites.Breastfeeding an infant is vital to a newborns development, insofar not everyone has this knowledge. WIC does offer free infant formula to its participants only strongly encourages mot hers to breastfeed. b. Describe the policy’s strengths and limitations Limitations convoluted when discussing WIC can be drawn to breastfeeding evaluate. Because WIC provides free infant formula, breastfeeding rates shit been a hot payoff amongst WIC participants. However, according to the issue WIC Association breastfeeding rates have slightly risen in recent years.In the year 2004, approximately 55% of mother’s alive(p) in WIC’s benefits were breastfeeding; in the year 2010 rates had increased to over 60% (National WIC Association [NWA], 2011). An additional limitation involved with WIC is of course supporting (Mahoney, 2008). severally year Congress authorizes just how much of funding will be allotted for the WIC program (Mahoney, 2008, pg. 4) According to the USDA: They requested $6. 1 billion for the WIC Program for fiscal year 2009, a 1. 3% increase from fiscal year 2008.This request was based on projected increases in participation and food costs , and the USDA’s proposal to limit nutrition services, pull down administrative costs, and to restrict eligibility for Medicaid recipients †a proposal jilted by Congress for fiscal year 2008 (Mahoney, 2008, pg. 4). With inflation rates continually on the rise and because WIC is not an entitlement program, if funds are not available legal participants at nutritional luck may not receive the supplemental nutrients as they have in the past (Mahoney, 2008, pg. 5).In contrast to limitations WIC also has much strength. In Indiana alone, according to the National WIC Association in the fiscal year of 2011 167,875 women, infants, and children participated (National WIC Association [NWA], 2013, pg. 1). WIC is preparing ways in which women can avoid the long lines, the stigma, and hassle when get nutritious foods. Indiana is currently preparing plans in converting the WIC program to the Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) by 2020 (NWA, 2013, pg. 2) c. Who gains and who loses as a result of the policy? . Are thither people in need who are unexpended out? Who is left out? WIC serves a tightly-defined cosmos †strictly low to moderate income, nutritionally at-risk heavy(predicate) women, breastfeeding women, non-breastfeeding postpartum women, infants, and children up to their fifth birthday (Facing Hunger in America, 2011). Participants of WIC’s family members may benefit from participation, yet if you were not mentioned previously you may be left out from receiving WIC benefits. e. Is the policy addressing only a plowshare of a larger turn up?What is the larger issue? f. Does the policy improve social well-being? rationalize in detail. g. Does the policy advance the cause of social and economic justice? References Bitler, M. , & Currie, J. (2004, June). Does wic work? The effects of wic on pregnancy and birth outcomes. Retrieved from http://www. econ. ucla. edu/people/written document/currie/more/prams. pdf Facing Hunger in America. ( 2011, June 23). Wic works. Retrieved from http://facinghungerinamerica. blogspot. com/2011/06/wic-works. hypertext markup language Kowaleski-Jones, L, & Duncan, G. (2002).Effects of participation in the wic program on birthweight: Evidence from the longitudinal survey of youth. American daybook of Public Health, 92(5), 799-804. Retrieved from http://www. ncbi. nlm. nih. gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447164/ Mahoney, M. (2008). The special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants, & children (wic): Opportunities to influence participants’ health in Minnesota. tobacco plant Law Center. Retrieved from http://phlc. stylefish. com/sites/default/files/resources/phlc-policy-wic. pdf National WIC Association. (2011). Advocacy exploit center.Retrieved from http://www. nwica. org/? q=advocacy/1 National WIC Association. (2013, January). How wic impacts the people of Indiana. Retrieved from http://www. paramountcommunication. com/nwica/Indiana. pdf National WIC Association. ( 2011, November). Wic funding: What does sequestration mean for wic’s prox? Retrieved from http://www. paramountcommunication. com/nwica/WICSequestration. pdf Neuberger, Z. (2013, March 5). Sequestration could deny nutrition deny up to 750,000 at-Risk low-Income women and children. Center and Budget and insurance policy Priorities.Retrieved from http://www. offthechartsblog. org/ folk/food-assistance/child-nutrition-and-wic/ Neuberger, Z. , & Greenstein, B. (2013, March 5). The impact of the sequester on wic: 575,000 to 750,00 eligible low income women and children at nutritional risk could be denied benefits. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Retrieved from http://www. cbpp. org/files/2-26-13fa. pdf Studymode. (2010, February). Social welfare: Wic schema. Retrieved from http://www. studymode. com/essays/Social-Welfare-Wic-Schema-285472. html Whaley, S. E. , Koleilat, M. , Whaley, M. Gomez, J. , Meehan, K. , & Saluja, K. (2012). restore of the special suppleme ntal nutrition program for women, infants, and children. American Journal Of Public Health, 102(12), 2269-2273. doi:10. 2105/AJPH. 2012. 300770 Wolf, J. (n. d. ). Wic: Women, infants, & children. Retrieved from http://singleparents. about. com/od/financialhel1/p/wic. htm U. S. Department of Agriculture. (2011, March). The food assistance landscape. ( scotch knowledge Bulletin No. 6-8). Washington DC: Economic Research Service. Retrieved from http://www. ers. usda. gov/media/129642/eib6-8. pdf\r\n'