Introduction
The bill number and title of law that led to the policy’s creation is the Child Nutrition Act of 1966. This act was created to establish a better nutritional standard for food served to children in public schools (Andreyeva et al., 2012). The act also established the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provides food assistance to low-income families (Black et al., 2004). This paper seeks to address various issues related to this policy
Summary of the Law
The Purpose of the Law
The law aims to ensure that low-income pregnant, postpartum, and breastfeeding women and infants and children up to age five who are found to be at nutritional risk have access to a nutritious diet. The program provides supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for eligible participants (Whaley et al., 2002).
The Goals of the Law
There are four goals of the WIC program: to improve the health of pregnant women, new mothers, and infants; to help keep young children healthy and growing; to reduce iron-deficiency anaemia among pregnant women, new mothers, and infants; and to encourage breastfeeding (Whaley et al., 2002).
Research Related to the Issue the Law Sought to Address
The WIC program provides supplemental foods, health care referrals, and nutrition education for low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and non-breastfeeding postpartum women and infants and children up to age five who are at risk of nutritional deficiencies (Deming, Briefel & Reidy, 2014). The WIC program is available in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and Guam. The WIC program is effective in improving the health of participants. In addition, research has shown that WIC participation can help reduce child welfare caseloads by providing nutritious food and nutrition assistance to low-income families (Whaley et al., 2002).
Additionally, a study by the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) found that the WIC program increased the food intake of pregnant women and their infants, decreased the number of low birth-weight babies, and decreased the rates of child abuse and neglect. The study also found that the WIC program positively affected the children’s school readiness and social-emotional development. Another study by the University of California, Irvine, found that WIC participation can lead to long-term reductions in poverty and food insecurity for low-income families. The study also found that WIC can help reduce the number of children in child welfare cases (Blakeney et al., 2020).
Besides, a study conducted by the USDA in 2002 found that women who participated in WIC received an average of more than two pounds more food per month than those who did not participate. The study also found that these benefits were particularly apparent in pregnant and breastfeeding mothers. This study relates to the issue of food insecurity for women and their children (Carlson & Neuberger, 2015). Another study conducted by the University of California, Los Angeles, in 2006 found that WIC participants were likelier to report improved diets and increased food intake than those who did not participate. According to this study, this result was likely because WIC offers participants various nutritious foods and beverages, as well as food counselling and nutrition education (Anderson et al., 2020).
A study by the National Center for Health Statistics in 2003 found that almost one-third (31%) of pregnant women and new mothers who received food stamp benefits also received WIC benefits. The study also found that pregnant women and new mothers who received food stamps were more likely to be overweight or obese (41% and 33%, respectively) than those who did not receive food stamps. This finding indicates that food stamp benefits may encourage pregnant women and new mothers to engage in unhealthy behaviors (Rojhani et al., 2021).
Arguments for the Legislation
It was a bipartisan effort when Congress first passed the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) in 1972. The legislation had strong support from both Republicans and Democrats, as well as from then-President Gerald Ford. Supporters of WIC point to its positive impact on participants’ health and its economic benefits (Carlson & Neuberger, 2015). The proponents of this bill argue that it is essential to provide supplemental nutrition to women, infants, and children who are struggling to meet their nutritional needs. They point out that these individuals are more likely than others to suffer from malnutrition and that providing them with supplemental food can help to prevent serious health problems.
Moreover, some proponents of this policy argue that by providing these services, society benefits in terms of improved health and decreased costs associated with health care. They further assert that the WIC program benefits low-income women and their children, who are more likely than others to lack access to adequate nutrition. They note that through WIC, these individuals can receive both nutritious and affordable food, making it a valuable resource for those in need (Bitler & Currie, 2005).
Arguments against Legislation
There are a few different arguments that opponents of the WIC program make. First, they argue that the program is ineffective and does not actually improve participants’ health outcomes (Bitler & Currie, 2005). For instance, according to a report from the Congressional Research Service, WIC participants had no significant difference in weight status or height compared to those who did not participate in the program (Hoynes, Page & Stevens, 2011). Additionally, a study published in The Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics found that WIC did not improve participants’ nutritional status compared to those not enrolled in the program (Owen & Owen, 1997).
Another argument against the WIC program is that it is expensive. For example, the Congressional Research Service report found that in the fiscal year 2010, WIC costs taxpayers approximately $5 billion. Additionally, the study published in The Journal of Human Nutrition and Dietetics found that, on average, WIC participants spent more than twice as much on food as those not enrolled in the program (Rojhani et al., 2021).
Other opponents of the WIC program argue that it is not necessary. For example, according to a report from the Congressional Research Service, only about 5 per cent of pregnant women in the United States are eligible for WIC. These Opponents assert that the program is unnecessary because other programs are already in place that provides similar assistance, such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) (Hall & Neuberger, 2021).
Historical Background
The WIC was created in 1972 in response to the 1971 White House Conference on Food, Nutrition, and Health findings. The program was designed to help low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and postpartum women and their children achieve optimal health. Since its foundation, the program has expanded nationwide and now serves approximately 8 million participants monthly (Blakeney et al., 2020). All 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and American Samoa operate their own WIC programs. This program expansion was due to rising levels of obesity and chronic diseases in America’s population, which has led to increased rates of child and maternal malnutrition (Whaley et al., 2002).
The program provides food vouchers, nutrition education, and health screenings to low-income pregnant women, new mothers and their children up to age 18. In 2011, the program served approximately 8 million people. Approximately one-third of participants are children under the age of five years. The program is funded by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The National Farmers Union has been a staunch advocate for the WIC program, arguing that it helps improve the nutritional status of low-income families and children. The National Women’s Law Center has also argued in favor of the program, stating that it provides critical nutrition assistance to low-income mothers and their children (Andreyeva et al., 2012).
The WIC program has been the subject of several congressional hearings, including one in 2009 that examined the program s effectiveness in achieving its goals. The program has also been the subject of several reports from federal agencies, including a report released in 2009 that found that the program had significant benefits for participants and their children (Hoynes, Page & Stevens, 2011). In 2012, the WIC program received a bipartisan reauthorization from Congress. The reauthorization increased funding for the program by $191 million over five years and included provisions that would improve the program’s efficiency and accountability (Blakeney et al., 2020).
State and local agencies administer the WIC program. Each state has its program, which varies regarding how the food is distributed, the eligibility requirements, and the funding level. Eligibility is based on household income and the number of children under the age of 18 who are in the household. The food distributed through the WIC program is generally comparable to food available at grocery stores. The program provides participants with vouchers that can be used to purchase food at any grocery store or food market (Carlson & Neuberger, 2015).
Analysis of the Policy’s Achievements
There is strong evidence that WIC improves the health of participating women and children. A recent study found that babies born to mothers who participated in WIC were less likely to be born prematurely or at low birth weights (Carlson & Neuberger, 2015). A report published in JAMA Pediatrics found that infants who received WIC were more likely to be breastfed at six months and one year than infants who did not receive WIC (Bunik et al., 2009). Additionally, a study published in the journal Pediatrics found that children who received WIC were more likely to be enrolled in school and have better health outcomes overall than children who did not receive WIC (Foster et al., 2010).
In addition, WIC has been shown to improve the diets of participating families. Families who participate in WIC consume more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains than those who do not participate. They also have lower rates of obesity and other diet-related chronic diseases. A recent study found that the WIC program increased the food security of participating pregnant women and their infants. The study found that, although some families still had low intakes of fruits and vegetables after participating in WIC, the majority of participating pregnant women and their infants had intakes that were close to or above the Healthy People 2020 recommended levels for fruits and vegetables. The study also found that WIC increased the number of fruits and vegetables pregnant women and their infants ate, even after considering factors such as income, education, race/ethnicity, and food insecurity (Bunik et al., 2009).
Amendments
In 1975, the first amendment was done, extending it to no breastfeeding women and children up to 5 years old. This amendment ensured that all women, regardless of their socioeconomic background, have access to the nutrition assistance program. In 1978, the Nutrition education requirement and Social services referral requirement were added to the program. This initiative was in response to studies that showed a need for increased access to nutrition education and social services for low-income pregnant women, new mothers, and their infants (Richardson, 2006).
In 2002, the enhanced food package and the breastfeeding promotion and support program were added to WIC as supplemental nutrition assistance programs for pregnant women, postpartum mothers and infants up to 6 months old (Black et al., 2004). The Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) National Nutrition Monitoring and Evaluation (NNME) report released in 2006 showed that the incidence of iron deficiency among infants receiving WIC decreased by 25% between 1995 and 2002. The amendment in 2004 added zinc to the list of essential nutrients that must be included in WIC food packages. The amendment in 2006 increased funding for breastfeeding support programs and made other improvements. The amendment in 2008 added a nutrition education and counselling component to the program, designed to improve pregnant women’s diets, postpartum mothers and infants (El-Bastawissi et al., 2007). In 2010, amendments were made to increase breastfeeding promotion and support funding, improve the program, and add family planning services. The amendment in 2012 added a healthy food purchasing component to the program (Blakeney et al., 2020).
Benefits of the Policy
The benefits of the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) are numerous. For example, WIC provides eligible pregnant women and mothers with nutritious food and nutrition assistance to help ensure their children are healthy and grow up to be strong and healthy adults (Blakeney et al., 2020). Additionally, WIC provides eligible infants and children with access to healthful foods and nutrition services that help them reach their full potential. In addition, WIC provides financial assistance to help low-income families afford foods essential for their health and well-being. Finally, WIC helps connect pregnant women and mothers with health and nutrition resources and services (Carlson & Neuberger, 2015).
Challenges that the Policy Faces
The program faces many challenges, including a lack of funding, high administrative costs, and a need for more awareness among the public about its existence. Additionally, the program is often limited in what types of foods it can purchase due to budgetary constraints. Some critics argue that these limitations unfairly disadvantage certain groups, such as low-income pregnant women who may not be able to afford healthy foods (Carlson & Neuberger, 2015). Besides, many mothers eligible for WIC do not participate because they need to learn about the program or do not believe they are eligible. Finally, state or local governments often administer the program, which can create jurisdictional challenges (Blakeney et al., 2020).
Policy Alternatives
Some policy options for the WIC program have been or could be investigated. One possibility is to raise the program’s finances, which could be accomplished by either increasing the program’s annual funding or increasing the amount of funding granted to WIC each year (Blakeney et al., 2020). Another alternative would be to look into ways to increase the program’s efficiency and quality. This approach could entail looking for methods to improve the way WIC runs, such as increasing the number of participating agencies or enhancing the quality of food delivered to participants (Rojhani et al., 2021). Finally, it is possible to investigate measures to improve WIC accessibility. This could entail expanding the number of places where WIC services are provided or looking into ways to make WIC more inexpensive for participants.
The Population this Policy Impacts
The WIC program provides supplemental nutrition assistance to low-income pregnant, postpartum, and breastfeeding women and infants and children up to age five who are at risk of malnutrition. Vulnerable groups may be more likely to require these services due to poverty, lack of access to quality food, or a lack of health care (Carlson & Neuberger, 2021). The WIC program is designed to help vulnerable populations meet their basic needs.
The Role of Social Workers in Working with the Affected Population
The social worker’s role in working with the impacted population is to provide support and resources. The current policy and policy alternative(s) do not significantly impact how a social worker would engage with this population. The social worker would provide support and resources to help ensure that individuals receive the necessary nourishment and health care (Masho, Rozario & Ferrance, 2019). Additionally, the social worker would work to identify any barriers or challenges individuals may face accessing these services. The social worker would work to address any issues that may be preventing individuals from reaching their full potential. These issues may include but are not limited to: lack of access to resources, barriers to accessing services, and discrimination (Blakeney et al., 2020). The social worker would work with the impacted population to identify and address these issues.
Conclusion
WIC provides a much-needed safety net for low-income mothers and their children. The program has been shown to improve the health outcomes of participants, as well as increase school performance and reduce the likelihood of childhood obesity. While WIC is not without its critics, the program has positively impacted millions of families across the United States. It continues to be an essential part of our nation’s safety net. The WIC program is a supplemental nutrition program that provides food, nutrition education, and health care referrals for low-income pregnant, postpartum, and breastfeeding women and infants and children up to age five at risk of malnutrition. The USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) administers the program.
References
Anderson, C. E., Crespi, C. M., Wang, M. C., Whaley, S. E., & Chaparro, M. P. (2020). The neighbourhood food environment modifies the effect of the 2009 WIC food package change on childhood obesity in Los Angeles County, California. BMC Public Health, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08779-2
Andreyeva, T., Luedicke, J., Middleton, A. E., Long, M. W., & Schwartz, M. B. (2012). The revised Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children food packages positively influence access to healthy foods. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 112(6), 850–858.
Bitler, M. P., & Currie, J. (2005). Does WIC work? The effects of WIC on pregnancy and birth outcomes. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management: The Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, 24(1), 73–91.
Black, M. M., Cutts, D. B., Frank, D. A., Geppert, J., Skalicky, A., Levenson, S., … & Children’s Sentinel Nutritional Assessment Program Study Group. (2004). Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children participation and infants’ growth and health: a multisite surveillance study. Paediatrics, 114(1), 169–176.
Blakeney, E. L., Herting, J. R., Zierler, B. K., & Bekemeier, B. (2020). The effect of women, infant, and children (WIC) services on birth weight before and during the 2007–2009 great recession in Washington state and Florida: a pooled cross-sectional time series analysis. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-020-02937-5
Bunik, M., Krebs, N. F., Beaty, B., McClatchey, M., & Olds, D. L. (2009). Breastfeeding and WIC Enrollment in the Nurse-Family Partnership Program. Breastfeeding Medicine, 4(3), 145–149. https://doi.org/10.1089/bfm.2008.0140
Carlson, S., & Neuberger, Z. (2015, May 4). WIC Works: Addressing the Nutrition and Health Needs of Low-Income Families for More Than Four Decades | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/wic-works-addressing-the-nutrition-and-health-needs-of-low-income-families
Deming, D. M., Briefel, R. R., & Reidy, K. C. (2014). Infant feeding practices and food consumption patterns of children participating in WIC. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 46(3), S29-S37.
El-Bastawissi, A. Y., Peters, R., Sasseen, K., Bell, T., & Manolopoulos, R. (2007). Effect of the Washington special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants and children (WIC) on pregnancy outcomes. Maternal and child health journal, 11(6), 611–621.
Foster, E. M., Jiang, M., & Gibson-Davis, C. M. (2010). The Effect of the WIC Program on the Health of Newborns. Health Services Research, 45(4), 1083–1104. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2010.01115.x
Hall, L., & Neuberger, Z. (2021, July 12). Eligible Low-Income Children Missing Out on Crucial WIC Benefits During Pandemic | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/eligible-low-income-children-missing-out-on-crucial-wic-benefits-during
Hoynes, H., Page, M., & Stevens, A. H. (2011). Can targeted transfers improve birth outcomes?: Evidence from the introduction of the WIC program. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7-8), pp. 813–827.
Masho, S. W., Rozario, S. S., & Ferrance, J. L. (2019). Intimate partner violence around the time of pregnancy and utilization of WIC services. Maternal and child health journal, 23(12), 1648-1657.
Owen, A. L., & Owen, G. M. (1997). Twenty years of WIC: a review of some effects of the program. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 97(7), 777-782.
Richardson, J. (2006). Child Nutrition and WIC Legislation in the 108th and 109th Congresses. Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress.
Rojhani, A., Ouyang, P., Gullon-Rivera, A., & Dale, T. M. (2021). Dietary Quality of Pregnant Women Participating in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16), 8370. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168370
Whaley, S. E., Meehan, K., Lange, L., Slusser, W., & Jenks, E. (2002). Predictors of breastfeeding duration for employees of the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 102(9), 1290-1293.
write