scholarly journals Medical Care for Public Assistance Recipients

1951 ◽  
Vol 66 (4) ◽  
pp. 89
Author(s):  
W. Palmer Dearing
2019 ◽  
pp. 168-201
Author(s):  
Yoosun Park

Welfare programs took months to develop in the War Relocation Authority camps. When aid finally reach the impoverished, it proved not only inadequate, but delivered through a Kafkaesque system designed to uphold the “radically abnormal” economic structure of the camps. Many conflicting factors were at play. Public assistance was a new phenomenon for the Nikkei; the deep reluctance to accept aid was slow to ebb and never entirely jettisoned. The concentration camps were, however, costly places to live; while subsistence food, shelter, and basic medical care were provided, private funds were necessary to purchase all else required for daily living. While the Nikkei Welfare Section workers believed public assistance was necessary reparation rather than unearned charity, a deeply held censure of aid—lest it breed dependency, fund the undeserving, coddle the enemy—existed on the part of the Caucasian administrators. Even the begrudgingly doled and unequivocally insufficient aid was difficult to obtain.


1951 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 101-107
Author(s):  
Jules H. Berman

The 1950 amendments are substantial in scope and, when taken together with the changes made to the old-age and survivors insurance program, should have a profound effect on the state-federal assistance programs. State and federal assistance agencies will need time to work with these amendments before their exact effect can be assayed and future trends determined and changes planned. Several respects in which the state-federal assistance programs are deficient and in need of improvement are now well known. Assistance programs financed from state and federal funds still fall short of the objective of being available to any needy person. The new program for the permanently and totally disabled will meet some of the needs of persons previously not covered by a state-federal program. There are many disabled persons, however, who are equally in need but who are not permanently and totally disabled and who will not be aided under the new program. These individuals will be dependent upon state and local general assistance programs. In a number of states these programs are far from adequate and in some areas nonexistent. We also know that the direct payments for medical care, potentially, can be an important part of the assistance program. This plan cannot achieve its potential, however, without some additional money from the federal government either in the form of a separate provision in the formula governing the federal share for medical expenditures, or in the form of an increased average maximum on the assistance payments. Without such provisions, the usefulness of the new amendment to make direct payments for medical care will be limited. To the extent that states divert money from supplying maintenance needs to paying for medical care, the new amendment might actually reduce the amount of money available for meeting maintenance needs. With additional money, the medical care amendment can do a great deal to meet medical costs not now met by other programs such as health or rehabilitation. In this statement, I have attempted to analyze the new amendments and to evaluate their effect on the public assistance programs. Although the new amendments leave some deficiencies uncorrected, they have advanced the programs considerably and should result in a considerably improved state-federal plan for meeting the assistance needs of people.


JAMA ◽  
1972 ◽  
Vol 219 (13) ◽  
pp. 1740-1744 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. W. Hammel

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document