Resolution on Poverty and Socioeconomic Status

Adopted by the American Psychological Association, February 2022.

Whereas the income gap in the United States between low and high Socioeconomic Status (SES) has continued to increase, with the average income of the lowest fifth of the population down 25% and the average income of the top fifth up 23% since the 1970s (Duncan et al., 2019) and where rates of poverty have increased to 11.6% in 2021 from 11.5% in the preceding year; where overall numbers of persons in 2021 who live in poverty are in excess of 37.9 million (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022a); and where persons with low SES have limited access to acquiring wealth due to low wages, predatory lending and credit practices, and barriers to income generating resources;

Whereas in times of natural disasters, pandemics, and economic downturns associated with job loss and high rates of unemployment and under-employment, persons of low SES and those living in poverty in urban, suburban and rural locations experience more devastating and long- lasting personal and financial repercussions than those with greater economic advantage (Buheji et al., 2020; Finch & Finch, 2020; McAlpine & Alang, 2021);

Whereas persons at the intersection of low SES and multiple minoritized identities, including persons of color; women; lesbians, gay, bisexual, queer, transgender, and non-binary individuals; persons with mental illnesses; immigrants; refugees; persons with physical and/or intellectual disabilities; and court system–involved persons, have been historically and systemically discriminated against through policies, laws, and ordinances as well as bias and stereotyping that have created a range of barriers to opportunities thus solidifying financial hardship and economic inequality (APA, 2020; Gonzales et al., 2020; Guedel & Colbert, 2016; Iguchi et al., 2005; McGarrity, 2014; Martinchek & Carther, 2021; Massey, 2020; Sakimura, 2020; Torres et al., 2018; Whittle et al., 2017; Wilson et al., 2020; Wright et al., 2014; U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2018);

Whereas compared to 8.2% of White persons who live in poverty, the rates are disproportionately higher among most non-White populations, 26.8% American Indian and Alaska Natives, 19.5% Blacks, 17% non-White Hispanics, 8.1% Asians, who have been systematically excluded from opportunities to gain wealth while also having the potential for intergenerational wealth stolen (Akee, 2021; National Congress of American Indians, 2020; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021a). Diversity within these various groups should also be recognized [e.g., poverty rates for Asian individuals vary by country of origin: 13% Chinese, 7% Filipino, 8% Japanese, 11% Korean, 6% Indian, 12% Vietnamese (Pew Research Center, 2021)]. Notably, when population breakdowns by race/ethnicity in the U.S. are considered, poverty rates are disproportionately higher for Asian, Black, and Indigenous individuals but lower than expected for White individuals (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021b); Diversity within these various groups should also be recognized (e.g. poverty rates for Asian individuals vary by country of origin: 13% Chinese, 7% Filipino, 8% Japanese, 11% Korean, 6% Indian, 12% Vietnamese (Pew Research Center, 2021);

Whereas there was an increase in child poverty rates, with the percentage of children and youth below the age of 18 living below the poverty line rising from 14.4% in 2019 to 16.1% in 2020 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021a). Furthermore, Black, Hispanic, and Indigenous children are overrepresented among children living below the poverty line (Children's Defense Fund, 2018; Thomas & Fry, 2020). More specifically, 35.5% of Black people living in poverty in the U.S. are below the age of 18. Similarly, 40.7% of Hispanic people living below the poverty line in the U.S. are younger than age 18, and 29.1% of American Indian and Native American children lived in poverty in 2018 (Children’s Defense Fund, 2018). In contrast, approximately 21% of White people living in poverty in the U.S. are less than 18 years old (Thomas & Fry, 2020);

Whereas compared to the 2020 poverty rate of families with a male head of household (11.4%), families with a female head of household had a poverty rate of 23.4% in 2020, an increase from 22.2% in 2019 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2021a) with a direct impact on increasing numbers of children and other family members;

Whereas racial, ethnic, and gender economic gaps persist in the U.S. with working White men making significantly more money than their White, Black, Latinx, Asian, or Native American women counterparts. Compared to every dollar paid to White, non-Hispanic men, Latinx women were paid 55 cents, Native American women were paid 60 cents, Black women were paid 63 cents, White women were paid 79 cents, and Asian women were paid 85 cents (National Partnership for Women & Families, 2021);

Whereas evidence establishes that the income gap between the economically marginalized and the wealthiest in societies continues to be associated with significant inequity in morbidity and life expectancy (APA, 2021a; Bosworth, 2018). Low SES is associated with higher mortality rates and with increased rates of pervasive and untreated mental illnesses, osteoarthritis, hypertension, diabetes, coronary heart disease, AIDS/HIV infection, cervical cancer, and other chronic health conditions in men and women across the life span (Schiller et al., 2012; Stringhini et al., 2017; Tobias, 2017) than those who are more economically advantaged. Where low- income women are more likely to have chronic and other disabilities than their higher-income counterparts, thus limiting their employment options and straining their financial resources (Brault, 2012; Women’s Bureau, U.S. Department of Labor, 2015);

Whereas demonstrable inequities associated with low SES begin before birth with greater likelihood of fetal death and infant mortality (Gilman et al., 2017; Larson, 2007) and where many birthing parents, particularly communities of color and those living below the poverty line, receive inadequate prenatal and postnatal care resulting in significantly higher rates of maternal prenatal and perinatal complications and death (Gadson et al., 2017; Kaplowitz et al., 2018; Lefmann et al., 2017; Oropesa et al., 2001; Ross et al., 2020; Ross et al., 2019; Taylor et al., 2019). Where poverty has been identified as an adverse childhood experience (ACEs), and where low-income children have significantly higher rates of exposure to a range of ACEs that are associated with poor physical and mental health outcomes across the life span (Crouch et al., 2020). This divide in morbidity and mortality rates along economic lines has continued to grow (Bosworth, 2018), with higher death rates for low-income infants (as well as adults), thereby decreasing the life expectancy for all members of society. This inequity may be compounded by an interaction with the negative health outcomes associated with U.S. racial constructs (APA, 2021d; APA, 2021f);

Whereas individuals living in economically depressed communities are more likely to experience adverse food and nutrition conditions such as “food deserts” or “food swamps.” These locations are found in urban, rural, and remote areas and are more likely to have limited access to fresh fruits and vegetables thereby impacting their nutrition and well-being, contributing to higher rates of morbidity and mortality (Banner et al., 2020; Fong et al., 2020; Madzia et al., 2020; Phillips & Rodriguez, 2020; Walker et al., 2010);

Whereas poverty is detrimental to psychological well-being, with individuals with low-income being twice as likely to suffer from a diagnosable mental health disorder compared to those in higher-income brackets (Lipman & Boyle, 2008; Sareen et al., 2011; Walker & Druss, 2017) and with poverty being a significant obstacle to accessing needed emotional and behavioral health treatment for adults and children (APA, 2021a; Ralston et al., 2019; Santiago et al., 2013), and experiencing mental illness, especially when untreated, increases the risk of individuals living below the poverty line and remaining economically disadvantaged across the life span (Anakwenze & Zuberi, 2013; Funk et al., 2012; McAlpine & Alang, 2021);

Whereas the impact of poverty on young children is significant and long lasting, thus limiting opportunities to achieve improved SES (Greenfield & Moorman, 2018; Cohen et al., 2010; Assari, 2018), where poverty is associated with substandard housing, hunger, homelessness, inadequate childcare, unsafe neighborhoods, and under-resourced schools (APA, 2021e; Chaudry & Wilmer, 2016; Ralston et al., 2019; Wimer et al., 2016); and low-income children are at greater risk than higher-income children for a range of cognitive, emotional, and health-related problems, including detrimental effects on executive functioning, below average academic achievement, poor social emotional functioning, developmental delays, behavioral problems, asthma, inadequate nutrition, low birth weight, and higher rates of pneumonia (Aber et al., 2012; Bailey & Dynarski, 2011; Last et al., 2018; Shonkoff et al., 2009; von Stumm & Plomin, 2015);

Whereas living in poverty is associated with differences in structural and functional brain development in children, adolescents, and adults in areas related to cognitive processes that are critical for learning, communication, and academic achievement, including social emotional processing, memory, language, and executive functioning (Chan et al., 2018; Farah, 2017; Hair et al., 2015; Kim et al., 2013; Noble et al., 2015);

Whereas children and families living in poverty often attend under-resourced, overcrowded schools that lack educational opportunities, books, supplies, and appropriate technology due to local funding policies (Edley et al., 2019; Pfeffer, 2018; Schanzenbach, 2014; Spiegelman, 2018). Children living below the poverty line often live in school districts without adequate equal learning experiences for both gifted and special needs students with learning differences and where high school dropout rates are high (Kearney & Levine, 2016; Mason-Williams et al., 2015; Yaluma & Tyner, 2020);

Whereas students living in poverty are less likely to receive vocational training and/or upon high school graduation are significantly less likely to be able to attend college or employment training programs due to insufficient income for tuition, are more likely to accept student loans and default on loans (Hillman, 2014) thus negatively impacting future opportunities to acquire higher wages and stable employment (Koricich et al., 2018; Madaus et al., 2014);

Whereas living in poverty is associated with environmental injustice, including increased exposure to physical and social environmental stressors such as environmental pollution (e.g.,lead paint, unclean air, contaminated water), inadequate infrastructure, under-resourced neighborhoods, crowding, excessive noise, substandard housing, infringement upon natural resources on Native reservation lands, inadequate water and sanitation services (Gasteyer et al., 2016; Rollings et al., 2015; Schüle & Bolte, 2015; USCCR, 2018), and diminished ability to evacuate or rebuild after destructive climate events, including hurricanes, earthquakes, and wildfires, and where the events of dislocation and destruction in totality have detrimental effects on mental and physical health in ways that perpetuate and contribute to poverty (Leichenko & Silva, 2014);

Whereas those living in poverty when compared with more advantaged populations are at substantially greater risk of exposure to community violence (Fonagy et al., 2012; Schüle & Bolte, 2015) and where women and children living in poverty are at increased risk of experiencing interpersonal violence (Ahmadabadi et al., 2017; Bunting et al., 2018; Crouch et al., 2020; Goodman et al., 2009; Nurius et al., 2020) and the associated sequelae of housing instability and homelessness, child welfare involvement (Dworsky et al., 2013), under- employment, and unemployment (APA, 2021e; Crowne et al., 2010; Parapouch et al., 2021);

Whereas lack of affordable health insurance that includes preventive services, mental health, and substance abuse coverage impedes health and well-being, with women of lower incomes being about three times more likely than more affluent women to be uninsured (20% versus 7%, respectively) and more likely to have inadequate access to care (U.S. Census Bureau, 2020a), and where the inability to afford high transportation costs affects the accessibility, adequacy, and quality of the health care services provided to individuals with disabilities (Hamilton et al., 2020; Williamson et al., 2017) with unemployment and financial dependence major barriers to utilize health care services for women with disabilities (Matin et al., 2021), and where about 5.5% of children in the U.S. lacked insurance coverage in 2018;

Whereas children born to teenage parents living in single-parent homes are at increased risk of living in poverty across the life span, and where poverty is a significant predictor of teen parenthood (Young et al., 2004) and where adequate birth control and family planning services are not covered by health insurance plans for a significant number of women or are otherwise inaccessible to those seeking them (Lu et al., 2019);

Whereas older adults often live on limited incomes, have few prospects for future earnings, and frequently face overwhelming health care costs, and where 13.9% of older women and 10.2% of all older adults lived on incomes below the poverty level, with the highest rates of poverty for those 80 years of age and older; and 22% of older African American women living alone live in poverty (Li & Dalaker, 2019; U.S. Census Bureau, 2021b);

Whereas older adults of low SES when compared with more advantaged same-aged peers have higher rates of medical and psychological disorders and reduced access to medical care, prescription medications, long-term care, and community-based care (Kaye et al., 2010; Louie & Ward, 2011) and Medicare funds mental health care services at a lower rate than medical care, further limiting access to mental health and substance abuse services for older adults living in poverty. The underfunding of Indian Health Service (IHS) has an even greater negative impact on specific Native populations. Medicare funding is approximately three times higher than IHS funding per capita (Martinchek & Carther, 2021; U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2018);

Whereas migrant families are by the nature of their work and life circumstances poorly served by health and mental health professionals (Martinez et al., 2015) and are more likely to experience economic exploitation (Brennan, 2014; Hennebry, 2017);

Whereas undocumented immigrants often face harsh and unsafe conditions and are vulnerable to legal actions that displace them and further inhibit their access to health and mental health services, compounding issues of poverty and limited English language proficiency (Chen & Vargas-Bustamante, 2011; Hacker et al., 2015);

Whereas research that excludes communities of color and other populations of marginalized identities and/or persons of low SES contributes to prevailing negative stereotypes and reinforces systemic racism and where culturally sensitive research focused on populations of low income including racial and ethnic minorities, immigrants and refugees, persons with disabilities, minimum- and low-wage workers, families receiving public assistance, older women, migrant workers, and people living without homes is limited (APA, 2021c; APA, 2021d; APA, 2021f; APA, 2019; Cancian & Danziger, 2009; Desmond, 2016; Rosen, 2014);

Whereas negative perceptions of persons of low SES, including those who receive public assistance and other benefits, arise in the context of misguided attitudes that poverty is a result of personal failings rather than the intentionally inequitable distribution of resources that benefit those with economic power and privilege; discriminatory policies and practices that perpetuate systemic racism and discriminatory acts; political systems that maintain the status quo for the benefit of persons with affluence and power while ignoring the strengths and competencies of less advantaged individuals and communities (American Enterprise Institute, 2016; APA, 2019; Gustafson, 2012; Howard et al., 2017; Katz, 2013); and where APA has resolved to act to combat racism and its pervasive impacts on minoritized populations (APA, 2021c; APA, 2021d; APA, 2021f);

Whereas safe housing, adequate food, and access to health care are recognized as human rights (APA, 2021b) and many individuals are financially vulnerable and unable to enjoy equal access to safe and affordable housing, food, equitable wages, and living conditions that promote well-being due to under-employment and instability in working hours; and where full employment for low-income workers at the legal minimum wage is often inadequate to cover basic needs for childcare, rent, food, transportation, and other necessities; and where many jobs do not provide paid sick-leave, family leave, health insurance, or other benefits (APA, 2021e; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2019);

Whereas working conditions for low-income individuals tend to be worse than those of more advantaged workers including fewer breaks, unpredictable work schedules, and poor physical working conditions (Fletcher et al., 2011); and where the APA supports the protection of human rights of all persons (APA, 2021b);

Whereas safety net programs and legislative and policy initiatives that ensure individuals and families whose incomes are below the federal poverty threshold have their basic needs met are of crucial importance in addressing the impact of poverty and remain underfunded (e.g., food stamps, free breakfast programs, universal health care, universal basic income, free preschool, and the Indian Health Service) (APA, 2021b; APA, 2021e; APA, 2021f; APA, 2019; U.S. Government Accountability Office, 2018);

Whereas psychologists as researchers, clinicians, human service providers, educators, and policy advocates (and for whom many have privileged status in terms of educational, economic status, racial/ethnic background) have a responsibility and obligation to better understand the causes of poverty, structural racism and their impact on health and mental health, to help prevent and reduce the prevalence of poverty and to effectively treat and address the needs of individuals and families with low income by building on the strengths of communities (APA, 2021a; APA, 2021b; APA, 2021c; APA, 2021d; APA, 2021f; APA, 2019; APA, 2017a); As stated in the ethic code, psychologists are ethically guided to "respect the fundamental rights, dignity, and worth of all people" and "psychologists are aware of their professional and scientific responsibilities to the community and the society in which they work and live" (APA, 2017a);

Therefore, be it resolved that the APA:

1. Will advocate for culturally sensitive and inclusive research that examines the causes and impact of poverty across the life span, including structural racism, economic disparities, and related intersectional issues including SES; classism; ageism; ableism; environmental and psychosocial stressors; physical, mental, and behavioral health problems including, but not limited to, depression and substance abuse; partner and interpersonal violence; unintended pregnancy; child maltreatment and exploitation; elder abuse, trauma, and exploitation; and will advocate for the broader dissemination of these research findings via teaching and service (APA, 2021a; APA, 2021c; APA, 2021d; APA, 2021f).
2. Will advocate for more empirically based and culturally sensitive research focused on stereotypes, stigma, and bias associated with poverty, as well as eradicating prejudicial and negative attitudes about poverty and those living at a lower SES and otherwise challenge prevailing beliefs that collectively perpetuate policies and tolerate poverty and social
3. Will advocate for more research on special populations who are lower SES (women, children, immigrants, refugees, undocumented immigrants, migrants, people of color, older people, people with disabilities and other chronic health conditions such as AIDS/HIV infection, and rural and urban populations).
4. Will advocate for exploration and research about the role higher education loans play for students at all SES levels and their intersecting identities. Will advocate for programs that foster deeper awareness for students and their families before they accept student loans, with increased focus on mindful utilization of student loan funds by the institutions that receive
5. Will advocate for research that identifies and learns from indigenous efforts by low- income people to work together to solve personal and shared problems or create organizations that advocate effectively for social justice. This includes supporting policies that specifically recruit those who have had lived experience with poverty into positions of leadership and public policy institutions, research institutions, and learning institutions.
6. Will recommend that where possible and appropriate SES be identified for published reports of social and health sciences
7. Will advocate for incorporating evaluation and assessment tools for both researchers and practitioners, and for encouraging integrative approaches such as the building of public and private community partnerships in programs addressing the issue of poverty and individuals with low-income and economical marginalization, which psychological research has identified as effective strategies for addressing community-level issues and problems.
8. Will advocate for psychological graduate and postgraduate education and training curricula that give more attention to the causes and impact of poverty, to the psychological needs of individuals and families with low incomes, and to the importance of developing cultural humility and sensitivity to diversity around issues of poverty in order to be able to help prevent and reduce the prevalence of poverty and to treat and address the needs of low-income
9. Will advocate for public policies that encourage access to high-quality early childhood education and a high-quality public school education for all children, better equipping individuals for self-sufficiency.
10. Will advocate for public policies that ensure access to secondary and postsecondary education and training that allows working families to earn a living wage to meet their family’s
11. Will advocate for public policies and programs that ensure access to sufficient and nutritious food, environments that enhance health, and affordable and safe housing and neighborhoods for all
12. Will advocate for public policies that ensure access to family-friendly jobs offering good quality health insurance, including mental health and substance abuse services, flexible work schedules, and sufficient family and medical leave.
13. Will advocate for public policies that ensure access to comprehensive family planning in private and public health insurance
14. Will advocate for public policies that ensure parity with medical coverage for mental health and substance abuse services under Medicare and Medicaid and ensure for all individuals, regardless of ability to pay, access to health care and mental health andsubstance abuse treatment that is comprehensive and culturally sensitive, that accommodates the needs of the children of parents seeking treatment, and that addresses the special needs of older adults in poverty, including prescriptions and long-term care.
15. Will advocate for public policies that encourage access for all individuals, regardless of their types and levels of disabilities, to high-quality health
16. Will advocate for public policies that ensure all working families have access to affordable, high-quality childcare, which is available year-round, for the full day, and for all work shifts, as well as before- and after-school care.
17. Will advocate for public policies that provide early intervention and prevention for vulnerable children and families that enhance parenting, education, and community life so children can develop the necessary competencies to move out of
18. Will support public policies that provide early interventions and prevention for vulnerable children and families that are strengths-based, community-based, flexible, sensitive to culture and ethnic values of the family, and have a long-lasting

*The word family should be understood to incorporate the functions of family members rather than their biological sex or sexual orientation, for example, family members responsible for childcaring and providing financial support. It should be highlighted that these functions are not mutually exclusive but include broad functions within the family system.