Analyzing and Solving Social Problems ● 135The corresponding interventive theory, compulsion, would suggest that gov-
ernment policy on family poverty be focused on clear rules and requirements
for people receiving government assistance, so that those receiving welfare
benefit payments or other assistance do so on the condition that they do
what is necessary to gain paid employment. In this scenario, it is usually the
“deserving poor” (those who are unwell or have children, for example) who
receive government assistance, while the rest, the “undeserving poor,” have to
provide for themselves. Social policies are seen as needing to be constructed
so as to get people out of the “culture of poverty” (Shannon and Young,
2004). One such example might be reduced business taxation and business
costs to stimulate job growth. Another, more negative, example would be
reducing welfare benefit payments to individuals who start a new job but
then leave without reasonable cause soon after starting.
Socialist explanatory theory explains family poverty as arising from the
exploitation and unjust treatment of certain groups in society by those with
power and money (Freire 2000). The only way to deal with family poverty
would therefore be to overthrow unjust social structures and share out the
wealth of the nation to different collectives that are based on nonexploit-
ative relations. This theory leads to the corresponding interventive theory
of class struggle, whereby the working classes combine resources and energy
and campaign against low wages, exploitation, and oppression by those with
wealth. Family poverty would be solved by governments sharing out the
nation’s wealth and introducing a collective mode of operation in society.
Alternative theory starts with the community and suggests that family
poverty arises where there is a disconnect between different power systems, so
that resources are not shared equally among many different groups, and where
there is a breakdown of supportive network structures, for example, the loss of
connection to one’s indigenous heritage or the closure of local churches. The
corresponding interventive theory is that of participation, whereby groups
are enabled to have participatory and decision-making power. Clarke (2013)
argued that poverty has its root causes in governance and leadership but that
community voice, advocacy, and grassroots community development can be
used to achieve positive change. An example of alternative theory in action
in New Zealand has been the development of community hubs to encourage
local groups to start up initiatives to reduce family poverty at the grassroots
level (Children’s Commissioner’s Expert Advisory Group 2012).
Personal-Level Explanatory and Interventive Theories
Cognitive-behavioral theory would explain family poverty at the personal
level by suggesting that people have not been able to gain skills or attitudes