A Solomonic choice

In the story of Solomon, a mother is told she has an impossible choice: to give up her child or see him split in half. Our Children’s HealthWatch pediatricians see shades of this choice in the faces of the low-income families they treat each day.

Do they miss another month’s rent payment or buy enough food to get through the month?

Do they put their child to bed hungry again or risk having the power shut off because they spent that money on healthy food?

Do they stay home with a sick child and risk losing their job or do they leave the child alone?

These types of choices are becoming more and more common in the current economy, as people around the country face reduced wages, job loss and home foreclosure.

Congress, right now, is finding itself in a similar bind.  As the federal deficit continues to rise, they are attempting to pay for any new spending by cutting other programs.  But when they propose cutting funding for a program that helps low-income families in order to pay for other programs that help low-income families, our children’s health and learning fall victim to this grim calculus.

Congress is close to passing a bill that will protect teacher’s jobs and provide states with more Medicaid funding -- very important priorities. But in order to pay for this bill, they would take funding away from the SNAP/ Food Stamp program.  In May of this year, SNAP participation set a new record: 40.8 million people took part, an increase of almost 400,000 individuals from April 2010, the prior record level.  Child hunger has hit an all-time high and nearly half of all of SNAP participants are children.  It is critical that Congress ensure there is enough funding available to continue to meet the ongoing need.

In April 2009, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) boosted SNAP benefit levels. Research shows that the current proposal to return to the pre-ARRA benefit levels would increase financial stress for low-income families and harm their children’s health. A 2008 study by Children’s HealthWatch, a leading pediatric research organization, found that even the maximum SNAP benefit was inadequate to provide a minimally healthy diet throughout the month. Low-income families would need almost $2,000 in additional funds to close the yearly gap between benefits and the actual cost of the Thrifty Food Plan, the government’s standard for a nutritious diet at minimal cost.

Children’s HealthWatch research demonstrates that SNAP protects children’s health.  Young children whose families receive SNAP benefits are more likely to have consistent access to nutritious food and to be in good health than children whose families do not receive SNAP.  The first three years of life are the period of most rapid brain and body growth. Any type of nutritional deprivation during this time negatively affects a child’s health, resulting in poor health, frequent hospitalizations, iron-deficiency anemia and increased risk for developmental delays.  In turn, this drives up health care and education costs and potentially impacts the future generation’s ability to fully contribute in the workforce.

Our country is not in a position where we can choose between programs that protect families during times of need.  In a $3.8 trillion federal budget, it is impossible to believe that there are no other options for protecting teacher’s jobs and Medicaid coverage than by taking food out of the mouths of babies and their families. The ARRA SNAP boosts were warranted when passed and continue to be essential to ensuring children’s health now and in the future.

The mother in the story of Solomon decided in the end to give up her child, and was thus rewarded for her selflessness and given back her child. Congress would do well to follow this wisdom by choosing not to harm one program for America’s families to benefit another.

Mariana Chilton, Ph.D, MPH and Patrick Casey, M.D. are co-principal investigators at Children's Healthwatch, a leading pediatric research organization.