US Fares Poorly in Child Welfare Survey
PARIS - America has some of the industrial world's worst rates of infant mortality, teenage pregnancy and child poverty, even though it spends more per child than better-performing countries such as Switzerland, Japan and the Netherlands, a new survey indicates.
The OECD, a Paris-based watchdog of industrialized nations, urged the United States to shift more of its public spending to its youngest children, under the age of six, to improve their health and educational performance.
The report released Tuesday, "Doing Better for Children," marks the first time the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development has reported on child well-being within its 30 member countries.
The U.S. spends an average of $140,000 per child, well over the OECD average of $125,000. But this spending is skewed heavily toward older children between 12 and 17, the OECD survey showed.
U.S. spending on children under six, a period the OECD says is key to children's future well-being, lags far behind other countries, amounting to only $20,000 per child on average compared to the OECD average of $30,000, the survey showed.
"A better balance of spending between the 'Dora the Explorer' years of early childhood and the teenage 'Facebook' years would help improve the health, education and well-being of all children in the long term," the OECD said.
As a result, it says, infant mortality in the U.S. is the fourth-worst in the OECD after Mexico, Turkey and Slovakia. American 15-year-olds rank seventh from the bottom on the OECD's measure of average educational achievement. Child poverty rates in the U.S. are nearly double the OECD average, at 21.6 percent compared to 12.4 percent.
The rate of teen births in the U.S. is three times the OECD average, with only Mexico recording a higher rate among OECD countries, the report said.
Timothy Smeeding, author of "Poor Kids in a Rich Country: America's Children in Comparative Perspective," said America's troubles stem from a flawed mix of government spending and not enough help for the working poor.
"Most of what we spend is for health care, so there is less money to spend on income support programs, to keep the incomes of the poor up. We do spend highly on education - but it's off the charts on health care," he said by telephone from the United States.
Some European countries have public preschools and day cares, for example.
"The parents in Europe aren't as poor. They have universal health care, and it's understood that you have access to health care without recrimination. ... They have children when they're ready," said Smeeding, who also heads the Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
"A lot of kids born in our country are accidents," he said. "Young women need to learn to wait to finish their education, not have a kid at 18 or 19. And it is these poor, unwed mothers having most of the babies in the U.S."
Among other OECD countries, France, Germany, Britain and Belgium spend more on their children than the U.S., while Switzerland, Ireland, Australia and Italy spend less, according to the survey.
The countries that spend the most on early childhood include Hungary, Finland and the Slovak Republic, which each devote well over a quarter of all childhood spending to children under the age of six.
Britain also spends more than the OECD average on its children, and like the U.S., devotes most of this spending to its older children between the ages of 12 and 17.
But Britain is plagued by high underage drinking and teenage pregnancy rates. British teen drunkenness, as measured by the number of 13 and 15 year olds having been drunk at least twice, topped the charts at 33 percent, far above the OECD average of 20 percent and the 12 percent rate recorded in the U.S.
Associated Press Writer Rachel Kurowski in Paris contributed to this report.

Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
10 Comments so far
Show AllGood jobs with decent pay for heads of households would do wonders for the health and welfare of America's children. To thrive and be happy, children need and deserve stability and security in their lives. Adequate nutrition and decent housing should be a given. The number of children being brought up with family income below the poverty line is appalling and shameful in the wealthiest country in the world. And yet the unemployment rate is rising while we attend to more important things.
I spent 20 years of my life tutoring elementary school children in the Florida public school system in K-3rd grade. It was common for kids to come to school shivering, dressed in the flimsiest of clothing on cold, windy days and so many came without breakfast that we finally expanded the free lunch program to include a hot breakfast. Not much learning can take place on an empty stomach and a rundown dump in a ghetto is not the best place to start life.
Childhood is such a short period of our lives and yet it leaves an indelible stamp either for good or for ill and often for success or for failure. Taking care of our children should be our first national priority. The United States can afford to spend billions on national defense, maintain over 700 military bases throughout the world, spend enormous sums of money to pursue an immoral and barbaric war in areas of the world where we have no right to be, but we cannot afford to do right by the poorest and most vulnerable of our own people.
Great comment and you have my deepest respect.
More testing will not cure the problems that you describe.
Joe
Where are all the 'Right to Life' folks AFTER children are born? Just wondering.
"Right to Life" cares about the unborn child and some of them would murder to protect it. But hey dude, after the child is born the "Religious Right" passes the kid off the the Wingnut base and they say the kid is just another leach on society.
You just can't win with these people.
It seems obvious that the "For profit" system built into US Government Policies wherein more and more services "Privatized" sucks a lot of the funding from the poor into the hands of the already rich.
And look how our wonderful militarized democracy is treating the helpless little kids in Iraq or in Afghanistan or in Pakistan or in Gaza. The US military doesn't have a clue as to the number of young children killed, wounded, maimed, or the number aborted by our military machine. And I'm sure it cost more than $140,000.
$140,000 PER CHILD! WHERE THE HECK IS THAT MONEY GOING! I bet, if it is tracked, it winds up mostly in the pockets of private corporations or ridiculous red tape BS. They may spend that money PER child, but it is not being spend ON that child.
Yes, my guess is it's spent not so much on as against each child, going into programs that even though some might be intended to sound helpful, are actually more punitive in nature, or designed to use the child simply as a funnel to get the money to corporations. Until there's a ChildUnionPac with billions of dollars to pseudo-legally bribe members of Congress, that's going to be tough to change. It requires all our participation, every day. Maybe we should take a tip from the conservatives who want to privatize social security and just give each family the money to be spent on the politician, food source or alternative energy of their choice.
And if families want to go all Jonathan Swifty on their political asses and do all 3 at once, that would be OK too.
Embrace alternative energy! Save the climate! Biochar a Republican today!
from the article:
"Most of what we [the US] spend is for health care, so there is less money to spend on income support programs, to keep the incomes of the poor up."
the $140k goes to the health insurers...
The USA is a third world country disguised as a superpower...like a back alley bum in an Armani suit...looks good from a distance but stinks as you get closer.
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats