Statement from IWPR Staff on the Murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery

Statement from IWPR Staff on the Murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery

We mourn and condemn the murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery, and the many others who have lost their lives to police violence and racial hatred. We send our heartfelt condolences to their families and the communities that have been impacted by the loss of their loved ones, and commit to working alongside them until there is justice.

The terror, racism, and differential treatment visited upon Blacks in the U.S. on a near daily basis at the hands of multiple systems—law enforcement, education, healthcare, and criminal legal system—are woven into the fabric of American society and culture. We can no longer turn away from the violence, and must commit to doing our part to create a more just and equitable country. Now is the time.

IWPR stands in solidarity with Black women and men, their families, and communities as well as with the protestors who have taken to the streets to demand reform, accountability, equal protection under the law, and above all justice.

We condemn the use of violence and inflammatory rhetoric against protestors. We condemn white supremacy, police brutality, the militarization of the police, and the structural racism embedded in the criminal justice, educational, and heath care systems that have led to instability in Black, Indigenous, and other communities of color.

Artwork by shirien.creates

As an organization, IWPR is responsible for producing much of the research and analysis focused on understanding the economic and lived realities of women and families. As such, we commit to the following:

1. Using intersectional and anti-racist frameworks and approaches in our research to not only understand outcomes, but the historic institutional and structural context for those outcomes as well. Beyond reporting data on Black women and their families and highlighting areas of need, we are committed to identifying connections between present-day outcomes and the legacy of slavery and white supremacy, institutional and structural violence, and the intersectionality of racism and misogyny, or misogynoir.

2. Leading with recommendations grounded in the lived realities and experiences of Black women, their families and other historically disenfranchised communities and that builds a more equitable society. We will work to change economic policies that exacerbate economic inequalities, deepen poverty, compromise educational attainment, increase health disparities, impede economic mobility, and criminalize Black people and their communities.

3. Creating a platform for the voices of Black women who are often silenced, in order to continue the dialogue around important themes highlighted by the protests such as racism, anti-blackness, and police brutality. We will actively partner with other Black leaders, experts, and organizations in our research to ensure we center the voices of Black women and their families.

4. Reflecting internally on our organizational practices, policies and culture to ensure that we do not unwittingly replicate the racialized hierarchies and power systems, injustices and inequities we seek to change. We affirm our commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion in recruitment, hiring, retention, and promotion as a means to provide meaningful professional growth opportunities for Black women, and women of color.

Our hearts are comforted and we are encouraged by the global outpouring of support for those on the frontlines fighting for racial and social justice, and a better world for all of us. To be certain, all oppression and discrimination are linked—the systems and structures that maintain racial privilege in society are the same systems and structures used to maintain gender, class, heterosexual and other kinds of privilege. We must all do our part to dismantle these systems and to create a more just and equitable world. ​

In Solidarity,

Nicole, Cyndi, Ryan, Ariane, Jeff, Valerie, Chandra, Federiga, Lindsey, Elyse, Susana, Erika, Lea, Erin, Anna, LaVonda, Tessa, Adiam, and Zohal

Let’s Treat Women Workers like Millennials and Give them what they Want: Lifting Up the Need for Supports and Childcare for Women in the Workforce During the Pandemic and After

Let’s Treat Women Workers like Millennials and Give them what they Want: Lifting Up the Need for Supports and Childcare for Women in the Workforce During the Pandemic and After

Employers have created millennial-friendly offices that take into account that workers need and value in order to be successful. Why haven’t we done the same for women?

By C. Nicole Mason

Over the past decade, there have been hundreds of articles written about how to accommodate  millennials in the workplace. Millennials, now the largest segment in the workplace, value work-life balance, flexible work schedules, and more relaxed work attire. The 1960s work culture of late hours, stale suits, and jobs where employees feel undervalued are non-negotiables for this cohort of workers. Employers have responded, creating millennial-friendly offices that take into account what these workers need and value in order to be successful in the jobs. The question is why haven’t we done the same for women?

 At the start of the year, women made up more than 50 percent of the workforce and a majority or primary or co-breadwinners, earning at least 40 percent of all household earnings. The number of the women in the workforce has fallen dramatically since start of the Pandemic. Women now comprise 49.2 percent of all workers, still close to half of all U.S. workers.  Despite the number of women in the workforce, employer practices and policies haven’t shifted to accommodate their needs or provided work supports that would make them successful in their jobs and help them advance in their careers. For the most part, employers still use a “Mad Men” workplace model centered around a male breadwinner, who can work endless hours and has a stay-at-home wife. This model is outdated and hasn’t been a reality for decades.


In 2019, in 49 percent of married-couple families both the husband and wife were employed. The rate of married-couple families where only the husband was employed is just 18.5 percent. In families with children, 91.3 percent of parents work outside of the home and one in two of more than 30 million families in the U.S. with children under the age of 18 have a breadwinner mother.

Long gone are the days where women’s income accounted for a minor share of household income and workforce participation was optional. This was never the case for Black and Latino women, whose income has consistently made a considerable portion of their household incomes.

COVID-19 and its impact has exposed the fragility of the U.S. economy and the healthcare system, and has shed light on the dual role women workers hold: Primary wage earner and primary care giver. With schools out, childcare centers closed, and stay-home-orders in effect across the country, the caretaking demands placed upon mothers have increased significantly, forcing many working mothers into a near impossible position: take care of their children or risk losing their job.

Smiling mom holding kid daughter curious about cooking in kitche

In a recent Op-Ed in the Washington Post, Melinda Gates rightfully points this out. She says, “It’s always been women who shoulder the burden of care. Even when most women work full-time outside the home, they still spend two hours more each day on household tasks and caregiving.”

Gates is not alone. Sheryl Sandberg, LeanIn co-Founder, is also sounding the alarm.  Women, she says, were already working a “double shift. The pandemic is creating a “double double shift. “It’s pushing women to the breaking point.”

Gates and Sandberg join a cacophony of women’s advocates and organizations, such as the National Partnership for Women and Families, the National Women’s Law Center, and the Institute for Women’s Policy Research that have long been calling for better work and family policies that would ensure that women not only have access to quality jobs, but have the necessary supports to ensure that they are able to keep them.

Now is the time to create an economy and workplaces that work for more than half of the American workforce: women. It’s long overdue. National paid sick and family leave, childcare supports and employer-sponsor or subsidized facilities, and flexible work schedules would go a long-way towards this effort. If we can do it for millennials, we can do it for women too.

Get to Know the Paycheck Fairness Act

Get to Know the Paycheck Fairness Act

To close the pay gap, we need good public policies at the state, local and federal levels. Encouraging women to negotiate a higher salary doesn’t do much if there are institutional and structural barriers that prevent her from earning her value in the labor market. These barriers include entrenched and institutionalized gender norms and expectations, pay secrecy, policies that allow employers to request salary history, and placing undue burdens on women to prove pay discrimination and limiting the remedies available to them.

The Paycheck Fairness Act Would:

  • Prohibit employers from using salary history which ensures that salaries are not based on prior pay disparities that can follow workers from job to job.
  • Protect against retaliation for discussing pay with colleagues, including stopping employers from being able to fire employees for sharing information. Greater transparency about salary is key to helping identify disparities.
  • Ensure equal pay for equal work, requiring employers to prove that any pay disparities that exist between men and women are a business necessity and job-related.
  • Equalize discrimination claims based on gender, race, and ethnicity, so plaintiffs who file claims under the Equal Pay Act have the same robust remedies as those who make claims under other laws.
  • Support employers and employees to achieve fair pay practices, including providing technical assistance to employers, requiring wage data collection, and offering salary negotiation training programs to give women the tools to advocate for higher wages.

The 2019 Paycheck Fairness Act (PFA) is sponsored by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA). Passing the Act would help accelerate the closing of the pay gap by addressing loopholes in the Equal Pay Act of 1963, ensuring that women and men are paid equally for equal work.

For more information, visit AAUW.

Get Your Money: How to Negotiate Your Salary

Get Your Money: How to Negotiate Your Salary

How to Negotiate Your Salary

Do Your Research. Talk to people in your field and go online to search up the going salary for your position.

Toot your own Horn. Come to the discussion prepared to talk about your accomplishments, contributions to the company or the unique skills and talents you bring to the table. Create a brag sheet—a one-page summary of your recent wins.

Play it Smart. In salary negotiations, have a number in mind, but allow the employer make the first offer. Then state your expectation and take it from there.

Start at the Top. If there’s a salary band, start at the top. No need to low ball yourself. It allows wiggle room for negotiation.

Remember salary is only a part of the package. You can negotiate more than salary. Benefits like vacation, retirement contribution, transportation costs, tuition assistance, and schedule flexibility can also be negotiated.

Get out of your head. Negotiating a salary or raise can be anxiety producing. Focus on the reasons why you deserve the raise or desired salary (hint: you’re awesome) and don’t apologize for knowing your worth.

Be patient. Take time to think about an offer and be willing to make a counteroffer if necessary.

Honor your worth. Focus on the big picture and gauge for yourself what is important, when to drop an issue, and how to stay firm but respectful with what you want. If the offer is too low and you won’t be happy, it’s OK to walk away.

To learn more about salary negotiation, sign up for AAUW’s free online course here:

Out in the Open: Stopping Work Retaliation Against Salary Sharing

Out in the Open: Stopping Work Retaliation Against Salary Sharing

You understand the importance of salary transparency. You know that you can better advocate for yourself when you know what your coworkers are earning. But what do you do if your employer has policies discouraging or preventing you from sharing salary information? And worse, what do you do if your employer threatens or punishes you for talking about your salary?

Retaliation is a form of employment discrimination or harassment. It can take many forms including but not limited to discipline, demotion, firing, salary reduction, or job or shift reassignment. Salary sharing is a protected activity, meaning it is a federal labor right. But many employers, especially in the private sector, continue to retaliate against employees for discussing salary because the punishment for doing so is insignificant; employers may be forced to provide backpay or rehire wrongfully terminated employees.

The Paycheck Fairness Act would protect workers by strengthening punishments for employers who commit equal pay violations. Support the Paycheck Fairness Act and protect your right to share salary information for collective bargaining.

Spilling the Tea: Why Salary Transparency is Necessary for Pay Equity

Spilling the Tea: Why Salary Transparency is Necessary for Pay Equity

Knowledge is power—especially when it comes to your paycheck. When employers are open about their payscales and criteria for evaluating raises and promotions, employees can make informed decisions about whether they are being paid fairly and whether it is appropriate to negotiate for a higher salary or promotion. This is important for all women, who earn less than men in all but five occupations, but especially important for women of color, for whom the gender wage gap is magnified by a racial and ethnic earnings gap. Employers who promote pay secrecy perpetuate the gender wage gap, as a result of which women earn $0.82 per $1 that their male counterparts earn.


Though federal law affirms that workers have a right to discuss their salaries with one another, many employers, particularly in the private sector, have policies that discourage or prohibit sharing salary information. The Paycheck Fairness Act would strengthen protections for workers who openly discuss their salaries, reveal workplace bias and disparity in pay, and put the impetus on employers to prove that any pay discrepancies are a business necessity. By passing the Paycheck Fairness Act, workers can hold employers accountable and make sure they are earning what they deserve.

The Time for Paid Leave for All is Now

The Time for Paid Leave for All is Now

By C. Nicole Mason and Jeffrey Hayes

Twenty-seven years ago, the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) became law, providing crucial job protection to workers when they welcome a new child or take necessary time off to care for a family member. The landmark legislation ensures that workers do not have to choose between their jobs and families when faced with life changes or serious health challenges.

What we know is that companies thrive, families benefit, and employees feel secure knowing they can rely on FMLA. For more than two decades, FMLA has helped millions of workers to balance work and family needs.

Unfortunately, FMLA only covers only about 60 percent of the workforce, leaving many of the most vulnerable workers without coverage or support to take time off to care for their families or meet unforeseen serious health needs.

Although a critical building block for family economic security, leave provided under the FMLA is unpaid. For low-wage workers, and others who live paycheck to paycheck taking unpaid leave can have a devastating impact on their overall economic well-being.

As we reflect on how FMLA might be strengthened and what kinds of public policies at the local, state and federal levels will be necessary to win economic equity for families in the coming years, several states are leading the way on paid family and medical leave. They include: California, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, and Washington. These programs provide partial wage replacement to covered workers for all the FMLA reasons.

In Washington, DC the Paid Family Leave Act will be fully operational on July 1, 2020, and three more states—Massachusetts, Connecticut, and Oregon–are currently implementing laws.

In the states where there is paid family medical leave is the law—families are healthier, and workers are able to take care of their loved ones with less fear of losing their job or retaliation.

There’s no doubt–the time is now for a national, comprehensive paid leave policy that covers family and medical events for all workers, in all sectors.

A worker starting their career in 1993 when FMLA became law is now approaching retirement. We cannot let another generation of workers balance work and caring for loved ones without updating our policies for the 21st century.

Quantifying the Impact of the Global Gag Rule: What 2020 Candidates Should Know

By Anna Bernstein

Abortion has not been a top issue raised in Democratic debates so far, despite the growing number of threats to access across the country. But with strong support of abortion rights among the long list of candidates, the 2020 election provides an opportunity to eliminate federal funding restrictions on abortion. Notably, these restrictions go beyond funding within the United States, with the Global Gag Rule playing a key role in U.S. aid abroad.

U.S. taxpayer dollars have been prohibited from being used for abortion care since 1973, through the Helms Amendment, which states that no foreign assistance can be used to pay for abortion services as a means of family planning.

The Global Gag Rule takes this type of restriction even further. Formally called the Mexico City policy, the rule places strict limits on U.S. global health aid by preventing U.S. aid-funded organizations from providing information or services about abortion. It requires foreign non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to agree that they will not “perform or actively promote abortion as a method of family planning” with any funding—regardless of whether the United States is the source of those funds—as a condition for receiving U.S. family planning assistance. The rule was first announced by the Reagan Administration and has subsequently been revoked and reinstated by Democratic and Republican presidents, respectively.

But the Trump Administration went even further in enacting the policy. The Global Gag Rule was expanded by President Trump in 2017 to include most other forms of U.S. global health assistance, rather than just family planning funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) and the Department of State. This extends the rule to affect a funding pool 15 times larger than that of the George W. Bush-era policy.

Work is being done to document the effects of this iteration of the Global Gag Rule. The policy has led to diminished reproductive health and humanitarian aid services, disruption to non-U.S. donors, reduced advocacy work, and high costs for organizations attempting to comply with the policy. Qualitative research has demonstrated exacerbated barriers to health care, funding gaps, and overall confusion and misunderstanding among the global health community.

In addition to this evidence, a few studies have examined past implementations of the Global Gag Rule to measure the effects on fertility and other outcomes. These studies provide estimates of the impact of the policy on a range of countries in sub-Saharan Africa, allowing researchers to quantify what impact this rule has had in the past—and providing insight to what may be occurring with the latest iteration of the policy.

Bendavid et al. (2011) evaluated whether the gag rule was associated with changes in the inferred abortion rate in 20 African countries. The authors compared the periods of 1994 to 2000 and 2001 to 2008, around the 2001 reinstatement of the rule by George W. Bush. Countries that received higher assistance for family planning and reproductive health when the policy was not in place were classified as high-exposure countries.

The analysis found that the inferred abortion rate significantly increased for women in those countries once the Global Gag Rule was implemented: after adjusting for a number of related factors, women in highly-exposed countries were over two and a half times as likely to have an abortion. So even though this policy is put into place by politicians opposing abortion, the abortion rate goes up while it is in effect. This is likely due to reduced access to contraceptive services caused by the rule’s limits on U.S. family planning aid.

Jones (2011) took this type of evaluation further by examining actual abortion data within one country—Ghana—and using actual woman-level data rather than estimations. Unlike Bendavid et al., Jones analyzes the effects over three changes in the policy’s implementation rather than just 2001.

The findings are once again counterintuitive to the stated goal of the Global Gag Rule: no demographic group reduced use of abortion. Instead, women in rural areas actually increased their abortion use when the policy was in effect.

Jones is also able to quantify why this increase in abortion use occurred. She finds that the lack of contraceptives available during the years of the policy caused a 12 percent increase in pregnancies to rural women.

More recent research by Brooks et al. provides even more evidence that the Global Gag Rule increases abortion prevalence in sub-Saharan Africa. Again, a reduction in contraceptive use is found, paired with an increase in abortion rates in countries with high levels of exposure to the policy.

These rigorous evaluations provide evidence that the Global Gag Rule not only reduces access to contraceptive services—it actually increases use of abortion. Forty-five percent of abortions are unsafe, with the proportion even higher in countries with more restrictive abortion laws. By cutting off access to safe abortion services, while also reducing access to contraception, it may be pushing even more women and girls to seek unsafe abortion.

This research illuminates some of the important, and often overlooked, effects of U.S. policies. Not only will the 2020 election determine access to reproductive health services in the United States, but it also has the potential to impact the health of women and girls around the world.

Read recent research on the economic effects of access to abortion and contraception from IWPR’s Center on the Economics of Reproductive Health.

Reproductive Health and Community College Students: Building Momentum toward Holistic Approaches to Student Success

Reproductive Health and Community College Students: Building Momentum toward Holistic Approaches to Student Success

by Tessa Holtzman, Anna Bernstein, and Lindsey Reichlin Cruse

On July 8-9, 2019 in Washington, DC, the Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) hosted a convening on expanding reproductive health access for community college students. The convening brought together reproductive health and higher education experts, program leaders, community college representatives, and students to share their strategies and consider new opportunities to improve reproductive health access for the community college population. With over 40 people in attendance, the convening offered a powerful opportunity to discuss the need for greater attention to students’ reproductive health, the role that improved access to family planning information and care could play in students’ outcomes, and how colleges and communities around the country are working to close existing access gaps. This post describes highlights of the convening and foundational principles that emerged from the discussion that can guide future efforts to expand access to reproductive health for community college students.

The Case for Reproductive Health Access for Community College Students

In the absence of supportive services pregnancy and parenthood can diminish a college student’s ability to attend college and succeed once enrolled. Providing students with the resources, including access to affordable contraceptive options and information they need to decide if and when they want to start a family, is key to supporting their postsecondary success. Yet, just half of community colleges have health centers, and, according to IWPR’s research (here and here), many do not provide supports to help students meet their reproductive and sexual health needs.

Recent efforts to improve community college outcomes have increasingly focused on taking a holistic approach to student success. Holistic or wraparound supports can take many forms, from individualized coaching that refers students to on- or off-campus services, such as campus food pantries, emergency aid programs, or child care. As holistic approaches to improving student outcomes are increasingly seen as best practice, ensuring that access to reproductive health services is included in the suite of supports provided to students, either directly or indirectly, is essential.

As holistic approaches to improving student outcomes are increasingly seen as best practice, ensuring that access to reproductive health services is included in the suite of supports provided to students, either directly or indirectly, is essential.

One study estimates that unplanned pregnancy accounts for 10 percent of dropouts among female community college students and 7 percent of dropouts among community college students overall.

College-aged young adults are likely to be sexually active and many do not use birth control or other forms of contraception regularly, or do not have access to the form of contraception they prefer. Community college students want to prevent pregnancy, but often hold misconceptions about birth control and are at higher risk for unintended pregnancy than college students overall. Unmet need for contraception is high among women in community college, with cost and insurance often getting in the way of their ability to use their preferred contraceptive methods. The legacy of reproductive coercion can also effect the ability of community college students of color to access their preferred method of contraceptive care.


When students have access to family planning support, however, success is more likely. For example, legal access to contraception and abortion has been historically shown to improve a range of economic outcomes for women, including educational attainment. A 2007 study estimated that by 2000, more than 250,000 women over the age 30 were able to obtain bachelor’s degrees as a result of access to contraception. Ensuring students can access a range of family planning services, including contraception and abortion, and that campuses are family friendly for students who have children, is key to supporting community college students’ health needs and educational aspirations.

Increasing Access to Reproductive Care on Community College Campuses

To move the needle for community college students’ access to reproductive health supports, campuses need a better understanding of the link between reproductive health and student outcomes, along with more information and examples of approaches that help students with their reproductive needs. The convening included programs that are working to increase reproductive health access for college students, including:

  • BAE-B-SAFE, a partnership between Healthy Futures of Texas and Alamo Community Colleges in San Antonio, Texas,
  • The Women’s Fund of Omaha’s Adolescent Health Project, which serves students at Metropolitan Community College in Omaha, Nebraska, and
  • G.I.R.L. (Gathering Information Related to Ladies), a student advocacy group led by African American women from Jackson State University.

A number of community colleges were also represented at the event, including Austin Community College, Miami Dade College, and Pasadena City College, in addition to national groups, such as Power to Decide, National Women’s Law Center, and Young Invincibles.

Several principles emerged from discussions among convening participants and IWPR’s research to guide efforts to integrate reproductive health into colleges’ holistic approaches to student success:

  • Building college & community partnerships. Knowing that many community colleges do not have the capacity to provide direct reproductive health services to students, colleges should build partnerships with community reproductive health providers to facilitate students’ access to care that can meet their reproductive health needs. Referrals to outside services and information on pregnancy and family planning would play an important role in allowing students to plan when, and whether, they want to become pregnant while in college.
  • Providing access to inclusive, safe, and culturally-competent care. As colleges think about how to connect students with reproductive care, they should ensure that the care offered is centered on the needs and preferences of students, and that it is confidential, consistent, accessible, and inclusive of all students, including current parents, students who want to become parents, students who do not want to become parents, and LGBTQ+ students. Services must also be culturally conscious, taking into account disparities in access to reproductive health supports, existing biases in the provision of sexual and reproductive health care, and the impact that the legacy of reproductive coercion may have on the perceptions and experiences of students of color.
  • Making the case for new investments. Messaging about the importance of increasing students’ access to reproductive health services must resonate with students, faculty, staff, and college leadership. For example, explaining the link between access to reproductive health services and improved student outcomes will help make the case to college administrators that investing in greater support for students’ reproductive health needs is worthwhile. More research is needed on students’ needs and the availability of services on community college campuses to strengthen this case and to clarify how colleges can make a measurable difference.
  • Peer-to-peer learning & information sharing. Connecting community college leaders with others who are already working to increase student access to reproductive health care on college campuses can demonstrate the potential for success. Greater communication of current practices in the field can also exemplify the benefits of this work and provide a roadmap for institutions interested in learning more.
  • Building awareness & support. Greater attention to the importance of students’ reproductive lives for college success, and advocacy to increase access to services, is essential to moving the needle forward. Cultivating high-level champions would help raise awareness and build momentum toward integrating reproductive health into holistic support models. The philanthropic community should dedicate their convening power and funding to share best practices and build capacity in the field. Partnerships between student groups on four-year and community college campuses, reproductive health organizing networks, community and reproductive justice activists, and other stakeholders would also help broaden the call for action.

As colleges and higher education experts increasingly understand the role of students’ non-academic lives in their success in higher education, students’ reproductive desires and access to care must be brought into the conversation. By doing more to address the reproductive health needs of community college students, colleges can achieve better and more equitable educational outcomes and contribute to the economic success of students and families.

By doing more to address the reproductive health needs of community college students, colleges can achieve better and more equitable educational outcomes and contribute to the economic success of students and families.

July’s convening was funded by the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, as a part of a project designed to raise awareness of the need for reproductive health access as an integral component of community college student success, and strategies that can promote progress. Through this initiative, IWPR is conducting research to: understand efforts to connect community college students with reproductive health care and resources around the country; =identify gaps in access and opportunities to meet existing need; and share promising strategies for expanding community college students’ access to reproductive health information and care. This work is intended to inform and inspire higher education leaders, philanthropists, policymakers, and others to improve access to reproductive health services in community college settings and encourage integration of reproductive health and economic and community development initiatives more broadly. Learn more about this work on

Voices of Student Parents: “Time is the biggest issue for sure.”

More than one in five college students are parents, but student parents are often under-recognized on college campuses. This blog post is the third in a series highlighting the experiences of student parents, including the challenges they face, and the resources and supports that help them succeed. Find other IWPR resources on student parents at the Student Parent Success Initiative page on


By Felicia

Attends a four-year, private college in Kentucky

Pursuing an undergraduate degree in Child Development

Parent of a nine-year-old

Why I enrolled in school

I wanted to enroll in school because I have always loved school, was always encouraged to do well in school, and I wanted to have a good future. College is a way to have a brighter future for my family. I also want to set a good example for my child by going to college. I expect my child to go to college and complete schooling no matter what. Getting through college despite all the challenges is being a good role model for my child.

College is a way to have a brighter future for my family.


What it’s like being a single parent

It has been a struggle, but I wouldn’t change it for the world. Do I want to improve things for myself and my peers? Absolutely. However, I have built strong bonds with other student parents at my school by going through this struggle side-by-side with them. It is almost like a club! One situation that keeps presenting a challenge to us is finding child care while our children are sick. How do we go to school and/or work when our child can’t go to school or care programs during times of illness? This is especially a problem for those with jobs with strict requirements or classes with strict attendance policies. Also, if you are a single parent, there is no other parent to stay home with the child. It isn’t even an option. What do you do?

It has been a struggle, but I wouldn’t change it for the world.

You calculate how bad missing class will mess up your grade and either take the hit to your grade, or email your professor and pray they let you bring your child to class with you. We are trying to get something done on campus about adding a provision in the attendance policy for student parents with sick children, but nothing has come of this yet.

The costs and benefits of going to school for me and my family

I will be honest: the time away from my child hurts most. I would love to be a stay-at-home mom, but that is not an option for me. Right now, I am a student-mom, a working-outside-the-home-mom, a single-mom, a stressed-out-beyond-belief-mom who doesn’t feel like anything she is doing is working.

Time is the biggest issue for sure.

I am always having to let something slide to meet the demand of something else. Homework takes away quality time with my child, housework takes away time from my homework, class time takes away time from my housework, etc. Something is always slipping. Luckily, I have a great scholarship, so money has mostly been secure for me. There have been financial struggles, but they are probably not the same as others have suffered. Time is the biggest issue for sure. I think school is worthwhile because it only lasts a few years and then I will have the degree forever. It is just hard to do the daily grind.


Supports that would be helpful to college success

I would not be able to attend school without child care. It absolutely would not happen. I am now receiving state assistance for child care, so that is wonderful. I think having things be as efficient, convenient, and streamlined as possible makes things doable for student parents. Living close to your school helps, living close to your child’s school helps, having child care as close to campus as possible helps, etc. I would like for the schools to be more accommodating to student parents in things like absences, graduation requirements, etc. It is not always possible for us to do the things other students do.

I would not be able to attend school without child care.

Hopes for after graduation

I want to take a short break and then go on to a graduate school program for Marriage and Family Therapy. I want to become a Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist to help people facing challenges like the ones I have faced in my life.


One thing that others might be surprised to know

Homework can’t start until after the kids are in bed! We pull all-nighters for totally different reasons! We can never procrastinate because there’s too much to do.

We can never procrastinate because there’s too much to do.


Policy change that could better support student parents’ success

I think all college campuses should have child care for student parents accepted into their colleges for kids ages 0-12. I think having certain work requirements to access state assistance is prohibitive to student parents because they are already in school. For example, my state recently changed the rules for child care assistance to say that full-time students do not have to work 20 hours a week to get assistance. This made all the difference for me.

We make our society healthier, happier, safer, and more functional when we educate mothers.


The benefits of investing in student parents

More college students being able to successfully complete their degree programs improves communities by stimulating the economy. When I graduate and become qualified for jobs that pay more, I will no longer need to receive public assistance. I will be paying more taxes that go towards support programs that help others. Also, investing in student parents helps alleviate child poverty, and childhood poverty comes with all sorts of risk factors for other problems later on. We make our society healthier, happier, safer, and more functional when we educate mothers. In addition, children see the benefit of pursuing a college education. Learning becomes a family value that is passed along to the child. The individual child and society gain benefits further down the road.

Learning becomes a family value that is passed along to the child.