One Family has two main themes of emphasis. Firstly, are the struggles of a black welfare family with a single mother, and the racial and economic disparity they face. There is a particular emphasis toward the malfunctions of government and social programs which attempt to elevate that economic disparity, but because of larger systemic problems regarding race and the identity of those on welfare, the struggle to leave the welfare cycle seems hopeless and with that finding social serenity beyond the impoverished and dangerous community and house which Mrs. Black and her family live. Secondly, despite the fact that Mrs. Black and her family are on welfare and economically disadvantaged, they are no different than you, I, or Nancy Sirkis. It is the systems and circumstances that found Mrs. Black, and then ultimately her family in their situation of poverty and the struggle which goes with that. But they are a family who wish for hope, happiness, and prosperity nonetheless, and do the best they can to find happiness and love in their destitution. Though a sense of economic hopelessness is present in Mrs. Black's attitude, hope for happiness and love in her family and children is still very present, and Sirkis makes clear that they should not be pushed aside and othered because of their economic status.
“For Mrs. Black and myself, the turning point came in the course of a conversation when we discovered that we were the same age. I had assumed she was older; she had assumed I was younger. At that moment the gulf between our worlds was revealed at its widest: she with fourteen children and little hope for the future; I with one child, a husband, and attainable dreams. We sat in silence facing each other - two people, one white, one black; one richer, one poorer - two women” (Sirkis 15).
“MICHELLE-nine years old…
I wish for a bike. I wanna take it outside and ride it…
I love God an my mother an my father an my little brother.
I love my whole family” (Sirkis 103).
“Care or don’t, you still the same. You still got no money. You still got no food. So what’s the difference if you care or don’t care? That don't put money in your pocket or food in your mouth” (Sirkis 69).
One Family can be related to Du Bois’ “Darkwater, ‘The Damnation of Women.’” Du Bois, through poetic prose, discusses the consciousness of black women and mothers. The identity of the black mother, Du Bois categorizes, is split not only in its intersection of woman and black american, but in being a mother self-identity is lost. Mrs. Frances Black very much experiences an exemplification of this theorizing. Put under the stress of being a victim of the welfare system and unable to achieve economic stability, Mrs. Black is faced with an othering identity. But she is also the mother of fourteen children, ten of which live with her, and she must take care of. Not only might her identity fracture under the stress of her circumstances, but the task of taking care of all her children and making her house a home divides her further.
One Family follows Mrs. Black, a single black welfare mother in New York in the late 60’s and her ten children. One Family is a book of photographs and text, the photographs, also taken by Nancy Sirkis, feature - as does the text- the Black family in their home in various and common circumstances. From praying over a meal, to jumping on an empty mattress. The conditions of their rather destitute apartment and living space of “four roach- and mice- infested rooms” (16) are also a prominent theme. One Family is written by intermingling interviews with Mrs. Black and her children about various issues they face in the welfare system and in their impoverished community, along with their hopes for the future and how they currently live their lives. Mrs. Black talks candidly in her interviews of the challenges, roadblocks, and inabilities of the welfare system.
Nancy Sirkis is a photographer, journalist, and social activist from the upper west side of New York. She documents urban environments and the often underrepresented.
The problem of welfare and the separation of the family unit amongst black Americans is still very prominent and impacting black families today. The child welfare system actively splits up black families at a disproportionately high rate. Child welfare programs even engage with black families at a higher rate and separate them at similarly high rates. The issue persists as a result of misconceptions which come to fruition about the monolithic black, and stereotypes regarding black families. The relationship between welfare workers and black families, similar to Mrs. Blacks experience in One Family, has a history of being tumultuous as it still is now. The introduction of welfare reform in the Clinton era further cut welfare spending, so the problem of family separation is compounded for black families in the light of an inability to get welfare or not enough welfare.
To understand the historical context of One Family, a civic and political history leading up to 1970 is essential to understand the unstable nature of the social and political climate at that time. The Civil Rights act had been legislated in 1964. However, Richard Nixon and the republican party had taken back office by 1968 and tensions around civil rights and Vietnam were strenuous and protests were common. For instance the SFSU student strike of 1968 which consisted of a five month protest ultimately leading to the first ethnic studies program in America (PBS), and the Watts race riots in LA in 1965 which did millions of dollars of damage to the city. In this unstable socio-political climate, welfare was a prominent issue affecting many black Americans in particular. Medicaid and Medicare were also introduced in 1965 and from there the welfare system has a tumultuous history. A specific era of welfare reform began in 1968 only a year after Nancy Sirkis began photographing and interviewing Mrs. Black, and two years before the publication of One Family. This era of reform amounted to the Family Assistance plan which was enacted in 1969. The Family Assistance Plan amounted to more money per family, but more families were under its umbrella, however the Family Assistance plan implemented a floor of income in order to be eligible for the program. This meant people working could still get welfare, but there was the stipulation of having a job and those already on welfare had to begin to get a job after their children reached a certain age, even, like in Mrs. In Black's case, she has ten children who need to be taken care of. This is of course problematic for certain black folks and single mothers who may be in jobless communities or unable to work from their other responsibility, especially since crime in these impoverished areas is higher and her children might be more susceptible to become victims. Though the tumultuous social environment of the 60s has gone away, the issues of racial disparity and the problem of welfare are still very much active issues.
“For the first time, a minimum income floor would apply nationally—$1,600 a year for a nonworking family of four, paid by the Federal Government. That same $1,600 figure was also used to compute income supplements for the working poor. A family with earnings up to $720 annually would receive a full $1,600 supplement. Any income above $720 would be subject to a “marginal tax rate” of 50 per cent: For every two dollars earned above $720, one dollar would be subtracted from the $1,600 Federal supplement. The cutoff income figure —the point at which the supplement disappeared—would be $3,920” (Welsh).
“child-welfare workers are effectively punishing families, particularly Black families, because they are poor. (Only about 17% of children removed from their homes nationwide are in foster care because of allegations of physical or sexual abuse.) The problem intensified after Clinton-era welfare reform reduced direct aid to poor families, Roberts says; there are now major U.S. cities where 60% of Black children have had some form of contact with child-welfare officials” (Ross).
Ross, Janell. “Behind the Racial Disparities in the US Child-Welfare System.” Time, Time, 20 Apr. 2022, time.com/6168354/child-welfare-system-dorothy-roberts/.
Welsh, James. “Welfare Reform: Born, Aug. 8, 1969; Died, Oct. 4, 1972-a Sad Case Study of the American Political Process.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 7 Jan. 1973, www.nytimes.com/1973/01/07/archives/welfare-reform-born-aug-8-1969-died-oct-4-1972-a-sad-case-study-of.html.
The hardships and conditions which Ms. Black and her family live day to day as a direct result of the economic disparity and racial othering they experience on the welfare system have a close connection to the experiences of women and families today under similar circumstances of economic hardship and racial disenfranchisement. Despite the gap in time and space, Khan-Cullors experience in California as documented in When They Call You A Terrorist parallels the experience Mrs. Black has in her neighborhood especially in regards to crime and conditions. The sense of othering which Khan-Cullors describes and a separation of her identity because of being both impoverished and black is of major consequence in One Family as well.
A moment which stood out to me in reading this book was on page 60 in which Mrs. Black is discussing dealing with the welfare system. She details that getting money, even for the basic necessity of coats, was not given to her, in fact, a case worker lied to her about sending money for coats and Mrs. Black had to take her children down to the office of welfare to threaten to leave them in order to get basic necessities. This moment made me particularly emotional because it highlights exactly what Sirkis wants to show, the welfare system and those who are labeled as welfare citizens are treated as not humans. Why must it take such a brazen act in order for something so basic be provided for this family?
This book is extremely engaging and personal. Though the information in these interviews and photographs evidences truths about our social and political realities and is a stark example as to why reform is needed even today, but ultimately this is the story of a mother and her children and the individual realities that they live in. Simply engaging with this book for its historical context would be to miss the point, and to relate yourself to the emotions which the very real people in this book experience is crucial.