Challenging welfare mythmaking: Caps, (mis)classification and concealment of larger families’ labour in austerity Britain

The alleged ‘welfare dependence’ of larger families has long been used as a symbolic anchoring point in seeking to legitimise British welfare reform. This article focuses on the Benefit Cap and Two-Child Limit, setting out how defences of both reforms framed impacted claimants as ‘workless’, ‘welfare-dependent’ and requiring welfare constraint and restriction to ‘activate’ them. Larger families are particularly sensitive to social security policy changes due to their higher needs and yet their everyday experiences are rarely heard. This article is a corrective to this, drawing on qualitative longitudinal research with families affected by both policies. We document how larger families are both routinely engaged in the labour market and doing extensive social reproductive labour. A dominant policy framing of ‘worklessness’ collides with the everyday realities of larger families. We argue that a re-imagined welfare state can and should recognise and resource social reproductive labour and make that work possible.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Critical Social Policy
Published
2025-03-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/02610183251324115
Primary Topic
Social Policy and Reform Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Challenging welfare mythmaking: Caps, (mis)classification and concealment of larger families’ labour in austerity Britain

Tracey Jensen, Ruth Patrick
Critical Social Policy
Social Policy and Reform Studies
article

Challenging welfare mythmaking: Caps, (mis)classification and concealment of larger families’ labour in austerity Britain

Tracey Jensen, Ruth Patrick
article en

Abstract

The alleged ‘welfare dependence’ of larger families has long been used as a symbolic anchoring point in seeking to legitimise British welfare reform. This article focuses on the Benefit Cap and Two-Child Limit, setting out how defences of both reforms framed impacted claimants as ‘workless’, ‘welfare-dependent’ and requiring welfare constraint and restriction to ‘activate’ them. Larger families are particularly sensitive to social security policy changes due to their higher needs and yet their everyday experiences are rarely heard. This article is a corrective to this, drawing on qualitative longitudinal research with families affected by both policies. We document how larger families are both routinely engaged in the labour market and doing extensive social reproductive labour. A dominant policy framing of ‘worklessness’ collides with the everyday realities of larger families. We argue that a re-imagined welfare state can and should recognise and resource social reproductive labour and make that work possible.

Critical Social PolicyVol. 45(4)
University of York (GB), Lancaster University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 93%
Social Policy and Reform Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Challenging welfare mythmaking: Caps, (mis)classification and concealment of larger families’ labour in austerity Britain — Tracey Jensen, Ruth Patrick · Critical Social Policy (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS