Last week I had the opportunity to participate in a “poverty simulation” as part of a legal conference I attended. It was an eye-opening experience for me.

Each participant was a member of a “family” and each family had to live through one month with a given set of circumstances and resources. For four 15-minute “weeks,” we had to fulfill responsibilities like going to work or school, and pay for food, utilities, and clothing. As time allowed, we could also visit institutions like social services, a pawn shop, an inter-faith organization or a title-loan company.

I was 13-year-old Penelope Perez. My “family” consisted of an imprisoned father, a 21-year-old brother attending community college, my twin sister and a 3-year-old brother. Here’s what I learned.

1. The struggle to overcome poverty is exhausting. For those who are truly poor, doing the right things requires more time and energy than we might imagine.

With no parents in the home, my older brother bore an incredible load. His days were filled with daycare drop-offs, applying for financial aid programs and trying his best to buy a few healthy groceries.

Finding time to attend classes was hard for him. So I can imagine how difficult it must be for someone like him to make time for studying, having a social life or taking on extra work to improve the situation.

2. It’s easy to be anonymous. People struggling against poverty may remain unknown to community members who could otherwise help them.

This is partly because of the all-consuming nature of the struggle. But it also seems to be a function of how our society tries to address poverty. Individuals are quickly lost in all the formulas and paperwork.

At two points in the process, I told Penelope’s sad story to busy aid workers. Both times, I was asked, “What is your biggest immediate need?” I wrestled over whether utility payments or groceries were top priority. It did not even occur to me to mention the need that truly would have been my greatest in that situation: love. Hope. To know that someone cared about me and my family.

3. Family is foundation. It’s been said over and over again. And we must keep saying it, because it’s true.

I didn’t get to read all the notebooks that described each family’s circumstances. But as I listened to the debrief at the end of the simulation, it became apparent that almost every “family” was a variant of the “traditional” family. Several included divorced spouses. Some were unmarried, cohabiting couples. Mine involved two absent parents. The lesson was clear: when the family structure breaks, poverty is likely to follow.

The fact that something is “traditional” doesn’t make it right. But when it comes to prosperity, it’s hard to beat an intact family with a mother, father, and children, living and working together as a team.

4. Sometimes we make choices, and sometimes we live with the choices of others.

Children don’t get to choose whether their parents marry, do drugs, commit crimes, or stay together. Children are left to do what they can with circumstances they did not create and cannot control. The community should support them.

But when those children reach a certain age, they do have the opportunity to make different choices than those their parents made. As the saying goes, “You are not born a winner or a loser, but you are born a chooser.”

5. The Church is often overlooked.

During the debrief at the end of the simulation, the director said that many times when she conducts the session, few participants even think to visit the “inter-faith services.”

“Official” programs run by bureaucrats have supplanted the Church as the primary means of helping the poor. This is tragic, because the Church is a source of not only material and financial resources, but also of emotional, spiritual, and relational support.

 Poverty is complex. It’s not always the result of a person’s own bad choices, as some tend to think. And throwing money at it isn’t always the answer, as others tend to think.

But I think this is universally true: Strong personal relationships are key to alleviating the problem of poverty. Not only are they the basis of the kind of families that tend to avoid poverty, but they are also the basis of the kind of holistic caring that can ensure the real needs of real people are truly met.

Government programs are poorly suited to nurturing personal relationships. Their efficacy at addressing poverty is therefore seriously limited.

Rita Dunaway lives in Harrisonburg and is the author of "Restoring America's Soul: Advancing Timeless Conservative Principles in a Wayward Culture." Her column appears on

(8) comments


Maybe "dad" should have simulated not going to jail.


Agreed. And maybe crackhead "mom" should stop having a dozen kids by 12 different men.


Of course a strong family is the best foundation for a successful start in life. That's not the question. The question is what does society do with those who do not have a strong family? The government programs that Rita and others constantly criticize are just trying to fill that gap. The idea that liberals somehow want to break up families and have everyone reliant on the state is freaking c-r-a-z-y. Like I've said about other things, I know a lot of liberals, and I don't know a single one who thinks that way.


Dear LVW, the problem of poverty is easy to fix for the majority of those who are able-bodied but refuse to work. Make their children wards of the state and let the parents die of starvation and exposure if they refuse to work - if they are too lazy to make an honest effort to help themselves then they shouldn't expect me to provide for their needs.


You are absolutely correct Mufalme Bishop, my royal brother! This approach would cure our poverty "Problem" in a single generation, and run the Demokkkrat party completely out of business. They simply would run out of "victims" to pander to.


There are two types of liberals LVW: those that foolishly follow their emotions rather than relying on facts, and believe in government run social programs because it "feels" like the right thing to do, and then there are those who know full well that these programs are a sham, and that they do more harm than good by leading to increased government dependency and decreased personal responsibility. The second group, unfortunately, manipulates the first group quite skillfully to advance their own political ends and increase their power. You and your friends are members of the first group. This is the piece of the puzzle that you're missing. Come out of the darkness and into the light LVW. You're almost there.

R B Tate

A “poverty simulation”? Now that is hilarious! Perhaps they have never visited an outhouse, or fetched wood for a stove on a cold morning. I’m trying to paint a picture (with a straight face) of these barristers, many likely growing up attending private schools, and pocketing weekly allowances, now going off to a poverty simulation workshop. And just how does it make them understand how to help po-folks escape their situation? By pretending to go to a social services office, or getting a make believe car title loan of about 300% APR?

Is “Penelope Perez” actually telling us that it took a legal conference with a poverty simulation to get her to learn that a strong family and church (rather than government) are more helpful factors in getting kids off to a good start and helping those in need? Or that getting ahead can be difficult, life is about choices, and not always fair? Our grandmother’s grandmother’s grandmother and circuit preachers were telling us this about 1790.


This is a wonderfully written column Rita, and so true.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.