Presentation on the topic "Maternal (family) capital". Presentation "Maternity (family) capital: problems of legal regulation prospects" on the economy - project, report Maternity capital: latest news

PAGE_BREAK-- 1.3 Decreased reproductive attitudes and behaviors
Currently, small families (1-2 children per family) prevail in 76 countries of the world, which is approximately 40% of the world population. Over 20 countries are experiencing depopulation.

The United Nations cautiously predicts that in 2050 a quarter of the total population will live in 54 countries.

Since 1992, Russia has been at the historical stage of a demographic catastrophe.

Over the past 15 years, the natural decline in the population of Russia amounted to 12 million people, that is, every year we lose 800 thousand people.

The main determining factor in the current demographic situation is the birth rate, which has dropped in our country to the lowest level in the world.

The number of children born on average to one woman in her lifetime was 1,296 children in 2006, while simple reproduction (in which the population does not increase, but does not decrease) requires an average birth of 2.65 children per one marriage (including compensation for infertility, divorce and widowhood).

The measurement of reproductive attitudes revealed that the decrease in the number of births goes with a decrease in the socio-cultural need for children.

In the 1994 All-Russian micro-census of the population, it was revealed that married women in real family life would like to have more children than they have - an average of 2.03 children, while 1.9 actually planned or expected to give birth. The small difference between the desired and the actual number of children shows that in really difficult life circumstances, most Russian families had as many children as they wanted.

This suggests that the problem of mass Russian small families has another important reason - the lack of appropriate needs in most families.

The results of selective studies revealed a weakening of the need for children with a change in marriage generations, a divergence in the reproductive attitudes of husbands and wives, lengthening of attitudes towards the timing of marriage and timing of births, activation of attitudes towards the use of contraception and abortions before the birth of the first and second child.

In accordance with the weakening of the need for children and reproductive attitudes revealed in sociological and demographic studies in the first half of the 1990s and beyond, a decrease in the total fertility rate is observed.

In 1991-1992, the revolutionary change in the political system and the "shock therapy" in economic life at the same time incredibly increased the value claims regarding the level and style of life and worsened the living conditions of most people. As a result, while the population continued to need two children, a huge gap arose between what they began to strive for and what they actually had.

The psychological experience of this cognitive dissonance has activated aspirations to reduce it. From the height of new life values, the achieved standard of living in all strata and strata of society could not but be assessed as extremely low. A similar public mood was also manifested in sociological surveys, especially those where the question was about the preferred number of children.

The reforms of 1991-1992 turned out to be difficult economically for the majority of the population, the contrast between hopes for the future and deteriorating living conditions created a psychological dissonance. Polls regarding the preferred number of children and, in particular, the ideal number, the most susceptible to public opinion and being an indicator of the respondent's awareness of this, digitally expressed the then social feelings and moods, and not the actual reproductive preferences of people.

The smaller the ideal number, the less dissonance and the desire to close the gap between the "shock situation" and "ideal conditions", the greater the correspondence between the reduced "ideal childhood" and the "shock" standard of living.

The prevailing negative assessment of the financial situation among the majority of the population is a fact that declares itself in any polls. In demographic studies, the value orientations of the respondents are also under the pressure of prevailing public opinion. The negative assessment of what is happening in the country also applies to family living conditions, of course, it is far from ideal conditions.

The stabilization of the economy in the country in 1995-1998 and a slight increase in the standard of living led the majority of the population to a more positive assessment of the living conditions, which affected the reduction of dissonance and, moreover, the weakening of efforts to remove it.

However, after the default of 1998, the ideal number is falling again to return to its original pre-perestroika state in the first half of the 2000s.

The results of a selective study "Russia - 2000" conducted by the Department of Sociology and Demography (Sociological Faculty of Moscow State University) among the urban population with an intentionally overestimated proportion of families with two or more children in 29 regions in 1999-2000 (90% - women) show, nevertheless less, about the low level of reproductive orientations and its decrease depending on the age of the respondents.

The study showed that the birth of a second child in one-child families is even less likely than the birth of a third child in two-child families.

According to the study "Russia - 2000" after the "shock therapy" of 1992 and the actual deterioration of living conditions, 50% of respondents noted a decrease in well-being. After the default of 1998, the number of those who noted a decrease in wealth increased to 83%.

After the default, three times more people classified themselves as poor than before - 41.3%; to the rich - 4%; to medium-income - 32.6%. Thus, it was not the poorest, in fact, but the middle classes who “lowered themselves” to the level of the poor. This specific example how economic status, without increasing the value of children and family prestige, creates a psychological dissonance between prestigious consumption and reproductive attitudes.

An interesting fact is that the richer the family, the lower the reproductive attitudes. This trend exists all over the world - a significant increase in the population in the world is given by the developing countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

Similar data were obtained in surveys by the Levada Center in 2005, where in groups with a low consumer status, the indexes of children are higher than those with a high status.

Religious orientations influence the increase in the indices of the number of children.

Approximately a quarter of respondents (27%) do not consider themselves religious people, and only 4% - very religious, while less than 15% performed a religious ceremony during marriage; want their children to be believers 56% and about 31% - atheists.

Religiously oriented people value the family way of life higher and have more children: for example, the share of 3-4 births in the family is 36% for believers, and 13% for atheists.

Reproductive attitudes and orientations are one side of the manifestation of the need for children in various social situations associated with the specifics of the living conditions of the respondent (more precisely, the family) and the events of the reproductive cycle. Another aspect of the intensity of the need for children is the strength of the motivation to achieve the number of children that is dictated by the need itself.

Curiously, economic motives came out on top in terms of their influence on the growth in the number of abortions (51.7%), ahead of psychological (48.4%) and social (24.9%) motives.

In everyday family and marriage life, the practice of sexuality with a massive need for two children is accompanied by the use or non-use of contraception, and depending on the effectiveness of this, as well as taking into account the difference in the degree of fertility of married couples, there are different durations of protogenetic and intergenetic intervals - with full satisfaction of two children of the existing need for children, the family seeks to avoid conception at all or to delay the moment of the “contraceptive misfire”, and this result is the more likely, the more reliable the use of contraception. This line of routine behavior is not very interesting from a scientific point of view, since in the case of an “unfavorable” outcome (in the absence of a need for children), the result is obvious - this is an abortion.

Much more interesting is the problematic line of behavior when the need for children is not satisfied (that is, it is greater than the number of children available).

In determining mortality and fertility, a significant role belongs to the reproductive health of women.

The prevalence of diseases of the female reproductive system is an important factor in maternal and infant mortality.

Solving the urgent problems of socio-demographic policy in our country, overcoming depopulation and its consequences is impossible without a radical improvement in the reproductive health of women, reducing the level of infertility, maternal and perinatal mortality.

Good reproductive health is a factor that works simultaneously to improve the health of the population as a whole and to reduce mortality and increase average life expectancy.

The formation of reproductive health is a complex and multifaceted process in which the action of both objective and subjective factors is intertwined.

According to polls in 2007, 66.5% of the women surveyed are married, including 14.5% in cohabitation.

Living conditions are an important factor in deciding whether to have an abortion or have a child. In this regard, the surveyed population is characterized quite positively: more than ¾ of the respondents live in their apartments, houses or parts of the house together with their parents or husbands.

At the same time, almost a quarter of the respondents' housing conditions leave much to be desired: they do not have their own housing (see Appendix III).

The desired number of children was 2.16. At the same time, 2.9% would not want to have children at all, 70.2% - one or two children, 25.3% - three or four children, 1.6% - 5 or more (see Appendix IV).

It is important to note that the results of the survey differ sharply from official state statistics, according to which 30% of children in Russia are born out of a registered marriage, and only about half of these illegitimate children are recognized as fathers and registered on the basis of joint applications from both parents. The fact. That women who have children born out of legal marriages do not like to say that they have never been married and tend to pass off any marriage, including a short-term relationship without cohabitation.

The conducted studies indicate the existence of a serious problem of deterioration in the reproductive health of the population due to poor quality medical care. Further study of this problem is needed, including with the help of new opinion polls both among the general public and among healthcare workers.
1.4 Preservation of the population as the most important function of the state
The main wealth of any country is people, human potential.

The decline in the birth rate and the reduction in the total number of children in Russia is the most important problem.

A demographic transition is taking place in a transforming society. The catastrophic drop in the standard of living of the bulk of the population has led to the fact that women of childbearing age began to refuse to have children.

In most constitutions of the countries of the world, the family and marriage, which is the basis of the family, are not ignored.

Article 38 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation establishes that the family, motherhood and childhood are under the protection of the state.

The calculation base for benefits until 2001 was the minimum wage (SMIC). Since 2004, the minimum wage has been increased to 720 rubles. The share of family and maternity benefits as a percentage of the gross domestic product has been declining every year. Thus, in 1991 this figure was 2.1%, in 1995 - 0.8% and reached by 2003-2004 a value equal to 0.3% of GDP.

The monthly allowance for the period of parental leave until the child reaches the age of 1.5 years was established from January 1, 1994 and is paid at the expense of federal budget at the place of work after the end of maternity leave. The amount of the benefit does not depend on the number of children being cared for.

The amount of birth and child care benefits paid from the federal budget is rather insignificant. That is, the state, until recently, did not financially stimulate the increase in the birth rate.

Social policy regarding the family, according to the UN recommendations, "should become a priority for national governments and intergovernmental organizations."

But do not forget that any policy can be effective when it is based on a sound strategy, a specific program of action, should not be focused on the current moment, but should be implemented with a certain perspective in the future.

To make management decisions in social sphere, it is necessary to have a connection with the family, to know what problems it faces in different regions, what it needs.

The state social policy regarding the family now faces three main tasks:

1. providing the necessary conditions for the family to perform its functions;

2. providing conditions for combining work and family responsibilities with the personal interests of a person;

3. creation of favorable conditions for the birth and upbringing of healthy children, the protection of motherhood and childhood.

These goals are achieved subject to a certain system of principles:

1. the principle of family self-development (the creation by the state of the necessary conditions for the active and prosperous functioning of families, the full disclosure of their potential);

2. principle social protection(applies to those families who were unable to cope with their economic problems);

3. the principle of providing direct social services (individual assistance to families in solving socio-psychological, pedagogical, legal, medical, social and other problems);

4. the principle of taking into account the constantly changing needs of the family and adjusting conditions (creating macro conditions through laws, government decisions).

The state social policy regarding the family proceeds from the provisions that the family is an enduring value for the life and development of a person, plays an important role in the life of society, educating new generations, ensuring social stability and progress.

In this regard, it is necessary to take into account the interests of the family and children, as well as to take special measures for their social support during the period of socio-economic transformation of society.

Legislation plays the main role in the formation of social policy in relation to the family.
1.5 Maternity capital as an innovative form of family social support
The word innovation refers to some kind of innovation, innovation.

Nowadays, it is customary to associate the latest developments in the field of science and technology with the word innovation.

But few people know that the social sphere also needs innovation.

Because this is a new and, most importantly, constructive direction in the system of family social protection.

The advantages and disadvantages of the maternity capital system were discussed above. The main “plus” is that the state decided, albeit under pressure from circumstances (difficult demographic and socio-economic situation in the country), to provide additional assistance to families with children, the “minus” is that the prevalence, population coverage is quite small - it applies only to families that give birth to a second and subsequent children, while families that have one child need support, since in our country the level of income of young citizens, especially women of reproductive age, is not high.

I must say that the consequences of the law on maternity capital are already being felt.

Recently, in a news broadcast, the President of Russia cited the experience of one of the regions of Russia, where young families with children are entitled to land plots.

That is, the very idea of ​​maternity capital has positive consequences, it contributes to the development and implementation of innovations in the family social protection system.

One of the claims against the creators of the law on maternity capital is that this law applies exclusively to mothers, while at the same time there is such a category as single fathers with many children, even if it is not widespread enough.

And this is another direction for improving this law, and another direction for innovation.

As practice shows, most young couples cannot overcome their economic dependence on their parents. With the advent of children in the family, provided that there is a problem with preschool educational institutions for children, young spouses are forced to resort to the help of their parents. All this hinders the formation of a young family, the independence of young spouses.

That is why now the efforts of the state are aimed at improving the economic well-being of young families.

From the experience of other countries, it can be seen that assistance should be comprehensive and include both means of material support, fixed by law, and assistance in raising children, developing a network of preschool educational institutions, both public and private.

In our opinion, the next step, following the adoption of the law on maternity capital, should be the creation of a network of state and non-state (possibly based on the state order system) preschool educational institutions for children.

In the 90s of the twentieth century, many preschool educational institutions were requested, closed, and began to be used for a different purpose.

Now this problem has been brought to the attention again.

The innovativeness of maternity capital as a form of social support for the family lies in the fact that the state has found ways to create a new form of social assistance, which should stimulate the birth rate.

At the same time, it must be understood that demographic processes are influenced by many factors. The difficulty lies in the fact that not all factors can be taken into account and given a numerical expression.

For example, the birth rate is seriously influenced by moral factors - the value of the family and children, mutual respect of spouses for each other.

That is why the forecasting of social processes is a rather complex problem, as well as the solution of the identified problems.

But social policy should be based on certain scientific developments and research.

Forecasting the consequences of high level decisions require special attention.

Summarizing, it must be said that the family today is a complex social institution that includes established systems of relations between spouses, children and parents, family and other relatives, family and state and society.

As before, the family plays a key role in the life of society, the family way of life not only helps the direct reproduction of the population, but also solves economic and economic problems.

The institution of the family also plays an important (and, correctly, decisive) role in the socialization of the individual, the acceptance by the individual of those norms, attitudes and values ​​accepted in a given society. The main subject of human education is the family.

But, at the present stage, new forms of family relations are emerging.

A difficult ethical question (as well as a legal one), what group of people can be called a family?

This question is also important in this aspect - which families can claim social support from the state?

We believe that the main criteria by which a certain group of people can be considered a family are, firstly, the fulfillment of the reproductive function, and secondly (a less significant criterion), the compliance of family relationships with the norms of the law.

In the first case, it is quite clear that the state provides support to the family because of the need to have children, in our country this problem is very acute.

In the second case, the existing legislation should be improved, including those organizational and legal issues that are related to maternity capital.

Based on the foregoing, several main conclusions should be drawn:

1. the family is the most important social entity, with a historically established system of relationships;

2. the role of the family in modern society is determined by a number of functions performed by this social institution, in turn, the functions themselves are determined by the needs of the family;

3. in their historical development, the institutions of marriage and family came to monogamy as the most effective form of family and marriage relations;

4. in the formation of the family and family values ​​at all times and now the state, religion, public opinion have played a large role, reflecting the morality and ethical component of family and marriage relations;

5. Along with the traditional type of family, many alternative forms are emerging today, such as single-parent families, cohabitation, deliberately childless marriages, etc.;

6. these families, along with low-income families, are the object of the impact of the social policy of the state, since there are a number of economic, legal and ethical reasons why they cannot have a positive educational impact on children, or cannot have children at all;

7. Russia has been in the zone of a demographic catastrophe for a long time;

8. for a number of reasons, not only material, reproductive attitudes are declining, small families are widespread;

9. The main wealth of any country is people, human potential;

10. The catastrophic drop in the standard of living of the bulk of the population has led to the fact that women of childbearing age began to refuse to have children;

11. social policy in relation to the family, according to the UN recommendations, “should become a priority for national governments and intergovernmental organizations”;

12. State social policy in relation to the family is based on the provisions that the family is an enduring value for the life and development of a person, plays an important role in the life of society, the education of new generations, ensuring social stability and progress;

13. The very idea of ​​maternity capital has positive consequences, contributing to the development and implementation of innovations in the family social protection system;

14. The innovativeness of maternity capital as a form of social support for the family lies in the fact that the state has found ways to create a new form of social assistance, which should stimulate the birth rate;

15. Factors affecting fertility and marriage can be divided into three main groups: socio-economic, legal, moral.

Continuation
--PAGE_BREAK-- Chapter
II
. Social policy of the state as an instrument of social support for the family
2.1 Experience of foreign countries on social policy
The United States of America is a country with a liberal model of democracy.

This means that the responsibility for the well-being of a citizen - social, economic, medical, psychological - lies with him.

In such a situation, the state assumes responsibility for providing assistance to the most vulnerable, disadvantaged categories of the population.

The system of social protection in the United States does not have a single system, but is regulated by a variety of social assistance programs implemented across the country, individual states, communities, municipalities.

At the same time, there are certain conditions (as well as everywhere else) under which a family can apply for social assistance. This is, firstly, the family income is below the subsistence level, and, secondly, the unemployment of one of the parents. The criteria for determining need are poverty lines, which are determined and published by the US Census Bureau annually, for various categories of the population.

In general, all social support programs for families are similar and include certain forms of support. Here is their approximate composition:

1. income support programs - temporary assistance to needy families, tax incentives;

2. food assistance - food stamps, free and reduced school lunches and breakfasts, special supplementary meals for women with children under 5 years old, meals for children in day care centers;

3. medical assistance - state medical care, medical service centers;

4. housing assistance - construction of social housing for the poor, subsidies for the purchase and construction of their own housing, subsidies for rent and heating of a dwelling;

5. educational services - assistance in obtaining education and special training;

6. social services– providing care for children of students and working recipients, facilitating the adoption of children and assistance to foster parents, assistance to runaway and street children, legal and psychological assistance to adolescents, assistance to victims of crime and domestic violence, and the search for fathers who evade alimony.

But, as practice shows, despite the fact that needy families can be included in several social programs, this does not guarantee them a way out of their plight.

Most of the social policy programs in the US appeared in the periods before and after the Second World War. In the first case, this was due to the Great Depression, in the second - military hardships, losses among the population. By departmental affiliation, the programs were both federal and jointly administered by federal agencies and administrative agencies in the states.

In the 1960s and 1970s, there was a surge in activity in the field of social protection. More and more families have become recipients of social assistance from the state. But the problem of poverty in the slums of big cities, metropolitan areas, remained as before significant and complex. The public demanded a revision of views on social protection in the country.

Significant changes took place in the 1990s.

Social programs were transferred to the competence of the state authorities, so-called “block grants” began to be allocated from the federal budget for social programs, which the state authorities should distribute at their discretion. Many perceived and perceive these measures as a reduction in the financing of social protection, the transfer of powers for social policy to local authorities, and tightening conditions for receiving social assistance.

Public outrage particularly peaked in 2005, when the Bush administration succeeded in passing the National Deficit Reduction Act, driven by financial pressures from the increasingly costly war in Iraq and slower economic growth. A number of provisions of this law limited spending on social programs.

One of the most significant social programs was the Assistance to Families with Dependent Children (ASA) program. Which was introduced in 1935 as a means of overcoming the consequences of the Great Depression and ended in 1996.

By 1990, this program was extended to the families of the unemployed and expanded the range of services provided. All states were required to introduce special training and employment programs for social assistance recipients under this program.

The following had the right to design and estimate documentation:

1. incomplete families where there is no father or mother;

2. complete families, where the father is unemployed (the allowance is received by the mother, father and all children living in the family);

3. complete families where the father is unable to work;

4. families where there are no children of their own, but children of relatives live - in this case, only children receive benefits.

The Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families) program then replaced the TAC program. It covered the same categories of the population, only now the whole family received assistance, and not its individual members.

The main condition for granting VPTS is a family income below the established level. The program also includes children left without parental care and living in a family of other relatives.

Since 1996, the duration of receiving benefits was limited to 5 years, and the condition for receiving EPNS became labor activity. That is, within two years from the date of inclusion in the program, one of the parents must get a job or vocational training.

The introduction of the APNS has led to a reduction in the number of recipients and the amount of benefits.

In 2002, the state spent $25.4 billion on the program, including $14.6 billion from the federal budget, according to the most recent report from the VPNS program presented to the US Congress.

The reform of social assistance did not lead to an improvement in the situation of poor families with children, which caused sharp criticism from the public.

Also, almost all recipients of the APNS are included in food assistance programs.

Providing support in the form of food aid is very popular in the US. Such assistance is provided to lonely elderly citizens, the disabled, the homeless, and other socially vulnerable categories of the population.

More than half of food stamp recipients are families with children.

An important role in food aid is played by school breakfasts and lunches, which the needy receive free of charge or at a discount.

The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Pregnant Women and Those with Young Children reaches 7.9 million people and has a federal budget of $3.6 billion.

A significant proportion of American families with children cannot provide themselves with housing. Thus, the problems of families in Russia and the United States are similar.

In spite of a large number of social assistance programs, their effectiveness is low. These programs are uncoordinated, forced to compete with each other due to limited funding, they do not solve the problem of poverty in the country.

Recently, in the United States, the state is less and less involved in social support for families and in the social sphere in general, passing it into the hands of the private sector and volunteers.

The liberal model of social policy is criticized for its inefficiency and limitations. In fact, a wide range of families are cut off from receiving social assistance, only the most needy are provided with assistance, and this assistance does not guarantee an opportunity to escape from poverty.

The governments of most developed countries have long recognized the problem of depopulation and the need for the state to solve it.

This raises a number of questions, such as:

1) can the state influence the birth rate?

2) if so, how?

3) is it done in the interests of the citizens of their country?

In France, these questions were answered positively.

This is also due to the fact that after the Second World War, issues related to family policy were in the general context of the problems of restoring the country.

In France, as in other countries of the world, there were three main approaches to solving problems of the family and fertility:

1. limited access to contraceptives and abortions;

2. economic incentives for families to have children - maternity leave, various benefits, etc.;

3. promotion of family values.

In the latter case, it is noteworthy that even the Vichy government (1940-1945) insisted on the role of women as housewives; when hiring, preference was given to men who had a family and children. Thus, they had to financially provide for the family, while the woman performed the functions of raising children.

Economic measures to support the birth rate have always been the main ones in France.

Already in 1932, a law was passed that obliged employers to make monthly contributions to a special fund created to support large families.

In 1938, such benefits began to be paid to women caring for adopted children.

The French state has always encouraged formal marriages.

This is due to two groups of reasons:

1. moral reasons - many politicians and public figures called for a patriarchal, traditional model of the family;

2. demographic reasons - partners who are officially married are more confident in the stability and strength of this union;

Families in France are still receiving benefits. Some of them cover all categories of families, some of them depend on the income level of a family or a single parent, that is, they are designed for low-income and socially vulnerable categories of families.

It is important that the demographic policy is also oriented towards those people who want to, but for some reason cannot have children.

Since the early 1970s, there has been a decline in the birth rate.

Meanwhile, in modern France there are a number of ways to help families.

To date, the following types of benefits are available in France:

1. allowances for families with many children (more than two children in a family);

2. allowance for mothers (from the fifth month of pregnancy to the age of three months of the child);

3. parental allowance (for families with three or more children, if one of them is under three years old);

4. babysitting allowance (for working parents whose children are under three years of age);

5. another babysitting allowance (for working parents whose children are under 6);

6. allowance for supporting large families (for poor families with three or more children);

7. allowance for a single parent (until the child reaches the age of three);

8. allowance for preparing the child for school (only for poor families), etc.

As you can see, the state in France provides tangible assistance to families, especially those with more than three children.

In addition, there is a policy of restricting access to abortion and contraception (quite controversial and therefore gradually changing towards greater liberalization). Also, migration policy was until some time a means of replenishing the population of the country, until migrants began to create certain problems.

Abortion was legalized in France in 1975 under the influence of the feminist movement. But there are certain restrictions - abortion is allowed only in the first and second trimester according to the conclusion of the commission of doctors, there is a certain period for filing an application for an abortion.

The very method of restricting abortions and contraception turned out to be ineffective, as it led to an increase in the number of criminal abortions and high maternal mortality.

The current abortion rate in France is 27 abortions per 1,000 women.

In general, thanks to the measures taken to support families with children, the rather difficult demographic situation in France is slowly improving.

The model of social support for the family in France is quite productive, but there is not enough material, legal, organizational, scientific and methodological base to apply such experience in our country.

Like many other countries, Norway experienced a "baby boom" after the Second World War.

However, this surge lasted longer here than in most other countries, and in the early 1970s it was still 2.5. was due to the fact that in other European countries, the birth rate fell to the lowest levels.

Many attributed the subsequent decline in fertility to the fact that generations of women born after the war fell into a different opportunity structure - the development of contraceptives, the possibility of abortion, allowed women to choose when to have a baby and how many children to have.

It is still very common for Norwegian mothers with one child to give birth to another.

The Norwegian welfare state has a long tradition of large-scale family-oriented social policies. However, this policy was driven not so much by the desire to increase the birth rate, but by the ideology of gender equality and concern for the general well-being of children and their families. Undoubtedly, among the programs that reduce the cost of childbirth the most are the statutory, inclusive parental leave program, as well as expanded state support for kindergartens.

In Norway, the universal right to paid parental leave is guaranteed by the National Insurance Act, passed in 1956. To receive this benefit, the mother must have worked for at least 6 of the 10 months prior to the birth of the child. Women who do not meet these requirements receive a one-time benefit of (as of 2002) NOK 32,138 (approximately €3,900). Initially, the benefit period was only 12 weeks and the amount of compensation was low. The situation did not change until 1977, when the benefit period was extended to 18 weeks, and fathers also received the right to be on such leave for almost the entire period. At the same time, the period of guaranteed job retention (such a guarantee was always given in the case of parental leave) was increased to one year, that is, parents could take additional, already unpaid leave without fear of losing their job. A year later, the amount of compensation was significantly increased and began to cover 100% of earnings for most mothers who had a job before the birth of a child. Then, almost a decade later, the vacation period was further extended and increased several times since 1987, reaching the following options in 1993: 52 weeks with 80% salary compensation or 42 weeks with full compensation. This pattern remains to this day.

Fathers may also take leave for the entire period, with the exception of three weeks before the birth and six weeks after the birth of the child, which are granted only to the mother. Fathers can also get two weeks of unpaid leave immediately after the birth of a child.

In order to encourage both parents to participate in child care, an amendment was introduced in 1993 to reserve 4 weeks of the "long" part of the father's leave - the so-called "dad quota".

In August 1998, cash payments were introduced to parents who do not use the services of state-subsidized kindergartens, and from January 1999 this program began to cover all children 1-2 years old. The allowance is paid monthly, is not taxed, the rate is fixed and, at the time of its introduction, was approximately equal to the state aid for paying for a place in kindergarten. Currently, the monthly allowance is NOK 3,657 ($450). To be eligible for the full benefit, a child must not be in a public day care center full time (more than 32 hours per week).

State-subsidized kindergartens proliferated rapidly in the 1980s and 1990s. The subsidy is a contribution to the budget of the kindergarten based on the number of children attending it. The amount of the subsidy increases depending on the number of hours children spend in the kindergarten and is higher for children aged 0-2 than for other children preschool age. Many private kindergartens also receive subsidies at the municipal level.

The basic principle of financing kindergartens is that the costs should be shared between the state, municipalities and parents. It was planned that the state would cover 40% of the costs, and the remaining 60% would be divided equally between parents and municipalities. However, due to the rapid expansion of private kindergartens, the average contribution of municipalities was lower and that of parents was higher.

At the state level, the size of the parental contribution is not regulated.

Subject local government– the municipality – can set prices independently.

In half of the public kindergartens, the amount of payment for parents depends on income, in private ones the payment is fixed.

But both public and private kindergartens offer a discount if parents bring more than one child.

The rise in fertility observed in the Scandinavian countries during the 1980s and 1990s has revived interest in the question of whether generous family policies can stimulate fertility.

It must be said that the point of view expressed by J. Stoltenberg, Prime Minister of Norway in 2001, is that an important determinant of fertility is the "quality" of society and the population's confidence about the future.

Modern women are educated, enter the labor market on an equal footing with men and plan to participate on an equal footing with men in society.

As the Norwegian experience shows, children remain in the plans of both women and men, if society is ready to take on a significant part of the responsibility and associated costs.

This includes policies that allow women to combine childbearing and paid employment, measures that promote gender equality and encourage men to be involved in childcare.

It is possible that low-fertility countries, where there is still much to be improved in this area, stand to benefit the most from such a policy, especially if they can simultaneously create a stable economy and create an optimistic outlook among the population.

The experience of foreign countries shows that the state implements social policy in different directions - through support for a network of preschool educational institutions, material assistance, legal protection of the family and motherhood, non-material assistance
2.2 Legislation of the Russian Federation regarding the family: from social benefits to saving maternity capital
As mentioned above, in the Russian Federation, the family, motherhood, fatherhood and childhood are under the protection of the state and society.

This position is indicated in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the constitution or charters of the constituent entities of the Federation, in international (those regulatory documents that Russia has ratified), federal, regional, and local legislation.

The family is a constitutional and legal category based on marriage (that is, a legally formalized, voluntary union of a man and a woman, giving rise to mutual personal and property rights and obligations aimed at creating a family, giving birth and raising children).

Federal Law "On Additional Measures state support families with children” will be discussed below, as it underlies this study.

In this paragraph, attention will be paid to three legal documents - federal laws "On State Benefits to Citizens with Children" and "On State Social Support", as well as the Concept of State Family Policy.

Federal Law No. 81-FZ of May 19, 1995 “On State Benefits for Citizens with Children” does not apply to the following categories of citizens:

1. citizens of the Russian Federation (foreign citizens and stateless persons), whose children are fully supported by the state;

2. citizens of the Russian Federation (foreign citizens and stateless persons) deprived of parental rights;

3. citizens of the Russian Federation who have left for permanent residence outside the Russian Federation.

This law establishes the main types of state benefits for citizens with children:

Benefit for pregnancy and childbirth;

A one-time allowance for women registered in medical institutions in the early stages of pregnancy;

One-time allowance at the birth of a child;

Monthly allowance for child care;

Monthly allowance for a child;

A one-time allowance for the transfer of a child to be raised in a family;

A one-time allowance for the pregnant wife of a conscripted serviceman;

Monthly allowance for the child of a military serviceman who is conscripted for military service.

These benefits are paid through:

Funds of the Social Insurance Fund of the Russian Federation;

Federal budget funds allocated in the prescribed manner by federal executive authorities, in which the legislation of the Russian Federation provides for military service, service as private and commanding officers of internal affairs bodies, the State Fire Service, employees of institutions and bodies of the penitentiary system, women dismissed during pregnancy, maternity leave, persons dismissed during parental leave in connection with the liquidation of the organization, etc.;

Funds from the federal budget, the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, allocated by an educational institution of primary, secondary and higher vocational education for the payment of scholarships in the form of benefits for pregnancy and childbirth, a lump sum allowance for women registered in medical institutions in the early stages of pregnancy, women studying full-time the form of education;

Funds from the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation in the form of a monthly allowance for a child;

Interbudgetary transfers from the federal budget provided in accordance with the established procedure to the budget of the Social Insurance Fund of the Russian Federation for the payment of benefits for pregnancy and childbirth, a one-time allowance for women registered with medical institutions in the early stages of pregnancy, a one-time allowance for the birth of a child, etc.;

Subventions provided to the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation from the Federal Compensation Fund, formed as part of the federal budget, through the federal executive body that performs the functions of managing state property, providing public services in the field of education, for the payment of a lump-sum allowance when a child is transferred to a family for upbringing and through the federal executive body that performs the functions of providing public services and managing state property in the field of health care and social development, for the payment of a lump-sum allowance to the pregnant wife of a serviceman doing military service on conscription, and a monthly allowance for the child of a military serviceman who is in military service on conscription.

Most important articles about the amount of benefits.

Thus, the maternity allowance is set in the amount of average earnings, on which insurance premiums for compulsory social insurance in case of temporary disability and in connection with motherhood; scholarships for women studying full-time in educational institutions; monetary allowance - for women undergoing military service under a contract, serving as private and commanding officers in the internal affairs bodies, bodies of the penitentiary system, etc.

The amount of the maternity allowance for women dismissed due to the liquidation of the organization, the termination of activities as individual entrepreneurs, the termination of the powers of a notary, the termination of the status of a lawyer, as well as in connection with the termination of activities of other individuals whose professional activities are subject to state registration and licensing, is only 300 rubles.

The duration of maternity leave is seventy calendar days before childbirth and seventy after childbirth.

The same amount (300 rubles) has a one-time allowance for women registered with medical institutions in the early stages of pregnancy (up to twelve weeks).

A one-time allowance for the birth of a child is paid in the amount of 8,000 rubles. The same amount has a one-time allowance for the transfer of a child to be raised in a family.

The monthly allowance for child care is paid in the following amounts: 1,500 rubles for the care of the first child and 3,000 rubles for the care of the second; 40% of average earnings, for which insurance premiums are calculated, on which insurance premiums are calculated for compulsory social insurance in case of temporary disability and in connection with motherhood.

It is difficult to say how much these allowances correspond to the real socio-economic situation and the urgent needs of young families in Russia. Below are the results of a blitz survey, which was carried out in order to find out the opinion of the public about maternity capital.

The federal law "On State Social Assistance" is designed for low-income families and citizens living alone.

According to this law, the recipients of state social assistance may be low-income families and low-income citizens living alone, who, for reasons beyond their control, have an average per capita income below the subsistence level established in the corresponding subject of the Russian Federation.

The procedure for determining the subsistence minimum for a low-income family or a low-income single citizen is established by the subject of the Russian Federation, taking into account the subsistence minimums for the relevant socio-demographic groups of the population.

State social assistance is appointed by the decision of the body of social protection of the population at the place of residence of a poor family or a poor living alone citizen.

Social assistance is assigned on the basis of a written application of a citizen in writing or on behalf of his family to the social protection authorities at the place of residence or stay, in which the applicant indicates information about the composition of the family, income, property belonging to him (his family). This information may be subject to verification by the social security authority.

The amount of state social assistance is determined by the state authorities of the subject of the Russian Federation. Social assistance is provided both in the form of cash payments (social transfers) and in-kind assistance.

As can be seen from the above, great powers to provide social assistance are vested in the social protection authorities in the constituent entities (regions) of the Russian Federation. The question of how effectively they implement social policy remains open.

Another interesting legal document is the Concept of State Family Policy (or the Concept of State Policy for a Young Family).

This framework document defines a number of important concepts and specifies the position of the state in relation to the family.

So, the subjects of social policy in relation to a young family are legislative and executive authorities, employers, public associations, political parties, trade unions, religious denominations, charitable foundations, international organizations, legal entities and individuals, and the object, of course, is the family.

According to this document, a young family is a family in which the age of each of the spouses does not exceed 30 years, or an incomplete family consisting of one young parent whose age does not exceed 30 years.

The development of a young family is the process of establishing subject-object relations of a young family in the state and society, as a result of which it receives the necessary conditions and performs social functions and reproductive attitudes.

Institutionalization of a young family is the life process of a young family from the moment of its creation to stable functioning.

Family policy is based on a number of principles:

1. partnership (the obligation of the state - the rights and obligations of the family);

2. integrity and consistency (participation of all branches and levels of government in the development of family policy);

3. a single socio-economic, educational and legal space in the Russian Federation (unified social guarantees);

4. differentiated approach to different types of families (taking into account the specifics of each family);

5. social subjectivity (priority of independence and activity of the family);

6. social continuity of generations (preservation and maintenance of the relationship of generations);

7. humanism.

The main directions for the implementation of the Concept are the promotion of family values ​​among young people, the formation of the foundations of a pedagogical culture among parents, the formation of mechanisms for supporting young families, assistance in providing housing for young families, etc.

As expected results, it is expected to increase the value of the family and family lifestyle, increase the birth rate, increase the well-being of a young family, increase the number of families with adopted children, etc.

Based on this document, as planned, various projects and programs in support of young families should be implemented.

As can be seen from the above, before the adoption of the law on “maternity capital, social support for the family was not at a high level. Existing laws could not fulfill the function of stimulating the birth rate and promoting the family lifestyle.

Therefore, the emergence of the law on "maternity capital" was a completely logical consequence in the current situation.

The federal law "On additional measures of state support for families with children" was adopted State Duma December 22, 2006 and approved by the Federation Council on December 27, 2006.

The most important concepts that this law defines are:

2. additional measures of state support for families with children - measures that provide an opportunity to improve housing conditions, receive education, as well as increase the level of pension provision, taking into account the specifics established by law;

3. maternal (family) capital - federal budget funds transferred to the budget of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation for the implementation of additional state support measures established by law;

4. state certificate for maternity (family) capital - a nominal document confirming the right to additional measures of state support.

The main drawback of the law is that it is designed for the second and subsequent children, which is set out in part 1 of article 3 of this law - the right to additional measures of state support arises at the birth (adoption) of a child (children) with citizenship of the Russian Federation, for the following citizens of the Russian Federation, regardless of their place of residence:

2. women who have given birth (adopted) a third child or subsequent children since January 1, 2007, if they have not previously used the right to additional measures of state support;

3. men who are the sole adopters of the second, third child or subsequent children who have not previously exercised the right to additional measures of state support, if the court decision on adoption came into force starting from January 1, 2007.

Thus, maternity capital relies only on the second and subsequent children.

At the same time, only standard benefits remain for the first child, which can be assessed as not entirely fair, since the first child will also need education and housing (for which maternity capital funds can be spent).

Initially, the maternity capital was set at 250,000 rubles. At the moment it is about 343,000 rubles.

The same law establishes that the amount of maternity capital is reviewed annually, taking into account inflation growth rates and is set federal law on the federal budget for the corresponding financial year. Revision of the amount of maternity capital is carried out before the transfer of maternity capital from the federal budget to the budget of the Pension Fund of the Russian Federation.

Persons who have received a certificate may dispose of the funds of maternity (family) capital in full or in parts in the following areas:

1. improvement of living conditions;

2. receiving education by the child (children);

3. formation of the funded part of the labor pension for women listed in paragraphs 1 and 2 of part 1 of Article 3 of this Federal Law.

The disposal of maternity (family capital) funds may be carried out by persons who have received a certificate simultaneously in several areas established by this Federal Law.

According to the latest amendments, part of the funds in an amount not exceeding 50 percent of the amount of maternity capital funds due to a person who has received a certificate can be issued for the construction of an individual housing construction facility. Maternity capital funds can now be used to pay off a mortgage loan.

An application for disposal may be submitted at any time after the expiration of two years and six months from the date of birth (adoption) of the second, third child or subsequent children.

There are also moments when the competent authorities may refuse to provide maternity capital:

1. termination of the right to additional measures of state support on the grounds established by Parts 3, 4 and 6 of Article 3 of this Federal Law;

2. violation of the established procedure for filing an application for disposal;

3. indications in the application for disposal of the direction of use of funds (part of the funds) of maternity capital, not provided for by this Federal Law;

4. an indication in the application for disposal of the amount (its part in the aggregate) exceeding the total amount of maternity capital funds, which the person who submitted the application for disposal is entitled to dispose of;

5. restriction of the parent's parental rights in relation to the child, in connection with the birth of which the right to additional measures of state support has arisen;

6. removal of a child, in connection with the birth of which the right to additional measures of state support has arisen.

Briefly about how maternity capital funds can be used in the above three areas.

Maternity capital funds can be directed to the acquisition (construction) of residential premises. This is done by transferring the indicated funds to the organization that carries out the construction, and maternity capital funds can also be used to improve existing housing conditions. In this case, the residential premises must be located on the territory of the Russian Federation.

Residential premises acquired with the use of maternity capital funds are registered in the common ownership of parents, children and other family members (living together in the family).

The "housing issue" remains acute for many young families, so the opportunity to use maternity capital funds to purchase housing is a very significant point. But the question remains - to what extent does this assistance correspond to housing prices in our country? That is why it is necessary to increase the size of maternity capital.

Maternity capital funds can be directed to the child's education in any educational institution on the territory of the Russian Federation that has the right to provide relevant educational services, namely:

1. to pay for paid educational services provided by state and municipal educational institutions;

2. to pay for educational services provided by non-state educational institutions that have received an appropriate license in the prescribed manner and have state accreditation;

3. to pay other expenses related to education, the list of which is established by the Government of the Russian Federation.

The age of the child, for whose education maternity capital funds can be directed, as of the date of commencement of education according to the relevant educational program must not exceed 25 years.

Education in our country is commercialized, so the opportunity to spend money on education for a child is a good idea. Of all the areas in which maternity capital funds can be spent, this one is the most realistic, since maternity capital funds are not enough to buy housing, and the formation of the funded part of the labor pension is aimed at social support for women mothers, but does not provide social support to children.

The last direction in which maternity capital funds can be used is the formation of the funded part of the labor pension.

Women who have chosen this option, until the day the funded part of the labor pension is assigned, have the right to refuse to use funds in this direction.

At the same time, they have the right, if they did not make a decision on the disposal of maternity capital funds, when assigning the funded part of the labor pension, to take into account maternity capital funds as part of pension savings.

The law on maternity capital, of course, has its “pluses” and “minuses”, but it is worth noting that even such support should be taken positively, since the state finally provides assistance to the family and understands its importance as a social institution.
continuation
--PAGE_BREAK--

slide 2

- this is a measure of state support for Russian families in which, from 2007 to 2018 inclusive, a second child was born (or adopted) (or a third child or subsequent children, if at the birth (adoption) of a second child the right to receive these funds was not issued).

slide 3

The following have the right to receive maternity (family) capital:

a woman with citizenship of the Russian Federation who has given birth (adopted) a second, third child or subsequent children since January 1, 2007; a man with citizenship of the Russian Federation, who is the sole adopter of the second or subsequent children, if the court decision on adoption entered into force starting from January 1, 2007; the father (adoptive parent) of the child, regardless of the citizenship of the Russian Federation, in the event of termination of the right to additional measures of state support for a woman who has given birth (adopted) children, due, for example, to death, deprivation of parental rights in relation to the child, in connection with the birth (adoption) of which arose the right to receive maternity capital, to commit an intentional crime against a child (children) related to crimes against a person; a minor child (children in equal shares) or a child (children) studying full-time until he (they) reaches the age of 23, upon termination of the right to additional measures of state support for the father (adoptive parent) or the woman who is the only parent (adoptive parent) in cases established by federal law.

slide 4

The amount of maternity (family) capital: