How does poverty affect child development?

I need information on how poverty affects the physical, social, emotional, language and cognitive development of children.
I wont know about USA and poverty but i can tell you what happens in third world country where average per day income is less than $2.
first of all a child from poor family has been at a disadvantage since birth because the parents couldnt afford proper nutrition for him, since on average each family has 4-6 childern to feed and raise. So physically the child is weak and has weak immune system and is prone to catch all the viral diseases prevailing in the season. Most Govts now have an excellent immunization process for new borns and infants but in lot of rural areas its hard to convince people to travel to nearest health center to get their baby immunized . this is because 90% births in rural areas take place at home without any medical spervision.
Socially such childern feel complexed when they see their peers of well off families, eating junk food from Mcdonalds, KFC and pizza hut. one meal at these resturants costs more than what their whole family of 6-8 persons would spend in a week on food.
they dress differently and barely have basic necessity like water and electricity which is also a privilage for a different class. they are unacceptable in private schools and colleges. Most of these institutes conduct interviews where a childs family background is investigated and only those who qualify as coming from high- class or upper class are given admission.
These kids from poverty stricken families cannot have education as their priority because as soon as they are able to they have to join in earning and supporting the family. their child-like emotions and needs are automatically suppressed when they are made to feel responsible part of the family as a bread-earner.
go to the hood and found out!
They do have a disavantage but the do have a chance in the US since if your child has the wants it can do the impossible
in all and development. poor education. plus they are likely to treat their own chilren the same in later life.
Don't want much do you.?

Physical - think nutrition. Low budget = poor diet (sociological issue in there too)

Social - possessions, stigma of not 'having' the latest fashions/gadgets etc

Emotional - is a combination of external influences, like potential bullying/lower self esteem and the other contributory factors of why the poverty exists (parent/s, lower social status, poor job or job prospects.)

Language - families in poverty tend to have low educational standards/values, and do not have either the will, or the money to invest in books, thus access to resources is more limited.the language used in the home may be inarticulate, and heavily influenced by TV

Cog. development - ties into language skills. parents may not have the time or desire to spend with their children (working long hours etc.), and research shows this to be vital in developing thinking skills
lack of stimuli stunts development. a diet lacking vitamins and minerals with hinder physical development. social interactions will be difficult because they won;t learn appropriate behaviour, speech, and communication skills
poverty = malnutrition = slow physical development n weak health.
poverty = uneducation = obviously affects language and cognitive development.
poverty = frustration = affects emotional development
poverty = inability to communicate well = affects social development in social skills..
Poverty doesn affect childhood developement unless it is accompanied by malnutrition and/or bad parenting. Plenty of folk are poor and still do their best for their children (including going hungry so their kids can eat).
Based on the interviews of cohorts participating in the National Child Development Study, the research examined characteristics at various points in the lives of people born in 1958. It looked at whether as children individuals suffered from 'family disadvantage' in the form of poverty, lone parenthood, having an unemployed father or having been taken into local authority care. It also looked at whether their behaviour by age 16 could be characterised as 'delinquent' in terms of having been involved with the police or having played truant from school. The effects of these childhood experiences were separated out from the impact of 'initial conditions' in people's lives, as defined for example by the educational levels of their parents and the cognitive abilities that they displayed at the age of seven.

The study found that those with disadvantaged or 'delinquent' backgrounds fare badly in terms of earnings and employment chances as young adults, even at the age of 33. Men are also more likely to have had a spell in prison and women are more likely to be lone parents, by the age of 23, if they have negative childhood experiences.

To what extent do these poor outcomes in adulthood arise from the fact that disadvantaged and 'delinquent' children get on average vastly inferior educational results? The study found that education was important as a 'transmission mechanism', but that it typically accounted for under half of the differences identified. The disadvantages identified had a significant impact above and beyond their effect on education.

Of the family-based measures of childhood disadvantage, poverty was found to be by far the most important force linking childhood development with subsequent social and economic outcomes. Being brought up in a lone-parent family, for example, does not seem to matter in the absence of family poverty.

Finally, the study demonstrated an intergenerational link in the cycle of family disadvantage. It looked at the tested cognitive ability, at an early age, of the children of the 1958 cohort. Where the parents had themselves grown up in socially disadvantaged situations, the average cognitive ability of children was lower. This suggests a potentially important cross-generational link that may well spill over to affect the subsequent economic fortunes of the children of disadvantaged individuals.


This study shows how the economic position of families strongly affects the present and future welfare of children. Whether a family is able to meet the material needs of its children depends more on whether it has income from work than directly on whether it has two parents. However, the much greater amount of time that lone parents spend on average out of work means that a higher proportion of them are unable to meet their children's needs as they grow up. Such economic disadvantages can lead to both economic and social difficulties in adulthood, and feed through to the next generation. So today's high level of child poverty is likely to have continuing negative effects as the present generation grows up. Conversely, any measures that successfully address child poverty, especially by giving more households access to jobs, are likely to have wide-ranging effects in the years ahead, that go beyond the improvement of the immediate welfare of poor children.