This chapter analyzes the debates over inclusion of parents in the survivor benefit program under the 1939 amendments to the Social Security Act and the design and implementation of dependency standards for parents. Definitions and measures of dependency varied between different eligible groups. Qualifying for benefits proved difficult for aged Americans under administrative practices which privileged dependency centered on the nuclear family model. These benefits mirrored the occupational exclusions found in Old Age and Survivors Insurance, thus limiting access based on race, gender, and citizenship. Survivor benefits for parents are in a middle ground between means-tested and contributory systems in the spectrum of American social policy. While initially facing a means test, parent recipients were then presumed to be dependent for their lifetime, thus avoiding the continued investigations in OAA. Once dependency was established, the program’s administration placed recipients in the contributory track of social policy.

The expansion of responsible relative laws, including property lien and recovery laws, generated significant opposition and activism against these provisions. This chapter addresses the key critiques of those provisions, relying in part on the voices of recipients of Old Age Assistance and their families. Opponents contested the administration of these laws and the family norms underscoring support obligations. Advocacy organizations fought these provisions’ enforcement and pushed for their repeal. The organized response to responsible relative laws, as well as protests by individual recipients via fair hearings and court challenges, represent an early version of the welfare rights movement. While the efforts yielded limited success until the 1970s, they did bring attention to administrative practices in public assistance administration and offered a voice to the elderly relying on public benefits and the families required to provide support.