How food assistance programs can feed families and nourish their dignity
In the wake of the recent government shutdown, which left over 42 million Americans reliant on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits scrambling for food, the conversation around food assistance has taken a poignant turn. A New York Times interview highlighted the frustration and anger of individuals like a West Virginia woman who expressed, “We’re angry. Because we do count!” This sentiment underscores a critical aspect of food assistance: it is not merely about survival, but also about dignity and social status. Food plays a significant role in our identities, and being unable to provide healthy, nutritious meals can lead to feelings of shame and invisibility. Researchers in food inequality and justice have long noted that while food assistance programs are vital for meeting basic needs, they often inadvertently contribute to a cycle of stigma and diminished self-worth among recipients.
The article explores the psychological impact of food assistance, revealing that many individuals experience shame when their benefits fall short of covering grocery bills. The experience of navigating food pantries, often filled with low-quality or damaged food, can further exacerbate feelings of indignity. For example, one woman described the food available at pantries as “almost trash.” The stigma surrounding food assistance is compounded by societal perceptions that often paint recipients as undeserving or fraudulent. People using SNAP benefits frequently encounter judgment from cashiers and strangers, reinforcing negative stereotypes and feelings of inadequacy. However, research suggests that food assistance programs can be designed to preserve dignity. Programs that promote client engagement, such as bulk-buying cooperatives in Canada or innovative meal kit initiatives like “Pass the Love,” demonstrate that providing high-quality food can significantly enhance the experience of those in need. Participants in the meal kit program reported feelings of joy and respect, describing the kits as “gifts” that conveyed care and consideration.
Ultimately, the article advocates for a shift in how food assistance is approached, emphasizing the importance of treating food as a basic human right. This involves ensuring that individuals have unconditional access to fresh, nutritious, and culturally appropriate food that not only satisfies hunger but also uplifts their dignity and social status. By minimizing stigma and fostering a sense of worth through thoughtful food assistance programs, we can help those in need feel seen, valued, and empowered. The challenge remains to create systems that support not just physical nourishment but also the psychological and social well-being of all individuals, reinforcing the idea that everyone deserves to eat well and feel good about their food choices.
Food assistance does more good when it doesn’t make people feel bad for needing help.
SolStock/E+ via Getty Images
The
2025 government shutdown
drew widespread attention to how many Americans struggle to get enough food. For 43 days, the more than 42 million Americans who receive
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
benefits had to find other ways to stock their cupboards.
When asked how she felt about her benefits being suspended, one
woman in West Virginia
told a New York Times reporter, “We’re angry. Because we do count!”
Her sentiment reflects an often underappreciated fact about food. Food is not just a matter of survival. What and how you eat is also a symbol of your social status. Being unable to reliably feed your family healthy and nutritious foods in a way that aligns with your values can feel undignified. It can make people feel unseen and less important than others.
As researchers who study
food inequality
,
nutrition
and
food justice
, we have spent decades surveying and interviewing Americans about how they eat. We have witnessed firsthand how food assistance does help people meet their basic needs, but how it can also be stigmatizing and diminish their sense of dignity.
We have also studied alternatives to typical charitable food programs that, despite good intentions, tend to induce shame. We have learned that it is possible to help people put food on the table while preserving their dignity.
Dignity and food assistance
Addressing the root causes of food insecurity – what happens when people lack steady access to the
food they need for a nutritious diet
that’s in keeping with their preferences – is a persistent problem in the United States.
Thus, the
demand for SNAP benefits
, which help Americans buy groceries,
other government nutrition programs
, and
food banks and food pantries
rarely declines much – even when the economy is strong. Yet relying on food assistance programs
does not tend to support a healthy diet
and can take a toll on mental health.
As interviewers and clinicians, we have heard mothers describe the shame they feel when SNAP benefits do not cover the entire grocery bill.
We have witnessed the frustration
that comes with walking down a food pantry aisle lined with signs instructing hungry people to “take only 1 item!”
“The stuff looks like almost trash, but they give it to you,” one woman we interviewed said of her experience with food pantries and the like.
These kinds of stories are not uncommon. Charitable food programs receive leftover items from grocery stores, donations from community food drives and local businesses, and sometimes surplus from local farms. Food is often damaged in transport or from being handled too many times. A review of the research found that many people who use food pantries
described the food as unhealthy, moldy or inedible
. Being given unhealthy and unappealing food in a time of need is a double burden.
While free food may fill the stomach, it does not satisfy the desire to feel fully human and worthy of nourishment.
People who visit food banks
have told researchers that they have come to expect
low-quality food and few choices. When food aid is provided that way, it can leave the people it is supposed to help
feeling powerless
and
ashamed
.
These indignities are compounded by the fact that people who visit food banks and food pantries
routinely face suspicion and surveillance
around what they buy and how they eat, intensifying the
stress associated with food insecurity
.
In our research, we saw cashiers hovering over mothers using
SNAP EBT cards
in the self-checkout line.
Politicians routinely suggest that SNAP is corrupt
, contributing to nationwide perceptions that people who rely on this program are unfairly gaming the system. One study found that more than two-thirds of the Americans people who get food assistance have been the
target of hostile comments and interactions from strangers at the grocery store
.
Minimizing stigma
Several studies
have shown that food programs do not need to sacrifice dignity to offer help. Programs that offer opportunities for people with lower incomes to receive and give back are important.
In Canada, bulk-buying food cooperatives
did just that. Food assistance programs confer dignity when they
make people feel good
. People seeking help feel more satisfied after visiting food pantries that keep convenient hours or offer fresh produce.
SNAP has also tried to promote client dignity
by ensuring that benefits are accepted in major grocery stores and distributing the funds to debit cards, allowing people to look and feel like everyday shoppers.
Yet despite these efforts
social stigma persists
. People who are enrolled in the SNAP program are still
routinely devalued and judged for being poor
in a society that assigns social value and worth based on one’s position on the economic ladder.
Because SNAP benefits can be used to buy food at stores, the program generally allows for broad choices.
Brandon Bell/Getty Images
Cultivating dignity in food assistance
Minimizing stigma improves food assistance. Intentionally cultivating food dignity may be the next step.
Our assessment of a nationwide meal kit program demonstrated how dignity can be cultivated when food assistance programs consider the nutritional, emotional, aesthetic and cultural dimensions of food and eating.
In 2021, we conducted 116 interviews with participants of a meal kit program called
Pass the Love
. The program was free and anyone could enroll, no questions asked. The meal kits contained the necessary food and recipes to make three vegetarian meals a week, such as sesame coconut noodle salad or carrot coconut dal with rice. The program ran for four consecutive weeks.
When we interviewed participants about their experiences during and after the program,
we learned
that while they were thankful for the free food, what mattered more was the high quality, how it was packaged and how it conveyed care and respect.
Most participants had incomes at or well below the poverty line. They described what we came to call a “high dignity food experience,” meaning that it generated positive feelings and a sense of worth.
Opening the nicely packaged meal kit boxes each week felt like “Christmas,” to some people and a “gift” to others. Many found the “thought and care” that went into the program remarkable. Offering high-quality food to make nutritious, complete meals symbolized that low-income or food-insecure people deserve to eat well and feel good.
Our research, like similar studies that others have conducted, shows that
treating food as a basic human right
requires more than just giving people something to eat. It means ensuring unconditional access to the culturally appropriate fresh and nutritious food people need to thrive not just physically, but psychologically and socially.
Joslyn Brenton received funding from Partnership for a Healthier America as an external research expert.
Dr. Virudachalam received funding from the Edna G. Kynett Memorial Foundation, Rite Aid Foundation, and Partnership for a Healthier America in the last 36 months. She is a member of The Food Trust Board of Directors, the National Produce Prescription Collaborative Steering Committee, and Philadelphia City Council’s Food and Nutrition Security Task Force.
Alyssa Tindall does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
