Land’s experiences circle a central point: there is essentially no safety net in the United States for those struggling to provide for themselves, financially or otherwise. Be it those fleeing domestic abuse or striving to lift themselves from poverty, the U.S. lacks adequate support for those in need. Although her evidence is largely anecdotal, Land proves time and again that the American welfare system is an absurd caricature of help and, often, does more harm than good. 

Working as a maid, Land made under $9 an hour. To ensure that she and her daughter received the aid they needed, she could not work more than twenty-five hours a week; otherwise, she would not meet the guidelines for financial need. Social services paired with part-time work were not enough for her to adequately provide for her daughter. Yet, if she strove to raise her income, she would be forced to lose her benefits. It is a vicious cycle ruled by strict regulations that are blind to the real-world necessity of those reliant on them. Financial independence can be impossible without governmental aid; as Land explains, it is equally impossible with it. 

American poverty is ruled by strange restrictions and odd requirements. The already-messy process of acquiring aid is complicated by the staggering array of agencies and jurisdictions at play. Land found herself working with federal, state, and municipal organizations, forced to navigate the confusing bureaucratic arena at not one but three levels. In Washington state, for example—where Land lived during the events of the novel—there were seven distinct agencies offering aid, not including the Pell Grants she received to pursue higher education. For those without access to the technological resources, transportation, linguistic skills, or education necessary to properly navigate these channels, acquiring aid is excruciatingly inaccessible.

Poverty, according to Land, is an intractable state of forced stagnation. Through her experiences living in a homeless shelter and a halfway house, working a variety of low-wage jobs, and seeking governmental aid, Land met countless other people with stories just like hers. Many, often young mothers escaping domestic violence, had spent years struggling vainly to break even, let alone cross the poverty threshold. It is an impossible state to be in: at once reliant on government aid but aware that, if you work to improve your circumstances, you risk losing the very aid that ensures your survival. Similarly, long-term poverty makes no space for emergencies or accidents. It is a precarious state of being, as even the simplest emergency can prove devastating, setting a person back months or even years. Medical situations, for parents and children, were the most frequent drains on resources. For many readers of Maid, Land’s revelations will feel neither surprising nor comforting. Instead, her musings on the nature of poverty and its inescapability may seem tone-deaf or lacking perspective. The prejudice and hopelessness she once experienced will feel all too familiar, as will the limits of government aid.

Land describes several less-than-ideal encounters with both friends and strangers that indicate the poor perception that many Americans have of those reliant on welfare. She explains that strangers in the grocery store would judge her for using food stamps, expect her to use them only for certain items, or openly confront her for what they saw as wasting their tax dollars. To Land, who grew up comfortably middle class, this explicit bias was unexpected and startling, particularly because of the limited draw that welfare places on taxpayer money. Even long-time friends offered the same insights, commenting that it was their labor that paid for the assistance programs she relied on. By writing Maid and revealing the complexity of navigating welfare programs, the cyclical nature of poverty, and the quiet but painful judgment of those who are financially struggling, Land dispels the myths of poverty that are too often accepted. It is not for lack of effort, she explains, that people remain reliant—to presume so is both false and offensive.