Tag Archives: Child Poverty

For women under 30, most births occur outside of marriage

This article is from the liberal New York Times. (H/T Mary)

Excerpt:

 It used to be called illegitimacy. Now it is the new normal. After steadily rising for five decades, the share of children born to unmarried women has crossed a threshold: more than half of births to American women under 30 occur outside marriage.

Once largely limited to poor women and minorities, motherhood without marriage has settled deeply into middle America. The fastest growth in the last two decades has occurred among white women in their 20s who have some college education but no four-year degree, according to Child Trends, a Washington research group that analyzed government data.

[…]The forces rearranging the family are as diverse as globalization and the pill. Liberal analysts argue that shrinking paychecks have thinned the ranks of marriageable men, while conservatives often say that the sexual revolution reduced the incentive to wed and that safety net programs discourage marriage.

Actually, conservatives do argue that shrinking pay checks have discouraged marriage – shrinking paychecks caused by higher taxes, which are supported by single women and their overwhelming propensity to vote Democrat.

More:

The recent rise in single motherhood has set off few alarms, unlike in past eras. When Daniel Patrick Moynihan, then a top Labor Department official and later a United States senator from New York, reported in 1965 that a quarter of black children were born outside marriage — and warned of a “tangle of pathology” — he set off a bitter debate.

By the mid-1990s, such figures looked quaint: a third of Americans were born outside marriage. Congress, largely blaming welfare, imposed tough restrictions. Now the figure is 41 percent — and 53 percent for children born to women under 30, according to Child Trends, which analyzed 2009 data from the National Center for Health Statistics.

[…]Almost all of the rise in nonmarital births has occurred among couples living together. While in some countries such relationships endure at rates that resemble marriages, in the United States they are more than twice as likely to dissolve than marriages. In a summary of research, Pamela Smock and Fiona Rose Greenland, both of the University of Michigan, reported that two-thirds of couples living together split up by the time their child turned 10.

In Lorain as elsewhere, explanations for marital decline start with home economics: men are worth less than they used to be. Among men with some college but no degrees, earnings have fallen 8 percent in the past 30 years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, while the earnings of their female counterparts have risen by 8 percent.

“Women used to rely on men, but we don’t need to anymore,” said Teresa Fragoso, 25, a single mother in Lorain. 

Indeed. Ever since feminism produced such cultural advancements as coed classrooms, sex education and no-fault divorce, men have been so surrounded by freely available sex. Thanks to feminism, men don’t have to lift a finger to prove to women that they are capable of performing their traditional roles before sex is offered to them. When women decided to agree with feminists that men are identical to women, they refused to set expectations on men to act like men. When women decide that it’s not men’s jobs to perform their traditional male roles in a marriage, then they choose other men based on other criteria, e.g. – broad shoulders, a deep voice, athletic ability, nice shoes – and other concerns that have nothing whatsoever to do with marital success. Feminism is not good for men – it turns them into boys, who don’t have to prove themselves ready for marriage before they get sex. When men have sex handed to them on a silver platter, they stop caring about doing well in school, getting jobs and sacrificing to honor their commitments.

More:

Others noted that if they married, their official household income would rise, which could cost them government benefits like food stamps and child care. W. Bradford Wilcox, a sociologist at the University of Virginia, said other government policies, like no-fault divorce, signaled that “marriage is not as fundamental to society” as it once was.

Even as many Americans withdraw from marriage, researchers say, they expect more from it: emotional fulfillment as opposed merely to practical support. “Family life is no longer about playing the social role of father or husband or wife, it’s more about individual satisfaction and self-development,” said Andrew Cherlin, a sociologist at Johns Hopkins University.

[…]Reviewing the academic literature, Susan L. Brown of Bowling Green State University recently found that children born to married couples, on average, “experience better education, social, cognitive and behavioral outcomes.”

Times have changed. Before, men and women looked to each other for support – that’s why they married. Now the government gives single mothers support, so that they don’t need protectors and providers. Legions of social workers, public schools and day care are provided to teach children morality and religion – while women go to work to pay taxes for their salaries. Single mothers like this arrangement because government checks and government programs are much less demanding than husbands and fathers. It makes more sense to single women to choose exciting men to have sex with – men who are spontaneous, handsome, fun and dangerous – and then toss them aside if they try to hold her accountable to behave morally, or ask her to do anything that she doesn’t make her feel happy.

Finally, you might think that the church is aggressive about telling women how wrong it is for them to have premarital sex, but you’d be wrong. Pastors are terrified of offending women in their churches by talking about moral obligations and success factors for marriage. Women don’t want to believe that there are guidelines from morality and from social science research that could override their emotions and intuitions. They want to be happy, and whatever they decide while trying to be happy must be right. Pastors would never dream of telling women in their churches that there was anything from with the view of relationships they get from Bridget Jones’ Diary, Pretty Woman, Kate and Leopold, Eat, Pray, Love, etc.

Men: never ever marry a woman who cannot denounce feminism, socialism, premarital sex, abortion, divorce, adultery, and especially single motherhood – in the strongest terms. That is a pre-condition for marriage. And don’t accept her opinion on these questions. Expect her to convince you using evidence from research – books and research papers. Don’t marry someone who knows nothing about marriage. Don’t make a woman a parent when she knows nothing about parenting. Your future children are depending on your judgment. Fatherlessness puts children at risk for higher rates of povertyneglect and abuse, and a host of behavioral problems.

Related posts

New study: marriage and church attendance help kids finish high school

From the Marriage & Religion Research Institute. (I grabbed the PDF in case it disappears)

Excerpt:

The 1997 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth shows that students who now worship weekly and who grew up with two married parents are most likely to have received a high school degree.

Examining current religious attendance and structure of family of origin, 93 percent of students who grew up in intact married families and who attend weekly religious services have received a high school degree. Only 68 percent of students from all other family structures who never attend religious services received a high school degree. Eighty-nine percent of those who never worship but grew up in intact families and 81 percent of those who attend religious services weekly but come from other family structures received high school degrees.

Examining current religious attendance only, 87 percent of students who attend weekly religious services received a high school degree. In contrast, only 70 percent of those who never worship received a high school degree. Between these two extremes are those who attend at least monthly (81 percent) and those who attend less than monthly (76 percent).

Examining structure of family of origin, 91 percent of individuals who grew up with married biological parents received a high school degree. They are followed by those who grew up in a married stepfamily (80 percent), those who grew up with a single, divorced parent (76 percent), those who grew up in a cohabiting stepfamily (68 percent), those who grew up with an always-single parent (63 percent), and those who grew up in an intact cohabiting family (60 percent).

See the original article for footnotes, including links to other studies that confirm this finding.

The reason why this matters is because finishing high school is very important in order for people to avoid being poor.

Black economist Walter Williams explains.

Excerpt:

Avoiding long-term poverty is not rocket science. First, graduate from high school. Second, get married before you have children, and stay married. Third, work at any kind of job, even one that starts out paying the minimum wage. And, finally, avoid engaging in criminal behavior.

If you graduate from high school today with a B or C average, in most places in our country there’s a low-cost or financially assisted post-high-school education program available to increase your skills.

Most jobs start with wages higher than the minimum wage, which is currently $5.15. A man and his wife, even earning the minimum wage, would earn $21,000 annually. According to the Bureau of Census, in 2003, the poverty threshold for one person was $9,393, for a two-person household it was $12,015, and for a family of four it was $18,810. Taking a minimum-wage job is no great shakes, but it produces an income higher than the Bureau of Census’ poverty threshold. Plus, having a job in the first place increases one’s prospects for a better job.

Finishing high school is a major factor to prevent poverty, but research shows that the greatest preventer of child poverty (and child abuse) is marriage. Marriage stability also increases with regular church attendance. So, church attendance promotes both the completion of high school as well as the stability of marriage. Therefore, regular church attendance prevents poverty by helping two of the causes of poverty-avoidance.

Now… should we expect the secular left to promote church attendance based on this evidence? I think not.

One other point. The more marriage declines, the more children are raised without fathers, which makes it much less likely that children will accept the faith of their parents, leading to lower church attendance for the children of these fatherless homes. It’s a vicious cycle. The policies of the left that undermine marriage stability, like sex education, taxpayer-funded abortion, no-fault divorce and single motherhood welfare, actually cause the decline in church attendance that drives marriage rates and high school graduation rates down.

Round-up of good news for conservatives from the past week

First, from Heritage Foundation think tank, school choice reform passes in Washington, D.C. and Indiana. Now poor parents will have a choice to send their children to better schools without having to move to a richer neighborhood.

Excerpt:

The month of March closed with a victorious week for schoolchildren and families across the nation. School choice bills passed in both Washington, D.C., and in Indiana to expand educational options for students.

In Washington, the SOAR Act sailed through the House on a 225–195 vote, reauthorizing and expanding the successful D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program (DCOSP), which has been under attack by the Obama Administration for the last two years. In Indiana, legislation that has been cited as the “broadest” voucher expansion bill in the country similarly won hands-down in the Indiana House.

In Washington, House Education Committee chairman John Kline (R–MN) said last Wednesday:

Today’s vote is a victory for disadvantaged students throughout our nation’s capital. Over the last seven years, the D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program has placed a quality education within reach of students previously trapped in underperforming schools. This program has engaged parents, motivated children, and helped the dream of a diploma become a reality for thousands of D.C. students.

In a similar vein, Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma noted:

This is about promoting opportunity, focused tightly on those that have no choice today. … I’m here to give parents—especially parents without the means—opportunities for their children.”

The SOAR Act not only restores the DCOSP—which provides scholarships to low-income students in D.C.—it also expands the DCOSP to allow more students to receive scholarships.

Indiana’s legislation would provide families with a portion of their children’s public school funding to use on their choice of private schools. The amount of money families receive would be based on income levels.

Christian parents are not well served by government-run public schools, because public schools undermine Christian beliefs and result in poorly-educated educated children to boot. Let us have our tax money back so we can choose a school that serves our needs. We don’t let the government pick our laptop and cell phone, why should we let the government take our money and then choose a failing school for our children? I want to choose the school my children will go to – because I am the one who will be held accountable to God later for the children I’ve produced. And I want the poor parents and the rich parents to get the same voucher so that everyone can choose. I want the poor to have the exact same options that the rich have. And I want the failing schools to be closed down due to lack of funds, just the way that a business that fails its customers is closed down due to competitive pressures.

Next, Denver Republicans reject same-sex civil union bill.

Excerpt:

A bill to allow civil unions for same-sex couples in Colorado was stopped on Thursday night by a vote in the House Judiciary Committee.

The committee voted 6-5 to stop the bill from moving on to the full House.

The vote came after eight hours of testimony in a packed chamber at the State Capitol.

The measure easily passed the Senate last week with three Republicans joining all the Democrats voting for it.

Democrats said Senate Bill 172 could have cleared the House if all members there were allowed to vote.

This is a good idea because marriage benefits are given out to promote marriage, which is the most stable environment to raise children. Same-sex civil unions are proven to be less stable than opposite-sex marriages, and that is bad for children. If we care about children, then we need to give tax incentives for traditional marriage – the best environment in which to raise children. It’s not personal – it’s business.

Next, Texas Republicans shift money from contraceptive programs to crisis-pregnancy centers.

Excerpt:

About $7 million over the next two years would be moved from state-funded family planning services into crisis pregnancy center funding under an amendment passed by the Texas House during the budget debate.

The House voted 100-44 to pass the amendment, despite a short battle between author Rep. Randy Weber, R-Pearland, and several Democrats, who argued that family planning services help not only in the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, but also allow low-income women to get healthy check ups and cancer screenings. They said the amendment would cost the state money in the end.

“This takes money from the pot of funds used to reduce the rate of unplanned pregnancy to give money to counsel women who are pregnant already. Isn’t that counter-productive? asked Rep. Mike Villarreal, D-San Antonio.

Author of the amendment Rep. Randy Weber, R-Pearland, said that the “most innocent” need to be protected, which he said more funding for abortion-prevention centers would accomplish. He also said studies point to statistics that the poorest families using contraceptives were not successful.

I am not a big fan of single motherhood, but I am a big fan of adoption. And murdering an innocent child is certainly worse than either of those. Studies show that more contraception does not prevent abortions, it increases them.

Next, more education reform by Florida Republicans.

Excerpt:

Florida is widely recognized as the state leader in education reform. Students in the Sunshine State have made the strongest academic achievement gains in the nation since 2003, and they are one of the only states that have been able to narrow the achievement gap between white and minority students. Yesterday, the Washington Post highlighted the Florida model, and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush’s role in its creation:

“The president who turned No Child Left Behind from slogan into statute is gone from Washington, and the influence of his signature education law is fading. But another brand of Bush school reform is on the rise.

“The salesman is not the 43rd president, George W. Bush, but the 43rd governor of Florida, his brother Jeb.

“At the core of the Jeb Bush agenda are ideas drawn from his Florida playbook: Give every public school a grade from A to F. Offer students vouchers to help pay for private school. Don’t let them move into fourth grade unless they know how to read.”

State leaders seem to know a good reform strategy when they see it, and many across the country are beginning to embrace the Florida reform model.

Governor Susana Martinez of New Mexico and Governor Gary Herbert of Utah just signed the Florida-style A-F grading system into law in their respective states. The scale grades schools and school districts on a straightforward, transparent scale designed to inform parents and taxpayers about achievement results. The move will arm parents with more information about school performance – a necessary step to improving education. State leaders in Indiana, Arizona and Louisiana also recently implemented the A-F grading scale.

While transparency about school performance is essential to results-based education reform, providing parents with opportunities to act on that information is crucial. Many states are now working to enact that most important piece of the Florida reform model – school choice.

[…]Florida students have demonstrated the strongest gains on the NAEP in the nation since 2003, when all 50 states began taking NAEP exams. Moreover, between 1998 and 2008, the average score for black students increased by 12 points in reading from 192 to 204. In Florida, it increased by 25 points—twice the gains of the national average. If African American students nationwide had made the same amount of progress as African American students in Florida, the fourth-grade reading gap between black and white would be approximately half the size it is today.

Republicans are all about helping the poorest African-American children to get high-quality educations. And we don’t just talk about it, and we don’t just express good intentions, and we don’t just pass ineffective laws to much media fanfare. We deliver the goods – we walk the walk – we have the evidence of good results. It’s not about vague rhetoric and happy feelings. It’s about delivering the goods we promised to deliver. Better educations for poor minority students. Higher standards. Better outcomes.

If we care about children, then we do not kill them, we do not make them grow up without mothers and fathers, we do not force them into failing schools. Conservatism is pro-family, pro-parent, and pro-child. This is what we believe, and we act on those beliefs when we are voted in. No more happy talk about hope and change. If you want results for poor minorities, you vote Republican. And we don’t provide “compassionate” welfare programs to incentivize broken homes either, because that is the number one cause of child poverty. Conservatives hate making people slaves to the government.

Must-see videos on education policy

Related posts