The following editorial appeared in the San Jose Mercury News on Friday, Feb. 24:
If motherhood before marriage is the new norm for U.S. women under age 30, it’s urgent to find out why.
Politicians railing against the decline of family values won’t be much help. Evidence suggests that money rather than morality underlies this troubling trend. We need to find out the root causes to decide how to deal with it.
More than half of babies born to U.S. women younger than 30 occur outside marriage, according to a New York Times report. But the trend is dramatically different based on education levels: 92 percent of women with college degrees are married when they have a baby, compared to 43 percent of those with a high school diploma or less. The fastest growth was among young white women.
Babies born to single mothers are more likely to grow up in poverty, founder in school and have emotional or behavioral problems. If we don’t catch these problems before they start, society will pay a much higher economic and social cost down the road.
Most young women say they’d like to marry — if they could find the right man. About eight in 10 unmarried new mothers say they hope to marry their children’s father some day, but fewer than one in seven has done so by the time their kids turn 3, according to sociologists Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas, authors of the book “Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women Put Motherhood Before Marriage.”
So what gets in the way?
The sexual revolution is a convenient whipping boy for political demagogues, who say the fact that young women don’t need men to support their babies has been the ruination of family values. If that were the case, college-educated women with higher incomes would be more likely to give birth without marrying than less educated women. And that’s not the picture.
Edin and Kefalas found that women in their 20s don’t want to rush into a wedding that’s likely to end in divorce. And when they take a good look at their babies’ fathers, they don’t always see Mr. Right.
The elephant in the room is the economic predicament of today’s young men who are not college-educated. They face a much trickier job market and unstable financial future than they used to. Entry-level wages for men who finish high school have fallen 23 percent since 1973, adjusted for inflation. Some of the sharpest drops in married two-parent families are in places such as Loraine, Ohio, since the steel mills closed.
Funny how lack of money and an uncertain future can change your point of view — or others’ views of you.
Even if some guys want to do the right thing for their babies, they may be reluctant to make a lifelong commitment to the mothers when they don’t know where they’ll get their next paycheck. And young women who want to have babies may dodge marriage for similar reasons.
It’s tempting to wish we could turn back the clock to the 1950s and make married-with-children the norm. But the ‘50s weren’t paradise either, especially for women trapped in unhappy marriages.
Instead, we need to find ways to improve the economic status of young men to make marriage a more attractive and realistic option.
And we need to deal with a new generation of kids likely to need more help with school and job skills.
Comments (43)
Add comment@fromdust
1. great post;
2. yes, I pay taxes for "stuff" lumped into that FICA that I dont agree with, but it's the price of being an American in good standing;
3. this health care issue, no matter what side of it you're on, is controversial because it mandates that you as an employer pay for "stuff" that may not sit well with you and there is nothing in the contract (US Constitution) to back its authority to do so;
4. the 1st Amendment is on the side of the Church and similar institutions that have issue (this might be a stretch, but conscientious objectors are in a similar set of circumstances, with reference to objecting but still participating in the liberties we enjoy)' and,
5. debatable whether this mandate "supports the functions of the United States" per our Constitution.
grendel
1. As an employer, you're required to provide all sorts of things for your employees. FICA is one, but so is a safe workplace. You have to comply with the ADA. You can't sexually harass workers. You can't discriminate based on race or gender or age. Maybe you disagree with some of those requirements, but they're the price of being an employer in good standing.
2. The healthcare mandate falls in that same category. The ACA is a law passed by a majority vote in Congress and signed by the President, so until the Supreme Court rules otherwise, it complies with the Constitution. "Controversial" is a meaningless term in this context.
3. Your school lunch analogy is interesting, but you have the roles somewhat wrong. You're not the parent, you're the school. And you have a mandate to serve a lunch menu with grains and meats and vegetables...but you personally are a vegetarian so you refuse to serve meat to any of the students, even though many of them are not vegetarians. They're not your children, they're some other parents' children who happen to like meat. Don't want to serve your own kids meat, no problem. But if you want to run a school and get public funds for it, heat up those patties of mystery meat.
I'm a wee bit confused...
How does the validity of #2 above fit with #3 - 5? The second points states that there are things you fund with which you don't agree, but that doing them is the price of citizenship in the US, but then going on to 3 - 5, you state that you cannot be forced to fund things with which you don't agree. Where is the dividing line?
A husband and a wife gives the child the best chance
Look around you. A home with a loving husband and a loving wife dedicated to each other gives any children in the family the best chance to prosper.
Of course there are exceptions. Fortunately for our country, there are many exceptionally talented and dedicated single moms. Easy to see some stellar cases when a single mom can do it. But I surely guarantee you it is not so easy. Not impossible, but not easy.
I know there are so many times when my precious wife and I desperately needed each other. Raising kids is tough and some days seem like overwhelmingly tough. Some days it seemed like a tsunami of issues would converge on us. Financial issues, time issues, illnesses or hormonal outbreaks would spring up. Or sometimes we all need a time to hug each other. It can be hard to hug yourself all alone. It is really nice to have your husband or wife to tell you you are wonderful when you do not feel so wonderful. Together we were stronger than either one of us alone could possibly be.
And a strong-willed child to his or her detriment, can dishearten and fatigue and discourage a parent standing alone. But two parents who love and cherish each other and cherish their child can support a stressed child physically, emotionally and financially far, far better than one. --- most of the time.
1 more, and then it's a dead horse issue
1. @ Lat58: we're talking about coverage for an elective set of circumstances -- is that really health care? What if I want coverage for tattoo removal? I made a mistake, c'mon...
2. @fromdust: much deeper argument with lines firmly entrenched. I'm not speaking for the Church, but I would appeal to the unflinching principle that God is pro-life and the faithful aspire to welcome him into their lives thru his (bastard) Son, Christ Jesus.
my apologies to any I have offended.
latitude and fromdust.....
Thank you for trying. I also thought Grendels school lunch analogy was lacking,and that his points 2 and 3 are in direct conflict with each other. You two did an excellent job clarifying.
It is very clear, at the end of this conversation (for me anyway) that no matter how simple the logic, a very religious person simply cannot accept the idea that another person may NOT be subject to their personal Religion, and is unable to use that basic idea to reason about laws they would create for people of all or no faith.
Frankly, it's that attribute about the religious right that scares me the most.
philistine
but I wont hold it against you.
swimmer, here's something to cheer you down
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/251fa6410b/women-s-health-experts-speak...
Mike
Sorry Grendel
But you don't get to define 'healthcare'.
Maybe I think the cleft palate you're born with is natural because God made you that way.
Or the limb that you lost in car accident...sealing up the stump might be 'healthcare', but the prosthetic limb...sorry, but you made 'a mistake'.
Your heart attack is because you smoked and didn't exercise, so no healthcare for you.
The law is pretty clear that the Secretary of HHS defines what services are to be provided. Not Grendel. Not the Pope.
But I give you points for obfuscation.
Latitude58:
presumptuous, but overall an acquired taste.
Back to the article
Perhaps females need taught. If he is not Mr Right, Having a baby will not change him into someone he is not. It get old hearing about the lack of good men, while women seek and reward the worst men have to offer. Like it or not sex has consequences. Not thinking about them does not dismiss them.
If womanizing bad boys turn you on, don't complain if getting pregnant doesn't turn him into the ideal father figure. You want the man of your dreams to someday marry, don't date anyone that does not resemble him.
“The sexual revolution is a
“The sexual revolution is a convenient whipping boy for political demagogues, who say the fact that young women don’t need men to support their babies has been the ruination of family values” Is definitely the whipping boy, it has been twisted. Young women don’t need men to support their babies, it doesn’t mean they don’t want them there. It was saying with equal opportunity and equal ay for equal work you have a choice, if you don’t love him, you don’t have to marry him. If he abuses you, don’t marry him; if he won’t be faithful don’t marry him. You don’t have to live on happy pills to stand to be in the same room with him. The sexual revolution is about knowing you always have a choice and learning the ability to stand on your own two feet so you don’t have to be trapped in a miserable marriage.