- Obama: Hole U.S. ‘digging out of’ requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- Obama’s regulatory agenda will cost U.S. economy $143B next year: report
- Patriot Act author on James Clapper: Fire, prosecute him
- Russia P.M. Medvedev: No amnesty for political prisoners
- Michigan GOP Senate hopeful reminds government is the ‘servant’
- Christmas, by Congress: Members mull a 15-cent tax on trees
- U.S. unemployment falls to five-year low of 7 percent; 203K jobs added
- World mourns Nelson Mandela and celebrates his life; burial set for Dec. 15
- Bill O’Reilly reminds: Nelson Mandela ‘was a communist’
- John Boehner says GOP should support gay candidates: ‘I do’
HICKS: Marriage hard, but worth effort
Question of the Day
Marriage is hard. That’s what I told the guy sitting next to me on the plane Tuesday when he explained that he and his bride of less than a year have split up, despite the birth several weeks ago of their son.
That’s what I told a girlfriend in an e-mail, and another over lunch recently when she shared her fear that she and her husband might not make it through a rocky patch.
That’s what I tell myself on any given day, and what I remind my husband when we try each other’s patience or expect special skills that simply don’t exist. Like mind reading.
Lifelong marriage - once a goal held in the hearts of every newlywed couple - no longer is an expectation even for those who enter the bonds of matrimony with the best of intentions. That is, if they enter matrimony at all.
Two recent studies reveal some startling realities about the state of marriage in America and the trends that impact families, children and the communities we share.
The journal “The Future of Children,” a collaboration of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and the Brookings Institution, devotes its most recent issue to the subject of “fragile families,” defined as families that are formed when children are born of unmarried couples. In the first comprehensive, longitudinal study of such families, a disconcerting picture emerges. Among the findings contained in the journal’s summary:
- At the time of their child’s birth, most parents in fragile families are romantically involved and have high hopes that they will get married; most, however, are not able to establish stable unions or long-term co-parenting relationships.
- Both mothers and fathers in fragile families have low earnings capacities stemming from low-quality education and from physical, emotional and mental health problems.
- The capabilities and contributions of unwed fathers fall short of those of married fathers and differ in important ways by the kind of relationship the fathers have with their child’s mother.
- Children who grow up in single-mother and cohabiting families fare worse than those born into married-couple households, although being raised by stable single or cohabiting parents seems to entail less risk than being raised by single or cohabiting parents when these family types are unstable.
- The costs of nonmarital births are high, both to children and parents in fragile families and to society as a whole; reducing births to unmarried parents should be policymakers’ primary goal.
Naturally, the journal includes several suggestions for public policies intended to strengthen “fragile families,” all of which call for expanded social programs to address the supposed root cause, identified as nonmarital childbearing. As you might expect, emphasis is on avoiding childbirth over promoting marriage, as if a government in a free society could do either.
Sadly, I don’t think there’s a government program that will turn around our culture’s shifting attitudes about marriage.
Unfortunately, perhaps due to our cultural distaste for doing hard things, negative attitudes are evident in our view of the institution itself. According to a recent study from the Pew Research Center, 39 percent of Americans now say marriage is obsolete.
More importantly, 34 percent of Americans said the growing variety of family living arrangements is good for society, while only 32 percent said it didn’t make a difference and just 29 percent said it was troubling.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
- Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement
- Obama administration issues permits for wind farms to kill more eagles
- Rush Limbaugh: Obama trying to make Mandela death about himself
- Bill OReilly reminds: Nelson Mandela was a communist
- PRUDEN: British press horrified as London's new mayor dares to proclaim the truth
- Obama: Hole U.S. 'digging out of' requires billions more in unemployment benefits
- NAPOLITANO: Pope Francis should be saving souls, not pocketbooks
- EDITORIAL: Our ideological president
- Kill team: Obama war chiefs widen drone death zones
- MILLER: Obamacare enrollees include 101 members of the House of Representatives
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Red Alert focuses on the hottest political topics in the nation and calls Americans to action.
History doesn't have to be grim; there is a lot to be learned from the pages of time.
The Constitution: Every issue, every time. No exceptions, no excuses. And how to get from here to there.
Why can’t humans just be free to be humans?
White House pets gone wild!