Why do people in America think you must get married if you have kids?

[burning 4 revenge]

By lower class you mean working class and by middle class you mean posh right?

 

For one there's nothing wrong with being working class, I'm working class myself and I'm proud of it, I'd never want to be middle class. And you middle class people may snear at us but did you know that most working class people snear at middle class people too? In fact I'm sure that I read somewhere that even a lot of middle class people themselves are embarrased about their status.

 

Even if there was something wrong with being working class, so what if more working class people have kids out of wedlock than middle class people? That doesn't mean that having kids out of wedlock is wrong, or would turn you into a working class person, and I doubt it would make your kids more likely to go to prison.

 

How about if the father didn't leave home because they were married? Good chance he and his wife would be arguing all the time. Do you think that would be better for the kids? It's well known that kids are better off with one parent than two that are always arguing all the time.

 

And who cares what the royal family does? Is that who you really want to be like?

 

 

[Tayla]

Then thats an economic issue rather than a marriage issue. Poorer children do worse at school than richer children. Obviously being poor affects your ability to fund a wedding, buy your own home, afford health and dental care, raise your children wiithout both parents having to work, buy healthy food...the list goes on

 

There are many other factors to consider, and to focus on marriage as the cure for the ills of society seems ridiculous to me.

 

WOW - truly not an accurate accessment at all. ! My mother was a single parent and we were as poor as they come, Let me share how my moms' children turned out. Son #1- Full Lieutenant in NAVY- Following 4 years at the Naval Academy. Son #2- 2 doctorals-20 years for Fort500 companies, since relocated-semi retired and consults for business's.Son3: Marketing Director for Postal system. Son:4- Retired AirForce -Serving 25 years and with High Military Honors Daughter: Moi! Administrator for a Technology Company. Son: Worked for Apple/Mac during its start up, retired at 34!!! . He does consulting work now since he can . So speak if you have data otherwise claiming that those from lower income surely cant have brains or ambitions despite the *common* mans ill reasoning that the economy determines your life path. IT doesnt! Married or not, Kids can and will prove the societal norm incorrect if given the chance. My brothers are living proof that we may not had been rich and we may have had to work twice as hard to get into the colleges because of the economical challenges . It doesn't take money to raise kids to achieve, It takes a parental guidance that one can achieve! Never once did my mom tell us otherwise. The amazing thing in america- Libraries are free for public use, and we used them many a times to educate ourselves! We went to free lectures at colleges to gain insight, we worked in summer time at places to understand hard work and giving back to the community. Rich or poor all is available to be done...go figure

 

Bottom line:

 

Marriage is not the cure-all or the insurance that your kids will turn out better or okay.

 

To the original oster- I am american and I do not think you have to be married to have well adjusted children.

[Els]

I'm more curious why people think you must have kids if you get married, really.

[burning 4 revenge]

Theres virtually no difference between morality in the US and the UK /w'ere like mirror image in that regard

 

Its possible that moral standards are bit different on the Continent, but the US often kind of follows the UK's lead on a lot of cultural matters even to this day. Our "morality" is that of the greater Anglo-Saxon culture that includes the UK, Canada, Australia and us of course

[carhill]

I'm more curious why people think you must have kids if you get married, really.

LOL, the couple with the three babies who came to look at my mom's house today will explain it to you

 

Ever notice how married people with children have married people with children as friends and other 'childless' couples and single people are relegated to lesser status? This is an observation over many years. It's called peer and societal pressure/acknowledgment/validation

[silverfish]

WOW - truly not an accurate accessment at all. ! My mother was a single parent and we were as poor as they come, Let me share how my moms' children turned out. Son #1- Full Lieutenant in NAVY- Following 4 years at the Naval Academy. Son #2- 2 doctorals-20 years for Fort500 companies, since relocated-semi retired and consults for business's.Son3: Marketing Director for Postal system. Son:4- Retired AirForce -Serving 25 years and with High Military Honors Daughter: Moi! Administrator for a Technology Company. Son: Worked for Apple/Mac during its start up, retired at 34!!! . He does consulting work now since he can . So speak if you have data otherwise claiming that those from lower income surely cant have brains or ambitions despite the *common* mans ill reasoning that the economy determines your life path. IT doesnt! Married or not, Kids can and will prove the societal norm incorrect if given the chance. My brothers are living proof that we may not had been rich and we may have had to work twice as hard to get into the colleges because of the economical challenges . It doesn't take money to raise kids to achieve, It takes a parental guidance that one can achieve! Never once did my mom tell us otherwise. The amazing thing in america- Libraries are free for public use, and we used them many a times to educate ourselves! We went to free lectures at colleges to gain insight, we worked in summer time at places to understand hard work and giving back to the community. Rich or poor all is available to be done...go figure

 

Bottom line:

 

Marriage is not the cure-all or the insurance that your kids will turn out better or okay.

 

To the original oster- I am american and I do not think you have to be married to have well adjusted children.

 

Tayla, I have been trying to make that point all along. Unfortunately, your family is the exception to the status quo that kids from poorer families do less well than those from more well off families. Having said that, I've got more O levels than all three children of the future King of England

 

I am a lone parent myself - and never married either (burn the witch!). It's easy to get married, and easy to get divorced.

 

How about this generalisation : The only reason people get married is for the presents, the big dress, and the party. If women didn't go on about it so much, no one would bother getting married.....

[taiko]

True, they don't flaunt they illegitimate children (I believe polite society refers to them as bastards)

 

Instead they hide them away in the dark, where they develop personality disorders and end up quite dysfunctional.

 

 

Illegitimate children? What is an illegitimate child? What legitimizes a child?

 

ALL children are legitimate. The problem tends to be a lack of good parenting. A breakdown of family units and a lack of sound parenting.

 

Lower classes???

 

What are you on about, really? Have you been to the UK anytime in the last two centuries??

In the Republic of the Philippines the state actually stamps the birth certificate with a big "illegitimate" over stamp. Right now about 20% lof couple live outside of the traditional family with their legally married partner. Many more are part of second off the books families, that includes nominally Catholics as well as Muslims who have religious backing for such behaviour.

[Ross PK]

In East Asian countries (China, Japan, Korea), the share of out of wedlock children is 1%, compared to 40% in the US and 50% in the UK. You see? The US numbers aren't much lower than the UK numbers. In East Asia, marriage has nothing to do with religion, but simply a desire to provide a stable framework for children to be raised. It's not to please God. Both Japan and South Korea are first world countries too, so it's not a matter of being in an industrialized country either.

 

I wish more Americans would "think you must get married if you have kids." Unfortunately, it's no longer popular in the US either, to our own detriment. But the thing is, if you look closely at the American data, you will find that the professional upper-middle class overwhelmingly have children in marriage (96%) and have a far lower divorce rate (at less than 20%). The majority of out of wedlock births and divorces in America are occurring among the lower and lower-middle classes. The sad thing is that this creates a downward spiral for the lower classes, preventing upward mobility in a divide and conquer sort of way, like a reset button back to zero with each generation. The people who would benefit the most from a stable family unit (pooling of resources for the next generation) now do not have such a unit.

 

As others have said, lower lifetime income, mental illness and criminal behavior are directly correlated with children born out of wedlock.

 

 

Obviously correlation does not imply causation, but the correlation is very strong. So regardless of whether it was directly due to having kids out of wedlock, or conditions/attitudes that led to kids being born out of wedlock in the first place, it doesn't change the fact that children born out of the wedlock do worse in school, get worse jobs and go on to have children out of wedlock.

 

As parents we worry about the slightest things for our children, like chemicals in our plastic bottles or mercury in our fish, but why do we ignore the 800-lb gorilla that is out of wedlock births and divorce? Those two social events are far more traumatic to our children than anything else we could put them through.

 

Think about it, isn't it more likely that the 'lower class' people who are more prone to crime and having kids with issues are the sort of people who would be less bothered about getting married? And that 'classy' people with their 2 kids, puppy, white picket fence who walk with their noses in the air are more likey to be the type of people who would want/think you should get married?

 

Do you really think that a couple getting married would really change the way their kid would turn out in a positive way? How can it? Like I said, if anything being married will make it harder for both the parents to split up if they want to, which will mean the home will be more likely to be unstable.

 

Like silverfish said, getting married wont cure any problems.

 

You hit the nail right on the head there, silverfish.

Edited November 25, 2009 by Ross PK

[thom3]

WOW - truly not an accurate accessment at all. ! My mother was a single parent and we were as poor as they come, Let me share how my moms' children turned out. Son #1- Full Lieutenant in NAVY- Following 4 years at the Naval Academy. Son #2- 2 doctorals-20 years for Fort500 companies, since relocated-semi retired and consults for business's.Son3: Marketing Director for Postal system. Son:4- Retired AirForce -Serving 25 years and with High Military Honors Daughter: Moi! Administrator for a Technology Company. Son: Worked for Apple/Mac during its start up, retired at 34!!! . He does consulting work now since he can . So speak if you have data otherwise claiming that those from lower income surely cant have brains or ambitions despite the *common* mans ill reasoning that the economy determines your life path. IT doesnt! Married or not, Kids can and will prove the societal norm incorrect if given the chance. My brothers are living proof that we may not had been rich and we may have had to work twice as hard to get into the colleges because of the economical challenges . It doesn't take money to raise kids to achieve, It takes a parental guidance that one can achieve! Never once did my mom tell us otherwise. The amazing thing in america- Libraries are free for public use, and we used them many a times to educate ourselves! We went to free lectures at colleges to gain insight, we worked in summer time at places to understand hard work and giving back to the community. Rich or poor all is available to be done...go figure

 

Bottom line:

 

Marriage is not the cure-all or the insurance that your kids will turn out better or okay.

 

To the original oster- I am american and I do not think you have to be married to have well adjusted children.

 

The plural of anecdotes is not data.

 

Any intelligent person would understand the concept of a distribution. No one said marriage was a "cure-all," but divorce certainly does not help the child unless one is in an abusive marriage. Also lower income families generally do raise children who have lower educational attainment and lifetime income. Are there many exceptions? Of course! I'm one myself. But that doesn't change the fact that as a group, the generalization is valid. I look at my classmates from my low-income high school and I see that most have not gone to college, many are unemployed, the ones who are employed are working in retail and part-time gigs.

 

Here's some data for you:

High school students living in low-income families drop out of school at 4.5 times the rate of their peers from high-income families (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2008).

 

See data table:

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2008/dropout06/tables/table_01.asp?referrer=report

 

Another on education:

In modern America disadvantaged children face an elevated risk for a variety of adverse educational outcomes. According to the 2007 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), only 16 percent of fourth grade students eligible for free lunch score at proficient levels in reading compared with 44 percent of fourth graders whose family incomes are above the eligibility cutoff for free lunch; the disparity in math scores is even larger, 21 versus 53 percent (NCES 2007).

 

http://closup.umich.edu/publications/.../closup-wp-13-improve-edu-poor.pdf

 

Here's one on the impact of divorce:

Table 1 shows that adults whose parents divorced before they were 18 years old have significantly lower educational attainment, occupational status, and household income. They tend to experience more current economic hardship and have more of a history of economic hardship. Adult children of divorce fare significantly worse than others on all indicators of socioeconomic status. Adults whose parents divorced when they were children are significantly more likely to marry early, have a history of divorce and remarriage, and have an unhappy relationship, and they are more likely to mistrust other people. However, they do not have significantly lower levels of social support. Thus, adult children of divorce report significantly worse interpersonal relationships on four of our five indicators. These associations are not simply due to background characteristics. All associations with parental divorce (except for social support) are significant with adjustment for parental education, minority status, sex, and age.

http://www.jstor.org/pss/354022

(You will need an institutional license to access full article)

 

Here's results from an Oxford British Longitudinal Study on the impact of divorce:

Similarly, delinquency was by age twenty-one years twice as high amongst boys and girls who had experienced parental divorce whilst they were aged under five years (Wadsworth, 1984). A multivariate analysis that took into account the possible mitigating or exacerbating effects of social class, birth order and family size on the infant (under age five years) experience of parental divorce showed that amongst those predicted statistically as at risk of deliquency, but who did not in fact become delinquent, there were much higher prevalence rates of hospital admissions for stomach ulcers and for emotional disturbance by age twenty-six (Wadsworth, 1984). Also by age twenty-six years there was a greater likelihood of divorce or permanent separation amongst women who experience parental divorce or death during their first five years of life (Wadsworth, 1984). Table 1 shows that in the birth cohort study of children born in 1946 those who experienced parental divorce during their school years were significantly more likely to have lower educational attainment, whatever the social class of their family of origin.

 

By comparison, parental death (mostly fathers) had little impact on the child's later educational attainment and may even have increased the chances of going to university for those from manual social class families. However, only children seemed not to suffer this increased risk to a statistically significant extent. Remarriage of the custodial parent did not improve chances of higher educational attainment amongst children from divorced families, whereas in the case of those from families in which a parent died, parental remarriage was significantly associated with an increased likelihood of higher educational attainment (Wadsworth and Maclean, 1986).

 

http://lawfam.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/2/2/155

Edited November 25, 2009 by thom3

[Quinch]

I'm more curious why people think you must have kids if you get married, really.

 

Absolutely. If anyone is going to get tax breaks, it should be the childfree people. We don't take as much money from health and education budgets and we don't pollute or consume finite resources at the same level.

 

(Quinch feels smug for not having children )

[Stung]

Statistics are malleable, particularly those drawn up to reflect sociological trends, where it is almost impossible to isolate and take into account all contributing factors.

 

It's my personal take that most of those studies show that partnered parents tend to be more successful; whether or not the actual marriage certificate is useful to them still appears to be debatable.

 

It seems that many posters on this thread are talking at cross-purposes when some are theorizing about unmarried but partnered co-parents and others are talking about single parents, as if they were the same thing.

[thom3]

Statistics are malleable, but it's better than anecdotes and hunches. I bet you wouldn't fly on a Boeing 747 wing without it first clearing statistical models of tolerance.

 

Regarding partnered parents, I agree in general, but I think you would have to also consider if both partnered parents are biological parents (aside from cases of adoption). If only one of the partnered parent is the biological parent and the other biological parent is not dead, I fail to see how it would be any different than a divorcee with children remarrying, which as the above studies have shown is less ideal for the kids than a widow with children remarrying. Obviously the biggest issue here is the broken family's impact on children, regardless of whether there was a marriage certificate or not.

Edited December 5, 2009 by thom3

[sonicranger]

Look up the marriage and out-of-wedlock child rearing statistics for Sweden. I believe it is something along the lines of 50% + that have kids with no marriage planned.

 

It is a societal construct as to WHY most marriage occurs, IMO. In Sweden they have excellent health care, are educated and just plain don't feel the need to "marry" to prove anything, to receive any additional benefits etc.

 

 

Now, I will agree with others that a BIG motivator, albeit subconsciencously, is probably the whole; money, health insurance, safety net bit.

The other motivator is the fairy tale and the wedding industry itself. They've convinced American women that the only way to be "happy" is to have a fairy tale wedding, with 300 guests, roast beef, flowers and a great photographer.

 

I mean, WTF, I don't need ANY of that crap to A) Be with the woman of my dreams B) Prove to her or anyone else that I love her.

[Sam Spade]

People in america gt married because boys are repeatedly bashed on their heads with the idea that the only way to get a girl to pay attention to them is to ask her to marry them .

Don't get me started on girls.

[Scottdmw]

I don't think that marriage is supposed to exist to make adults happy. The whole idea is to provide a stable environment for children.

 

I think marriage was developed so to speak and has remained as an almost universal feature of human civilization for our entire history because it helps men and women who have children together to stay together and gives those children a good home to grow up in. A piece of paper from the courthouse is not the issue, the issue is two people making a decision of the will to stay together for the good of the family as a whole, even if it sometimes means they themselves have to sacrifice. Yes they could probably get divorced and find more romance or better sex somewhere else, but they choose not to do that because the small good it does them is outweighed by the great harm it does their children. Most divorces are not about abuse, they are about one partner deciding they would have more fun somewhere else.

 

The data show that children do best with a stable family situation. See the post by Thom above for some data examples. Biological parents have a hardwired instinct to treat their own biological children really well. That is not to say that adoptive parents can't as well, but in general and on average biological parents will do more. Children can learn by growing up with both their biological parents as well, they share a lot of genes, and to a reasonable extent what worked for the parents may work well for them too. That is why children have such an inborn fascination for finding their biological parents if they don't grow up with them.

 

Societies other people have mentioned like Sweden and indeed most of Western Europe are frankly on the way out right now. Their populations are declining and being replaced by people from areas with a stronger focus on having children. The same thing is happening in the United States to a lesser extent, we only have population growth because of immigration from Mexico. These other societies have things that we don't like, authoritarian governments, patriarchal family structures, less in the way of individual rights. But, it is a demographic reality that their civilizations are replacing ours. If you believe in our values over theirs and care what will happen in the future, you have to find some way to make those values compatible with still having population growth or at least replacement, and put healthy children before pleasure for adults.

 

Scott