How big a problem is family
fragmentation? “Immense,” says Mitch Pearlstein, head of the Minnesota think
tank Center of the American Experiment — “the biggest domestic problem facing
this country.”
So big he went out and interviewed
40 experts of varying ideology across the nation and relayed their answers in
his book “Broken Bonds: What Family Fragmentation Means for America’s Future.”
That’s the good news. The bad news
is that none of the experts is confident he has an answer, and neither is
Pearlstein.
What is family fragmentation? The
facts are easy to state.
About 40 percent of babies born in
America these days are born outside of marriage — about 30 percent of
non-Hispanic whites, more than 50 percent of Hispanics and more than 70 percent
of blacks.
Back in 1965, Daniel Patrick
Moynihan was prompted to write his report on the black family when the
out-of-wedlock birth rate of blacks was 25 percent. He believed, correctly,
that this spelled trouble ahead.
Half a century later that’s the
figure for supposedly privileged non-Hispanic whites.
Scandinavian countries also have
high out-of-marriage birth rates, but couples tend to stay together and raise
their children to adulthood. In America, not so much.
Pearlstein notes that the percentage
of children living with two parents in 2009 was 86 percent among Asians, 75
among non-Hispanic whites, 67 percent among Hispanics and 37 percent among
blacks.
But these numbers include
step-parents. When you take into account findings that child abuse by
stepfathers is substantially above average, that’s not entirely good news.
The numbers that show that children
raised by their two biological (or adoptive) parents do substantially better in
every respect in life than those who are not.
They do better in school and in
higher education, they do better at jobs and economically, they develop more
stable and lasting relationships personally.
They’re more likely to earn success
— what American Enterprise Institute President Arthur Brooks identifies as the
chief source of personal satisfaction and happiness.
Confronted with those facts, most
Americans’ impulse is to be wary of passing judgment on single parents. Some of
them indeed do raise children who do well. Yet many struggle through
difficulties that happily married parents seldom experience.
Back in the culturally conformist
America of the mid-20th century, there was a stigma against unmarried
parenthood and divorce. Marriage rates were higher and divorce rates much
lower. But there’s little sign that such a stigma will return.
Even among cultural and religious
conservatives, there is no perceptible move to repeal the no-fault divorce laws
that almost every state passed in the 1970s.
Family fragmentation is unsettling
nevertheless, because it seems to be creating a two-tier society. In his 2012
book “Coming Apart,” AEI scholar Charles Murray highlighted how among the
wealthiest 20 percent of whites, divorce rates and single parenthood have
returned to 1950s levels after a blip upward in the 1970s.
But among the poorest 30 percent of
whites (and among much larger percentages of Hispanics and blacks) divorce and
single parenthood have become a way of life.
That is exacerbated by the recent
decline in college attendance by young men and the dearth of job opportunities
for less educated men. That makes them less marriageable and less prepared to
take responsibility for children they may father.
Brookings Institution scholar Isabel
Sawhill, echoing Murray, tells Pearlstein that we are becoming a “bifurcated
society,” not just because of income inequality but because of family-formation
patterns.
One conclusion from all this is that
the nation is being deprived of a substantial amount of human capital by family
fragmentation. Young people are achieving less than their potential, with
cumulative negative consequences for all of us.
Is there any way to reverse the
fragmentation trend? Some of Pearlstein’s experts call for raising taxes; some
call for lowering them. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) calls for legislative remedies
to reverse “implicit marriage penalties in our tax code and welfare programs.”
Such changes may be useful “nudges,”
to use Harvard law professor (and Obama appointee) Cass Sunstein’s term. But
perhaps well-off Americans should, as Charles Murray suggests, preach what they
practice.
Few Americans want to stigmatize
single parents. But should we be afraid to tell people there’s a better way?
No comments:
Post a Comment