“For Women Under 30, Most Births Occur Outside of Marriage” is an article published by the New York Times earlier this year. This article discusses the rise of unwed couples having children in the last 50 years and presents a surprising statistic:
today, more than half of the women under 30 who give birth are not married.
Why is this happening? Is marriage going out of style?
Some argue that the state of the economy is playing a key role in this shift. Many people are out of work, and planning a wedding involves time and money, which are difficult to procure if a person is without a job. Because these couples choose to live and sleep together anyway, sometimes a baby may come as an unexpected surprise. Others argue that because it is becoming so common for unwed couples to live together, the pressure to get married when a child comes along is no longer applies, as modern society no longer frowns upon unwed parents as much as it has in previous generations.
The article notes that a woman’s level of education plays a large role in whether or not she is married when she gives birth to children. In 2009, 51% of births among white women ages 20-30 with no college degree were outside of marriage, while 34% of births among white women with some college experience occurred outside of marriage, and only 8% of white women who completed a college degree had a child outside of marriage. Additionally, the article presents research showing that 2/3 of unmarried couples who have children together split up before the child turns 10.
What does this mean for family structure and values in the future? Since many children are being born out of wedlock, where the parents are much more likely to not end up staying together, there will ultimately be a rise in the number of “broken” homes in the United States. What effects will that have on the children? As the article states, research has consistently shown that children born outside of marriage are more likely to fail out of school and fall into poverty than their peers who were born to married parents.
Although I personally support the idea of a two people getting married and working as partners to help raise their children in a loving, safe environment, I understand that times are changing and that family structure is altering due to the economy, a change in society’s standards, and a number of other factors. Regardless of their marital status or living situation, it is my hope that all parents remember to always make the needs of their children their first priority and to think about how each decision they make will ultimately impact their children.
What do you think is playing the largest role in our society’s shift away from marriage? In your opinion, what is the purpose of marriage?
Image Source
Recommend
Comments (43)
Marriage: The union between a man and woman. The coming together of two bodies.
*exaggeratedly interlocks fingers for demonstration*
Sex.
Once upon a time, in good faith, it was assumed that along with sex comes all of the commitment of marriage: loyalty, devotion to making one's partner happy with oneself. Now it's almost the mirror opposite and it is assumed that along with marriage comes sex... like loyalty has to be earned (which defeats the whole purpose... you know, unconditionally standing by one's partner regardless of whether it's through good times or bad, because conditional loyalty isn't loyalty at all). People have lost all concept of this in this "me me me" culture. It's almost pointless to even try to explain.
I don't think anyone sees the need to make a commitment to one person. No one sees the need to live in a sacrificial commitment to another person, who would likewise live sacrificially toward you. Society, for better or worse, has encouraged the younger generations to seize what we want now, what gives pleasure to us now, and not necessarily think of others when it comes to having what we want. That is not exactly a recipe for successful marriages...or even a recipe for people to desire marriage at all. It is reflected in our hook-up, no-strings-attached, commitment-less style of dating.
I don't think it is the best environment for raising a child.
~As the article states, research has consistently shown that
children born outside of marriage are more likely to fail out of school
and fall into poverty than their peers who were born to married parents.~
Ah must be why I'm so poor heh. Economy more than likely definitely plays a role in the decline in marriages. The high divorce rate deters some people because they feel what's the point. The decline of strong religious beliefs probably as well. That one I have no concrete proof about, but back in the older days (even just 20 years ago) pretty much anyone you would talk to was religious or went to church often and followed their rules strictly. Nowadays I don't know many people who go to church or even claim a religion. Marriage and of itself isn't seen as important as it used to be. It used to be one of the goals. Go to school, graduate, get a good job, get married, have kids, retire, have grandkids, die. That was the path everyone was 'supposed' to lead. Now things are all jumbled up, people just do what they want. Lots still follow the path, and that's probably why their study shows more educated people have less bastard children. Though I think that also comes from the fact that when you're serious about college you have much much less free time to be out having sex and getting pregnant.
To me marriage is just marriage. It doesn't hold any special meaning other than you pledge your love for someone else in front of a bunch of other people and get these nifty rings out of it. Honestly I think it shows more devotion and dedication to be in love and stay with someone without ever getting married, than it does to just get married.
The only real purpose of marriage is for tax purposes, medical rights etc.
If you love someone, a piece of paper is not going to magically make you love them more. If it does, I think you need to evaluate some things. You don't need to be married to spend your life together. You don't need to be married to successfully raise a child with two parents. You don't need marriage to have a commitment. You don't need marriage to get laid.
As for broken homes. Almost half of all marriages end in divorce these days. Getting married in no way prevents a rise in 'broken homes'.
@Pure_Taint@xanga - The article offers some evidence that would contradict what you're saying.
@Jenny_Wren@xanga - It won't let me read the article.
I don't see how there could possibly be a difference in two unmarried people living together/spending their lives together and raising a child. Or a married couple living together/spending their lives together and raising a child.
Being married doesn't automatically equal a better home. Especially if it's one of the 1:2 marriages that fail.
Why more sinful babies? I think it comes down to two things; human nature and the economy. People aren't getting married at 16 anymore so holding off on sex is kind of ridiculous in biological terms. But, whereas some people may have wanted to get married at, say, 23, they are having to hold off until the economy gets better. That normally takes years. In those years, you are normally bound to start doing the nasty if you haven't already. But why are people getting pregnant when there are ways of stopping it? If you aren't seeing that education (of women specifically) is the defining factor in all this, you're blind. First of all, those with a better education probably have a better idea of the risks involved and may have more at stake, a college education or good job. They're more likely to use protection than those of lower educations. Time and again, it's been shown that "Abstinence Only" education is not effective. Those with higher educations, normally, didn't receive this type of sex ed. But, even those who receive an expanded sex ed program are still vulnerable to factors which make them less likely to use protection of some kind when having sex, one of which is religious stigma (Thanks Pope).
The key to any prospering and responsible society is education of all its population. As the article states, higher education means less children out of wedlock and, as other research points out, less children over their lifetime. Not only that, but higher education generally translates to a lower chance of divorce, though that's a trickier subject. So, wouldn't it make sense that children born out of wedlock are more likely to do poorly? The parents probably aren't educated (one of the biggest predictors in the education of a child) and are probably less well-off. Also, if they're less educated, remember, they are more likely to be divorced. Of course, in practice it doesn't mean that every kid born out of wedlock will be a fuck up, but it's sort of implied. I think you should be careful and need to look at the factors that led to the pregnancy or the divorce in the first place.
Purpose of marriage? Well, I'm going to treat marriage as simply a promise to another person to be exclusive with them and to devote oneself to the other. I'm not treating it as a religious or legal bond. With that out of the way, I think the purpose is simply to say "So, we can't find anyone better for each of us besides each other and we're both happy with that. How about we try to have a family and make each other happy?" That's really the end of it. My brother and his wife dated for 6(?) years and lived together for two years (and boned) before marrying in their late twenties. Both college educated, both with jobs, and still without kids 2.5 years later. They didn't do it for religious reasons (neither is religious) and while the tax breaks are nice, neither of them needed the extra money. They simply wanted to promise to each other that they would try to make each other's life better till the end.
@JusticeCho@xanga - You need to remember that the divorce rate isn't a measurement of happiness. Many marriages in the old days were terrible, but the social stigma against divorce, or the financial strain for a woman, it would apply would be unbearable. It's true that people are following their religions less today than 50 years ago in terms of numbers, but that doesn't explain why divorce rates are actually lowest among atheists and agnostics and highest among born-again Christians. If that trend follows, then it would actually be good for the divorce rate if more people dropped their religions altogether. Also, have you been to college? That's where a fair number of people lose their virginity... There was and is plenty of fucking going on in college. I do agree with your statement, though, that it shows much greater devotion to say "We don't need marriage to show our love".
@T3hZ10n@xanga - It made sense to me. I also think this way.
People are lazy, and when something stops working, instead of fixing it they just throw it out the window. That is my theory.
for me, i would not have children before marriage. i just prefer that i'm in a stable marriage before i bring children into this world. i think as hard as life is, putting children in the middle of it is even more complicated. nothing in life is easy but when two people are committed and they show that they're in it together, it's much easier to bring kids into this world.
@xhalesx@revelife - I agree! People think it's gonna be all roses but a good marriage takes a lot of hard work and a mutual desire for it to work. I think after a few years people just get sick of each other and that's where the laziness is. A lot of people want the good life, but don't want to put in the work it takes to get it.
Whether married by heart or paper and heart.. not alot of people are for marriage/commitment... soooo... my, oh, my, what a mess.. anyway, I am definitely supportive of marriage before having children. I like that idea of children growing up with parents who are set examples of people who persevere and support and pleasure their spouse.
@learningtolive_again@xanga - I know ya do deep down.
@T3hZ10n@xanga - Lol I actually think you would be very surprised if you met me. I may really disagree with you on certain things, but there are certain things we agree on or have similar views on.
@mcmeister89@mancouch - I'm soon to graduate college, and abstinence-only education worked fine for me. I'm married now, though.
@mcmeister89@mancouch - Also, where are you getting the stats that religious people have higher divorce rates? Here is a study (among many) that would say otherwise: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/09/25/factchecker-divorce-rate-among-christians/
@mcmeister89@mancouch - Yeah I didn't mean to imply that divorce and happiness were exclusively connected. Divorce rates are possibly lowest amongst those groups because they aren't being forced to marry based on anything other than their own desires, and not what they're told is the proper and right thing to do and they know they have the option not to unless they really want to. Just a theory of course. I went to college, but for me I definitely had more sex outside of college than I did while in college. Spent too much time going to class plus working full/part time to be able to have sex as often.
@JusticeCho@xanga - Ah. I mean, I was busy too, but I suppose having a girlfriend made it more readily available. I was only a bachelor for one of my college years.
@Jenny_Wren@xanga - As should be apparent, it is a correlation. States that more highly support abstinence only tend to have higher pregnancy rates. It doesn't mean that every child who has this education will get pregnant at a younger age. It is simply more likely.
Gospelcoalition.org huh? Sounds pretty indifferent and unbiased... except that it's run by Focus on the Family, a notoriously right-wing Christian group. Joking aside, you didn't read the whole article did you? The only part of the entire page that even mentioned secular Americans said that "Nominally attending conservative Protestants are 20 percent more likely to divorce, compared to secular Americans." which only adds to my argument.
Now, where did I find my statistics? A research paper published by the Barna Research Group which was confirmed by the Associated Press after researching US census data. Go look up Barna on Wikipedia. They are a research group dedicated to helping the Christian churches. Basically, they went against what should have been their own bias (which is called "performing science") and reported that, according to their research, atheist/agnostics had a divorce rate of about 21%. You can find their site just by Googling them, but here's a great site that deals with their data, plus corroborating data from other studies which support this claim (all the studies are listed at the bottom of the page): http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_dira.htm
The studies I'm citing are between six to ten years old, but unless the general divorce rate in America jumped drastically (it didn't), the numbers would be about the same. And they are. From the site you sent me, regularly attending Protestant Christians have a divorce rate of about 36% which is only 2% higher than the 34% reported by Barna 10 years earlier. So, we know that's remained pretty much constant AND that both groups independently came to similar results. You'll also note, if you read the rest of the website I sent you, that the highest divorce rates lie in the Bible Belt and southern states. Not exactly the bastion of secular America if you ask me.
Lastly, I tried finding the "many" other published research papers you were referring to... Couldn't find a damn one that backed up your claim that Christians had lower divorce rates. That's weird, unless of course it was only an assumption...
I'm not sure why the research you quoted only includes white women...
@icecreamsunde@xanga - That's because it was the research presented in the original article.
@mcmeister89@mancouch - The Gospel Coalition was reporting the study, not conducting the study.
And something to consider concerning the statistics--they are drawing a distinction between serious Christians, and those who are merely nominal, which in reformed Christian culture simply means that their beliefs don't effect much of their lives, at least as far as they are willing to admit, outside the church.
If we actually take account of those who are sincere about their faith (as in, it is not just a cultural leaning, as it might be, for instance, in the Bible Belt), that would mean that conservative,practicing Jews are 97% less likely to divorce than the average secularist. And that active, conservative protestants are 35% less likely to divorce than the average secularist.
If we are allowed to be precise about belief, as you are in categorizing atheists/agnostics by their percentage rate of divorce, than let this study stand as it is precise in its findings. It seems the more religious and the more conservative you are (in an effectual, proactive way), you have a far greater chance of marital success than others.
To arrive at this understanding, you would have had to read this note in parentheses near the table:
"In reading the table, the numbers represent the likelihood of divorce compared to those with no religious affiliations. So 20% would mean that group is 20%more likely to divorce than Americans with no religious affiliations while -97% means the group is 97% less likely to divorce than the non-religious."
I found studies supporting the idea that the devoted religious have happier marriages with a lower chance of divorce, there are several links at this source:
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2006/12/why-religion-matters-even-more-the-impact-of-religious-practice-on-social-stability
Oddly, it didn't take much searching. ;)
Lastly--were any of the numbers revealed on how many marriages actually happen with non-religious couples? It seems that most don't trouble themselves to get married, so that is is easier to leave if things don't work out. I mean, EVEN factoring in all loose practices of cultural Christianity, 64% of 10,000 successful marriages is a whole lot more successful marriages than, say, only 79% of 7,000. And I'm totally throwing out random guesses at the ratio of marriages.
Sorry for the fact that the link to the original article isn't working, everybody. Here is the link to the original article from the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/18/us/for-women-under-30-most-births-occur-outside-marriage.html?_r=2&