The black community's 72 percent rate eclipses that of most other groups: 17 percent of Asians, 29 percent of whites, 53 percent of Hispanics and 66 percent of Native Americans were born to unwed mothers in 2008, the most recent year for which government figures are available. The rate for the overall U.S. population was 41 percent.The article addresses (but doesn't answer) the question of why this is happening and what significance it has. I think it's a tragedy.
09 November 2010
41% of American babies are born to unwed mothers
This from an AP story carried in the StarTribune (and elsewhere, undoubtedly). I believe the data cited in the article are national, rather than from Texas or Houston, but I can't be sure:
Hmm. Statistics from Sweden: 44% of the new parents are married, 48% in stable relationships and lives together without marriage ("sambo") and 8% single mothers.
ReplyDeleteHow many of those American newborns have parents that just aren't married (yet)?
[source: http://www.svd.se/nyheter/inrikes/svenska-kvinnor-foder-fler-barn-an-eu-snittet_653625.svd]
I dismiss. A marriage certificate is no "awesome parent" pass.
ReplyDeleteA reason cited for the spike in unwed births is that the recent mini "boom" in birth rate dove with the economic crisis. The potential parents who plan their reproduction are for the most part married. With births down overall, that makes the unwed birth portion higher than statistical average.
ReplyDeleteBut I'm dubious of the statistic. The CDC says:
"The number of births to unmarried women increased 4 percent between 2006 and 2007, to 1,715,047. The birth rate increased 3 percent; the proportion of all births to unmarried women reached 39.7 percent of all US births in 2007. All of these measures were at record levels for the United States. According to preliminary data, the number and percent of births to unmarried women both increased again in 2008, but relatively modestly, whereas the unmarried birth rate declined."
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/unmarry.htm
It would be interesting to know how many of the out-of-wedlock births are to parents in a stable, committed relationship. I suspect 'planned' vs. 'unplanned' births would be a more revealing statistic.
ReplyDeleteThis is why I'm on board with teaching sex ed and birth control in schools. Parents really, really should be teaching their kids this stuff, but they're not. Better to teach everyone in the schools, and then if parents disagree and have a good relationship with their kids, they'll be able to discuss their own family's views.
I agree with Mirar: marriage is not the real point here. In France more than half the babies are born to unwed parents and no one bats an eye, because married parents isn't an accurate predictor of safe raising environment any more, if it ever was.
ReplyDelete(http://www.la-croix.com/article/index.jsp?docId=2326072&rubId=4076)
I think what needs more data is how many children are being raised by a single mother alone and with no father or other family members helping. There are committed parents of all races who chose not to get married that fall into the Star Tribune statistics.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that a two parent family makes it easier for everyone - children and parents. But a "parent" does not have to be only a man or woman.
Here in Texas the schools teach abstinence only exclusively. Abstinence only works great if you can do it. But, when your hormones finally overcome you and, because of lack of education, you are unaware of other ways to avoid pregnancy the result is kids giving birth to kids. Why do we teach abstinence only in Texas? Because it makes the religious zealots feel better.
ReplyDeletethe real problem--> the black community's 72 percent rate
ReplyDeleteIt is true that a marriage certificate has no bearing on parenting ability but I don't think that's the point. A marriage is a public statement to the society in which the couple live. A statement which says, "We are committed to each other and this relationship and we publicly declare our commitment." It somehow adds a stronger cement to the relationship, it's not quite so easy to walk away from it if things get a bit rough. In my humble opinion some of that cement is also holding together the fabric of the society in which that public declaration was made. Imagine an example of the extreme opposite, a society in which commitment is totally disregarded as a necessary ingredient in a relationship. Walk into a relationship, have kids, walk out as soon as it loses a little luster. Who cares? Society certainly doesn't care. Is that society better off?
ReplyDeleteI'm not a radical on this topic. I certainly don't stand in judgement of other committed couples having children out of wedlock. (Many I'm sure raise more stable, secure and happy children than married couples.) But I also think this is a topic with deeper ramifications than many people think about and readily dismiss as totally irrelevant in today's society. I disagree. I think it is still relevant in today's society and deserves deeper thought than many people give it.
It's actually quite easy to walk away from marriage in most jurisdictions. Divorces aren't particularly difficult, it's only division of property and child custody that are. And you can have those issues regardless of whether you are legally married or not. I'd say that having a child with someone (or buying a home, for that matter) represents a far greater level of commitment than throwing an expensive party and signing some papers.
ReplyDelete