Children living in single-parent households face a greater risk of living in poverty, according to a report released Wednesday by The Heritage Foundation.
A child’s probability of living in poverty is reduced by 82 percent when his parents are married to each other, according to “Marriage: America’s Greatest Weapon Against Child Poverty.”
Author Robert Rector said the government should work harder to educate the American public about the value of marriage.
... Heritage Foundation Research Associate Rachel Sheffield told CtizenLink that young people benefit greatly by learning more about marriage.
“The government should provide information to youth about the value of marriage, and help connect them with community resources that will help them relearn the skills needed to sustain those healthy marriages,” she said.
Almost 40 percent of all single-parent families with children were poor in 2009; less than 7 percent of married couples with children were poor.
According to the report, nearly 75 percent of poor families in the United States are headed by single parents.
8 Comments
That's what marriage is intended to address: the poverty and social ills that flows from children being raised without their father.
Marriage is not a political tool that serves to coddle special interest groups; nor is it a registry of relationships that merely functions as a distributor of government goodies. Marriage is not a private matter, it is a public one, as the public has to pay for these single parent families.
The aims of the institution of marriage are much bigger than recognizing which person loves another!
Anny connection between the Nanny State and a Fatherless home?
This is what happens when government replaces the father. You have the break down of the family and a degradation of society's moral fabric.
So, how is the National Organization for Marriage addressing this issue? In their existence, what have they ever done to help in preventing single parethood? Their only goal is tp prevent the extension of marriage to same sex couples, which has nothing to do with this issue. And even if they ever succeed on that front, which I don't believe they ever will, same sex couples can still legally adopt. If it's all about the children, why aren't they focusing on adoption laws? There are many same sex households (married or not) that are raising children in a very stable, loving environment that a child might otherwise never see.
@Stefan
A sure way to address the issue is CUT the size of government! Build on the 1990's welfare reforms and return to our values.
When Romney is elected and the Conservatives take the senate, we can renforce our Marriage laws, reform our entitlements and come 2014, just about every Democrat up for election that year will be in a Conservative leaning state paving the way for 60+ seats in the hands of Conservatives.
Boy, I can't wait for that.
Not that I think the Dems are that great as they can often be just as bad, but I don't think any transfer of power is going to have any effect on the current marriage laws in 7 states, and I believe an amendment to the constitution will never happen. There's not even much Romney will be able to do if he get's elected, which I don't think will happen, but realize is a strong possibility.
This is what the cultural left NEVER cared about. This is what people like Stephen CANNOT fathom...
In their minds marriage has no component outside of their agenda... The ravages of family breakdown cannot matter when the very agenda is family deconstruction.