NYT Article on "Rise of Single-Parent Families is Not a Good Thing"

[Anonymous]

Haven’t read all the responses but I feel a need to point out that this is an opinion piece and that correlation does not equal causation. There are simply too many other variables out there. I think a PP on page 2 had a good post about the problems of lumping all types of single parents together. It’s way more complicated than just that.

[Anonymous]

I lived and worked in Boston up until recently. So many 40 plus, never married, educated and career focused women I knew just decided to forgo getting married or quit looking for a man and opted for a sperm donor instead. They have a nanny or 2 and see their kids on the weekend. I wonder if one were to compare their kids outcomes to a comparable heterosexual couple (upper middle class or higher, educated with careers) what the main difference would be if any.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I lived and worked in Boston up until recently. So many 40 plus, never married, educated and career focused women I knew just decided to forgo getting married or quit looking for a man and opted for a sperm donor instead. They have a nanny or 2 and see their kids on the weekend. I wonder if one were to compare their kids outcomes to a comparable heterosexual couple (upper middle class or higher, educated with careers) what the main difference would be if any.

the main difference is they have more emotional resources because they don’t have to deal with a DH! only sort of kidding …

anyway, my neighbor just had a baby on her own and I’m pretty sure she’s going to be just fine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Society already ioverwhelmingly favors two-parent families in literally everything. That’s why it’s so hard to be a single parent, duh.

If its so hard, why is there a rise in single parenthood? Seems like you agree with tge author that this isn’t a good thing.

NP. There's not really a rise in single parenting. The percentage of kids in single parent households has been stable since the '90s.

But much higher than the 70s. Is this good or bad?

It’s good because women can leave abusive marriages.

What if they were never even married? Still good?

Even better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need to adequately and accurately prepare people for marriage and the rigors of family life. You know - bring people down to reality. I think Americans have a very ambitious view of marriage and partnership that rarely aligns with reality - hence so many are absolutely miserable. We need to better prepare young people for being heads of household. Our current navel-gazing/everyone is special/take me as I am/fragile culture is doing nobody any favors.

This x 1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't taken the time to read this whole thread, so if this has been mentioned, sorry, but if not I think it should be noted - Dan Quayle. Thirty years ago he was excoriated by the media because he used a fictional single mother in a TV show to highlight the glorification of single-parenthood. Turns out he was right. And we also owe Quayle a collective thanks because he was one of the people who was on the phone with Pence on Jan 6 telling him that he MUST certify the votes and that he had no discretion. Turns out Quayle helped save democracy too.

Except the study shows that a Murphy Brown has the same outcome as a 2 parent family. So no Dan Quayle was wrong.

I personally would have liked Pence to have refused to certify the election so he could have gone to jail with the rest. The only person that needs to ask Dan Quayle is Pence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Haven’t read all the responses but I feel a need to point out that this is an opinion piece and that correlation does not equal causation. There are simply too many other variables out there. I think a PP on page 2 had a good post about the problems of lumping all types of single parents together. It’s way more complicated than just that.

They also only count 2 parent families with resources. So they leave out abusers and the poor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I lived and worked in Boston up until recently. So many 40 plus, never married, educated and career focused women I knew just decided to forgo getting married or quit looking for a man and opted for a sperm donor instead. They have a nanny or 2 and see their kids on the weekend. I wonder if one were to compare their kids outcomes to a comparable heterosexual couple (upper middle class or higher, educated with careers) what the main difference would be if any.

The study shows the children have the same outcome.

[Anonymous]

This came up many years ago at a policy event at the Reagan building decades ago. Hosted by the Atlantic, a highly regarded policy wonk (from Brookings IIRC) presented all the data supporting two parents are better than one through the lens of lifting kids out of poverty and leading to better outcomes on multiple levels.

All backed up by data, including longitudinal studies.

The upper class policy wonks, advocates, etc went nuts.

“Racist!”

“Not true! I’m a single mom with a big six figure salary and my kids go to (insert big 3 dc school)! You are wrong!”

Um…the poor guy with the data wasn’t wrong. The audience just centered themselves instead of realizing they are the outliers instead of the norm. And more importantly, socioeconomics plays a big role in all outcomes…because money can fix a lot of issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lived and worked in Boston up until recently. So many 40 plus, never married, educated and career focused women I knew just decided to forgo getting married or quit looking for a man and opted for a sperm donor instead. They have a nanny or 2 and see their kids on the weekend. I wonder if one were to compare their kids outcomes to a comparable heterosexual couple (upper middle class or higher, educated with careers) what the main difference would be if any.

The study shows the children have the same outcome.

…in terms of what can be objectively measured.

But you can’t easily measure whether someone has Daddy issues, trust issues, attachment issues, etc.

Kids raised by happily married parents tend to have the best relationships.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This came up many years ago at a policy event at the Reagan building decades ago. Hosted by the Atlantic, a highly regarded policy wonk (from Brookings IIRC) presented all the data supporting two parents are better than one through the lens of lifting kids out of poverty and leading to better outcomes on multiple levels.

All backed up by data, including longitudinal studies.

The upper class policy wonks, advocates, etc went nuts.

“Racist!”

“Not true! I’m a single mom with a big six figure salary and my kids go to (insert big 3 dc school)! You are wrong!”

Um…the poor guy with the data wasn’t wrong. The audience just centered themselves instead of realizing they are the outliers instead of the norm. And more importantly, socioeconomics plays a big role in all outcomes…because money can fix a lot of issues.

LOL, but the data literally says a single mom with resources has the same outcome as a 2 parent family with resources and does better than a 2 parent family without resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it’s true. I doubt any support from the government or any other institution is forthcoming. No one cares about families, kids, or even society anymore. It’s allllllll about the $$$$$$$$

COVID basically cemented this for me. We came to rescue so many industries because the economic effects, but told parents to basically pound sand and figure it out when schools and parks and supportive services closed. I have a special needs kid and that was a really sobering time for me.

I never thought of it this way (contrast to propping up other industries) but this is so true

And not just parents, women especially. It’s women who took the brunt of home schooling and closed daycares.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I lived and worked in Boston up until recently. So many 40 plus, never married, educated and career focused women I knew just decided to forgo getting married or quit looking for a man and opted for a sperm donor instead. They have a nanny or 2 and see their kids on the weekend. I wonder if one were to compare their kids outcomes to a comparable heterosexual couple (upper middle class or higher, educated with careers) what the main difference would be if any.

The study shows the children have the same outcome.

…in terms of what can be objectively measured.

But you can’t easily measure whether someone has Daddy issues, trust issues, attachment issues, etc.

Kids raised by happily married parents tend to have the best relationships.

kids raised by two parents tend to be in home with arguing, abuse and absent fathers even if they live in the home.

The opinion piece is comparing 2 parents with money to poor single women. It's a silly comparison. A mom with resources does not raise somebody with "daddy issues" because there was never a daddy to abandon them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course it’s true. I doubt any support from the government or any other institution is forthcoming. No one cares about families, kids, or even society anymore. It’s allllllll about the $$$$$$$$

COVID basically cemented this for me. We came to rescue so many industries because the economic effects, but told parents to basically pound sand and figure it out when schools and parks and supportive services closed. I have a special needs kid and that was a really sobering time for me.

I never thought of it this way (contrast to propping up other industries) but this is so true

https://annehelen.substack.com/p/other-countries-have-social-safety - "Other countries have social safety nets. The U.S. has women."

100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have read quite a bit about this and the research on divorce and kids is very mixed. In general, yes, it's not good in terms of impacts on kids. But if the divorce is amicable and children are shielded from the impacts, kids can do very well and it can be better for them than being in a situation with fighting.

There are many many things kids can and do experience that are worse than divorce. For example having a severely depressed parent or abusive sibling or bullying at school - these can all have more negative impacts on kids.

I was not at all surprised to read that the author is married with three kids. She no doubt brings her own bias into this. There are many college educated professional people who are terrified to get a divorce because they are afraid of stereotypes. So they stay in crap marriages and end up having unhappy kids, all to avoid the stigma of.divorce.

Unfortunately divorce raises the risk of all those “worse” outcomes happening—having a depressed or alcoholic parent, being bullied, etc.