I self-identify as a liberal, but this kind of mental gymnastics gives liberalism a bad name. Instead of agreeing that some behaviors are harmful, we try to re-draw the boundaries and re-define the problem away. So single mothers with multiple children and no visible means of support isn’t a problem; it’s an alternative family structure.
I don’t have a source, but I remember reading that most of these children are indeed planned for. The mothering instinct doesn’t go away simply because there are few suitable young men of your own race (high prison rates, etc.) and the men of other races largly prefer not to date you. So these woman are forging a new paradigm in family.
Raising a child as a single parents in a strong extended family doesn’t mean you have to go on welfare. Since society exists to serve us, we can envision a society where that doesn’t happen. It used to be adventagous to have a half dozen kids. Now you are better off with one or two. It used to be common to hand off your kids to nannies and nurses. Now it’s not. Instead of throwing around blame, we can work to reshape our social systems to support this emerging form of family.
I guess what I’m asking is are you really prepared to write off 70% of black mothers as basically no-accounts? For something on this scale, there must be a good reason for it. I’m not prepared to accept the the black female population is just somehow incapable of making what are obvious good decisions. There are causes here. Things worth looking in to.
So now our choice is saying “Yeah, well, I don’t care what the reason is. You suck.” and leaving them to make a choice between something that is obviously for some reason undesirable (birth in wedlock) or having their whole darn race smeared as bad. Or we can all get together and say “Hmmm, let’s look at those causes and see what we can tweak to make sure people are able to raise their kids well.”
Debaser. It’s not being married that helps get you out of poverty. It’s working, being college educated, and living in a stable two income household where parents are providers.
even sven. I need a source, 'cuz what you’re saying doesn’t jibe with what I’ve seen and experienced all my life. I agree with to extent on extended families and a new family paradigm, but I knew far too many young girls (15-19) when I was a teenager who got (a) pregnant, and babies or (b) pregnant, and abortions. I also knew plenty of three and four generation households of women all on welfare, so while an extended family can guard against welfare, it may not.
Also the statistics don’t mention women who initially have babies out of wedlock, and later marry the baby daddy (or some other dude.) That’s more than half the marriages I know. African-Americans have shotgun weddings out the yang, we’ve just dispensed with the shotgun.
Two anecdotes…so they might be illustrative, but not authoritative:
My wife works in a junior high school attendance office. She frequently has students held out of school, so they can stay home and baby-sit their younger siblings while their single mother has errands to run. So the presence of a “strong family support structure” isn’t always a pre-requisite when a single mom is deciding whether or not to have a baby.
A tragic case that was all over the local news last month: Mom A asks Mom B to watch her children for a day. Mom B has something else to do, and palms the kids off on Mom C. Mom C takes the bunch to McDonalds, and one of Mom A’s kids is hit by a train on the way.
All 3 mothers were 20 or younger; at least 1 had multiple children, and all 3 had never been married. (All were white, btw).
My point: children having children, with no means of support and no co-parent to help, is a scourge of our society.
They actually do. Freddy the Pig tells us that 69.2% of the kids are born out of wedlock, but from astro in 2000 53.3% were living in a single parent household. That shows that a good number of women are getting married after they have their first kid, but most are still being raised by one parent.
You seem to be in disagreement with yourself. “Marriage” is the mechanism that society has for two people who want to live in a stable household together and provide for children.
Also, to your other points: How are you supposed to have a successful career or go to college if you are having kids with only one parent to support them? You do know that having an out of wedlock child makes career and college harder for the mother and the kid, right?
Debaser: Not that disgree with your general premise, why are you focused so much on the women? The men are even more to blame, if you ask me. At least the women are trying to raise the kids.
As an “illegitimate” black child fed with WIC as an infant and now living a pretty comfortable life after college, I’m quicker to demonize nasal-voiced know-it-alls who talk out their asses to damn my very existance than the loving, generous woman who bore me.
I’d actually love to see numbers that compared not black-vs-white, but maybe urban-vs-suburban-vs-rural? Or Southern vs northern?
Do white women in Atlanta have the same rates of single-motherhood as black women in Atlanta? Are the numbers different in, say, Iowa?
It doesn’t show that at all.
It is entriely possible, indeed likely, that a child be born out of wedlock and yet born into a dual parent houselhold. People don’t need to be married to live together int he same houselhold or have a child.
IOW 100% of that 69.2% could have been living in a dual parent houselhold when the child was born, or 0% may have been. We simply don’t know.
Moreover the fact that more children are born out of wedlock than the number of children living in single parent houselholds tells us nothing because we have no idea if women living in single parent houselholds have on average more or less children.
Id be interested to see how much this is an economic issue than a racial or cultural one.
People tend to use correlations a wee bit too quickly with issues like this.
Otara
pizzabrat, nobody is damning your very existence. Can’t we all agree that 76% of births to unmarried women is a problem? Is it your opinion that simply pointing out this problem makes one a racist?
John Mace, good point about the men. They do share much of the blame. However, when it comes down to it it’s still up to the woman who gets to choose whether or not to have a baby.
No, my opinion that a culture dedicated to stigmatizing families with single mothers to the level that you’re doing is more damaging than the families themselves. Single motherhood doesn’t guarantee a lack of a masculine influence in a child’s life or a lack of adequate income. It doesn’t guaruntee an ignorant, immature mother unprepared for childrearing. My opinion is that people force these simple-minded generalizations, and latch on to delicious statistics like “70% illegitimate” one because they’re easy targets to blame the effects of racism on.
Well, you’re entitled to an opinion, even a foolish one.
Of course it doesn’t guarantee anything. It does make it much less likely, though.
These simple minded generalizations of which you speak are straw men of your own construction. Nobody else in the thread except for you is making these claims.
You’ve got another thing backwards also: The 70% illegitimate statistic isn’t delicious. It’s horrible. You are the only one who seems to be a fan of it. It’s the rest of us that are alarmed by it.
That’s not to say a high rate of absentee fathers (and I don’t think that’s what’s being represented in the 70% rate since I know of a few births out-of-wedlock where the mother simply chose not to stay with the birth father, and if someone’s willing to make a choice that dramatic with such obvious rerpecussions, I’m willing to trust she knows what she’s doing) is perfectly acceptable, but when people over-emphasize the phenomenon (like claiming it’s THE reason blacks are treated like trash by their countrymen), they’re more likely to be resented than listened to.
Inadequate income and lack of competence in child-rearing on the part of the mother as a result of single-motherhood was mentioned throught the thread. Besides, they’re well-worn generalizations relating to this topic. I don’t have to wait until they’re mentioned in this specific instance to dismiss them.
Where did I imply I was a “fan”?
Marriage is the predominant mechanism. It is still one of only several options to get two incomes. Living together with the child’s (working) father unmarried, living with other single mother peers, or living together with an adult sibling who pitches in with rent are the three main alternatives. The key is that second paycheck to cut down on housing expenses and utilities. Equally important is a stable, low-tension household where the adults and kids have understood boundaries re: household rules and privacy, and that other adult’s willingness to assume some child-rearing responsibilities
Oh, it’s definitely harder. It’s not impossible. Typically, you have an extended family arrangement where the mother moves back in with her parents to assist with child-rearing until the children reach school age or she’s working regularly and can afford child care. Often she dates with the intent to audition husbands and child providers. If she’s smart, she holds off on having any more kids until she can finish her high school and college degrees and gets a job with some health care benefits. If not, she will likely perpetuate a cycle of generational poverty.
Debaser: In at least two respects that 70% of blacks statistic is misleading. One: I suspect it only tracks initial instances of out of wedlock births; eventually the woman will get married to someone. Two: When all black ethnic groups in this country are considered, I suspect African-Americans have a higher instance of having unmarried births than say, immigrant women from African countries or black women from the Carribbean living here.
Post #34. Even you must have realized this, because you quickly came back and clarified that you weren’t in post #36.
Remember, it’s the same post where you called me a “nasal-voiced know-it-all”. Which, BTW, is a racist statement. How would it go over if a white person in this thread called you an insult that was based on the percieved characteristics of your race?
You mean lower, right?