Whoop-de-do. Mega-stars Brad and Angelina are engaged and their six “kids are thrilled.” But, the couple apparently is not in any hurry to marry. No date set. No idea when.
It’s clear that I’m an old fogey, a social conservative who believes the new norm in regard to marriage — or should I say, non-marriage — is a tragic trend in a world where kids struggle to find role models and stability.
Lovely Angelina might think herself unique; however, she’s just one of the masses in a growing trend of older, unmarried mothers. Two decades ago, 28 percent of births in the United States were to single mothers. That number is now up to 45 percent — a trend once dominated by teens, but not anymore.
The U.S. Center for Health Statistics (CHS), as per the Heritage Foundation, (newsletters@heritage.org, April 12, 2012), reports teen births have dropped, in some places, 50 percent. That’s certainly something to celebrate.
But, not so fast: Today, 75 percent of the current increase in unwed births is among women between the ages of 18-29. Ms. Angelina doesn’t fit into that age group anymore, but not to worry; she’s plenty sure of herself. I do wonder if she cares about her influence on women who don’t have her economic status. Or if she’s proud of the message she sends to her children.
We already know that “single-parent families are much more likely to be dependent on government welfare,” but consider this: Additionally, children raised outside of married-parent homes are at greater risk for a “variety of negative outcomes.” Angelina’s clearly not worried about all that stuff and though the icon is admired by many, her example promises sorrow.
And, so we can ask, why is society so quiet on this trend? Could it be the answer is the protection of adult gratification, enhanced by ignorance of consequences? And, marriage advocates are rendered quiet by peer pressure?
I enjoy watching real estate shows on cable TV. It’s common to see unmarried parents buying homes. They’ll commit to a mortgage contract, but not to their union. In one show, the mother, a real estate agent, ferried her daughter and the daughter’s boy friend around as they looked to buy a home to celebrate their first year of dating.
We’re moving at high speed away from the very culture, which stabilized children and families for centuries. We debate the tragedy of national debt left for the next generations, and of children’s physical safety and health as per McDonald’s, on and on. Yet the lack of attention to the value of married parents and stable homes is ignored.
As I see it, self indulgence is at the root of this sorrow. If mom and dad are compatible enough to live together, why not teach — through example — the value in relationship commitments by certifying intentions. Some describe commitments as “psychological contracts.” Thus, we mentally identify who we are and seek a partner who wants the same. Life without relationship commitments reaps emptiness, a hollowness, which is never filled, thus leading to addictions and destructive behavior. Hedging one’s bets is costly.
Yes, it seems divorce began this ugly matter. Numbers shot up about the time “free love” was the new recreational God in the 60s and 70s. Then marriage became a nuisance.
Don’t bother writing me in support of divorce. This review is not about dangerous relationships. I encourage couples to flee from the sick, violent and ugly. This discussion is about vision, maturity, self-discipline and sacrifice. It’s about the children.
Start your search engines. If you’re looking, there is more social science evidence on the Web to support my premise, but common sense trumps all stats. On the other hand, maybe it’s easier not to know. Maybe it’s just easier to follow Angelina down the slippery slope.
East Valley resident Linda Turley-Hansen (turleyhansen@gmail.com) is a syndicated columnist and former Phoenix veteran TV anchor.
janet5890 posted at 12:07 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.
Why does the paper continue to carry this woman's smug, look down her nose rants?
Mike McClellan posted at 1:18 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.
Ms. Turley-Hansen's point is well-taken: A stable, two-parent family is the ideal for child-raising.
The New York Times had a recent article that's also disturbing: many of the modern marriages are "just happened" types. That is, the man and woman hook up, then start to spend more time at each other's places. Eventually, one moves into the other's place, really with no thought, and eventually, they fall into marriage. In other words, the marriage "just happens." And soon enough, they find that they haven't thought about anything in regards to marriage and bam, divorce.
I do wish, though, that the Turley-Hansen types would spend more time trying to strengthen existing marriage rather than trying to block gay marriage. Everything she writes about today is not affected by gay marriage at all.
Yet she and folks like her spend an inordinate amount of time trying to stop those.
Accuracy posted at 6:58 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.
Linda Turley-Hansen’s column “Marriage remains society keystone” tells us how the flagging economy has affected marriages in the country and that it has had a double-edged impact on American marriages.
Combined with the high percent divorce rate, forty percent of all American babies are now born outside of marriage. In these days of economic hardship, due to the recession, the media and individual Americans need to get serious about efforts to strengthen marriages.
There is the need to get the message out that stronger marriage is beneficial for both personal and national economic stability and for raising well adjusted children.
samkat posted at 8:53 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.
Linda: Anyone can take a set of numbers and manipulate them to suit their position. Sadly, in modern society, fewer couples are getting married and divorce is becoming more common place than one would care for. Sadly, our flat earth religious zealots have only themselves to blame as they are so eager to cut public education classes that support civics, sex education, etc to suit their misguided ideology that they actually have created the current problems. An elective bible study class in high school is not going to cut it. If they didn't get enough bible study time in church, an elective in our public schools is not going to cut it.
Mike, since you are are a retired educator, would you care to add to my comments about why our youngsters enter the real world lacking some of the basic skills to prepare them for married life as well as financial and moral responsibilities? Heck, most of them cannot even balance a budget. Auto shop,machine shop, home education and the host of other courses that used to be the norm when I and my children were in high school are long gone, cut by our so called conservative legislators who are too intent on siphoning off our public education money to support their quasi religious private schools at tax payer expense. Heck, my youngest daughter was in the DECCA program in the 1970s and was eligible to become a cosmotologist by the time she graduated even though she was too young to take the state test, which she did as soon as she turned 18.
Far too many of our young women end up pregnant because of the lack of sex education and lack of contraceptives, particularly in lower income homes. Even good girls (and boys) get carried away since there is no pill yet to control hormones and sexual urges. Look at Bristol Palin as an example.
If you want to go for the gusto, do your opinion pieces on where our short sighted legislators have gone wrong in our public education system.
downtownresident posted at 9:09 pm on Sat, Apr 28, 2012.
Linda's been sleeping with Kathi too much.
concernedcitizen posted at 9:05 am on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.
I whole-heartedly agree with Linda's opinion. While it is true that any statistics can be turned to prove your own viewpoint, there are tons of statistics that truly do show that marriage between a man and a woman is what is in the best interest of children. Even a marriage that is struggling but stays together is better than parents who divorce but still try to stay involved in the children's lives. Children need the constant example of a mother and a father in the home in order to develop into well-adjusted adults who are ready to make a difference in society. One may make fun of LDS communities and other Christian groups in the east valley, but yet how many more of those children, percentage-wise, grow up to be better adjusted and prepared for making a difference in the real world?
My wife and I have done foster care for several years and adopted a few children through that process, and we've seen the devastation that happens to so many of these children who almost always come from broken homes. Currently there are over 12,000 children in the foster care system. If you and your spouse have the heart to take in one or more of these children into your homes, you can make at least a small difference by showing them how the roles of man and woman combined can help teach them, by example, so many more things about life than schools or other institutions can.
I know I will get comments about this, but please people, let's not call it gay marriage, we can call it a civil union with all the same legal rights of marriage (because that is what the LBGT community is wanting), but please do not redefine the definition of marriage as defined by God himself, between a man and a woman. If people want to choose that lifestyle, that is their choice, but why do I have to be forced to change my definition and my thought processes because other people obviously don't feel good enough about what they are doing, and as such have to force it on everyone else in order to make themselves feel ok about it? I know people feel heterosexuality is "forced" on them, well, to be honest, heterosexuality is what has kept the human race going for at least 6000 years...which is why it is the "norm" in society. If you feel "forced" to believe in heterosexuality when you want to be homosexual, then maybe your conscience is telling you something. Again, I know I will hear flack on that, but there is a lot of truth to that as well. If there is something that I know I shouldn't do, I will try to force it on others to "get my way." But in the end, I'm still in the wrong for that particular behavior/choice.
I appreciate people like Linda who are willing to speak up on topics such as these. Regardless of your religious beliefs, if nothing else think of the tax implications of the children in foster care alone-it costs between $1000-$3000/month to take care of a child in foster care. Think if more families had both a mother and father, who were responsible and did what they should do for their children? Let's say it cut the # of foster kids in the system in half, how much would that save? 6000 kids X $2000 (avg) /month = $12 million dollars saved in a month, X 12 months = $144 million dollars of our annual state budget. The reason single parents fly off the handle more is they are taking on the roll of 2 people, as it was designed to be, and can't handle the stresses and take things out on their children. It doesn't have to be this way, if you are reading this and are debating whether to marry or not, take the plunge. Commit. There is beauty in a man and woman who fully commit themselves (heart, mind, body, spirit) and then raise children in that type of environment. I've seen it, and it works. It takes sacrifice, which, like Linda hints at, is not a desirable attribute nowadays in our "I gotta get what I want NOW" world. With the faster speeds of technology and information literally at our fingertips, we forget that it takes time and dedication to raise a future generation. And ideally that starts with both a mother and father. And to dispel any amount of "looking down our noses," an ideal is something we strive with all our hearts to achieve. We may not achieve it fully, or ever, depending on our individual life circumstances, but if we are striving for it we will still be a blessing to our children and to future generations.
VofReason posted at 3:01 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.
I think there is pretty solid evidence that married parents provide the best developement opportunities for children. I think there is ample evidense that children in on parent scenarios have more challeneges. I see above the statement that cutting government classes on relationships etc is a driving force of the problem. Counterintuitive. People learn most from their parents- good or bad. This is why problems in society and education is rarely about to little taxes and government intervention and much more about to little example. That is what a mother and father are about.
Cerulean posted at 3:06 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.
concernedcitizen,
I appreciate your service to young people in the foster care system. Thank you.
However, I do not take seriously anyone who believes to have directives “by God himself”. You do not!
abimopectore posted at 4:15 pm on Mon, Apr 30, 2012.
concernedcitizen,
You couldn't have said better. There would be no human race if marriage had been defined differently. It's been defined as such for thousands of years precisely because it's an overwhelming reality that cannot be changed no matter how many folks want to change this.