Money, Not Marital Status, Has the Most Impact on How Parents Raise Kids

[xchrom]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2015/01/29/council_on_contemporary_families_study_money_not_marriage_has_the_most_impact.html

Despite all the attention paid to marital status when it comes to raising kids, a new report from the Council on Contemporary Families finds that, in reality, financial status actually matters more. Sandra Hofferth, a professor at the University of Maryland, examined data released by the Census Bureau in December 2014 that measured various parenting practices reported by parents around the country. Despite much conservative hand-wringing over how single moms must be failing to adequately raise their children, Hofferth found that marital status didn't have much impact on whether or not kids were getting decent parenting.

Single parents do read to their kids slightly less than married parents, but not by much: six times a week for kids ages 3-5 instead of seven times a week, as married parents do. Both married and unmarried parents monitored TV viewing, with 93 percent of married parents and 90 percent of unmarried parents putting rules on how much and what kind of TV kids can watch. Marital status didn't have much impact on whether or not families had meals together, and single mothers actually ate more meals with their kids than married parents.

What Hofferth found was that it's money, not marriage, that has the greater impact on parenting practices. This was particularly noticeable when it came to participation in extracurricular activities. "For example, the extracurricular participation in sports of children in families at 200 percent or more of the poverty level is 42.5 percent, while the participation of those in poverty is 22.5 percent, a difference of 20 percentage points," Hofferth writes. "The difference between children of two married parents and children with a single parent was only 10 percentage points (44 percent vs. 34 percent)." And in the latter case, it's worth remembering that single parents are more likely to be poor, and therefore their lower rates of having kids in extracurricular activities may owe more to finances than to marital status.

Hofferth argues that, since income has such a tremendous impact on parenting styles, it's not fair to compare different family types without controlling for finances—her paper actually calls for an independent study doing just that. It's also important to note that none of these numbers suggest that lower income parents are bad parents. Most parents in all categories are conscientious parents who read to their kids, eat with their kids, and try to keep their kids engaged in activities besides TV-watching. But lower income parents often struggle to find the time, which suggests that more economic opportunities are what is needed to close up the gaps.

[TBF]

1. I grew up without money -

a child of factory workers. They were diligent - played sports with us and took us to libraries - everything they could and with a positive attitude.

Now my sister and I are older. I made it through college and grad school, and married someone from a middle class background.

She struggled with 2 pregnancies in her teens and raised her 2 children alone.

The difference in the experiences our kids have had are staggering. All the kids have gone to public schools (but with much different tax bases) and I can't imagine they are all that different in terms of actual IQ etc. But my kids naturally have had numerous extra activities, travel, camps in the summer, etc.

All the kids are getting older now. Her children are talking about community college/possibly with the idea of possibly transferring to a state school. Mine have 529s for wherever in the world they want to go.

[d_r]

2. there are lots of different stories

behind the rise of single parent families. There are teen mothers. Many, but not all, of those teen mothers live in poverty. Many. but not all, of those who live in poverty were children of single mothers themselves. These mothers face a tough road, it will be more difficult to finish school, find a job, and figure out their own identity with a child of their own. Statistically, they will never make as much money as women who were not teen mothers. Some of them live with their parents, some don't. Sometimes grandparents are primary custodians of the child, for a variety of reasons, sometimes they aren't.
Then there are single parents who have a partner but are not married. There are single parents who are divorced. There are single parents that are widowed.
Then there are single mothers who very intentionally have a baby. Many have become financially secure and well established in their careers. They decide to have a child and do so through a variety of means. These mothers have much different resources than single mothers living in poverty. As a group, the outcomes for children of these single mothers look more like the outcomes for children in two-parent households than the outcomes for children living in poverty.

We have too many children living in poverty in the United States, and it is a national disgrace. Poverty impacts children through a multitude of ways. Poverty co-varies with single parent homes, but it is not synonymous.

[FLPanhandle]

3. On average, the higher the income, the fewer children people have.

Having children is a major impediment to wealth accumulation, so teen parents, who don't have much, will have a harder time climbing out of low income status. Then add in that those parents are statistically more likely to have more children, and it's positive feedback loop making things worse.