Majority of births will soon be out of wedlock
Discussion
The percentage of babies born to unmarried mothers rose to 42.3% last year, up from 32% in 1994 & 10% in 1970. Some of this rise is undoubtedly due to cohabiting couples waiting longer before getting married, but much of it is due to tax & benefit policies which favour single parent families.
Telegraph said:
Majority of births will soon be out of wedlock
By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent
(Filed: 21/02/2006)
Half of all babies will be born to unmarried mothers by 2012 if present trends continue, says new research that suggests the rapid erosion of moral and religious taboos.
Moreover, fewer than half of families will consist of married couples and up to a third could be lone parents, said Dr Peter Brierley, a former Government statistician now specialising in religious trends.
Dr Brierley's projections followed the publication of official figures yesterday showing that the number of births outside marriage has almost quadrupled in recent decades.
The Office for National Statistics' Social Trends report, an annual snapshot of Britain, said that the figure rose to 42.3 per cent last year.
In 1994, the figure was 32 per cent and in the early 1970s it was less than 10 per cent.
The number of births outside wedlock exceeds 50 per cent in some parts, including Wales. In the North East, it was 54.1 per cent last year.
In London, where a higher proportion of young mothers are Muslims who adhere to more conservative family values, a third of children were born outside marriage.
The report said Britain now had the fourth highest level of births outside marriage in Europe, after Sweden, Denmark and France.
Much of the rise comes from a sharp increase in people living together. But the number of one-parent families is also increasing.
The figures have alarmed family campaigners, who say the collapse of marriage could have a serious impact on social structures.
They say that most of the statistical evidence suggests that children brought up by married parents do better than those raised by cohabiting couples or lone parents.
Dr Brierley, the executive director of Christian Research, an independent organisation that analyses Church statistics, said he had tracked birth patterns for his latest publication, Religious Trends 5.
"If we get to the stage where more than half of children are born outside marriage, we are fundamentally changing the basis on which society has worked for centuries.
"A whole range of traditional thought about 'home', 'marriage' and 'living together' will have to be re-examined.
"Psychologists say the children from single-parent families do not achieve so much or behave so well as those raised by married families."
Dr Brierley said his extrapolations show the number of married families will decline from 62 per cent in 2001 to 49 per cent in six years.
In contrast, the proportion of cohabiting couples will rise to about 18 per cent (from 13 per cent in 2001) and one-parent families could represent up to 33 per cent of the population (compared to 25 per cent in 2001).
"There is much more at stake here than statistics," he said. "The implications are quite frightening."
Although much concern has focused on single parents, cohabiting couples also provide less stable backgrounds for children, said the Economic and Research Council, a Government-funded social research body.
John Ermisch, a professor of economics at Essex University, said in a paper for the council: "Only 35 per cent of children born into a cohabiting union will live with both parents throughout childhood, compared with 70 per cent born within marriage."
Campaigners and Church leaders have accused politicians of marginalising marriage by undermining its legal and financial privileges and shying away from promoting it above other types of family.
Labour abolished the last tax break for married couples, the Married Couples' Allowance, while its tax credit system is said to favour single-parent families.
Ann Widdecombe, a former Tory Home Office minister, said: "After the death of the extended family, we are now seeing the death of the nuclear family.
"The long-term consequences are bad for everyone. A well-ordered society is based on the bedrock of marriage, otherwise we will have increasing social disruption
blindswelledrat said:
Interesting article. A lot of exclaimations about this being so bad for society but I can't see the negative implications.
Is this not simply a sign of the times?
I suppose the thinking is that a cohabiting couple provide a less stable home than a married one. I think statistics show that such couples are more likely to separate than married ones.
Jaglover said:
Interesting article. A lot of exclaimations about this being so bad for society but I can't see the negative implications.
Is this not simply a sign of the times?
I suppose the thinking is that a cohabiting couple provide a less stable home than a married one. I think statistics show that such couples are more likely to separate than married ones.
How?
What statistics?
scorp said:
How?
Divorces are very costly, an added incentive to stay together, live in partners can simply walk.
If your relationship has broken down the point you're thinking of leaving I cant see pound notes getting in the way unless you're as shallow as the average puddle.
sgt howie said:
How?
What statistics?
Read all the article above
John Ermisch, a professor of economics at Essex University, said in a paper for the council: "Only 35 per cent of children born into a cohabiting union will live with both parents throughout childhood, compared with 70 per cent born within marriage."
scorp said:
How?
Divorces are very costly, an added incentive to stay together, live in partners can simply walk.
Youv'e also publicly stood up infront of your immediate and extended family, friends, the local community and made vows, in addition to which you've recevied presents from all of them who were there to see them, gave you their best wishes etc..
Quite a public feckup then if it doesn't work.
Whereas with cohabiting you quietly move in together, and if it doesn't work you quietly exit.
Plotloss said:
How?
Divorces are very costly, an added incentive to stay together, live in partners can simply walk.
If your relationship has broken down the point you're thinking of leaving I cant see pound notes getting in the way unless you're as shallow as the average puddle.
Marriage represents a deeper commitment before you have the children, which is probably the main reason. I imagine some financial considerations might come into it as well however.
Jaglover said:
Marriage represents a deeper commitment before you have the children, which is probably the main reason. I imagine some financial considerations might come into it as well however.
I asked a recently married mate a while back what if felt like, any different to before? His comment was that the big difference was that they somehow felt more relaxed.
Perhaps with commitment doubts removed, the relationship seems more secure ( even if it really isn't ) that means she/ he are more relxed and that in itself is what makes the relationship work better?
scorp said:
If your relationship has broken down the point you're thinking of leaving I cant see pound notes getting in the way unless you're as shallow as the average puddle.
Me neither but it fits the trend, do you have a better theory?
Imposed conscience by afore mentioned piece of paper?
Until the point a child is involved that is.
I just cant see people staying together for financial reasons, they took away the married allowance ages ago after all...
Code Monkey said:
can just walk away from the mortgage, the money invested in the property and all else?
They could live in a council house, infact i have known more cohabitting couples living in council housing than i do that living in mortgaged housing. I can't speak for the whole country though.
Sign of the times I would say. I'm an unmarried father - I don't think that our 18 month old son is even remotely aware of his parents' marital status, or even what a marital status is. We live together, love each other, bring him up in the best and most stable way we can and we are all happy - I don't think that being married would make any difference to the way our lives are. We will probably do it eventually, but for no other reason than to [FrankGallagher] throw a big part-eh [/FrankGallagher].
Simply put, neither of us are religious so we don't really see the point, other than for tradition's sake. The only advantage of being married for me is that I have rights over my son should we split up - but we have no intention of doing that. All is well, why seek change?
Simply put, neither of us are religious so we don't really see the point, other than for tradition's sake. The only advantage of being married for me is that I have rights over my son should we split up - but we have no intention of doing that. All is well, why seek change?
david968s said:
Sign of the times I would say. I'm an unmarried father - I don't think that our 18 month old son is even remotely aware of his parents' marital status, or even what a marital status is. We live together, love each other, bring him up in the best and most stable way we can and we are all happy - I don't think that being married would make any difference to the way our lives are. We will probably do it eventually, but for no other reason than to [FrankGallagher] throw a big part-eh [/FrankGallagher].
Simply put, neither of us are religious so we don't really see the point, other than for tradition's sake. The only advantage of being married for me is that I have rights over my son should we split up - but we have no intention of doing that. All is well, why seek change?
Nail, head, hit.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff