Two roads diverged in a yellow wood… [bh]
In comments, motionview points to a nice piece by Kay S. Hymowitz in the latest City Journal. Here’s a taste:
Defenders of the single-mother revolution often describe it as empowering for women, who can now free themselves from unhappy unions and live independent lives. That’s one way to look at it. Another is that it has been an economic catastrophe for those women. Poverty remains relatively rare among married couples with children; the U.S. Census puts only 8.8 percent of them in that category, up from 6.7 percent since the start of the Great Recession. But over 40 percent of single-mother families are poor, up from 37 percent before the downturn. In the bottom quintile of earnings, most households are single people, many of them elderly. But of the two-fifths of bottom-quintile households that are families, 83 percent are headed by single mothers. The Brookings Institute’s Isabel Sawhill calculates that virtually all the increase in child poverty in the United States since the 1970s would vanish if parents still married at 1970 rates.
I should probably add something thoughtful or humorous here but everyone should just be happy that I was able to resist tritely ending the post with the last line of that Frost poem.
Update: This isn’t particularly interesting, I suppose. We all knew this already, right? Perhaps it would be more entertaining and worthwhile to suggest solutions. Bonus points if they don’t involve new government programs. Double bonus points if they do involve centaurs.