There is an interesting and large article in Sunday's News-Sentinel about unwed mothers. Since this significant social topic is rarely seen in papers, I read it. It has a great deal of data, but also a great deal of hand-wringing about how no one can understand the problem and what causes it.
Here is the data, condensed. Single motherhood, after leveling out for several years, has been increasing significantly in the last 10 years. Rates are stratified sharply by age,race, education and income, as they have been since statistics have been collected.
With regard to age, single mothers are universal among those 12-15, and make up 52% of mothers age 20-24, 16% of those 25-34, and 9% of 35-44. Interestingly, and relevantly, in my opinion, among those over 45 29% are single mothers at birth (not divorced raising a child).
In black women, 79% are single mothers, 58% in the hispanic population and 28% n the white population. In white women earning over 100,000.00, only 2% of pregnancies were to single women, as opposed to 20% of black women earning that amount. College educated women are also less likely to be single moms.
The article goes on to repeatedly state no one can explain these data. The article also says 'women can't do it all', and laments the relative lack of marriageable black men (who are more likely to marry outside their race). Gay couples raising children are not addressed (a relatively small number of pregnancies overall), nor is a possible lack of marriageable white men.
Single motherhood rates are up across all income and educational lines, despite the stratification by race and income. This suggests to me that the stratification, which the article dwells on and which is ancient, crusted news to Ob/Gyns, has obscured causation to the author of this article. We are not infrequently blinded by that which we wish to see, the basis of the phenomenon of 'hiding in plain sight'. I will give a remarkable medical example and then address the single moms.
It was well known that among men who had had both testicles removed sexual intercourse was uncommon.In a society such as the US, in which 85% of intercourse is male initiated, these men had a clear lack of initiative. It was theorized these men did not get erections, and so did not approach their wives. Nocturnal penile tumescence studies showed, however, that these men did obtain normal erections at a normal frequency, puzzling the investigators. They then thought it must be an inability to respond to sexual stimuli, that the night erections were reflexes. They showed these men pornographic materials, and they all obtained erections, now seriously puzzling the scientists.
Finally, these men were asked how often they thought about and fantasized about sex. Here it is well known (and there is an anatomic basis for this) that men fantasize about sex, and/or think about it, very frequently. Some jokes say every 7 seconds, but even ignoring humor it is several times per hour. The men without testicles almost never had sexual thoughts. This was the basis of their reduced sexuality. The investigators assumed it was a malfunction of the penis, when it was a malfunction of the mind.
The newspaper article concentrates on the racial, educational and income disparities in single motherhood, facts that have remained unchanged for 70 years, and ignores the global rise in single motherhood. Here is where I believe the answer can begin to be found, since it is here that the data have changed. The comment 'women can't do it all' is quite revealing in this context. Women can not do it all, but men have been treated as expendable in raising children, and even in the bearing of them for those women who pursue artificial insemination.
In our society's haste to do away with condemnatory, religiously based morality, we have found no replacement. Simplistic social studies suggested children of a single mother did just as well as income matched peers. These changes opened a path to tolerance of single motherhood, and then acceptance. But the fact that a woman can bear and raise a child alone in no way confirms that this is the best way, or even desirable.
Like adolescents, our society found out it could do something, and has not yet seriously asked if it is desirable to do that thing. We hasten to not condemn what we call the choices of others. At what point does a choice become a mistake, and a mistake become the problem of society? Some people like to have intercourse with children, but we do not consider that a choice let alone a mistake. We consider it a crime. Murdering a noxious neighbor is not a choice, and not usually a mistake. It is a crime. When should society, on behalf of itself and its members, stop condoning a troublesome behavior?
Asserting women's worth and equal rights need not and should not lead to a condition where women bear and raise children alone. The complaint that women can't do it all implies a looking for help. That help is readily at hand in a two parent family. Further social research finds that children of two parent homes are much more likely to complete high school, that families that eat a dinner together regularly have far fewer disciplinary problems with their children.
I hope that someone eventually says, and I am saying it now, that single moms are biologically possible, but socially undesirable, for the mother and the child. I long not for condemnation of those making mistakes, but a change in culture where sexual gratification takes a back seat to relationship, where contraception is more important than sexual reputation, where parents (or parent) truly supervise and educate their children, not leaving it in the hands of government through schools, daycares or nannies. I suspect that if the right questions were asked, the explanation of the rise in single motherhood crossing income and racial lines is found in the values of society. That is where the solution will also be found.
Ted
Here is the data, condensed. Single motherhood, after leveling out for several years, has been increasing significantly in the last 10 years. Rates are stratified sharply by age,race, education and income, as they have been since statistics have been collected.
With regard to age, single mothers are universal among those 12-15, and make up 52% of mothers age 20-24, 16% of those 25-34, and 9% of 35-44. Interestingly, and relevantly, in my opinion, among those over 45 29% are single mothers at birth (not divorced raising a child).
In black women, 79% are single mothers, 58% in the hispanic population and 28% n the white population. In white women earning over 100,000.00, only 2% of pregnancies were to single women, as opposed to 20% of black women earning that amount. College educated women are also less likely to be single moms.
The article goes on to repeatedly state no one can explain these data. The article also says 'women can't do it all', and laments the relative lack of marriageable black men (who are more likely to marry outside their race). Gay couples raising children are not addressed (a relatively small number of pregnancies overall), nor is a possible lack of marriageable white men.
Single motherhood rates are up across all income and educational lines, despite the stratification by race and income. This suggests to me that the stratification, which the article dwells on and which is ancient, crusted news to Ob/Gyns, has obscured causation to the author of this article. We are not infrequently blinded by that which we wish to see, the basis of the phenomenon of 'hiding in plain sight'. I will give a remarkable medical example and then address the single moms.
It was well known that among men who had had both testicles removed sexual intercourse was uncommon.In a society such as the US, in which 85% of intercourse is male initiated, these men had a clear lack of initiative. It was theorized these men did not get erections, and so did not approach their wives. Nocturnal penile tumescence studies showed, however, that these men did obtain normal erections at a normal frequency, puzzling the investigators. They then thought it must be an inability to respond to sexual stimuli, that the night erections were reflexes. They showed these men pornographic materials, and they all obtained erections, now seriously puzzling the scientists.
Finally, these men were asked how often they thought about and fantasized about sex. Here it is well known (and there is an anatomic basis for this) that men fantasize about sex, and/or think about it, very frequently. Some jokes say every 7 seconds, but even ignoring humor it is several times per hour. The men without testicles almost never had sexual thoughts. This was the basis of their reduced sexuality. The investigators assumed it was a malfunction of the penis, when it was a malfunction of the mind.
The newspaper article concentrates on the racial, educational and income disparities in single motherhood, facts that have remained unchanged for 70 years, and ignores the global rise in single motherhood. Here is where I believe the answer can begin to be found, since it is here that the data have changed. The comment 'women can't do it all' is quite revealing in this context. Women can not do it all, but men have been treated as expendable in raising children, and even in the bearing of them for those women who pursue artificial insemination.
In our society's haste to do away with condemnatory, religiously based morality, we have found no replacement. Simplistic social studies suggested children of a single mother did just as well as income matched peers. These changes opened a path to tolerance of single motherhood, and then acceptance. But the fact that a woman can bear and raise a child alone in no way confirms that this is the best way, or even desirable.
Like adolescents, our society found out it could do something, and has not yet seriously asked if it is desirable to do that thing. We hasten to not condemn what we call the choices of others. At what point does a choice become a mistake, and a mistake become the problem of society? Some people like to have intercourse with children, but we do not consider that a choice let alone a mistake. We consider it a crime. Murdering a noxious neighbor is not a choice, and not usually a mistake. It is a crime. When should society, on behalf of itself and its members, stop condoning a troublesome behavior?
Asserting women's worth and equal rights need not and should not lead to a condition where women bear and raise children alone. The complaint that women can't do it all implies a looking for help. That help is readily at hand in a two parent family. Further social research finds that children of two parent homes are much more likely to complete high school, that families that eat a dinner together regularly have far fewer disciplinary problems with their children.
I hope that someone eventually says, and I am saying it now, that single moms are biologically possible, but socially undesirable, for the mother and the child. I long not for condemnation of those making mistakes, but a change in culture where sexual gratification takes a back seat to relationship, where contraception is more important than sexual reputation, where parents (or parent) truly supervise and educate their children, not leaving it in the hands of government through schools, daycares or nannies. I suspect that if the right questions were asked, the explanation of the rise in single motherhood crossing income and racial lines is found in the values of society. That is where the solution will also be found.
Ted
There is another subset not mentioned here. A group of heterosexual couples/parents in long term committed relationships that do not include a legal marriage. When asked one receives many different answers for the reluctance of these couples to legalize their union,with or without children.
ReplyDeleteMy son(recently married) feels that it may be related to the fear of dealing with punitive divorce settlements. I have heard the,"We don't need the state to legalize our union".
My point is, the woman in these relationships do not function as single mothers and they skew the statistics.
Dr. Tsaltas, I myself was a single mother.I had my daughter,who you know,Meredith, when I was 17.This was in 1976. At that time people were very condeming and judgemental, much as today. But I did what I felt was best for me and my daughter. I was an exceptional young mother. My daughter always came first in my life. I never worried what people thought. I did what I thought was right. I met my husband when Meredith was 5 and he knew how I felt about her and he accepted her as his own. As you know Meredith turned out pretty darn good for being raised by a young single mom for 5 years! So to conclude, single women can and have raised children by themselves. Just set your priorites straight.
ReplyDelete