Live data from Hacker News

Two-parent households should be a policy goal

theatlantic.com

101–110 of 291 posts

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#101
post #92

People don't want to have children because: 1) they can't afford it, or 2) they don't have a reasonable apartment/home (same thing as 1. really) 3) they don't want to give up their lifestyle 4) they're genuinely afraid the future is dystopian and dark (which is rather interesting since I can't imagine a future more dystopian than one without children) So if you want to fix the society to want to have children again y…

So if you want to fix the society to want to have children again you have to make it

1) affordable,

2) less inconvenient,

Sweden has done about as much as any country reasonably can do address those two, and it hasn't had much effect on improving the birth rate.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#102
post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be very surprised if GP thought that only father/mother combos are the best and instead was just agreeing with TFA.

It feels extremely unusual to me to specifically call out a mother/father relationship if they weren't intending to exclude queer relationships. A note for all readers: don't say "nothing better than a [straight relationship]" if that's not what you mean.

Most relationships, especially with kids, are heterosexual.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#103

Nothing better than a father and mother in a stable, loving relationship for a child. Yes, let’s encourage this.

Encourage how? Force unhappy couples together? You think that is good for the children?!

> Encourage how?

By creating evidence-based policies that support and encourage nucleic families through education and counseling at accessible institutions for potential and actual family members.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#104
post #50
post #8

Can't read the article even with archive.ph, but do they have an analysis of why relationships break down?

Changing to Google DNS (8.8.8.8) fixes the problem. (Removed: "Cloudflare DNS blocks archive.ph.") Edit: Cloudflare clarifies below.

No, it doesn't. We don't block anything on 1.1.1.1 or otherwise mess with the integrity of DNS. See comment from Matthew Prince, CEO of Cloudflare: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19828702

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Equating a marriage with "submission" is the first thing that needs to die if we're going to create more two-parent households. It is simply no longer the case.

A marriage does not equate to submission, but patriarchal issues in current marriages are still very much present.

Yes many, probably most marriages are based on an equal relationship. But many are not. And in the past most were not.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#106
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How exactly is that better the two mothers? Do you have evidence?

Seems like raising a kid requires exposing them to many different experiences growing up, and generally speaking fathers will provide different experiences mothers. Do I have evidence? No. Do you have any evidence that any other form of parenting is just as good?

I’m not the one saying that the government should intervene in how people form families.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#107

I don't think that's been sociologically plausible for many decades. Some things are easy to tear down and nearly impossible to build back up. In some circles, the mere suggestion that this should be a policy goal is insulting, as it hints that single-parent homes are inferior. Our government isn't really allowed to prefer one over the other, even if it would result in less misery. Furthermore, the tools that governm…

Agreed. It took most of human history to build the old culture with immense social pressure to marry and have children, immense social pressure for men to provide and women to care for children, and intense taboos around divorce, births out of wedlock, even around non-marriage into old age That world is gone, and probably for the better in many ways. The world needs to find different cultural norms around children su…

> The world needs to find different cultural norms around children such that we can have a stable population and happy children.

Unfortunately, the world is dead. It can play around with cultural norms as if they are toys for whatever time it has left, but the diagnosis is terminal.

You don't have enough children, all of you, the fertility rate is below replacement and it is not a blip or a fluke. Children who grow up in your world are discouraged from even liking the idea of having children of their own some day. They grow up hearing all the same dumb jokes on sitcoms about how horrible it is to get married, to be pregnant, to raise children. The internalize it, and the next generation is smaller than the last. This isn't reversible.

> For most of human history, raising a family was not really a choice, culturally speaking

Only because if it was a choice, then you wouldn't be here to casually quip about "human history". A humanity that doesn't raise families has no future, there can be no one a thousand years from now to talk about past history.

Organisms that do not reproduce become extinct. It's been hardwired into our biology since day one. Talking about it as if it were some choice is bizarre and indicative of a lack of self-comprehension. Might as well talk about not having a choice in whether you breathe or eat.

The same people who talk about dangerous and virulent memes, the so-called "disinformation" are no more immune than those who wallow in the things.

> We’ve given up our stable optimum of centuries and clearly not yet found a new one.

Good news. You still have -30 years to find one.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#108
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Eliminating ownership of homes by investors should be a policy goal.

Or we could increase supply. A very small percentage of SFHs is owned by investors and those are still red out which fills a some needs that buying a home doesn't. The solution is to build, build, build. That's gonna bring prices down and houses will naturally become a less attractive investment. They shouldn't be a investment object anyways, just like food shouldn't be.

We also need to be careful about what we build - it can't just be more SFH.

The ideal would be for municipally owned mid-rise apartments in mixed-use neighborhoods to become common. Vienna does this very well, but public housing has been demonized in America (and, like the lazy dad who does a chore so badly they never get asked to do it again, our federal government starved public housing support so badly that most Americans think of it as an intrinsically horrific way to live).

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#109
post #43

I don't think that's been sociologically plausible for many decades. Some things are easy to tear down and nearly impossible to build back up. In some circles, the mere suggestion that this should be a policy goal is insulting, as it hints that single-parent homes are inferior. Our government isn't really allowed to prefer one over the other, even if it would result in less misery. Furthermore, the tools that governm…

>it hints that single-parent homes are inferior. Yeah they are, expecially for the average childrens in average single household (struggling single-mothers). The idea that being a single mother is heroic is dumb and a disservice for everybody, expecially the children involved. At best single-parents are Martyrs. Obviously there are the exceptions but data shows that single-parent households are extremily more likely…

But then we have to start asking questions about why a woman is a single mother. Is it better for children to be in a single parent household or in one where he mother is abused? Or one where the children are abused? Is living in a household with a non-contributing partner superior?

Can we control for confounding variables like education level and age at first conception because maybe the answer isn't "single parenthood is awful" but "women shouldn't have children so young" or "it turns out poor people just do worse than wealthy people". The first likely boils down to the 2nd.

I have seen so many varieties of single motherhood and couple parenthood that I'm not convince that single parenthood is inherently a problem. I think it's more poverty. Single motherhood often couples with poverty, although not always now that women are more educated. But I've seen dual income households that matched a single parent household have the same kind of struggles.

Perhaps we should just ask why our social net is so weak that being a single earner means you can't raise a child. Anyone can lose their partner and they shouldn't have to scramble to pick literally anyone just to ensure their kids are cared for.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#110
post #89
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A multi generational household occurs naturally when grandma and grandpa had a stable two parent households and now mom and dad do too. Moreover, it's not necessary to force everyone in the same house. My parents and inlaws are within 20 minutes. It's great and since they are both married and happy, there's little family stress and the kids get ample time with both grandparents. God forbid, if anything were to happen…

> A multi generational household occurs naturally when grandma and grandpa had a stable two parent households and now mom and dad do too. More importantly, young people need a reason not to move hundreds or thousands of miles away from their stable household. Investing in community resources, local economies, and infrastructure that promotes health and opportunity are all necessary.

WFH solves this too. RTO policies are anti-family. Hell, unchecked corporate work culture is part of why Japan and Korea's birth rates are so low. Can't be out having babies if you're at the office at all hours.
Post reply on HN