Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Two-parent households should be a policy goal

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 291 posts

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#51

Post by vorpalhex »

matthewfelgate wrote: post #23

The 1970s called; they'd like their arguments back! Arguing that children with married parents fare better, thus promoting two-parent families, is akin to suggesting that since blue cars have fewer accidents, everyone should drive a blue car. Pressuring dissatisfied couples to stay together or marry benefits no one. The article fails to provide actionable recommendations on promoting marriage.

It does make a clear suggestion on how to improve marriage rates: Employ more men.

It also spells out the advantage of marriage, even unhappy marriage: kids get in less trouble, have fewer problems, and are happier with better outcomes.

Relationships are much more about your ability to handle conflict and invest time than who the other person is.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#52

Post by neilv »

bluescrn wrote: post #16
bbor wrote: post #9

Serious question: why not three parent? Does every stable relationship involve sexual aspects? Seems like an article stating an obvious fact but missing the bigger picture

Given the rising costs of housing/living, it's going to take 3-4 working adults to fund a home before long. A 1-2 income household will become ever more of a luxury.

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

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#53

Post by giantg2 »

matthewfelgate wrote: post #23

The 1970s called; they'd like their arguments back! Arguing that children with married parents fare better, thus promoting two-parent families, is akin to suggesting that since blue cars have fewer accidents, everyone should drive a blue car. Pressuring dissatisfied couples to stay together or marry benefits no one. The article fails to provide actionable recommendations on promoting marriage.

"Forcing unhappy people to stay together or get married doesn't help anyone."

I largely agree, but the idea of promoting two parent households isn't antithetical to your statement. You could have programs that are meant to ensure that couples get married for the right reasons, with the right skills, etc. It's likely a marriage prep/ed course would result in fewer divorces, just as drivers ed results in better drivers.

Ine example, if your primary discussion about what happens if the marriage doesn't work out happens after the fact, then you were ill prepared. Better to have that discussion while on good terms going into it - like a collaborative prenup consultation at least.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#54

Post by j1elo »

bluescrn wrote: post #29
foobarian wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why stop at three? The saying goes, "it takes a village." Would be nice to see a resurgence of this instead of the insane isolation of suburban atomic families.

They'll still be staring at their own individual screens all day.

But still talking to each other, and to other outer circle friends who are not close by. So at least there's that.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#55

Post by helen___keller »

NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #10

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 such that we can have a stable population and happy children.

For most of human history, raising a family was not really a choice, culturally speaking, it was a mandate. Currently we’ve gone the other direction, and raising a family is a lifestyle decision like hiking the Appalachian trail, and partway through your partner may decide it is not for them.

From a freedom perspective this is ok but socially I think this is precarious. We’ve given up our stable optimum of centuries and clearly not yet found a new one.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#56

Post by digging »

version_five wrote: post #27
matthewfelgate wrote: post #23

The 1970s called; they'd like their arguments back! Arguing that children with married parents fare better, thus promoting two-parent families, is akin to suggesting that since blue cars have fewer accidents, everyone should drive a blue car. Pressuring dissatisfied couples to stay together or marry benefits no one. The article fails to provide actionable recommendations on promoting marriage.

Western society peaked in the 80s so maybe we should listen to some of the arguments from back then.

In the way that the peak of a cocaine binge feels really good in the moment, sure.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#57

Post by bluescrn »

neilv wrote: post #52
bluescrn wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given the rising costs of housing/living, it's going to take 3-4 working adults to fund a home before long. A 1-2 income household will become ever more of a luxury.

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

But guess who tends to have loads of money invested in property... politicians! (and their wealthy donors/supporters)

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#58

Post by User23 »

giantg2 wrote: post #33
ConfusedDog wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Being single parent can also file for the deduction. Receiving supposal and child support after tax also encourages divorce, which also encourages the benefiting party not to go to work or do works that doesn't pay taxes. I'd say the current policy is more encouraging of divorce than two-parent household.

Unless someone is severely disabled, spousal support is a horrible thing. Even worse are the states that make it compulsory after a certain number of years. Child support makes sense in theory, but is butchered in practice. The judgements often have little to do with how much it actually costs to support the child and is more about a percentage of income. Let's not forget, the state is the third party in a divorce. T…

The state also gets a 10% rake off the top, which is why child support judgments are so enthusiastically enforced.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#59

Post by matthewfelgate »

kwere wrote: post #43
NoMoreNicksLeft wrote: post #10

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…

You want to take children off single mothers and force them to be adopted?!

This isn't Victorian Britain.

What century are you living in.

Re: Two-parent households should be a policy goal

#60

Post by nicholasjarnold »

jvanderbot wrote: post #42
lokar wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

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

Yep, I don't have the source to cite right now, but I recall reading research indicating that the important factor was 2 loving and supportive parents regardless of their sex or sexual orientation.
Post reply on HN