“When Liberals Blew It.” That was the title of a Nicholas Kristof column in The New York Times last week. The column commemorated the fiftieth anniversary of Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s famous report on the breakdown in African-American family structure. Subsequently, Moynihan wrote:
“From the wild Irish slums of the 19th-century Eastern seaboard, to the riot-torn suburbs of Los Angeles, there is one unmistakable lesson in American history: a community that allows large numbers of young men to grow up in broken families ... never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future — that community asks for and gets chaos.”
Since the time of that prophetic pronouncement, things have only gotten worse – and not just in the black community. Kristof reports the latest numbers:
“In 2013, 71 percent of black children in America were born to an unwed mother, as were 53 percent of Hispanic children and 36 percent of white children…. At some point before they turn 18, a majority of all American children will likely live with a single mom and no dad.”
[On children living without two parents, see this chart on how we compare with other countries.]
What does this have to do with liberals? Well they uniformly and viciously attacked the messenger – accusing Moynihan of being a racist. While calling for a bigger and more generous welfare programs, they refused to endorse any effort to change the behavior of the people they were “helping.” Questioning patterns of behavior was “blaming the victim” in their view.
So in the face of liberal silence and indifference, things got progressively worse. Also writing in The New York Times, David Brooks describes what a fatherless society looks like:
“The health of society is primarily determined by the habits and virtues of its citizens. In many parts of America there are no minimally agreed upon standards for what it means to be a father. There are no basic codes and rules woven into daily life, which people can absorb unconsciously and follow automatically.”
According to Sara McLanahan of Princeton and Christopher Jencks of Harvard, a father’s absence increases antisocial behavior, such as aggression, rule-breaking, delinquency and illegal drug use – especially among boys. Having only one parent reduces the chance that a child will graduate from high school by 40 percent.
So why is this happening? One reason is the welfare state. In the 1960s and early 1970s the federal government funded a series of experiments with the negative income tax – a form of guaranteed income. One of the startling conclusions from an early assessment was that income support from the government caused a 40 to 60 percent increase in the dissolution of marriages. Although that conclusion was subsequently challenged (See Alicia Munnell’s summary of the debate) no one can deny that welfare programs are enabling a lifestyle that would have been inconceivable in earlier times.
Last week I reported that single women of child bearing age who live below the poverty level are almost five times more likely to have a child than single women whose incomes are 400 percent of the poverty level or higher. (See the chart.) There is virtually no difference in sexual activity across income groups.
Why is this happening? The Brookings investigators speculate that poor women “have less to lose” by having a child and point to this NBER study by way of explanation.
Two other trends exacerbate the social disintegration we are experiencing.
First, in his book Coming Apart, Charles Murray says that America is diving into two different cultures. In the college educated New Upper Class, religiosity, work ethic, industriousness, and family have either remained strong or have weakened minimally over the last several decades. However, these same attributes have either weakened substantially or have become almost nonexistent in the New Lower Class.
In his book Our Kids, Robert Putnam explains what this means for children. As summarized by David Brooks:
“Roughly 10 percent of the children born to college grads grow up in single-parent households. Nearly 70 percent of children born to high school grads do…. High-school-educated parents dine with their children less than college-educated parents, read to them less, talk to them less, take them to church less, encourage them less and spend less time engaging in developmental activity.”
The second trend is what Nicholas Eberstadt calls “the worldwide flight from the family.” This is indicated by the growing number of women who not only don’t marry, but don’t have children either.
“Europe has … seen a surge in “child-free” adults—voluntary childlessness. The proportion of childless 40-something women is one in five for Sweden and Switzerland, and one in four for Italy. In Berlin and in the German city-state of Hamburg, it’s nearly one in three, and rising swiftly. Europe’s most rapidly growing family type is the one-person household: the home not only child-free, but partner- and relative-free as well. In Western Europe, nearly one home in three (32%) is already a one-person unit, while in autonomy-prizing Denmark the number exceeds 45%.”
There are two kinds of humans who most need families: children and the elderly. And as societies around the world age and as seniors live longer, it seems that families will not be there to help them:
“In the decades ahead, ever more care and support for seniors will be required, especially for the growing contingent among the elderly who will be victims of dementia... Remember, a longevity revolution is also under way. Yet by some cruel cosmic irony, family structures and family members will be less capable, and perhaps also less willing, to provide that care and support than ever before.”
