The Family Is Here to Stay—or Not

4区 法学 Q1 Social Sciences
R. Haskins
{"title":"The Family Is Here to Stay—or Not","authors":"R. Haskins","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2015.0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary:The past four decades have seen a rapid decline in marriage rates and a rapid increase in nonmarital births. These changes have had at least three worrisome effects on children. Scholars disagree about the magnitude of these effects, but surveys and other research evidence appear to definitively establish that the nation has more poverty, more income inequality, and less salutary child development, especially as a result of the rise in nonmarital births and single-parent families.Ron Haskins examines whether and how government policies could do something to reverse these trends, or deal with their consequences if they can’t be reversed. He finds evidence that some policies could produce enough impacts to be worth pursuing further, at the very least by developing and testing pilot programs.First, writes Haskins, we might encourage marriage by reducing marriage penalties in means-tested benefits programs and expanding programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit to supplement the incomes of poorly educated men. Second, we have strong evidence that offering long-acting, reversible contraception and other forms of birth control to low-income women can reduce nonmarital births. Third, although the couples relationship programs piloted by the Bush administration in an effort to encourage marriage produced few positive results, there are some bright spots that could form the basis for designing and testing a new generation of such programs. Fourth, we could create more opportunities for disadvantaged young men to prepare for employment, and we could reduce their rates of incarceration. And, finally, we could do more to help single mothers raise their children, for example, by expanding child care subsidies.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"25 1","pages":"129 - 153"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2015.0016","citationCount":"11","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future of Children","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2015.0016","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

Abstract

Summary:The past four decades have seen a rapid decline in marriage rates and a rapid increase in nonmarital births. These changes have had at least three worrisome effects on children. Scholars disagree about the magnitude of these effects, but surveys and other research evidence appear to definitively establish that the nation has more poverty, more income inequality, and less salutary child development, especially as a result of the rise in nonmarital births and single-parent families.Ron Haskins examines whether and how government policies could do something to reverse these trends, or deal with their consequences if they can’t be reversed. He finds evidence that some policies could produce enough impacts to be worth pursuing further, at the very least by developing and testing pilot programs.First, writes Haskins, we might encourage marriage by reducing marriage penalties in means-tested benefits programs and expanding programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit to supplement the incomes of poorly educated men. Second, we have strong evidence that offering long-acting, reversible contraception and other forms of birth control to low-income women can reduce nonmarital births. Third, although the couples relationship programs piloted by the Bush administration in an effort to encourage marriage produced few positive results, there are some bright spots that could form the basis for designing and testing a new generation of such programs. Fourth, we could create more opportunities for disadvantaged young men to prepare for employment, and we could reduce their rates of incarceration. And, finally, we could do more to help single mothers raise their children, for example, by expanding child care subsidies.
家庭是否会留下来
摘要:在过去的四十年里,结婚率迅速下降,非婚生育迅速增加。这些变化至少给孩子们带来了三个令人担忧的影响。学者们对这些影响的程度意见不一,但调查和其他研究证据似乎明确表明,这个国家的贫困程度更高,收入差距更大,有益的儿童发展更少,尤其是由于非婚生育和单亲家庭的增加。罗恩·哈斯金斯(Ron Haskins)研究了政府的政策是否以及如何能够扭转这些趋势,或者在无法逆转的情况下处理它们的后果。他发现有证据表明,一些政策可以产生足够的影响,值得进一步推行,至少可以通过开发和测试试点项目来实现。哈斯金斯写道,首先,我们可以通过在经济状况调查福利项目中减少对婚姻的惩罚,并扩大劳动所得税抵免(Earned Income Tax Credit)等项目,以补充受教育程度较低的男性的收入,来鼓励婚姻。其次,我们有强有力的证据表明,向低收入妇女提供长效、可逆的避孕措施和其他形式的节育措施可以减少非婚生育。第三,尽管布什政府为鼓励婚姻而试行的夫妻关系项目收效甚微,但仍有一些亮点可以作为设计和测试新一代此类项目的基础。第四,我们可以为处于不利地位的年轻人创造更多就业机会,我们可以降低他们的监禁率。最后,我们可以做更多的事情来帮助单身母亲抚养孩子,例如,通过扩大儿童保育补贴。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Future of Children
Future of Children Multiple-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Future of Children is a collaboration of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and the Brookings Institution. The mission of The Future of Children is to translate the best social science research about children and youth into information that is useful to policymakers, practitioners, grant-makers, advocates, the media, and students of public policy. The project publishes two journals and policy briefs each year, and provides various short summaries of our work. Topics range widely -- from income policy to family issues to education and health – with children’s policy as the unifying element. The senior editorial team is diverse, representing two institutions and multiple disciplines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信