Single-Parent Families | Introduction
In May 1992, Vice President Dan Quayle suggested that a breakdown of the nuclear family was among the causes of recent riots in Los Angeles in which over fifty people had died. “I believe the lawless social anarchy which we saw is directly related to the breakdown of family structure, personal responsibility and social order in too many areas of our society,” Quayle remarked. He went on to criticize society’s increasingly permissive attitude toward out-of-wedlock childbearing, pointing specifically to the treatment of the issue in the television sitcom Murphy Brown. “It doesn’t help matters when prime time TV has Murphy Brown—a character who supposedly epitomizes today’s intelligent, highly paid, professional woman—mocking the importance of fathers by bearing a child alone and calling it just another ‘lifestyle choice.’”
Quayle’s speech, especially his reference to Murphy Brown, provoked an outpouring of commentary. Numerous Americans agreed with Quayle, expressing concern that the “traditional family” and “family values” were being undermined by a public morality that too readily condoned unwed motherhood and divorce. Many also agreed with Quayle’s argument that the media and popular culture were to blame for promoting loose sexual values and immoral lifestyles.
Others took exception to Quayle’s statements. Some, seeing his speech as a moralistic attack on single mothers, responded by insisting that most single mothers work hard to provide for their children and to raise them well. Others considered Quayle’s view of the traditional family as nostalgic and unrealistic, out of touch with the social and economic realities of life in contemporary America. The character Murphy Brown, played by actress Candice Bergen, directly responded to Quayle in a subsequent episode of the show. In words that doubtlessly resonated with many Americans, she declared, “Perhaps it’s time for the vice president to expand his definition [of family] and recognize that whether by choice or circumstance families come in all shapes and sizes. And ultimately, what really defines a family is commitment, caring and love.”
The intensity of the public reaction to Quayle’s speech suggests that his comments touched on an issue of concern to a large number of people. Indeed, many commentators have expressed alarm about the increase in single-parent families over the past four decades. In 1960, they point out, 5.8 million American children lived in single-parent families; by 1996 that number had risen to 18 million. This growth has been fueled by an increasing rate of out-of-wedlock childbearing. In 1960, 5.3 percent of American babies were born to unwed mothers; that rate has increased to 30 percent. These numbers are even higher for African Americans: As of 1992, 68 percent of African American babies were born to unmarried women. A rising divorce rate has also contributed to the growing number of single-parent families. The U.S. divorce rate rose nearly 250 percent between 1960 and 1980; it then leveled off at what is now the highest rate in the industrialized world. It is commonly noted that about half of the marriages undertaken today will end in divorce.
Much of the debate over single-parent families focuses on how these trends affect children. Many social scientists contend that children raised in single-parent homes are more likely to experience a variety of problems than are children raised in two-parent homes. According to Lloyd Eby, assistant editor of the World & I magazine, and Charles A. Donovan, a senior policy consultant at the Family Research Council, “The sociological evidence now available shows conclusively that children suffer when they grow up in any family situation other than an intact two-parent family formed by their biological father and mother who are married to each other.” Some sociological studies suggest that children of single parents are more likely to be poor, to commit crimes, to use drugs, to do poorly in school, or to become pregnant.
Commentators insist that these problems affect not only the children involved but also the larger society, which must pay the costs for increased crime, disease, poverty, and other forms of societal breakdown. Many conservatives insist that because most single-parent families are headed by women, society is particularly threatened by the presence of large numbers of adolescent males who have been raised without the guidance and discipline that is typically provided by a father. According to David Blankenhorn, the founder and president of the Institute for American Values and the author of Fatherless America: Confronting Our Most Urgent Social Problem, “Fatherlessness is the most harmful demographic trend of this generation. It is the leading cause of declining child well-being in our society. It is also the engine driving our most urgent social problems, from crime to adolescent pregnancy to child sexual abuse to domestic violence against women.”
While most people agree that children are better off in families with two parents (as long as both parents are nonabusive), many believe that the adverse impact of single-parent families on children has been exaggerated. According to Sara S. McLanahan, a professor of sociology and public affairs at Princeton University, children who grow up with one parent are “disadvantaged across a broad array of outcomes”; they are more likely to drop out of school, commit crime, or become pregnant. However, she concludes, “the evidence . . . does not show that family disruption is the principal cause” of these problems. According to McLanahan, “If all children lived in two-parent families, teen motherhood and idleness would be less common, but the bulk of these problems would remain.”
In addition, some social scientists and others argue that the causal connection between single-parent families and social problems is unclear. While most experts concede that children from single-parent families are more likely to experience problems such as poor school performance and poverty, many believe it is erroneous to automatically assume that these difficulties are caused by the absence of one parent. According to Arlene Skolnick, a research psychologist at the University of California at Berkeley, and Stacey Rosencranz, a graduate student at Stanford University, “Single parenthood may be correlated with many problems affecting children, but the causes may lie elsewhere—for example, in economic and emotional problems affecting parents that lead to difficulties raising children and greater chances of divorce.” Other commentators contend that for the large number of single-parent families who live in inner cities, a shortage of educational and employment opportunities is more likely to impact the quality of children’s lives than the number of parents they have.
Whether children are more likely to suffer social and economic problems when raised by one parent rather than two is a central theme explored in At Issue: Single-Parent Families. Throughout this anthology, Quayle’s concerns about “the breakdown of the family structure” are echoed and disputed as authors debate the implications of the growing number of single-parent families.
