Unmarrried middle class parents...

[RoseWhiteTips]

Unmarried middle-class parents more likely to see their children drop in social status

Children of professional parents who were not married had a 53 per cent chance of being on benefits, compared to 37 per cent for those whose parents had married.
(The Telegraph 20th January 2018)

Would you seriously consider marriage to safeguard the future status of your children?

You can be unmarried as a middle-class person, but chances are, will be left-leaning and not ultra-high-earning.

How can anyone believe data collected nearly 50 years has any relevance to today? Times have changed massively. We have four kids and have not got married. 24 years ago when we had DS1, no one in my fairly large circle of mainly graduate friends had a child without being married, it was considered mildly shocking and something naice people didn't do.

In 2018 having a child without being married is pretty mainstream. I'd bet good money that the statistics quoted don't apply today.

I haven’t read this report. What are they counting as benefits? I’m from the 1970 cohort with married middle class parents, but I’ve claimed not only child benefit (before we had it removed) but also maternity allowance…twice! I guess gay men, childfree by choice couples and the occasional trophy wife won’t ever claim benefits but surely that’s not 63% of the cohort.

And yes, being an unmarried mother in 1970 is really quite different to being an unmarried couple today - although married couples are still more likely to stay together than unmarried ones, with the associated social, emotional and economic advantages for their DC. Thats probably not because marriage magically causes commitment though - the causality probably runs the other way around.

Camomila You have just described causation. Being unmarried causes you to to be more likely to split, which causes you to be a single parent which causes you to be more likely to be poor, which causes your children to be more likely to be on benefits. It’s not correlation.

I'd love to know how they are defining mc. Ime the telegraph usually mean pretentious social climbing wanker when they say mc. All shiny new hunters and waving brandy around in a port glass whilst making derogatory comments about working classes and council estates who they mistakenly believe have less class.

So irrelevant to anyone who is mc by any normal, or even wide definition.

You get different glasses for wine and port. Who knew?
I use a chipped mug I got with an Easter egg for my mad dug

whilst making derogatory comments about working classes and council estates who they mistakenly believe have less class

And that's some posters on MN in a nutshell!

You get different glasses for brandy and port. Who knew?
Next you’ll be telling me there are different kind of wine glasses

Yes....

And there are more murders in the summer when ice cream sales increase too...ergo ice cream causes people to be more likely to commit murder

Plenty of middle class parents aren't married. It's considered quite right-on to eschew marriage in some liberal circles.

As for this research, well, it's outdated and biased. The "Marriage Foundation" lol.

Laughing at the ice cream/murder comment. I think that some people still won't get the point though.

lipstick I drink wine from a half pint tumbler at home, but more of a pint of lager person. I couldn't care less if I went to a dinner party and someone gave me a mug of lambrini with the main course. It's the pretentious/ put down others element I sneer at.

jaques

I think the data is too old to draw any meaningful conclusions for people to use to inform their decision on whether to get married today. As someone from a working class background who was educated with lots of middle class girls at secondary level, during the period of the research, it was really rare to come across divorced or unmarried parents of any class. In fact, the first divorce I came across was during sixth form, up until then I was more likely to meet someone with a widowed parent. Having said that, there are clear benefits to children of having a stable home life and evidence is pretty clear on positive outcomes for young people ending secondary education who still live as a family with both their birth parents. However, as has been highlighted upthread, this does not equate to causation. And of course this is not a reason to stay in an abusive or unsalvable relationship.

I don’t have types of glasses for different wines & spirits. Don’t drink spirits so it’s a moot point
I have flutes, and I have wine glasses from M&S that’s it
Someone once asked me what kind of wine do you drink? white I replied
They looked at me quite odd. I think I was meant to elaborate on preference & region
Don’t drink much,so it’s no odds to me,so long as it’s white or rose

Yes. The ice cream/murder correlation is as spurious as the pirates/global warming one.

I am married just not to DDs Father. I am a lone parent and wouldn't have it any other way. Daughter is set for life from my side of the family and me and I am very much middle class though chronically ill and subsequently unemployed for the foreseeable. I will encourage DD to learn a trade after school unless she wishes to study something requiring university ie. Nursing/medicine. There are too many studies in my opinion and most of them full of bollocks. Health and happiness, the things I wish for DD.

...although married couples are still more likely to stay together than unmarried ones...**

I'd like to know how the data is collected for this statement. How many couples under 50 do you know who got married without living together first? Many couples who are unmarried become married once children are on the way. So effectively making it look like a short-term unmarried relationship. Although as I said, I don't know how accurate data on unmarried couples could be.

I’m sure there is a correlation. Children who have grown up in a strong, loving family created by loving parents are more likely to see marriage as a positive and follow this course in their own lives. Marriage does confer financial and social advantages amongst the middle classes - one home, one set of bills etc but also strong male and female role models that support children to grow up confidently and free from the stresses of divorce, weekend parenting and the complexity of different rules in different homes. Then there’s the anger, the criticism of the other parents etc. Children are undoubtedly advantaged by stable marriage and this probably does impact on their long term prospects. That’s not to say children can’t succeed and grow into confident and secure adults from cohabiting parents but those who have serial blended families, a string of broken relationships and where the adults needs are put before the children’s must fare less well.

We were unmarried for 20 years then had a quick wedding mainly for my future and the children's. absolutely nothing has changed.

If you married a duke, or started working as a binman, I bet you how others perceive you would be an issue to you. If you do a similar job to everyone else you know, it night not be an issue

Work hasn't much to do with it in my case. The people I work with are only a small sample of the people I know. Most of them are members of the same family anyway (I work for a family-run firm).

Among my family, friends and acquaintances... single parents, co-habiting parents, married parents, a pilot, a single tattoo-covered lone-parent dad (a renowned artist and author), a dancer with the Royal Ballet, a 'Sir', an inventor, a pharmacist, a pop star, someone upper-class but v poor, a common-as-muck multi-millionaire, a Methodist minister, several South Africans, someone who coaches actors, a car mechanic, a foreign diplomat and a fair number of bog-standard 'ordinary' people. Where do I start with classifying that lot? Social class is irrelevant to me - I get on equally well with all of them.

The only people I don't get on with are those who look down their noses at those they believe to be inferior, because class does indeed matter to them. Funnily enough, I suspect that all of them perceive themselves as middle class.

*Oly5 well I suggest you get thee to a chapel at once if you care anything for your poor poor child! Perhaps frame your marriage certificate and place it above her bed so she can be remembered daily how lucky she now is

I'd like to know how the data is collected for this statement. How many couples under 50 do you know who got married without living together first? Many couples who are unmarried become married once children are on the way. So effectively making it look like a short-term unmarried relationship. Although as I said, I don't know how accurate data on unmarried couples could be

I think the data shows that unmarried couples tend to either marry or split up and fewer stay together unmarried for life. Again, I think that is changing somewhat because people realise that they don't need to be married. Also, ALL couples who are not married are by definition 'unmarried' so there could technically be huge variations in levels of commitment.

I would imagine that the statistics are less of a reflection on marriage itself than the kinds of people who do not get married before having children. Marriage appeals to both traditionalists or those who come from families where havingchildren out of wedlock is more frowned up (and likely to be from a higher social class) and well informed/educated people (who are aware that marriage is more than symbolic in that it confers legal rights and protections onto both parties that cohabitating couples do not have). The benefits of class aren't wealth, they are education and socialisation. It's quite likely that the statistics above have confused the middle class for those in middle class jobs/ with middle class budgets. If you have parents who place great importance on education a frown upon reliance on the state you are more likely to do well. If your parents don't really care about these thing the you are less likely to care yourself. Wealth is only useful in preventing social slipping when used to put a child in private education (where they will encounter more of a middle class culture).

Could you put up a link to the original survey, OP? Not the Telegraph article, I'd like to see the data, not the journalist's interpretation of it.

Well that's that then. My kids may as well give up now, before any wasted effort

Well that's that then. My kids may as well give up now, before any wasted effort

Yeah, there doesn't seem much point. Maybe you can teach them how to get really good at online poker so they can get some cash. I presume you will also take them down the job centre to sign on on their 18th birthdays. If only there was a piece of paper with your signature on that your kids had never seen, lying in a register office somewhere, then their futures would be so so different.