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?

The Marriage Foundation, eh?

Move along, nothing to see here

The Marriage Foundation, eh?

Move along, nothing to see here

I think it makes sense. I've seen many naice comfortable couples split and the man stays comfortable and the woman ends up stuffed due to not having been married when she stayed home with the babies while the man built up his career/business. Happens A LOT

Actually, pancake it is a myth that you will be okay if you are married. You are much more likely to have a roof over your head, but long term, you could end up in significant poverty as many older divorced women are realising. The one thing that makes a difference to how well you adjust financially to a split is not becoming financially dependent on a partner or a husband. I realise that for many, it is not a real choice, but women should never assume that they will be okay in the event of a split just because they are married. Courts don't really make long-term maintenance orders anymore and a person's biggest asset is likely to be their earning capacity over a lifetime.

Always a good idea to read the research you’re quoting from....

But we have also shown that parents who are married differ from those who are cohabiting in very substantial ways, particularly relating to their ethnicity, education and socio-economic status, and their history of relationship stability and the quality of their relationship even when the child is at a very young age. Once we take these factors into account, there are no longer any statistically significant differences in these child outcomes between children of married and cohabiting parents.

So marriage itself does not seem to confer magical properties, rather the differences in the type of parents who tend to be married and those who don’t. Socioeconomic and educational factors and their impact on outcomes for children are pretty well documented.

The fact is that having married parents is a protective factor for children. It’s linked to better outcomes in future life.

Not quite. The IFS research Crumbs links to points out that having the sort of parents who are more likely to get married before having children is a protective factor, even if they aren’t themselves married.

And yes, speakout, your alleged stance does not come across from your comments. It's a very subtle form of sarcasm you're using there.

Best protective factor for women is not to give up career,keep working
Don’t Give up work whilst your partner carries on working,and building their earning potential
IMO keeping working,an earnings potential. That’s the single biggest protection you can give yourself

Indeed JassyRadlett I think if you read my post I am clear it is likely to be the people who choose to marry that is an influential factor.

SusanBunch I am surprised you think it subtle.

The premise is fucking outrageous.

LOL. Literally LOL here.

XP and I were engaged when I became unexpectedly pregnant with DS. I have Endometriosis so we decided to go ahead with the pregnancy as it could be my one shot.

I was educated to Masters level, XP had a thriving business. I was able to be a SAHM until I got bored and decided working part time would be good for my wellbeing.

Then the recession hit. XPs business started to fail. There wasn't enough money to get married as we needed to use the fund to pay the bills . XP had a mental breakdown and became abusive. I took DS and left.

I set up in my own place, in a nicer area than I had been in with XP, very middle class. Yes I get some benefit top ups, but not much. I now earn the national average wage. I have completed further study. DS goes to an Ofstead Outstanding primary and will start at an Ofstead Outstanding secondary in September.

My parents are married, still together after 40+ years, own their own home etc. I went from having the same kind of future as them to having to choose to become a single parent to stop myself from being slapped about and DS having to witness it.

I laugh at these kind of reports. I've removed DS from an unhealthy home life (who wants to hear their three year old shouting at Daddy to stop hitting Mummy? I didn't, so I stopped it), taken him to a nicer area, found schools that support him, closer to family support (which XP tried to cut off). DS has a Grandad and Uncle who are involved and provide role models for him. Why would he need his homeless, unemployed father as a role model?

But no, he's doomed to failure because I didn't marry and stay with his abusive father. Despite me seeking to improve his life at every turn. Nope, I should have just got married. That would have fixed everything.

Ridiculous. Bloody Torygraph always seeking to demonize unmarried and single parents.

I realise that for many, it is not a real choice, but women should never assume that they will be okay in the event of a split just because they are married

I didn't say that either
But SAHMs who were married when their partner built a business/pension pot etc are usually LESS fucked than the ones were werent .

I didn't say that you're high and dry if you're married, but from what I've seen both struggle, but my unmarried friends that split post kids were in a few cases literally homeless and on benefits, and a lot of the married ones struggled too, but as in moving to a rental in a less nice area sort of way, nowhere near the level of poverty I've seen previously comfortable unmarried friends plunged into!

LipstickHandbagCoffee

Op,can you see the survey is not objective given it’s sponsored by marriage foundation*

Erm - yes, of course. Seems to be generating some chatter, nevertheless.

Some titles appear to be irresistible.

I grew up in a single parent household,and I’m ok
I can count on all 12 fingers and everything

Crumbs, you made a mention of stable relationships at the beginning of your post but went on to say:

However research would suggest that for children the best environment to grow up in is an enduring, loving family created by a married couple. That will upset a number of non marrieds who believe anyone who is married is smug but the evidence is in favour of marriage if children’s future wellbeing is the key consideration.

The IFS research doesn’t suggest that at all, and it isn’t evidence in favour of marriage. It’s evidence in favour of being in the demographic group that is more likely to marry before having children.

@ Lipstick

Absolutely Lipstick. I said on a post last week the best thing any woman can do for herself is to make sure she always has a way out, whether that be a job, savings or support from family and friends. Money is best, obvs, but any way out is a plus. It's what's made things work out for me.

IMO keeping working,an earnings potential. That’s the single biggest protection you can give yourself

Agree. A Lot of couples make deals where they take turns to support each others ambitions. The man almost always gets first turn. Then theres always "reasons" to postpone the womans turn or they split at that point

I’ve always worked FT. I don’t have joint account. I have my money, he has his
As a result of time & effort I have put into career I now have a minimum threshold I won’t earn below
I’d advise any woman and my dc don’t give up work, do keep your own money
I know lack of joint acc sends some on mn into a spin.and apparently indicates unstable relationship

Best protective factor for women is not to give up career,keep working
Totally agree, but my experience is that it is the mums who have made the choice to give up their career to have an 'easier' life, working PT or being a SAHM.

Totally agree, but my experience is that it is the mums who have made the choice to give up their career to have an 'easier' life, working PT or being a SAHM

But ideally, it shouldn't be made difficult for mothers. Child care should be affordable and high quality and the financial burden of parental leave should fall on the government, not private employers. There may be the odd lazy SAHM but very many do it because they think it's best for their kids, they can't afford childcare, or they are exhausted trying to juggle everything. Odd that so few men want to give up work for an 'easy life'.

If it's about children born in 1958, the findings seem plausible. They just aren't likely to tell us much today given the massive societal changes in the last 60 years. I'm married, ftr.

sahm less demanding,certainly.but I can’t fathom doing nowt,zilch. Just Chores and dc stuff
Now I know a klaxon will go off,and sahm will recite a bit ole list of tasks,enriching activities
Tasks that fill whole day and mean they’re simply too busy to work with everything they do
And besides they didn’t want to outsource their kids to strangers in daycare

It's not the chores per se, it's not being available. My youngest has an SN and he didn't tolerate a childminder, he had endless appointments. At one point I was living with my mum and I couldn't have had a cm in her house while I went out to work. To earn the same as I'd pay a cm. So, it's more about the struggle of making it all work rather than 'chores'. That lacks understanding. I've worked for four years now and I'm always on edge waiting for the next time I have to be somewhere during working hours.

@LipstickHandbagCoffee I got paid full wage for 10.5 months for spending time at home with my daughter.

I didn't go back to work. I got to do a bit of housework and then pretty much please myself. I didn't go back to work until DD was 6. I used to read a lot, visit museums etc. It was glorious

Oh and yeah; I could have worked. Didn't want to though!

Would I base my life decisions on a report on marriage and class produced (u scientifically) by a conservative pressure group?

No.

It is ludicrous.

I am ‘boho’ middle class, no money but definitely middle class. Do we know if ‘fail (sic) to marry’ includes single parents and divorced, alongside

And who says a spell on benefits is a ‘fall’ in social class? Jobseeker’s Allowance got a while while you sweat your way round the graduate job market? Why do we even listen to such crappy snobby nonsense.

I daresay on average single / divorced parents have less money to bestow on their kids as an allowance or trust fund, so they might need the benefit system more.

The Torygraph should get their brains out of their stick up arses.