Does trend of kids before marriage contribute to child poverty?

[purpleneon]

I feel like these days more and more people have kids without being married; it doesn't seem to be as important for either men or women.

This is fair enough, but particularly from reading Mumsnet threads, it seems like it is mainly women that get screwed when relationships with an unmarried partner breaks down & they have kids , especially when they're SAHP who haven't paid into their pension or worked for ages. This seems to be due to the huge difference of dividing assets of married people on divorce v. unmarried people on break ups.

Find it frustrating that people feel "judged" if you comment on how lifestyle choices contribute to outcome (which is not the intention), but this trend seems to be contributing to child poverty which is sad & it's the kids that lose out.

People also seem to expect the government to step in when the problem also stems from us as a society choosing to have children in more "unstable" settings.

How can unmarried people (esp. the lower earning partner) with kids be protected more when relationships break down?

I agree with most of what people have said though - probably makes no difference if there are no assets to start with.

More effective thing than marriage seems to be enforcing CM more. I'm confused though as I thought government can take it automatically for anyone paid via PAYE, which captures many people, but may be wrong about that!

I'm talking about marriage to prevent child poverty, so I'm NOT saying it makes sense if you are earning money and financially stable yourself. Was thinking about in context of women who are SAHM, or part time or give up earnings for childcare etc. who then have to rely on the government.

1. If I got married I'd be doing so in case I needed to get divorced. i.e - it's insurance. A contract that we sign, file away and hope never to take it out in a court of law. It's insurance. But that's not very romantic is it so society dresses it up as a dramatic declaration of undying love.

1. It doesn't matter the divorce rate is 50%. Not unless you also know the rate of co-habiting-couples-who-break-up rate.

1. This long term co-habiting automatically equaling married is bonkers. I don't want to get married. I may allow a man to live in my house for a period of time, but I reserve the right to ask him to leave quietly if we break up. I do not want to legally share assets. If you want to solidify your relationship in a legal way there is something for that... it is called marriage.

1. Marriage costs about £150.

@Thingsdogetbetter

A third of marriages end in divorce so hardly that stable. You can be married and have absolutely no assets to divide anyway. Spousal support is very rare so that's not a consideration for most. A divorced man/woman who is not RP doesn't automatically support their dc to the best of their ability or get into any trouble if they don't pay child support.

What would help?
Making home ownership within people's reach.
Making childcare outside the home affordable so parents can both work.
Educating women about the legal benefits of marriage OR ensuring legal contracts are drawn up about assets.

Equal pay for women so they're not usually the lower paid. Revamping the child support system so non-rp parent pay a fair amount and are penalised if they don't.

Coming down hard on non-rp who hides assets like pensions or go self employed to avoid child maintenance.
Stop blaming single mothers for child poverty and shift the focus to absent fathers.

You've got my vote 👏👏👏

@EvilPea

Theres little point in marriage if you have fuck all to protect or leave each other

Agree with this!

People in poverty won't be any richer for having a marriage certificate!

@purpleneon

More effective thing than marriage seems to be enforcing CM more. I'm confused though as I thought government can take it automatically for anyone paid via PAYE, which captures many people, but may be wrong about that!

They can. But it doesn't mean they will. Self employed NRPs can hide their earnings. It's not unknown for men (and women too I'm sure) to change jobs everytime the cms catch up with them.

For example,
I phoned the cms in March as I found out ex was working again. The chap I spoke to said they could contact him employer (I knew which company he was working for) and ask for whatever details he need. But its not unheard of for the companies to refuse to engage until the cms.... something legal. I can't remember now. I still haven't had a penny out of him. Last time I phoned they had no record of my previous call and said I'd closed the case.

In the past they've written to me about 1 dc and when I've phoned and said there are 2 on the claim told me ex dp told them there's only 1!!!!!!!! Fucking cunt. I sent copies of their BCs with his name on!

So they can take money straight from wages. But its a bloody battle!

@Thingsdogetbetter

A third of marriages end in divorce so hardly that stable. You can be married and have absolutely no assets to divide anyway. Spousal support is very rare so that's not a consideration for most. A divorced man/woman who is not RP doesn't automatically support their dc to the best of their ability or get into any trouble if they don't pay child support.

What would help?
Making home ownership within people's reach.
Making childcare outside the home affordable so parents can both work.
Educating women about the legal benefits of marriage OR ensuring legal contracts are drawn up about assets.

Equal pay for women so they're not usually the lower paid. Revamping the child support system so non-rp parent pay a fair amount and are penalised if they don't.

Coming down hard on non-rp who hides assets like pensions or go self employed to avoid child maintenance.
Stop blaming single mothers for child poverty and shift the focus to absent fathers.

www.lifesitenews.com/news/90-percent-of-unmarried-couples-with-babies-will-break-up-by-babys-teens-st/

Marriage is significantly more secure than cohabitation.
It's a statistical fact.
Unarguable.

Children have the same rights over their parents’ money whether those parents are married or not. We just don’t enforce that when it comes to maintenance. In the US arrears on child maintenance could prevent you from getting a job / passport in certain states - not in the UK.

@Simonjt

To be honest anyone who chooses not to be financially independent is showing that they’re not great at making good decisions.

Someone choosing not to work, or choosing not to upskill are likely to act the same way married or unmarried.

There are times in a woman's life Simon where she has no choice but to be financially dependent. After giving birth,or in late pregnancy for example. She could save for those things or she could expect the other half of the baby-making equation contribute. I know which one is fairer. Children NEED our time. Parents could just pop them out and go back to work but our world would be so much worse for it. The parent who is providing this essential service for society - the most essential service OF THEM ALL - can be forgiven for being financially dependent for a while, no? Or should they be flogged and shamed for their bad decision-making?

The fact that the whole of society isn't joining together in a great celebration of love and financial support after the birth of a baby is quite fucking sick, actually. The most important task of all in the survival and growth of our species and we scorn it and shame it and curse the mother for her dependence. Just fuck off!

Personally I wouldn't have had children without being married first, but from what I see and read it is not necessarily marriage (or lack of) makes the biggest difference, it is the very short period of time that some people seem to spend with a partner before having children - sometimes just a matter of months.

Having children young also means that women will not have had a chance to build a career first, which impacts on their earning potential when they try to return to work.

Obviously mistakes do happen, but I don't believe contraception is as unreliable as it is often made out to be here!

@Fifthtimelucky

Personally I wouldn't have had children without being married first, but from what I see and read it is not necessarily marriage (or lack of) makes the biggest difference, it is the very short period of time that some people seem to spend with a partner before having children - sometimes just a matter of months.

Having children young also means that women will not have had a chance to build a career first, which impacts on their earning potential when they try to return to work.

Obviously mistakes do happen, but I don't believe contraception is as unreliable as it is often made out to be here!

It seems to repeat as well - have one kid with a man you hardly know, break up, have another kid with another man you hardly know. This is not a choice that is conducive to emotional or financial security.

@Fifthtimelucky

Personally I wouldn't have had children without being married first, but from what I see and read it is not necessarily marriage (or lack of) makes the biggest difference, it is the very short period of time that some people seem to spend with a partner before having children - sometimes just a matter of months.

Having children young also means that women will not have had a chance to build a career first, which impacts on their earning potential when they try to return to work.

Obviously mistakes do happen, but I don't believe contraception is as unreliable as it is often made out to be here!

But playing devil's advocate, is it better for kids to have clapped-out geriatric parents?

I'm being rude I know, but the above is really judgemental, there are loads of brilliant younger parents, and dreadful older work-obsessed parents.

@lannistunut, I think @Fifthtimelucky may be suggesting that perhaps mid to late twenties/early thirties is better than late teens/ early 20s, as the low paid/unskilled job cycle is more likely the younger a woman is.

And second point made was that issue is exacerbated by people having kids with someone they have barely known a few months, which increases the chance of him bolting and not paying CM etc etc

It may seem judgmental but the whole discussion is on child poverty & sadly, decision making and life choices by people can undeniably contribute to the problems people find themselves in!

@purpleneon

*@lannistunut, I think @Fifthtimelucky* may be suggesting that perhaps mid to late twenties/early thirties is better than late teens/ early 20s, as the low paid/unskilled job cycle is more likely the younger a woman is.

And second point made was that issue is exacerbated by people having kids with someone they have barely known a few months, which increases the chance of him bolting and not paying CM etc etc

It may seem judgmental but the whole discussion is on child poverty & sadly, decision making and life choices by people can undeniably contribute to the problems people find themselves in!

I said upthread that most poverty is structural, you can make yourself feel better by pretending people have control over it but I disagree.

"@lannistunut I said upthread that most poverty is structural, you can make yourself feel better by pretending people have control over it but I disagree."

I disagree with you. I have 2 children and twice divorced and always owned my home and my children have never lived in poverty. I had assets i had earned before i had my first chid, i had assets when i had my second. I had assets as an independent woman. My children have not grown up in poverty, far from it. I am not married now. In fact marriage took a lot of my previously hard earned assets.

I now have total control over my life's earned assets, now i am no longer married. I have total control over my career, my earnings , my accrued assets. I built my assets, then had my children. Therefore my children have never experienced poverty.

I grew up in a council flat to immigrants. I did not incur any "structure" against my self determination to succeed. My children and i have been fine and i have afforded them many opportunities. I did that by by having my own money and securing myself before having kids.

I know people who have kids within a marriage and they are on the bones of their arse with no money. It is nothing to do with marriage and all about securing yourself and any children you plan.

@CinstonWhurchill congrats on making a success of your life, but one tale is irrelevant in terms of understanding wider poverty.

@lannistunut i understand wider poverty believe me.

''Find it frustrating that people feel "judged" if you comment on how lifestyle choices contribute to outcome (which is not the intention), but this trend seems to be contributing to child poverty which is sad & it's the kids that lose out.''

You find it frustrating that you're not applauded for being judgmental...

Childcare available to all would do a lot for women and children. Judging women for failing to sew it all up like you did is just shaming women, it achieves nothing.

[quote CinstonWhurchill]@lannistunut i understand wider poverty believe me.
[/quote]
Your post reminded me of a very senior female co-worker who told me they thought that there wasn't any sexism in the workplace because they'd made it to the top.

One swallow doesn't make a summer etc.

It may seem judgmental

Yes. Yes, it certainly is. As always these threads descend into telling people in poverty that they are the architects of their own misfortune.

What we need to do is to stop blaming women, and start blaming the men who fuck off and leave them with kids and no money. And that happens just as often to married people as it does to single people.

I also love the idea that if everyone just tried harder then everyone could have a high paid job so who does the low paid work in these scenarios? Or do we pay supermarket workers £50k?

If you are MC to begin with, with involved parents it doesn't matter.

@lannistunut. I had my children at 36 and 38 and didn't consider myself a clapped out geriatric! I'm not suggesting everyone waits that long though.

Of course there are some brilliant younger parents - and some awful older ones. I didn't suggest, and don't believe, that being older makes you a better parent. What it does do is make it more likely that you will be able to support yourself and your children financially if your relationship with their father breaks down. You may not be a high earner, but you will probably have more work experience.

@waybill. I'm certainly not blaming women exclusively. Both men and women make poor choices and they both share some of the blame for the consequences, along with the structural issues that others have mentioned. But I don't think it does anyone any favours to consider men as the only problem and to treat women as helpless victims who had no choices.

@Fifthtimelucky

*@lannistunut*. I had my children at 36 and 38 and didn't consider myself a clapped out geriatric! I'm not suggesting everyone waits that long though.

Of course there are some brilliant younger parents - and some awful older ones. I didn't suggest, and don't believe, that being older makes you a better parent. What it does do is make it more likely that you will be able to support yourself and your children financially if your relationship with their father breaks down. You may not be a high earner, but you will probably have more work experience.

@waybill. I'm certainly not blaming women exclusively. Both men and women make poor choices and they both share some of the blame for the consequences, along with the structural issues that others have mentioned. But I don't think it does anyone any favours to consider men as the only problem and to treat women as helpless victims who had no choices.

That is pure 💩. I started having children older. I had a degree and 10 years work under my belt. Then I had kids with a controlling sexist jealous person.

I couldn't afford to work and spend any time with my kids because the type of work available to pay for childcare meant working the same as pre kids - 12 hour days when you include commute and projects as well as travelling. So I was kind of trapped as my ex's work meant irregular hours and lots of travelling.

Yes I could have gotten a nanny or an au pair etc but that would have meant never seeing them and having someone else bring them up.

When we split 4 years ago, they were old enough not to need round the clock care. Also I started working part time from home but much lower paid than my ex. Also only possible because where I live is quite cheap.

Child poverty has a lot of factors involved - as others said, there are a lot of structural issues, housing is a major factor. This may be a part, but I think it's more complicated than just more kids born to unmarried couples. I think that trend is largely because fewer people get married just because of a pregnancy -- and marriages that are based solely on a pregnancy, well, they're less likely to go well either even when statistically marriages are more secure than cohabitation. Some marriages are less secure than others.

There have always been people who have kids with little resources, that's not new, but we do need more resources to be at a 'normal' playing field in today's society. It's harder to get back up when you're down if the hurdle is really high - again housing costs are huge in this. Marriage has protective elements, but it can also lead to poverty if you marry the wrong person too that can be harder to dig out of and plenty of people in either are find to start with and then things go downhill. I think more resources for adults to retrain while working is important with how our work lives have shifted.

I do think education on marriage needs to include the legal structures around it. Part of me thinks that part of registering to marry should include being given as least a general rundown of the legal rights and responsibilities of marriage. This information is easily and freely available, but I think it should be treated more like the contract it is.

I like the idea of cohabiting for x about of time giving similar rights to marriage.

I disagree from an ethical standpoint - if I'm entering into a legally binding contract with another person and the state, I want to actively sign the contract, not have it happen as a passive default from the passing of time. I don't think the state should change my legal status without my active involvement.

I also disagree with a pragmatic standpoint - especially as I think adults shouldn't be discouraged from living together when it benefits them as that also benefits the housing stock. If adults are living together how, from outside the home, do you prove two adults living in the same house are in a relationship that could be counted as a defacto marriage? I live with 2 other adults and we've all lived together for over a decade now -- without the marriage certificate how do you prove from outside the home who is in a relationship with who and who is single? You can't just use my kids' birth certificates because things can change in the several years since then. We all pay different bills. There are cases where common law marriages is legal reality where people have had to prove they aren't in relationships, and it's very invasive and questionable. People who want to harm will use the law to their benefit so we have to balance giving them more tools to use with what protection such a law would actually give.

The law has changed since I got married to prevent immigrants as I was from marrying as I did. It was sold and is still discussed as a protective measure for vulnerable people, but I'm not sure it's actually protected anyone - I've seen no evidence of it. It's just been used deport people and attempt to reduce marriage visa stats (no real evidence it's done that either) by raising the age and adding more requirements which could have increased child poverty from parents having to be in separate countries. Now people can plan around that, but having been caught up in more than one immigration law change, some will do things based on law being X, and then it becomes Y, so we can't just say that people know what they're getting into when there will be people caught out as the laws transitions and it affects personal lives.