TIME's Misleading Cover Story on Marriage

There's a lot not to like in the cover story for Time written by the smugly-married Caitlin Flanagan. There is, for example, the predictable singlism (Mark Sanford's soulmate is not just a single woman but an "emotionally needy single woman," because really, what other kind could there be), the obliviousness to any moral compass other than Flanagan's own (if parents are unmarried, it is because they "simply can't be bothered to marry each other"), and more. For this post, though, I will focus on the statement that is, by scientific standards, the most egregious and indefensible:

On every single significant outcome related to short-term well-being and long-term success, children from intact, two-parent families outperform those from single-parent households... if you can measure it, a sociologist has; and in all cases, the kids living with both parents drastically outperform the others." (emphasis mine)

Actually, they don't.

I will draw from the most impressive studies I can find (typically, those based on large, nationally representative samples) to show that:

• Sometimes children from single-parent homes do just as well, or even better, than children from two-parent families.

• Sometimes they do worse, but not "drastically" so, as Flanagan misleadingly suggests.

• When children living with one divorced parent do worse than those from two-parent homes, sometimes they were already having problems long before their parents divorced.

• Factors such as the quality of a parent's relationship with the child and the stability in a child's life can be more powerful than the number of parents in the household.

• The simple-minded "just get (re)married" advice can be misguided.

I. Here are a few examples, from large nationally representative samples, in which children from 2-parent households hardly differed at all from the others.

• In a large, nationally representative sample of two-parent biological households, adoptive households, stepmother, stepfather, and single (divorced) mother households, there were no significant differences across the different households in the children's grades, or in the children's relationships with their siblings or their friends. What mattered to the children was whether the parents were constantly arguing with them or with each other. The authors concluded: "Our findings suggest that adoption, divorce, and remarriage are not necessarily associated with the host of adjustment problems that have at times been reported in the clinical literature...It is not enough to know that an individual lives within a particular family structure without also knowing what takes place in that structure."

• What about sex? Are adolescents who are not being raised in two-parent households having earlier and more wanton sex? [Continue reading here at the Living Single post at Psychology Today.]

Comments

[Cheryl W]

I am continually amazed that Caitlin Flanagan still finds work -- Now Time Magazine after Atlantic and the New Yorker realized she only have one theme: Why isn't my life like Leave it to Beaver, and since it isn't, every one else is to blame.

[llisa]

Well, this is just my own non-scientific observation, but when scholastic honors and awards are listed in the local newspaper, the valedictorians and other honorees almost always have both parents (same last name, same address) listed after "son/daughter of". I had noticed this also years ago at awards ceremonies we attended for our daughters.

Also, those kids who were involved in orchestra (at least in our community) seemed to have strong two-parent families. Can't explain it, but have observed it through the years as we sat through many an orchestra concert or competition among the other parents year after year.

[pollye]

I grew up in that idealized, intact, two-parent family. Dad worked and mom stayed home. Dad was emotionally abusive and mom was his enabler. Dad could only feel good about himself by making his family miserable. Relatives have told me dad learned his behaviour in his own abusive home. None of his kids grew up with healthy self-esteem or confidence. When I saw myself falling into similar patterns with my child, I made a conscious decision not to perpetuate the abuse. I raised my daughter as a single parent from age one. I was able to do what dad was not, to examine my behaviour, and decide to do better. My daughter is, at age 30, a happy and well adjusted woman. She has high self-esteem and does not have by the deep sense of self-doubt that shaped her mother's life. We have one of the best parent-child relationships of anyone we know. She knows she is loved unconditionally even though i don't necessarily approve of some of her decisions. She also knows that she can bring ANY issue to me and I will listen without judging and then offer her honest insights. Family values have been preached at us since the 80s and I am sick of it. What matters most is the nurturing the children receive from the parents - whether they are single or partnered, married or unmarried, gay or straight . Those should be our true family values.

[Feesister]

Amen!

[afrayedknot]

"What mattered to the children was whether the parents were constantly arguing with them or with each other." Fair enough. With two people, differences of opinion and approach are a given. But why do we think arguing is inevitable? And if it is, how is divorce is a solution to arguing? Divorce/separation only changes the topics of arguments.

[Sinick]

Time magazine is done. Stick a fork it it. My 85-year old father-in-law gave us a copy to read the other day. I was surprised at how thin it was, with my benchmark being the last time I read it--approximately 20 years ago (well before Al Gore "invented" the Internet). A lack of advertising doesn't bode well in this day and age. R.I.P.