Dads Against the Divorce IndustryDA*DI is devoted to reinstating the societal valuation of Marriage and the traditional, nuclear American Family, with particular emphasis on the essential role of FATHERS. DA*DI offers contemporary reports and commentary on culture; its aberrations and its heroes. |
|
IRS, Welfare Discourage Low-Income Marriages By Dr. Wade F. Horn IN MANY INNER CITY
COMMUNITIES, it seems, it's easier to find a vegetable garden than a
responsible and involved father. Indeed, entire communities can
rightly be termed fatherless.
Conventional wisdom provides a simple reason: men impregnating
women, many of them young women, with little concern for the
consequences. But new research recently presented at the 1999
National Summit on Urban Fathers in Washington, D.C., suggests a
more complicated picture.
According to noted social scientist Sara McLanahan, at the time
of the birth of a child to a low-income, unwed mother, 82% of the
parents are romantically involved with each other. Fifty-three
percent are cohabiting at the time of the birth.
Moreover, 86% of these fathers have their name on the birth
certificate of the children. Seventy-eight percent helped the mother
during pregnancy, and 86% have plan to continue helping in the
future. Thus, contrary to conventional wisdom, the vast majority of
these fathers are romantically involved with the mother of their
child and, upon learning their partner is pregnant, very much want
to and plan to be a good father.
But most startling of all is this: When asked what the chances
are that they will get married someday, 52% say "almost certain" or
"a good chance." An additional 15% say "50/50." Hence, nearly
two-thirds of these couples see marriage as not only desirable, but
a likely outcome. Yet, we know that far fewer of these couples ever
go on to get married. Why not?
One reason may be that we are afraid to bring up the topic. How
many pro-marriage posters have you ever seen hanging on the wall of
a welfare office? Or brochures describing the benefits of marriage
prominently displayed in the waiting room of an inner city maternity
hospital? How many urban schools teach the skills necessary to
sustain a healthy and mutually satisfying marital relationship? The
answer, of course, is very few.
The consequence of our reticence to talk about marriage,
especially in low-income communities, is that young couples aren't
encouraged to move towards marriage. Little wonder so few of them
do.
But it gets even worse. Should these young couples decide to get
married, Uncle Sam punishes them. While the marriage penalty in the
tax code for two-earner couples is reasonably well-known, what is
less commonly understood is the fact that low-income couples face
the most severe financial marriage penalties of all.
The biggest culprit is the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). A
wage supplement designed to encourage work, the EITC contains a
horrific financial penalty for marriage.
That's because the EITC is not adjusted for the number of adults
in a household. Thus, in cases where both the mom and the dad are
working, the EITC penalizes a typical low-income couple about $1800
should they choose to get married.
But that's not all. Low-income couples who choose to get married
also frequently stand to lose housing benefits, access to job
placement and supportive employment services, even a slot in Head
Start for their child. In fact, according to calculations by Eugene
Steurele of the Urban Institute, should a single mother on welfare
choose to marry a man working full-time at a minimum wage job and,
in doing so, give her children a real live in-the-home dad instead
of a child support check, the new family's combined earnings plus
benefits would be $3,862 less than if the couple did not marry and
the woman stayed on welfare. And we wonder why marriage is
disappearing in low-income communities.
All of this wouldn't matter if marriage didn't matter. But it
does. And not just a little. It matters a lot.
Children fare much better when raised in a married, intact,
two-parent household. In addition, research indicates that both
married men and married women are happier, healthier, and wealthier
than their unmarried counterparts. Furthermore, the best indicator
of the violent crime rate in a community is not race, ethnicity or
even income, but the prevalence of marriage.
And marriage is the glue that binds fathers to their children.
Not a perfect glue, but a better glue than either cohabitation or
child support enforcement. The simple fact is this: If we want
children to grow up with loving, involved, committed fathers, we
will have to figure out a way to resurrect marriage in our urban
areas.
But, many shrug, its too late to do anything about all of this.
The genie is out of the bottle. We just have to face the fact that
fathers and marriage have largely disappeared from many urban areas
and get on with adjusting to this "reality."
Not so fast. Here are some ideas discussed at the National Summit
on Urban Fathers that Mayors can do to help restore fatherhood and
marriage in our urban areas:
o initiate a city-wide public education campaign to raise
awareness of the importance of fathers and to help inspire men to be
more involved fathers;
o establish a Fatherhood Resource Center where fathers þ- new and
experienced þ- can go for help, advice, or needed services;
o conduct a city-wide program audit to determine what message the
cityþs human service delivery system is communicating about the
importance of fathers and marriage; and
o use a portion of discretionary funds to provide seed grants to
small but effective community-based support, outreach and skill
building fatherhood programs.
Our nation desperately needs more of both. |
Dads Against the Divorce Industry