ROBERT RECTOR has a good article at National Review on the statistics discussed here last week showing  an illegitimacy rate of more than 40 percent for the first time in U.S. history. He writes:

The steady growth of childbearing by single women and the general collapse of marriage, especially among the poor, lie at the heart of the mushrooming welfare state. This year, taxpayers will spend over $300 billion providing means-tested welfare aid to single parents. The average single mother receives nearly three dollars in government benefits for each dollar she pays in taxes.

… If poor single mothers were married to the fathers of their children, two-thirds of them would not be poor.

 Rector rightly notes the relative indifference to the illegitimacy rate in the mainstream press.

The Left, with the complicity of the liberal media, hypes the issue of “teen pregnancy” — partly because feminists think girls should attend college for a few years before becoming single mothers, partly in order to strengthen their agenda of promoting condom use and permissive sex ed in the schools. (In reality, condom proselytizing is a bogus answer to actual social problems. Contrary to conventional wisdom, lack of access to birth control isn’t a significant contributor to non-marital pregnancy among teens or non-teens.) 

Liberal journalists and pundits deliberately remain silent on the far larger issue of out-of-wedlock childbearing among adults because they believe the collapse of marriage is irrelevant, if not benign. From their perspective, concern about marriage is a mere red-state superstition; the important task is to increase government subsidies as we build a post-marriage society.

                             — Comments —-

Jesse Powell writes:

The out-of-wedlock birth rate has been growing 5% to 7% a year exponentially since the 1960s. Before I go further I want to explain more precisely what I mean. Let’s say the number of married births in a population is fixed at 1,000. If there are 500 illegitimate births in a particular year the out-of-wedlock ratio is 33.3% (500 out of 1500). If there are 1,000 illegitimate births in a particular year then the out-of-wedlock ratio is 50% (1,000 out of 2,000). This means, in my way of calculating these rates, when the out-of-wedlock ratio goes from 33.3% to 50% the out-of-wedlock rate is considered to have doubled or gone up by 100%. 

When out-of-wedlock rates are calculated this way you will find that the out-of-wedlock rate has gone up relentlessly by 5% to 7% per year in an exponential fashion. What is so frightening about the out-of-wedlock birth rate is that it grows in an exponential fashion that moves towards 100%. 

From 1960 to 1970 the out-of-wedlock rate grew at 7.9% a year compounded (ratio went from 5.3% to 10.7%). From 1970 to 1980 the out-of-wedlock rate grew at 6.1% annually (ratio went from 10.7% to 17.8%). From 1980 to 1995 the out-of-wedlock rate grew 5.4% annually (ratio went from 17.8% to 32.2%). The period from 1995 to 2005 is a special period where the out-of-wedlock rate grew more slowly. I credit what I’ll call the cultural conservative revival that you can date as starting in 1995. There was an upsurge in concern and talk about out-of-wedlock births. The Republicans scored huge gains in the 1994 Congressional elections. There was the Million Man March in 1995. There was welfare reform in 1996. There was the Promise Keepers’ big gathering in 1997. I believe this cultural reaction against the social problems of the early 1990s is what led to the decrease in the rate of growth of out-of-wedlock births from 1995 to 2005. 

From 1995 to 2005 the out-of-wedlock rate grew 2.5% annually (ratio went from 32.2% to 36.9%). To look at what went on from 1995 to 2005 more closely I want to break apart what was going on for the different races and age groups. During this period among all whites the out-of-wedlock rate grew 3.2% (ratio 25.3% to 31.7%) and among blacks it fell slightly at 0.3% annually. More interesting is the difference among the different age groups of women. In general, since at least 1970, the out-of-wedlock rate among younger women has not only started out at a higher level but has grown more quickly as well compared to older women. This pattern held true during the 1995 to 2005 period. 

The growth rates in out-of-wedlock births from 1995 to 2005 among black women in the different age groups was as follows: 15 to 19 years old, 2.3%. 20-24, 2.3%. 25-29, 2.1%. 30-34, -0.7%. 35-39, -2.3%. You read that right; the out-of-wedlock rate increased for black women under 30 and decreased for black women over 30 during this time period. 

For all white women during the 1995 to 2005 time period the comparable numbers are as follows. 15 to 19 years old, 5.9%. 20-24, 5.6%. 25-29, 5.1%. 30-34, 3.0%. 35-39, 1.0%. 

During the 1985 to 1995 time period the out-of-wedlock rate grew at 5.3% (ratio went from 22.0% to 32.2%). For the different ages the growth rate was: 15-19 years old, 8.2%. 20-24, 8.5%. 25-29, 6.6%. 30-34, 4.9%. 35-39, 4.0%. 

The benefits from the cultural conservative revival appear to have worn off. From 2005 to 2008 the growth rate in out-of-wedlock births has been 5.3% annually, the same rate as during the 1985 to 1995 period. The overall out-of-wedlock ratio for the nation in 2008 was 40.6%. For the different age groups it was 86.7% for teenagers 15 to 19 years old, 60.9% for women 20 to 24 years old, 33.2% for those 25 to 29 years old, 20.2% for those 30 to 34, and 18.2% for those 35 to 39. 

A warning to all the non-Hispanic whites out there: Currently your out-of-wedlock ratio stands at 28.6% (2008 data). If the growth rate of out-of-wedlock births among non-Hispanic whites continues to grow at the rate it has been growing lately, say 5.5% a year, then by the year 2025 your out-of-wedlock birth ratio will be 50% and by the year 2041 your out-of-wedlock ratio will be at 70%. As the old saying goes, if you keep going the way you’re going you wind up where you’re headed.

Please follow and like us: