For those people unfamiliar with the "Man in the House" rule, it was a rule of welfare that a family that the Father was still living with could NOT get on welfare for they had an adult male who would work and therefore the family was NOT entitled to welfare.
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Man-in-the-House+Rule
While technically the rule was struck down in 1968 by the US Supreme Court, that case only involved a male who was NOT the parent of the children in the household. Male Parents were still grounds to deny a family welfare if the Father lived with the Children. In the 1970s and into the 1980s the courts slowly e ended the "Man in the House" rule, but it kept coming back via State Legislatures. The Later cases all said it was a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th amendment to treat children differently depending on whether they father lived with them or not.
Senator Moniyhan, before he was a Senator, wrote about the "Man in the House" rule and how it was destroying African American Families, for many African American males of the 1950s were of the last hired, first fired group of employees. Thus African American males had longer periods of unemployment then did whites, and often were unemployed way pass the six month unemployment insurance period (if they were eligible for unemployment in the first place). Thus a lot of African American and poor whites who were in the same economic group (Last hired, First fired) ended up on welfare and quickly found out they children were eligible for Welfare IF THEY MOVED OUT OF THE HOUSE. The Supreme Court ruling of 1968 took many years to be enforced in most states (I knew several WHITE families whose husband left the household every time welfare workers were scheduled to show up at their family's home and that was the late 1960s, early 1970s).
Sorry, a lot of males learned that they families were better off without them, if they did not have a job, as they grew up in the 1950s, 1960s and even the 1970s (and in some cases, even if they have a job, they children were better off economically without them).
Now, the above was NOT true of the Father had a full time job, but I am discussing your typical person of welfare, someone who is technically employable, but given a choose between him and almost anyone else, you opt to hire the other person. Thus I call them "Last hired, first fired".
Even today, while the Man in the House Rule is NO longer the law, you will see welfare rules that tries to do the same thing without saying an adult male can NOT be in the house. Even welfare workers see such men as parasites and will cut them off (and their families) welfare faster then a single Mother with children.
THE OTHER MAJOR PROBLEM is where jobs are for low income people. Most are shift work at low pay. Thus men and women often end up getting jobs where they rarely see each other to interact as a family and often end up with jobs so far apart one has to leave to minimize cost of transportation do to employment (Most jobs are in the suburbs, and if you do not have a car, and many of the people I am discussing do not for they can NOT afford one, getting to work can be a problem, often requires going to some city center by bus and then to the suburbs by bus. One way to cut costs is to move so that you are on the same bus lines as your job. Often with a husband and wife they can NOT be on the same bus lines for their jobs are on different bus lines. This drives them even further apart.
Yes, a lot of Fathers abandon their children, but in many cases (and I believe it is most cases) it is economics that drives the Father out. It is easier for a Male to get a job where he does NOT have show up not dressed to a T (i.e. construction, night janitor work etc as opposes to women who end up in a lot of retail jobs) and as such easier to live in a low rent house since they do not have children for CYS to worry about.
Just a comment on your comment. In many cases, the father do provide support as much as they can but when dealing with the lowest income groups economics kick in big time to break up relationships.
= new reply since forum marked as read
put em all in jail, we'll sort em out later, right?
Well walking around wondering who is going to pull out their AK and start shooting because they hate the government is something I have to watch out for everyday. RARE? BS. Keep digging, soon you'll not be able to type or speak. I sense your racial proclivities. You've said all you need to for me to understand your underlying intent along with the author of the original post. Pretty transparent, really.
