37 Percent of U.S. Births Out of Wedlock

[jpak]

http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/nat-gen/2006/nov/21/112103835.html

ATLANTA (AP) - Out-of-wedlock births in the United States have climbed to an all-time high, accounting for nearly four in 10 babies born last year, government health officials said Tuesday.

While out-of-wedlock births have long been associated with teen mothers, the teen birth rate actually dropped last year to the lowest level on record. Instead, births among unwed mothers rose most dramatically among women in their 20s.

The overall rise reflects the burgeoning number of people who are putting off marriage or living together without getting married.

The increase in births to unwed mothers was seen in all racial groups, but rose most sharply among Hispanics. It was up among all age groups except youngsters ages 10 to 17.

<more>

[Sanity Claws]

1. Not accurate

My understanding is that these stats are based on reviewing birth certificates and wrongly assume that the parents were not married if the parents had different last names. Some women do not assume their husband's names.

[pnwmom]

2. But don't birth certificates also have a box for marital status?

[Fleshdancer]

5. My daughter's birth certificate doesn't

I gave birth to her overseas though so her birth certificate was issued through the US embassy. I have no idea if that makes any difference. :shrug:

[sarge43]

7. FWIW and it's nearly 64 years old, but there's nothing on my

birth certificate about mother's marital status.

[Gruenemann]

10. On my 50-year-old birth certificate there's a box to check....

"Is birth legitimate yes/no"

[Richard Steele]

16. Self-delete; replied to wrong post. Sorry.

[sarge43]

18. Uh. That would be an interesting study in itself.

How, where, if and how much this tracking has changed over the years.

[Richard Steele]

15. I was born in Texas in '68, and mine doesn't. nm

[jpak]

3. I believe they have accounted for that

from the OP...

<snip>

According to census figures, the median age at first marriage was 27 for men and 25 for women last year, up from 23 and 20 in 1950. Meanwhile, the number of unmarried-couple households with children has been climbing, hitting more than 1.7 million last year, up from under 200,000 in 1970.

<snip>

[Gormy Cuss]

24. No, only a small percentage are imputed.

from the technical notes of the
National Vital Statistics Reports, Vol. 55, No. 1, September 29, 2006

Less than 1% were imputed, according to the report. In all but two states the mother's marital status is asked directly on the birth certificate.

Marital status
National estimates of births to unmarried women are based on two methods of determining marital status. For 1994–96, birth certificates in 45 states and the District of Columbia included a question about the mother’s marital status. Beginning in 1997, the marital status of women giving birth in California and Nevada is determined by a direct question in the birth registration process. Beginning June 15, 1998, Connecticut discontinued inferring the mother’s marital status and added a direct question on mother’s marital status to the state’s birth certificate. In the two states (Michigan and New York) that use inferential procedures to compile birth statistics by marital status in 2004, a birth is inferred as nonmarital if either of these factors, listed in priority-of-use order, is present: a paternity acknowledgment was received or the father’s name is missing.

In recent years, a number of states have extended their efforts to identify the fathers when the parents are not married in order to enforce child support obligations. The presence of a paternity acknowledgment, therefore, is the most reliable indicator that the birth is nonmarital in the states not reporting this information directly; this is now the key indicator in the nonreporting states. Details of the changes in reporting procedures are described in previous reports (34,139). The mother’s marital status was not reported in 2004 on 0.04 percent of the birth records in the 48 states and the District of Columbia where this information is obtained by a direct question. Marital status was imputed as ‘‘married’’ for these records.

There is the question about the meaningfulness of this given that there are many healthy and functional two parent households living together without legal marriage.


on edit: the reason this statistic matters is twofold. First, reporting changes in the expected pattern helps inform social policy. It's no longer rare to be born to an unmarried woman. Given the recent "family values" talk by conservatives in this country, the fact that so many mothers aren't married refutes the notion that we all share that narrow view of what constitutes 'family values.'

Second, marriage automatically declares two legal parents for a child, while only the mother is assumed to be the legal parent in the case of a single woman. That status can be changed via the courts but is otherwise automatic. Parents have rights and financial obligations for their minor children and that is why historically out of wedlock births were problematic unless there was a mechanism for the father to acknowledge paternity. As noted in the excerpt above, many states have adapted their birth certificates to allow it. With the advent of gay marriages, even the notion of mixed gender marriages will need to be adjusted.

[MazeRat7]

26. Oh there you go bringing logic and facts into a bumper sticker statement...

Which I might add, I appreciate. :think:

MZr7

[greenissexy]

4. The point?

What's the point with publishing the numbers? What's their agenda?

[Iris]

9. It's information.

You can use this any way you want.

For starters - how will gay marriage ruin an institution that's already become practically irrelevant to the larger culture?

[SoCalDem]

6. It could also be that people are more "casual" than we once were too

and because divorces cost a lot of money..

and because young people have quit believing in "knights on white horses"

and because women who want children are tired of waiting around to find "just the right man & just the right time" while their biological clock ticks away

and because infertility spikes in one's 30's and some women just say 'to hell with it..I want to be a Mom"

and because maybe people you have known for years may not be "legally married".. how many of your friends have actually shown you their marriage license

[Der Blaue Engel]

8. Why is this an issue?

Why do people care so damn much about who marries whom and when and why? The idea of "legitimacy" is a medieval concept that should have died a long time ago.

I'm not a damn "unwed" mother. I'm a mother. Period.

[irislake]

14. IS it an issue?

I thought only gays want to get married and that married couples are in the minority. Three out of my four children live common law and never plan to marry. Most of their friends are in common law relationships. Two of my daughters had babies after the age of 35 when they were financially secure. I am shocked to learn more babies are being born to women over thirty than under thirty. There is no stigma attached to common law relationships or to babies born out of wedlock. And because of birth control most births are planned. If this is not the way it is in the U.S. it soon will be. Last time I was at a "Christmas" party in Toronto in my old neighbourhood --- there was only one grandchild in the lot that was "born on the right side of the blanket". Heart breaking to think of all the mothers in the past who gave up babies they loved out of shame because of the social stigma.

[RC]

22. How are we to know if it is pre-marital sex

if we don't know if they intend to get married or not? :evilgrin:

[pnwmom]

27. It's an issue because, for one thing, children raised by a single parent

are more likely to be raised in poverty.

[mondo joe]

28. Out of Wedlock does not necessarily = Single Parent

[Der Blaue Engel]

29. And we don't already have statistics on children in poverty?

Ditto the poster above; "wedlock" is what is being measured here, not single parenting. For instance, what are gay and lesbian parents? "Single." Mm-hm.

[DURHAM D]

11. This rise is due to TomKat setting a bad example.

At least that is what I like to tell my racist family members.

[jkshaw]

12. Interesting sociology study ...

... in the late 60s, early 70s, reported in a woman's magazine -- the researchers went through births and marriages in churches in England very far back, as far back as records were kept, certainly earlier than the 1700s, and found the same levels of out-of-wedlock births as there were then current in mid-twentieth century.

As I recall, the researchers looked at marriage dates, then at birth dates of the first born of the couples, among other things, discounting things like premature babies.

It was pretty funny since at the time there was so much hysterical carryings-on among the powers that were at that time along the lines of what is happening to our young people, the world is going to the dogs, and so on.

I agree that this latest research looks flawed. Conditions aren't the same as this late middle ages study. Unmarried women giving birth was considered then beyond the pale. Literally. Both mother and child would have been ostracized. So the marriage would have had to happen.

[Parche]

13. cool

Marriage is only a paper certificate, nothing to be tied to.
There is too much noise made about marriage.
People dont need to be married to live together..

[slackmaster]

17. I'd be more interested to know how many kids have only one effective parent

Be they married or not, it's important for a child to have the influence of more than one parent who actively participates in his or her upbringing.

I've known many single moms, married one and have dated several. Most of them do a pretty good job, but they are at a serious disadvantage - The big tradeoff is how much of their own earning potential to sacrifice for being able to spend time with their children, and vice-versa. I've observed clear patterns of behavior problems among, for example, girls that are raised only by their mothers. It's not all good.

[Iris]

20. hmm. I just brought this point up in another thread (about the image of women in hip-hop)

but no one responded except to call me racist.

I'd say even in 2-parent households, there are a lot of emotionally absent fathers.

[slackmaster]

21. I agree completely, it's a very common problem

And I've seen a few 2-parent households with emotionally absent mothers.

[KoKo]

19. Might be Bush Fake Govt's Statistics ....but if the "Stars/Celebs" Do it....

then why not the rest of us. How many Celebs have babies out of wedlock...Singers, Rock Stars, all of it.

Society just goes after the examples they are shown. If that's what the rich and famous do then why not the rest of us. :shrug:

[valerief]

23. Marriage, what a quaint concept. Hey, I thought most US kids were

born illegitimate (that's what out of wedlock means, right?).

[FloridaPat]

25. I've met several women who had out-of-wedlock babies because of

health insurance. If they got married, they couldn't get on their husbands health insurance. If they were single, they got some kind of aid from the gov't. Gee, universal health care would be nice after the baby is born too.