Thirty reasons marriage matters more than ever

Published: Saturday, June 9 2012 10:04 p.m. MDT

Marriage increases the likelihood that fathers and mothers have good relationships with their children Next » 1 of 31 « Prev
Mothers as well as fathers are affected by the absence of marriage. Single mothers on average report more conflict with and less monitoring of their children than do married mothers. As adults, children from intact marriages report being closer to their mothers on average than do children of divorce.

Children's relationships with their father depend even more on marriage than do children's relationships with their mother. Sixty-five percent of young adults whose parents divorced had poor relationships with their fathers (compared to 29 percent of non-divorced families). On average, children whose parents divorce or never marry see their fathers less frequently and have less affectionate relationships with their fathers than do children whose parents got and stayed married.
Next » 1 of 31 « Prev
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Old Jake
Salt Lake City, UT

Lazy and uncommitted people make for lame parents.


Marriage equality, or in other words same sex marriage, constitutes a complex household.

Brian H.
Provo, UT

This isn't very good research - it's not even peer reviewed. The best scholars in family studies agree that family structure makes no difference for children's well being. Sure, it's well established that the married two-biological parent household is strongly correlated with economic advantages, family stability and educational achievement, but most of that correlation is due to selection effects. The people that are most likely to earn a high income are also the ones who are most likely to marry rather than cohabit, etc. Cohabitation and single parenthood are hugely disproportionate among low-education and low-SES groups, so it's really the lack of resources that affects children, not family structure per se. The families with fewest resources are more likely to experience instability in their families. Even relatively conservative scholars like Andrew Cherlin (favors marriage) don't say that family structure causes poorer outcomes for children. This research is completely bogus according to academic standards. If I was a reviewer at one of the top family journals, I'd reject this outright.

Provo, UT

I agree that it it is weak on the surface, but then I went to the Institute for American Values website and saw the 20 pages of endnotes backing the group's findings. I was reading today in Family Routines and Rituals by Barbara Fiese. In the book she concludes that poverty has an undetermined effect on the salience of family rituals, (and therefore stability of a home.) Strong correlation was found for unity and symbols. What counts most in family is structure.
Strong negative correlations to salience were found in the loss that results from a change in household dynamics. Change can be a major disruption of family. Recognizing resources/educational attainment as important to family dynamics- ok. Basing an argument for family stability on resources/attainment alone? I don't think so.


Brian H. you need sources. I've never seen a good study that concludes "family structure makes no difference for a child's well-being." As to your assertion that "it's really the lack of resources, not family structure per se", perhaps you missed conclusion #3, "The benefits of marriage extend to poor, working-class and minority communities." I don't know why you are instantly condemning this article, I'm sure you have your reasons, but that is no excuse for being a lazy reader. But perhaps I'm making assumptions. Perhaps you did not actually read the entire article. In which case I apologize for insinuating that you have poor reading comprehension skills. Still no excuse for comments that are clearly addressed in the article.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments