Because men chronically bail on their financial and emotional responsibilities to their children we ought to hitch them securely through the discriminatory heteropatriarchal institution of marriage? I agree that society suffers due to the loss of material support but that could also be remedied by a commitment to local, state and federal policies that make sure there's quality, affordable day care, housing, educational and employment opportunities for all families, single-parent or otherwise. There is indeed a moral failure here and it's not the diminishing social value of marriage, it's the disregard for women and children of all ages, races, and classes. Let's spend less money on the prison-industrial complex and help set the conditions that make it possible for these increasingly prominent family formations to thrive.

wow. wowowowowowowow. So you're saying that good day care is better than a real (and I mean more than biological) father, right?

This attitude both dismisses the importance of fathers in children's developmental and emotional lives and excuses the young men who father children from having to take any responsibility.

Man. I should leave my heteropatriarchical institution and go chase babes, and let the state have my kids. Great bargain for me. Too bad for my spouse and my kids.

Or the women could just not have babies whose biological father will end up in prison.

Dude, if you want to bail on your kids, do so, maybe they'd be better off without you. (Ever think of that?)

Not every society has had the 1 father 1 mother married with a cat a dog and a house. Some of them, believe it or not, live kind of communally and raising children is another communal task.

If you think you and your kids are better off that way, fine, but if you want to act like it's the only way to live and raise decent kids, well, sorry my friend, youre just telling yourself what you want to hear.

"I agree that society suffers due to the loss of material support but that could also be remedied by a commitment to local, state and federal policies that make sure there's quality, affordable day care, housing, educational and employment opportunities for all families, single-parent or otherwise. "

DUH! It is the welfare system's efforts to do just that that led to the explosion of unwed motherhood among those who can least afford it--poor and minority women. A poor women who gets knocked up and doesn't marry the father gets more in benefits than than she and the baby's father could possibly earn as an unskilled laborers. If she marries the father or tries to make something of herself before having kids, she gets nothing. No matter how much money you throw at this problem, the fact of the matter is that two people can spend twice as much time with their kids. And the mothers of these children are far less likely to get ahead due to the time and effort involved in raising kids, while the fathers have little incentive to better themselves since nobody is depending on them. Fathers have a very important role to play in the raising of children. Reducing that role to a paycheck is naive, insulting and isn't doing the fathers or their children any good.

First of all, the folks that live somewhat communally: Those that DO still have the menfolk in the picture. (Perhaps that's why they're willing to stay around and be communal.)

Secondly, I'd be willing to bet you that most young women who have children with men who won't stick around don't believe/hope/expect that's going to be the case.

Third, I don't CARE how nicely it went for you in your one-parent home, or how your little one is thriving with you living 2000 miles away, or whatever your situation is. Anecdotes don't mean anything. YOu can find anything anecdotally. Society -- as a whole -- works best for the greatest number when families stay intact. Show me one FACTUAL, LONGTERM study that says otherwise.

proxl:

First of all, the folks that live somewhat communally: Those that DO still have the menfolk in the picture. (Perhaps that's why they're willing to stay around and be communal.)

Or it could be that they really have no other place to go and no other way to support themselves, and that the community in which they live has extremely strong social pressure for them to take responsibilty for their children.

Instead of tut-tutting all the women who have children while unmarried for whatever reason and at whatever age (while some try also to prohibit both abortions and birth control!), let's put more pressure on men to be better fathers.

proxl wrote: "Secondly, I'd be willing to bet you that most young women who have children with men who won't stick around don't believe/hope/expect that's going to be the case."

First they look for the physical attributes they will accept. THEN they hope that he'll be a decent sort and stick around. Beliefs and expectations hardly exist in this fantasy world.