I do understand the difference between correlation and causation.
I just don't see how one can prove that getting married makes it less likely that a child will experience poverty during its lifetime other than statistical correlation.
Nevertheless, children whose parents never marry have an 81% chance of living in poverty during the 17 years of childhood.
By age 6, 68% of children in never married households experience at least one year of poverty, versus 12% in married households; by age 12, 78% versus 18%, by age 18, 81% versus 22%. (Source: The Economic Risk of Childhood in America: Estimating the Probability of Poverty across the Formative Years, Mark R. Rank; Thomas A. Hirschl, Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 61, No. 4. (Nov., 1999), pp. 1058-1067).
There are exceptions. There are always exceptions.
Still, my experience in representing people in divorce suggests to me that the reason isn't hard to see -- two earner families are financially better off than one earner families. Both parents contribute, not only to the economic well-being of their children, but many other ways. Not just parenting the children, but contributing to the family unit.
It's a very rare man or woman who contributes nothing of value to the family. |
