To: Kevin Rose who wrote (543029 ) 2/20/2004 1:57:56 AM From: Johannes Pilch Read Replies (1) | Respond to You obviously didn't read the article. If you did read it you didn't comprehend it or you are lying - which is a distinct possibility. The author certainly did note that in Denmark a leveling off of out-of-wedlock births occurred during the nineties. But he also noted that "the leveling off seems to be a function of a slight increase in fertility among older couples, who marry only after multiple births (if they don't break up first). That shift masks the 25 percent increase during the nineties in cohabitation and unmarried parenthood among Danish couples (many of them young). About 60 percent of first born children in Denmark now have unmarried parents."Even when Swedish couples bear a child out of wedlock, they tend to reside together when the child is born. " The author attributes this in part to the fact that Sweden has strong state enforcement of child support laws. But he also notes that because the welfare state in Sweden is so pervasive, tax rates are very high, forcing everyone to work, leaving less time for parenting, which further enlargens the welfare state to enable it to take care of children. Because of this, the author notes, ultimately "mothers and fathers can get along financially alone. So children born out of wedlock are raised, initially, by two cohabiting parents, many of whom later break up. "combines a high level of non-marital fertility with traditional behaviour regarding other demographic aspects." The fact yet remains that, regardless of traditional behavior (traditional behavior here meaning behavior that has traditionally accepted out-of-wedlock births), Austria's illegitimacy rate is still high and increasing - just like all of western and northern Europe. What the Kurtz article I mentioned does is show why Austria has a high level of non-marital fertility in the first place.Time to learn that 'one variable cause and effect' studies are inheritantly flawed, and usually biased.
