web analytics

ENCOURAGING MARRIAGE….

By ATWadmin On December 12th, 2006

Two cheers for the Conservative Party for having the guts to produce a report which argues that unmarried parents are more likely to separate than their married counterparts with devastating social effects, including higher rates of offending and drug abuse and poorer school results. Cameron has said that a future Conservative Government would restore the tax incentives once wisely put in place to encourage marriage, though I believe he considers gay marriage to be equally worthy of financial support, which it clearly is not.

Iain Duncan Smith, one of the authors of the report, makes it clear that his group had discovered that 50 per cent of unmarried parents, who he described as the "biggest rising group in child-rearing", split up before their child was five. "We do know that children from a broken home, particularly in these difficult poverty-stricken areas, are something like 75 per cent more likely to fail in education and that leads to problems with drug addiction and failure and dependency," he said.

Supporting heterosexual marriage is one of the most sensible things any Government could do. Labour has done everything possible to undermine it, with predictable societal consequences.

11 Responses to “ENCOURAGING MARRIAGE….”

  1. This problem goes back much further than the present government. Co-habitation, as it used to be known, really began in the 1970’s but took off in the 80’s and 90’s.

    I think what is really driving the high level of co-habitation and split-up (and let’s not forget that one in three mariages ends in divorce) is the cult of individualism. It’s me, me, me. If this relationship isn’t working, I’m just going to walk out and get another one. I know it’s tough on the kids, but, hey, I’ve a right to be happy!

    Individualism really took off in the 1980’s. Another word for individualism is selfishness.

  2. Who’s to say that if these parent had been married that they would have stayed together longer. Couples who get married are likely to be different than those who don’t. The consequences when they do may be worse if married than if not, i.e a divorce may be more stressful than splitting up if not married.

  3. Both Labour and Conservative governments have been guilty over the years of abandoning the concept of the traditional married family as the keystone of a functioning society.

  4. IDS was on TV yesterday – a good interview. The fun comes when they go beyond the stage of analysis and start making recommendations.

  5. Aileen,

    "Couples who get married are likely to be different than those who don’t."

    And so are their children. Indeed, you could equally restate the conclusions of the mentioned studies as "couples with problem kids are more likely to break up".

    A significant amount of the effect will be down to genetics. The part that is not down to genetics is not to do with the parents either (or at least nobody has been able to show that it is).

  6. So does this mean that the Conservatives will now come out in support of gay marriage?

  7. mahons

    the effect of break up of gay marriage on children is another kettle of fish, which I suspect was not covered.

  8. I know, I was jesting.

  9. >>Both Labour and Conservative governments have been guilty over the years of abandoning the concept of the traditional married family as the keystone of a functioning society.<<

    Is that not just reflecting society’s own abandonment of the traditional marriage.

  10. mahons

    I know, I as smiling as I wrote it. and here’s another one :o)

  11. "was" even