All Western nations have seen a decline in the institution of the traditional family. Marriage rates and overall fertility are falling while divorce rates and out-of-wedlock births are rising. In New Zealand these trends have been remarkable in their intensity: the family is in a worse state here than almost anywhere else.

In some quarters the decline of the family has been celebrated rather than mourned. The traditional family based on marriage is seen as oppressive; "new family forms" offer the opportunity for free expression. In fact, these family forms are not new - there have always been broken and incomplete families. What is new is the scale of their occurrence.

War was declared on the standard family in the 1970s. It was conducted by an unholy alliance of left and right, sexual liberators and feminists, who believed that the overthrow of the institutions of family and marriage would bring emancipation and self-fulfilment.

This group has advocated the rewriting of history founded on denial that a family led by a monogamous, married couple was ever the norm in Western society. This is coupled with unrealistically positive expectations of what the loss of traditional family ties will mean for people.

In New Zealand, Maori have been used to argue that monogamous marriage is an artificial restriction imposed on people who had previously been living happily in informal unions. This is a misrepresentation. It is wrong to suggest illegitimacy was of no consequence in Maori culture, or that there were no special ties between parents and their biological children.

In the 1970s, in concert with the war on the standard family, the welfare system moved in a less family-friendly direction. Assistance to couples with children was cut back. Parenting outside marriage is now the form of child-rearing most subsidised by the Government.

There are many adverse consequences for children resulting from the lack of involvement of two biological parents. Mortality and morbidity rates are higher on average, and such children are more likely to have serious accidents.

The risk of child abuse is higher for children in non-traditional households, with the presence of a step-parent being the strongest risk indicator.

Children from broken homes tend to perform less well at school. On average they are more likely to experience problems of mental health, poverty and relationship breakdown as adults.

It is sometimes claimed that differences in outcomes for children in traditional and non-traditional families can be accounted for by the poverty of single-parent households, but studies that control for income find that this cannot explain the wide differences.

Marriage provides a focus for striving. Work is pivotal to the male role, and out-of-work men are less likely to be involved with their children - if they are at all. Worldwide evidence consistently links male employment to family formation and marital stability.

Large percentages of single and divorced men are unemployed and the employment gap by marital status is increasing. Just as families without men need far more help than those with men, so men without families are far more likely to need assistance themselves.

While it has become difficult for men to support families, the welfare system has made it easier for women to have children without having a husband. Benefits for sole parents have increased in number and scope.

As welfare expenditure has increased, the answer has been seen in terms of "targeting" the really "needy". The more tightly that social assistance is targeted, the more swiftly it must be withdrawn, lowering the incentive to take a job.

On the other hand, universal assistance is costly and has other problems. The trade-offs are inescapable. However, lower levels of Government spending and taxation would alleviate the problem, and leave more after-tax income in the hands of many families.

None of this is to argue that children brought up in two-parent families always do better than those in families with only a single parent as a result, say, of death or separation, or that separation is sometimes best or unavoidable.

It is not a criticism of single parents - who often do well in difficult circumstances - to point out that, on average, the statistical evidence is that children in two-parent families fare better on many measures. This finding is important for social policy.

In the absence of any policy to prevent the decline of the family, the only acceptable response has been to treat the symptoms - no matter how ineffective these treatments may prove to be. What is needed is a policy of support for intact families, and recognition of the responsibilities of all parents, not just those who are in difficulties.

Public policy should signal that family stability is important for children and for society as a whole. People respond to incentives. Policy changes over the past 30 years have changed the incentives people face and largely explain family trends.

To strengthen the institution of the family based on marriage, changes are needed to policies and the incentives they create.

For more information, contact:

David Young
Communications Advisor
Ph: 04 499 0790
Email: dyoung@nzbr.org.nz

Web: www.nzbr.org.nz