I don’t think it smacks of eugenics at all. Like veggiewood, I’ve worked in Social Services and mental health in a small city with an extreme range of poverty to affluence. I see 14 and 15 year old girls in the emergency room, finding out they are pregnant only by chance since they came in for something else. Most of them live with their parents, and have support there.

The problem I have is with the people having 4-5 children and no way of supporting them. I’m not going on a “oh look at the welfare queens” rant. Where I live, these (mostly women) are not getting a ton of money to support themselves and their children, so it’s not like there is a financial incentive to have kids.

The kids are getting health care, and the moms are too AND I THINK THAT’S GREAT. No child should have to suffer poor health. However at the end of the day SOMEONE ELSE is paying for the social services that I and others provide to these children.

If you have one child by accident/ unplanned, and decide to keep it, fine. If you need help from the government, fine. I hope with all my heart you are able to get on your feet (or back on your feet). But if you continue to have kids and can’t support them, I have a problem with that. If your children are taken away by the state and you continue to have more, I have a problem with that. Part of my decision not to have kids was that I knew I would not be able to support them. I would like for everyone to have the ability to be a mother if that is what she wants, regardless of her income. But I hear young women say “I want to have a really big famileee!!”, and my feeling is, if that is what you want, you have to work for it. There are a lot of things/situations that a lot of people want and they can’t have, because they can’t afford it. If you want a big family, finish high school and at least get some sort of work.

Marriage is not as important for the health of children as stability of the parent(s). That means financial stability (no, it doesn’t have to be rock-steady, I’m aware that we are in a recession and people are losing their jobs left and right). Some women marry into money. Some live with extended family. Some work.

Stability also means a host of other factors, including emotional and mental health. I’m not saying that all of these areas have to be perfect before you have a child- no one is ever perfectly balanced, but many parents are “stable”, which to me means having ups and downs, but overall functioning well. I do think that the original intent of the article was lost in the writer’s misguided blame of the “unwed”.

Health care, day care, and maternity leave are all important things too- I agree with Another Sarah. The latter items imply that the mother is working. Yes, let’s catch up to more reasonable countries who offer such benefits (and their equivalents) to parents and nonparents. Let’s help young people to become financially secure, and discourage them from having MULTIPLE kids at a young age, not by shaming them, but by offering them a brighter future which includes opportunities for sane and healthy work.

I do think that in some ways a woman’s marital status becomes public property during and after pregnancy in the same way the woman herself does – people feel equally entitled to poke at her belly and ask when that fella’s going to make an honest woman of her.

The thing that drives me crazy, though, is the idea that unplanned = unwanted. Yes, I was shocked when I discovered that I was pregnant. Yes, I did consider all of my options before deciding to carry to term and keep the baby. No, that didn’t make it any less terrifying when I thought I was miscarrying. No, I don’t love my son any less than the mother who tracked her ovulation on her iphone, nor am I less fit to parent than she is.

Also, I take issue with the idea that having a child is bad because it makes things more difficult. Yes, people may struggle more with money. Those who have less of it to begin with will feel this more. To say, however, that only financially secure people should have children smacks of eugenics. You know what would actually help? Health care. Daycare. Reasonable maternity leave. All the things that reasonable countries already have.

Even so, it’s going to be rough. And it will be rough for everyone, married or not, planned or unplanned. Babies don’t let you sleep, you have no idea what you’re doing, and your entire life gets turned upside down. A new mother doesn’t need a husband’s support, she needs community support. People are eager enough to tell mothers they’re doing everything wrong – we don’t also need the NCPTUP telling us we’re dooming our children to be criminals.

Thanks also to misscalculate for the extra links and info, and to VisitorPass for pointing out an example of how raw data can be read through different lenses, to different sociopolitical aims.

I gave birth “out-of-wedlock” in 2008. Furthermore, our poor daughter has not one but two unwed mothers–is that twice as bad, or only half?

And good god the census (and other data gathering orgs) need to get better at studying families!

I think the term “unwed mother” needs to go. What does being wed have to do with anything? It’s like saying “blue-eyed mother” or “3rd grade teacher mother”.

On a funny note, my friend actually planned her pregnancy around her vacation. She and her guy had booked well in advance, and agreed to continue contraception until after the trip so she could take advantage of all the free alcoholic drinks that came with the trip package.

Also, this article delves into the relationship between unmarried births and lots of other factors including age. The proportion of unmarried births for women in their twenties has gone up a bit since the 70s.