Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
state_of_the_family_in_america [2015/11/13 13:09]
marri [5. Index of Belonging by Race and Ethnicity]
state_of_the_family_in_america [2017/06/08 08:05] (current)
marri
Line 11: Line 11:
 ===== 2. 2015 Index of Belonging and Rejection ===== ===== 2. 2015 Index of Belonging and Rejection =====
  
-Based on the most recent 2008-2012 data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey,​((Steven Ruggles, J. Trent Alexander, Katie Genadek, Ronald Goeken, Matthew B. Schroeder, and Matthew Sobek, ​"Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0 [Machine-readable database]," ​(Minneapolis:​ University of Minnesota, 2010).)) the U.S. Belonging Index is 46 percent and the corresponding Rejection Index is 54 percent. This means that 46 percent of teenagers aged 15 to 17 have lived with both biological((There may be a certain percentage of mothers who marry a man that is not her child’s biological father within two years of her child’s birth. Although the American Community Survey does not differentiate these cases, their infrequency renders them a relatively small fraction of intact families.)) ​ parents always married since their birth, whereas 54 percent of teenagers aged 15 to 17 have lived in broken families with biological parents who either never married or are no longer married.((Due to the method of data categorization in the American Community Survey, it is difficult to obtain an exact Index value. Refer to  [[http://​marri.us/​index-correction|http://​marri.us/​index-correction]] for a technical explanation.)) ​ The Index of Belonging and Rejection has not changed in any statistically meaningful way since 2008.+Based on the most recent 2008-2012 data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey,​((Steven Ruggles, J. Trent Alexander, Katie Genadek, Ronald Goeken, Matthew B. Schroeder, and Matthew Sobek, ​//Integrated Public Use Microdata Series: Version 5.0 [Machine-readable database]//, (Minneapolis:​ University of Minnesota, 2010).)) the U.S. Belonging Index is 46 percent and the corresponding Rejection Index is 54 percent. This means that 46 percent of teenagers aged 15 to 17 have lived with both biological((There may be a certain percentage of mothers who marry a man that is not her child’s biological father within two years of her child’s birth. Although the American Community Survey does not differentiate these cases, their infrequency renders them a relatively small fraction of intact families.)) ​ parents always married since their birth, whereas 54 percent of teenagers aged 15 to 17 have lived in broken families with biological parents who either never married or are no longer married.((Due to the method of data categorization in the American Community Survey, it is difficult to obtain an exact Index value. Refer to  [[http://​marri.us/​index-correction|http://​marri.us/​index-correction]] for a technical explanation.)) The Index of Belonging and Rejection has not changed in any statistically meaningful way since 2008.
  
 {{  :​index_of_belonging_and_rejection-_2008-2012_family_intactness.png?​direct&​600 |2015 Index of Belong and Rejection}} {{  :​index_of_belonging_and_rejection-_2008-2012_family_intactness.png?​direct&​600 |2015 Index of Belong and Rejection}}
Line 38: Line 38:
  
 ===== 4. Index of Belonging by State ===== ===== 4. Index of Belonging by State =====
 +//(See [[state_of_the_family_across_the_states|State of the Family Across the States]])//
  
 Regionally, the [[state_of_the_family_across_the_states|Northeast]] (50 percent) has the highest Family Belonging Index and the [[state_of_the_family_across_the_states|South]] (42 percent) has the lowest. [[state_of_the_family_in_utah|Utah]] (57 percent), [[state_of_the_family_in_minnesota|Minnesota]] (56 percent), and [[state_of_the_family_of_nebraska|Nebraska]] (55 percent) have the highest Family Belonging Indices of all the states, while the [[the_state_of_the_family_in_washington_dc|District of Columbia]] (17 percent), [[state_of_the_family_in_mississippi|Mississippi]] (32 percent), and [[state_of_the_family_in_louisiana|Louisiana]] (36 percent) have the lowest Family Belonging Indices of [[state_of_the_family_across_the_states|all the states]]. Regionally, the [[state_of_the_family_across_the_states|Northeast]] (50 percent) has the highest Family Belonging Index and the [[state_of_the_family_across_the_states|South]] (42 percent) has the lowest. [[state_of_the_family_in_utah|Utah]] (57 percent), [[state_of_the_family_in_minnesota|Minnesota]] (56 percent), and [[state_of_the_family_of_nebraska|Nebraska]] (55 percent) have the highest Family Belonging Indices of all the states, while the [[the_state_of_the_family_in_washington_dc|District of Columbia]] (17 percent), [[state_of_the_family_in_mississippi|Mississippi]] (32 percent), and [[state_of_the_family_in_louisiana|Louisiana]] (36 percent) have the lowest Family Belonging Indices of [[state_of_the_family_across_the_states|all the states]].
Line 60: Line 61:
 ===== 7. The Solution ===== ===== 7. The Solution =====
  
-Many reforms are needed in the nation: primarily religious,​((Christopher G. Ellison, Amy M. Burdette, W. Bradford Wilcox, “The Couple That Prays Together: Race and Ethnicity, Religion, and Relationship Quality Among Working-Age Adults,” Journal of Marriage and Family (2010) ​Vol. 72 , pp.963 – 975.+Many reforms are needed in the nation: primarily religious,​((Christopher G. Ellison, Amy M. Burdette, W. Bradford Wilcox, “The Couple That Prays Together: Race and Ethnicity, Religion, and Relationship Quality Among Working-Age Adults,​” ​//Journal of Marriage and Family// 72, (2010)963-975.
 \\ \\
 \\ \\
 \\ \\
-This entry draws heavily from [[http://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF10I85.pdf|U.S. Index of Family Belonging ​and Rejection (2010)]], ​ [[http://​downloads.frc.org/​EF/​EF11K28.pdf|Second Annual ​Index of Family Belonging and Rejection (2011)]], [[http://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF13B31.pdff|Third Annual Index of Family Belonging and Rejection (2013)]], [[http://downloads.frc.org/​EF/​EF14B32.pdf|Fourth Annual Index of Family ​Belonging and Rejection (2014)]], and [[http://downloads.frc.org/EF/EF15B28.pdf|Fifth Annual Index of Family ​Belonging ​and Rejection (2015)]]))  but also financial, educational,​ legislative,​ legal, and judicial. However, all else is secondary to a reform in the relationship between mothers and fathers. American men and women need to learn anew how to belong, so that they can not only beget but also raise the next generation together. Correcting this sexual dysfunction is likely our biggest societal challenge. Should that be attained, many of the other reforms will gradually to fall into place: [[marriage_in_welfare_reform|Social security]] will be reformed because the family unit will be stronger. [[effects.of.marriage.on.children.s.education|Education]] scores will rise very significantly,​ with significant fiscal benefits. The [[effects_of_family_structure_on_crime|rates of crime]], rape, assault, murder and addictions will drop creating a more just and orderly society. The list continues across all [[effects_of_family_structure_on_policy_outcomes|public policy dimensions]].+This entry draws heavily from original research found in [[http://marri.us/research/research-papers/​index-of-belonging-and-rejection-state-by-state/|Index of Family Belonging and Rejection: State by State (2011)]], [[http://marri.us/research/research-papers/family-intactness-influence-on-major-state-social-policy-outcomes/​|Family ​Intactness: ​ Influence on Major State Social Policy Outcomes]], and [[http://marri.us/family-demographics/​family-intactness-and-public-policy-outcomes-by-state/​|Family ​Intactness ​and Public Policy Outcomes by State]]))  but also financial, educational,​ legislative,​ legal, and judicial. However, all else is secondary to a reform in the relationship between mothers and fathers. American men and women need to learn anew how to belong, so that they can not only beget but also raise the next generation together. Correcting this sexual dysfunction is likely our biggest societal challenge. Should that be attained, many of the other reforms will gradually to fall into place: [[marriage_in_welfare_reform|Social security]] will be reformed because the family unit will be stronger. [[effects.of.marriage.on.children.s.education|Education]] scores will rise very significantly,​ with significant fiscal benefits. The [[effects_of_family_structure_on_crime|rates of crime]], rape, assault, murder and addictions will drop creating a more just and orderly society. The list continues across all [[effects_of_family_structure_on_policy_outcomes|public policy dimensions]].
  
 Rejection on the current is a problem new to America and to the world, and new strategies and new forms of leadership are needed to respond to this challenge. Without this change —the restoration of the husband-wife relationship—all other attempts at reform are essentially built on social sand and will collapse over time, for want of a foundation. Rejection on the current is a problem new to America and to the world, and new strategies and new forms of leadership are needed to respond to this challenge. Without this change —the restoration of the husband-wife relationship—all other attempts at reform are essentially built on social sand and will collapse over time, for want of a foundation.