Having Kids Before Marriage Does Not Increase Divorce Rates

  • Thread starter Thread starter Midwest88
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PS

Just a little more information about cohabitating if anyone wants to copy and paste it in their “Cohabitating” file for future reference use.

Listen to Saint Pope John Paul II The Great (here) . . . .

**b) De Facto Free Unions **
  1. This means unions without any publicly recognized institutional bond, either civil or religious. This phenomenon, which is becoming ever more frequent, cannot fail to concern pastors of souls, also because it may be based on widely varying factors, the consequences of which may perhaps be containable by suitable action.
Some people consider themselves almost forced into a free union by difficult economic, cultural or religious situations, on the grounds that, if they contracted a regular marriage, they would be exposed to some form of harm, would lose economic advantages, would be discriminated against, etc. In other cases, however, one encounters people who scorn, rebel against or reject society, the institution of the family and the social and political order, or who are solely seeking pleasure. Then there are those who are driven to such situations by extreme ignorance or poverty, sometimes by a conditioning due to situations of real injustice, or by a certain psychological immaturity that makes them uncertain or afraid to enter into a stable and definitive union. In some countries, traditional customs presume that the true and proper marriage will take place only after a period of cohabitation and the birth of the first child.

Each of these elements presents the Church with arduous pastoral problems, by reason of the serious consequences deriving from them, both religious and moral (the loss of the religious sense of marriage seen in the light of the Covenant of God with His people; deprivation of the grace of the sacrament; grave scandal), and also social consequences (the destruction of the concept of the family; the weakening of the sense of fidelity, also towards society; possible psychological damage to the children; the strengthening of selfishness).

The pastors and the ecclesial community should take care to become acquainted with such situations and their actual causes, case by case. They should make tactful and respectful contact with the couples concerned, and enlighten them patiently, correct them charitably and show them the witness of Christian family life, in such a way as to smooth the path for them to regularize their situation. But above all there must be a campaign of prevention, by fostering the sense of fidelity in the whole moral and religious training of the young, instructing them concerning the conditions and structures that favor such fidelity, without which there is no true freedom; they must be helped to reach spiritual maturity and enabled to understand the rich human and supernatural reality of marriage as a sacrament.

The People of God should also make approaches to the public authorities, in order that the latter may resist these tendencies which divide society and are harmful to the dignity, security and welfare of the citizens as individuals, and they must try to ensure that public opinion is not led to undervalue the institutional importance of marriage and the family. And since in many regions young people are unable to get married properly because of extreme poverty deriving from unjust or inadequate social and economic structures, society and the public authorities should favor legitimate marriage by means of a series of social and political actions which will guarantee a family wage, by issuing directives ensuring housing fitting for family life and by creating opportunities for work and life.

— Saint Pope John Paul II The Great (Section 81. Familiaris Consortio)

And Catholic Answers echoing the Church’s teaching here.

And also as per Catholic Answers Peggy Frye (with a link update), the Pennsylvania Bishops (1999 Pennsylvania Catholic Conference) here and here.
 
Cathoholic, thanks for those terrific posts you included above. Fascinating how they play fast and loose with the distinction between one and multiple children out of wedlock! Excellent resources and insight.
 
This statement does not align with overall statistics.

divorcesource.com/blog/unplanned-pregnancy-and-marriage/

Four of my friends are divorced and remarried. (age 45-55) All were pregnant when they married the first time and felt they “had to get married”. None of the first marriages lasted greater than five years. Sorry. I don’t buy this. Marrying without the feeling one has free will to choose, does not seem to end well. IMO.
None of the people you described would have been classified as having kids before they married would they not? Seeing as they were pregnant when they married?
 
This statement does not align with overall statistics.

divorcesource.com/blog/unplanned-pregnancy-and-marriage/

Four of my friends are divorced and remarried. (age 45-55) All were pregnant when they married the first time and felt they “had to get married”. None of the first marriages lasted greater than five years. Sorry. I don’t buy this. Marrying without the feeling one has free will to choose, does not seem to end well. IMO.
OK, but how would getting pregnant and raising a child when they aren’t married to each other have worked out for them? It seems to me that your examples are mostly object lessons about why a couple ought to put off sex until after marriage, rather than reasons they should not let pregnancy “force” them into a marriage. Married or not, they were going to be “forced” into parenting together, after all.
 
Most of the people who are having children without the benefit of marriage are less-educated and often poor:
harvardmagazine.com/2012/07/when-having-babies-beats-marriage

Consider these points from the article:
94 percent of births to college-educated women today occur within marriage (a rate virtually unchanged from a generation ago)”

"Edin argues that the poor place tremendous value on marriage—but often see it as unobtainable.

“The poor all say they want marriages like middle-class people have, marriages that will last,” Edin says. “Middle-class people are searching longer for their partners, they’re marrying people more like themselves, and as a result marriages have gotten happier and more stable.”

The poor may share middle-class attitudes toward marriage, but the fit with their circumstances isn’t nearly as good…"

"[Edin] cites a range of obstacles that prevent the poor from realizing their marital aspirations, including the low quality of many of their existing relationships; norms they hold about the standard of living necessary to support a marriage; the challenges of integrating kids from past relationships into new ones; and an aversion to divorce. People told her that “marriage is a big thing which they respect and don’t think they’re up to.” **A mother quoted in that paper said, “I don’t believe in divorce. That’s why none of the women in my family are married.

But even as low-income Americans view marriage as out of reach, Edin asserts, they continue to see bearing and raising children as the most meaningful activity in their lives.** “One theme of Doing The Best I Can is that poor men really want to be dads and they really value fatherhood,” she says. “Both women and men at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder see having kids as the ultimate form of fulfillment”: given their bleak economic prospects and minimal hope of upward mobility,** being a parent is one of the few positive identities available to them**.”
 
Men and women, particularly college educated women are having children later in life in addition to marrying later too. Perhaps the older age at these milestones means more maturity and knowledge of self, a better ability to discern marriage?

Spiritual consequences aside, perhaps many of those who don’t marry are better off? The reduction in divorce by reducing marriages suggest that marriage just isn’t for many (most?) people.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top