From the kindle: Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women put Motherhood Before Marriage, by Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas

From the kindle: Promises I Can Keep: Why Poor Women put Motherhood Before Marriage, by Kathryn Edin and Maria Kefalas October 12, 2013

This is an older book, first published in 2005.  I came across this in a reference somewhere and read this a couple years ago.  Right now, I want to reread it with notes, as part of the bigger project of writing something for the Chicago Tribune’s “Plan of Chicago” project.  The fundamental idea in the book, as I recall it, is that poor unmarried women and girls do indeed intentionally have children (rather than being ignorant of conception and contraception or being unable to attain it) but that the reasons behind this are much more complex than just a desire to be a lazy “welfare queen.”

These notes aren’t necessarily going to be very orderly — but I imagine that even so, this could be interesting to someone else besides myself, so join me in reading this book!

***********************

Preface — why this matters:

The book chronicles 162 low-income women, beginning in the late 1990s, in Philidelphia and Camden, trying to answer the question of “why”:  “to develop policy interventions that have real potential for success, understanding why these women make the family choices they do is essential.”  (page vii)   Reference to Andrew Cherlin, Marriage-go-round, 2009 — US divorce rates higher than other countries, and non-marital unions all the more so (“In some European countries, couples maintain decades-long partnerships without ever marrying . . . marriage is still the way that American couples sustain long-term relationships.”  (ix) 

Introduction

in 1950, 1 in 20 children was born to an unmarried mother.  Now 1 in 3.  Half of all poor women who give birth while unmarried have no high school diploma.  1st time unwed mothers average 21 years old.  4 in 10 unwed fathers have already been to prison or jail by the time the baby is born.  Social scientists are recognizing that “children seem to benefit when parents get married and stay that way.”  (* I’d think this would be fairly obvious, but I suppose given the seventies mantra that it doesn’t matter, it’s good for this to be acknowledged, and better yet to be documented by research.)

4 in 10 women are living with the child’s father when the baby is born, and generally intend to marry.  Bush marriage initiatives wanted to use the “magic moment” of the birth to get couples to tie the knot — political left was infuriated.  “Many of us don’t believe that the traditional family is the only way to raise a healthy child.” 

In any event, why have childbearing and marriage become so radically decoupled among the poor? 

One issue is that survey data really doesn’t help with understanding these sort of whys. 

Rarity of marriage among poor has not meant that the desire is gone — but marriage is more a dream, a luxury, where children were a necessity, “the chief source of identity and meaning.” 

“To most middle-class observers, depending on their philosophical take on things, a poor woman with children but no husband, diploma, or job is either a victim of her circumstances or undeniable proof that American society is coming apart at the seams.  But in the social world inhabited by poor women, a baby born into such conditions represents an opportunity to prove one’s worth.  The real tragedy, these women insist, is a woman who’s missed her chance to have children.”  (p 6).

“Poor women often say they don’t want to marry until they are ‘set’ economically had established in a career.” — because marriage could mean “loss of control.”  (p. 9)  So there’s a distrust of men.  “In a surprising revesal of the middle-class norm, they believe it is better to have children outside of marriage than to marry unwisely only to get divorced later.” 

At the same time as they have high standards for marriage, they have relatively low standards for what it means to be a “successful mother.”  And being a mother becomes “virtually the only source of identity and meaning in a young woman’s life.”   (p. 10) — motherhood saves them from drugs or partying.  motherhood doesn’t bring hardship, but they attribute “every bit of good in their lives to the fact that they have children.”  (p 11). 

[then there’s a section describing the particular Philly and Camden neighborhoods, where industry has left and the economy is extremely troubled)]

Researching the book:  one of the two authors rented an apartment in East Camden, joined a local church, and volunteered in an after-school and summer-job program, meeting a large number of local residents.  The other author recruited single mothers from white working-class neighborhoods in Philly, meeting them while volunteering in various programs.  Some limits:  they interviewed women earning less than $16,000.  Age range:  from 15 to 56; age 25 on average.  73%  had their first while while a teenager.  50% had been on welfare at some point in past 2 years.  1/2 were neither working nor in school at the time; 40% worked low-end service jobs.  Roughly 1/3 black, 1/3 Puerto Rican, 1/3 white.


Browse Our Archives